The following are excerpts from a piece written by Methodist theologian and missiologist D.T. Niles entitled "World Methodism: A Memorandum." That piece was written on April 4, 1965. These excerpts provide some of the theological convictions behind Niles' proposal for a World Methodist Conference of Churches, considered by the Commission on the Structure of Methodism Overseas (COSMOS) of the Methodist Church, predecessor to The United Methodist Church. The original document is held by the Commission on Archives and History in Madison, NJ.
1. The Church throughout the world is one family and is under compulsion to seek to live a common family life. Jesus Christ is enough to maintain this unity, as well as to support the diversity that must exist within the family.
In terms of structure this will mean an autonomous church in the “locality” which is open at both ends: towards Church Union in the locality and towards participation in an international community. Indeed, no structure must be created, and no posture adopted which will make more difficult the quest for Church Union going on in different parts of the world than it is already. Particularly, financially strong churches must remember that they can unwittingly create a situation in which it is felt that gratitude for financial aid must be expressed by accepting policies which will please the donor churches.
2. A Church has no meaning apart from its task in Mission. In some countries the weakness in secular terms of the Church there is its main missionary asset. An international church structure must never be intended or used to destroy this asset.
A further factor is that a church engaged in mission has to be mindful of how it looks to those to whom it is seeking to commend the gospel. It is important, for instance, whether the Buddhists in Ceylon [Sri Lanka] think of the Church in Ceylon as belonging to Ceylon or as part of what to them looks like a religious empire. (The Roman Catholic Church is increasingly facing this problem. The Doctrine of Collegiality of Bishops is an attempt to meet this problem within the context of the Doctrine of the Primacy of Peter. There is no reason why Churches in the Reformed tradition cannot find a more satisfactory solution.)
3. The problem of autonomy is misconceived when the issue is raised, either in the form “we must be autonomous in our several countries”, or in the form “autonomy is a dangerous state into which you can trust only certain churches”.
The question always is a double one.
(a) What kind of autonomy must a church have in order that it may most effectively discharge its task and mission, maintain its image in the eyes of those among whom it is set and be conscious of its own selfhood?
(b) To what extent can a church in one region be a governing authority over a church in another region without distorting its own life? The necessity to govern raises as many problems as the necessity to be governed.
4. The truest safeguard against the dangers of nationalism in church life lies in strengthening the missionary movement. Churches live and work in countries. Countries have their own political and social dynamism. Churches must therefore be free to make their witness where they are. Otherwise they are deprived of an essential condition for obedience. But, at the same time, the church in the region must itself be an international community. This is one of the results achieved by the missionary movement.
It should not be forgotten that internationalism as such is also of various kinds. A colonial structure is also an international structure. In other words, true internationalism in a church structure cannot be achieved by side-stepping the autonomy issue.
5. There is an essential part which confessional groupings of churches can play and have to play in the search for Church Union, in the quest for contemporary re-statements of the Faith, in pressing forward the Christian Mission, and in helping their related churches in their various regions to maintain living contact with their particular spiritual heritage. Distortion arises only when confessional loyalties are so structured as to make the quest for local Church Union seem like a deviation or to make the attainment of autonomy seem like a lapse into isolation.
6. Also, the structure that is agreed upon, whether for the region or for the world, must be such as to be open to the future. It must be realized especially in the contemporary scene that not only are the present structures of church life under theological criticism, but that they are also being seriously corroded by the pressures of social change.
7. Whatever structure is agreed upon, provision has to be made for the Methodist Churches in the several countries themselves to become members of the World Council of Churches.
*****
The fact must remain that there is serious questioning of the theological validity of creating a world-church which is at the same time a denomination. In the COSMOS plan [for an international Methodist church], the contrast is made between the de-centralized nature of this church and the nature of the Roman Catholic Church. The whole point is that no Roman Catholic will accept that his Church is a denomination. The issue is not as between centralization and de-centralization. The issue lies at a much deeper level. If the church is in the world and for the world, then the question must be squarely faced as to what secular realities should be taken into account in determining the churches’ structure. This is not the place to argue this question. The point has simply to be made that, however satisfactory the constitutional adjustments may be, there are those who cannot conscientiously belong to a world-church which is also a denomination.
The COSMOS plan, it is suggested, is to give to churches “overseas” a choice between two alternatives – autonomy and participation in a truly International Methodist Church. Here again the problem is that the matter is thought of in constitutional terms. What is needed is not a choice between two alternatives but a “both and”. Autonomy for a church is not a choice. It belongs to its very nature. It is simply one of the quirks of history that the modern discussion of autonomy for churches is following the same lines as independence for countries which once belonged to a colonial set-up. Both autonomy and internationalism must go together. It seems much more prudent, therefore, to try to achieve what is intended and what is agreed to generally is needed, i.e. churches effective in their regions which are at the same time safe-guarded against the dangers of nationalism and isolation by the creation of a structure which is theologically plural. This will have the advantage of drawing together the two main streamsof Methodism, British and American, from the very beginning, without having resolved what must remain an on-going theological debate.
Dedicated to fostering conversations about the global nature of The United Methodist Church
Friday, June 28, 2019
Wednesday, June 26, 2019
Jacqueline Ngoy Mwayuma - African Women and Mission, Part II
Today’s post contains remarks prepared by Rev. Jacqueline Ngoy Mwayuma for the panel “African Women and Mission” at the Methodist Mission Bicentennial Conference. Rev. Mwayuma is administrative assistant to Bishop Mande Muyombo of the North Katanga Episcopal Area. Rev. Mwayuma’s remarks are translated from French.
Personal History
“The Lord says a word, and the messengers of good news are a great army.” This text from Psalm 68:11 has often encouraged me as a woman in missionary work in Africa.
In all the history of the world, God needed humans to accomplish his salutary mission for the whole of humanity. The history and mission of The United Methodist Church in Africa is very important to me personally as a clergyperson because I am part of it.
I was called from a young age to serve God, something that is not easy. In this society, the primary roles of women were agriculture, child-care, caring for cattle, and housework. God freed me from this hold through The United Methodist Church in order to be a valuable tool in the primary mission of the Church.
After graduating with my degree in theology in 1984, I served in the following positions:
From 1984 to 1999, the Church entrusted me with a great responsibility at the level of our Episcopal region, that of coordinator of women's work. In that role, I took charge of technical, spiritual and literacy services for women in several ecclesial districts. After two years, the supervised women were able to manage their small businesses. Because they mastered basic concepts of reading and arithmetic, this work was successfully accomplished.
I worked in a newly established parish that had fewer than 60 members. After two years, more than 200 souls were won for Christ. God used me for the healing of a sick woman whose arms could not make any movement. Thanks to prayer, she was healed.
From 2000 to 2005, after having had an accelerated training in the field of basic community healthcare in India, the responsibility for basic community healthcare was entrusted to me.
Several seminars were organized in villages near the city of Kamina on preventive medicine with the motto, “Better to prevent than to heal.” In order to support this work financially, the wife of the missionary Tom Rayder of Kamina gave sewing equipment to upgrade the workshop as a basic community health care production unit.
From 2006 to the present day, several responsibilities have been entrusted to me among others:
I was circuit superintendent, that is to say, the head of several parishes. My duty of visiting them was indispensable to the clergy there. I travelled long distances varying between 50 and 60 kilometers by bicycle to achieve these objectives. A few years later, we planted five churches using the greatest strategy of prayer and door-to-door evangelism. Following this growth, the Bukama circuit became an ecclesial district with a District Superintendent.
As I journeyed in ministry, I did not cease to plant new churches and build new schools (Bukama, Luena, Lubudi, Kabalo) and to urge young people to serve God as clergy. That is how I have ten clergy as my spiritual children, including my current Superintendent in the Kalemie district where I work.
I was appointed superintendent of a rural district destroyed by wars, with responsibility for 11 pastors, 5 local preachers, and 10 heads of establishments (directors and prefects). Nine churches were rehabilitated, and six were built. Five new schools were built, and seven were rehabilitated. The membership statistics in the District of Kabalo increased from 326,540 to 912,693 members.
In view of this experience, the church has entrusted me with another great responsibility, that of being the Assistant to the Bishop.
In short, this mission has had a great impact in my life as a clergyperson and as the second female pastor in the North Katanga episcopal region and the first in our Annual Conference of Tanganyika.
Personal History
“The Lord says a word, and the messengers of good news are a great army.” This text from Psalm 68:11 has often encouraged me as a woman in missionary work in Africa.
In all the history of the world, God needed humans to accomplish his salutary mission for the whole of humanity. The history and mission of The United Methodist Church in Africa is very important to me personally as a clergyperson because I am part of it.
I was called from a young age to serve God, something that is not easy. In this society, the primary roles of women were agriculture, child-care, caring for cattle, and housework. God freed me from this hold through The United Methodist Church in order to be a valuable tool in the primary mission of the Church.
After graduating with my degree in theology in 1984, I served in the following positions:
From 1984 to 1999, the Church entrusted me with a great responsibility at the level of our Episcopal region, that of coordinator of women's work. In that role, I took charge of technical, spiritual and literacy services for women in several ecclesial districts. After two years, the supervised women were able to manage their small businesses. Because they mastered basic concepts of reading and arithmetic, this work was successfully accomplished.
I worked in a newly established parish that had fewer than 60 members. After two years, more than 200 souls were won for Christ. God used me for the healing of a sick woman whose arms could not make any movement. Thanks to prayer, she was healed.
From 2000 to 2005, after having had an accelerated training in the field of basic community healthcare in India, the responsibility for basic community healthcare was entrusted to me.
Several seminars were organized in villages near the city of Kamina on preventive medicine with the motto, “Better to prevent than to heal.” In order to support this work financially, the wife of the missionary Tom Rayder of Kamina gave sewing equipment to upgrade the workshop as a basic community health care production unit.
From 2006 to the present day, several responsibilities have been entrusted to me among others:
I was circuit superintendent, that is to say, the head of several parishes. My duty of visiting them was indispensable to the clergy there. I travelled long distances varying between 50 and 60 kilometers by bicycle to achieve these objectives. A few years later, we planted five churches using the greatest strategy of prayer and door-to-door evangelism. Following this growth, the Bukama circuit became an ecclesial district with a District Superintendent.
As I journeyed in ministry, I did not cease to plant new churches and build new schools (Bukama, Luena, Lubudi, Kabalo) and to urge young people to serve God as clergy. That is how I have ten clergy as my spiritual children, including my current Superintendent in the Kalemie district where I work.
I was appointed superintendent of a rural district destroyed by wars, with responsibility for 11 pastors, 5 local preachers, and 10 heads of establishments (directors and prefects). Nine churches were rehabilitated, and six were built. Five new schools were built, and seven were rehabilitated. The membership statistics in the District of Kabalo increased from 326,540 to 912,693 members.
In view of this experience, the church has entrusted me with another great responsibility, that of being the Assistant to the Bishop.
In short, this mission has had a great impact in my life as a clergyperson and as the second female pastor in the North Katanga episcopal region and the first in our Annual Conference of Tanganyika.
Monday, June 24, 2019
COSMOS and Methodist Models of World-Wide Church
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology at the General Board of Global Ministries. The opinions and analysis expressed here are Dr. Scott's own and do not reflect in any way the official position of Global Ministries.
Questions and uncertainties about the future of The United Methodist Church as a world-wide denomination are swirling at the present moment. But this isn't the first time United Methodists and their predecessors have wrestled with such questions. In the 1960s, the Commission on the Structure of Methodism Overseas (COSMOS) tried to discern how the Methodist Church should structure itself across national and regional boundaries in the future.
The time in which COSMOS operated was in many ways different than our own. Those discussions were heavily influenced by pressures for more autonomy from Asian and Latin American branches of the church, operating in parallel with processes of political decolonization. The expectation of increasing ecumenical unity up to and including denominational merger, both in the US and elsewhere, significantly influenced the contours of the discussion as well.
Nevertheless, perhaps there is something to be gleaned from the varying models of world Methodism considered by COSMOS. Questions of the tensions between connection and autonomy, concerns about rising nationalism, and debates over what types of decisions are best made at which levels of the church characterized discussions then as they do present-day discussions.
Here are links to descriptions of the four main alternatives that COSMOS considered. The text is taken from a COSMOS document generated in 1965. The original is held by the General Commission on Archives and History in Drew, NJ.
1. Maintain and Modify the Present Central Conference System
2. Encourage the Formation of Autonomous or United Churches
3. Create a Decentralized "International Methodist Church"
4. Create a World Methodist Conference of Churches
COSMOS discussed these alternatives in a series of meetings throughout the 1960s, most notably at a consultation held in Green Lake, WI, in 1966. That consultation included 250 participants from around the world, including representatives from the Evangelical United Brethren.
Although there was a Congress held in Atlantic City, NJ, in 1970 to consider forming an International Methodist Church, that proposal never came to fruition. Instead, The United Methodist Church took both of the first two approaches: full autonomy for those Asian and Latin American annual/central conferences desiring it, and a continuation of the central conference system for those who stayed in The United Methodist Church.
Americans were not convinced of the value of a reworking of structure and questioned whether COSMOS even had the authority to suggest such a new structure. Many were preoccupied with finishing the work of the 1968 merger with the Evangelical United Brethren. Many outside the US who had pushed for a rethink of structure had become autonomous by 1970, and organizations like CIEMAL and the World Methodist Council provided other avenues for collaboration in the absence of an International Methodist Church.
That has led us to where we are today as a world-wide denomination. Yet where we are was not inevitable, as COSMOS shows us. Nor is the future ahead of us inevitable, either.
COSMOS: Create a World Methodist Conference of Churches
The following is a justification of the fourth of four main
alternatives for how to structure the Methodist Church internationally
that were considered by COSMOS, the Commission on the Structure of
Methodism Overseas. This proposal was largely drafted by D. T. Niles of the Methodist Church in Sri Lanka. The text is taken from a COSMOS document generated
in 1965. The original is held by the General Commission on Archives and History in Drew, NJ.
Alternative IV: A World Methodist Conference of Churches by D. T. Niles
In this proposal, the United States would become one of eight or ten regional or central conferences. There would also be regions made up of the present autonomous churches which have grown out of both the British Methodist and the American Methodist tradition.
There would be a world general conference of Methodist and Methodist related churches composed of some five hundred delegates elected by the churches in the regions. This body would presumably meet in the various regions. It would have sufficient power to provide for the unity of its member churches and to deal with world matters facing the churches. It will not be a legislative body. Such a world conference would be a consultative body, a court of reference and an executive organ whenever its member units desire to act together.
There would be found commissions of this world conference: a theological commission – a commission on law and discipline – a commission on social and international affairs – and a program committee.
Each region would hold its own conference at such time and such intervals as it may determine in order to deal with matters pertaining to its own region. Each region would, in effect, be an autonomous Methodist Church.
There would be sufficient unity in the structure so that it is a true organ of world Methodism. This is provided in the following ways:
1. A doctrinal basis embodying the historic tenets of Methodism shall be a part of the constitution of the conference in each region.
2. The General Conference will be a delegated body in which every annual conference or district synod, as the basic unity of the Church, is represented.
3. (A) There will be, relating together the conferences in the American Methodist tradition, a Council of General Superintendents (Bishops) in which body every member would be recognized as an equal and as a General Superintendent in the whole Church as well as of the electing unit. This Council will meet at such intervals as it may determine.
(B)There will be also, relating together the Conferences in the British Methodist tradition, a Council of Presidents of the Conferences, on which body every President will be recognized as an equal and as having standing as President in the whole Church as well as of the electing unit. This Council will meet at such intervals as it may determine.
(C) The Heads of the United Churches into which Methodist[s] have entered and which churches are member units of the World Conference shall be members of the Council of Presidents.
4. There will be written into the constitution of the conference in each region provisions giving effect to the Methodist tradition of a connexional system the itinerancy of its ordained ministry and its General Superintendents and District Chairmen [sic].
Alternative IV: A World Methodist Conference of Churches by D. T. Niles
In this proposal, the United States would become one of eight or ten regional or central conferences. There would also be regions made up of the present autonomous churches which have grown out of both the British Methodist and the American Methodist tradition.
There would be a world general conference of Methodist and Methodist related churches composed of some five hundred delegates elected by the churches in the regions. This body would presumably meet in the various regions. It would have sufficient power to provide for the unity of its member churches and to deal with world matters facing the churches. It will not be a legislative body. Such a world conference would be a consultative body, a court of reference and an executive organ whenever its member units desire to act together.
There would be found commissions of this world conference: a theological commission – a commission on law and discipline – a commission on social and international affairs – and a program committee.
Each region would hold its own conference at such time and such intervals as it may determine in order to deal with matters pertaining to its own region. Each region would, in effect, be an autonomous Methodist Church.
There would be sufficient unity in the structure so that it is a true organ of world Methodism. This is provided in the following ways:
1. A doctrinal basis embodying the historic tenets of Methodism shall be a part of the constitution of the conference in each region.
2. The General Conference will be a delegated body in which every annual conference or district synod, as the basic unity of the Church, is represented.
3. (A) There will be, relating together the conferences in the American Methodist tradition, a Council of General Superintendents (Bishops) in which body every member would be recognized as an equal and as a General Superintendent in the whole Church as well as of the electing unit. This Council will meet at such intervals as it may determine.
(B)There will be also, relating together the Conferences in the British Methodist tradition, a Council of Presidents of the Conferences, on which body every President will be recognized as an equal and as having standing as President in the whole Church as well as of the electing unit. This Council will meet at such intervals as it may determine.
(C) The Heads of the United Churches into which Methodist[s] have entered and which churches are member units of the World Conference shall be members of the Council of Presidents.
4. There will be written into the constitution of the conference in each region provisions giving effect to the Methodist tradition of a connexional system the itinerancy of its ordained ministry and its General Superintendents and District Chairmen [sic].
COSMOS: Create a Decentralized "International Methodist Church"
The following is a justification of the third of four main
alternatives for how to structure the Methodist Church internationally
that were considered by COSMOS, the Commission on the Structure of
Methodism Overseas. The text is taken from a COSMOS document generated
in 1965. The original is held by the General Commission on Archives and History in Drew, NJ.
Alternative III: Decentralized International Methodism Church
This proposal is an effort to see what would be involved in the United States becoming a Central Conference – or a Regional Conference – alongside other central or regional conferences. The United States would become one of eight or ten regional conferences. There would be an international general conference composed of approximately four hundred delegates, elected by the annual conferences in all of the regions. This conference is intended to provide for the unity of the church and to deal with international problems and inter-regional relationships. It will be a delegated body. Each annual conference would have at least two delegates, one minister and one layman [sic]. Additional delegates would be elected at large from each region, so that the membership will be approximately one half of the United States and one half from other regions.
The general conference would have legislative power over matters distinctly inter-regional and international. It would establish the boundaries and number of the regional conferences; provide consultative boards and agencies for the work of the church; establish a judicial system; provide for the raising of funds for international and inter-regional responsibilities; and suggest standards for church membership, ministry, for ritual and worship; and offer its aid in other aspects of the work as requested.
The eight or ten regional conferences would meet quadrennially and deal with matters primarily relevant to the regions. Each regional conference would: (1) Formulate its statement of faith within the Methodist heritage; (2) Establish standards of church membership; (3) Provide for the organization and administration of the local church; (4) Set standards for the ministry; (5) Provide for a general superintendency of the region, including the designation of the title by which the general superintendent would be known (Bishop, general superintendent or president); Determine the number of superintendents, their term of support, compensation, powers, duties, privileges, and Methodist support.
The unity of the church would be provided for in several ways: (A) Common Methodist heritage in doctrine, ritual, policy; (B) The regional conferences would be bound together within a single constitutional framework. Within this framework greater or less power could be given to the general (international) conference or to the regional conference. (C) The international general conference would be a world forum with what other powers the church as [a] whole might choose to give it; (D) A council of general superintendents all of whom are equal. This council would meet at least once in each quadrennium and plan for the general oversight and promotion of temporal and spiritual interests of the entire church and for carrying into effect the rules, regulations and responsibilities prescribed by the general conference; and (E) An itinerant ministry and general superintendency.
Several questions have been raised concerning this proposal. Is there sufficient unity at the center of this organization? Is it a church? Does it provide adequately for unity or Methodist Churches in difference [sic] parts of the world? Does this proposal undermine efforts toward church union?
Alternative III: Decentralized International Methodism Church
This proposal is an effort to see what would be involved in the United States becoming a Central Conference – or a Regional Conference – alongside other central or regional conferences. The United States would become one of eight or ten regional conferences. There would be an international general conference composed of approximately four hundred delegates, elected by the annual conferences in all of the regions. This conference is intended to provide for the unity of the church and to deal with international problems and inter-regional relationships. It will be a delegated body. Each annual conference would have at least two delegates, one minister and one layman [sic]. Additional delegates would be elected at large from each region, so that the membership will be approximately one half of the United States and one half from other regions.
The general conference would have legislative power over matters distinctly inter-regional and international. It would establish the boundaries and number of the regional conferences; provide consultative boards and agencies for the work of the church; establish a judicial system; provide for the raising of funds for international and inter-regional responsibilities; and suggest standards for church membership, ministry, for ritual and worship; and offer its aid in other aspects of the work as requested.
The eight or ten regional conferences would meet quadrennially and deal with matters primarily relevant to the regions. Each regional conference would: (1) Formulate its statement of faith within the Methodist heritage; (2) Establish standards of church membership; (3) Provide for the organization and administration of the local church; (4) Set standards for the ministry; (5) Provide for a general superintendency of the region, including the designation of the title by which the general superintendent would be known (Bishop, general superintendent or president); Determine the number of superintendents, their term of support, compensation, powers, duties, privileges, and Methodist support.
The unity of the church would be provided for in several ways: (A) Common Methodist heritage in doctrine, ritual, policy; (B) The regional conferences would be bound together within a single constitutional framework. Within this framework greater or less power could be given to the general (international) conference or to the regional conference. (C) The international general conference would be a world forum with what other powers the church as [a] whole might choose to give it; (D) A council of general superintendents all of whom are equal. This council would meet at least once in each quadrennium and plan for the general oversight and promotion of temporal and spiritual interests of the entire church and for carrying into effect the rules, regulations and responsibilities prescribed by the general conference; and (E) An itinerant ministry and general superintendency.
Several questions have been raised concerning this proposal. Is there sufficient unity at the center of this organization? Is it a church? Does it provide adequately for unity or Methodist Churches in difference [sic] parts of the world? Does this proposal undermine efforts toward church union?
COSMOS: Encourage the Formation of Autonomous or United Churches
The following is a justification of the second of four main
alternatives for how to structure the Methodist Church internationally
that were considered by COSMOS, the Commission on the Structure of
Methodism Overseas. The text is taken from a COSMOS document generated
in 1965. The original is held by the General Commission on Archives and History in Drew, NJ.
Alternative II: Encourage Developments Toward Autonomous and/or Union Churches
For the Methodist Church, consideration of autonomy as the goal toward which we should move in our structural relationship was given fresh impetus at the Asian Consultation in Park Dickson, Malaysia, November 1963. This consultation said:
“We believe that the Methodist Churches in Asia are called to give serious consideration to becoming autonomous churches or, in some countries, where it seems to be God’s will, uniting with other churches to become united churches. Development of Methodist autonomy will still be in the direction of church union which is an autonomous state. Any changes which contemplate autonomy will prepare the way for union. Such a step will also make eventual union easier to achieve be removing many of the present hindrances in our policy.
“Autonomy does not mean severance of our ties with Methodist churches in other lands or an unbiblical accommodation of the church to nationalistic sentiments present in some of our countries. It does not mean becoming self-supporting immediately or breaking the close relationship our churches have had with the Board of Missions in the U.S.A.
“Autonomy does mean becoming fully responsible for administration and legislation, for faith and practice with the Central Conference or its equivalent as the supreme governing body. The Methodist Church would become free to have, under God’s guidance, that form of church structure through which the mission of the church can be served best in each country. Realizing self-hood through self-government, an autonomous church will become more able to accept its place alongside other churches in the area and be free to establish church to church relationships throughout the world, participating fully in the ecumenical movement. With roots in the soil and a structure suited to the people, the autonomous church would be able to work and witness more effectively in its national and cultural environment.”
Autonomy is seen as necessary in order that people in each nation may visualize the church as an indigenous body—in order that the church may adequately fulfill its mission to and responsibilities for the life of the people in that particular nation—that the church is not seen as a foreign body. It is seen as a means to further church unity at the local level. It is the expression of a genuine maturity in the life of the church, and therefore the proper goal in church-mission structural relationships. It was suggested that autonomy is necessary “in order that Christ’s presence shall be truly and fully realized in each place where his body is.”
Alternative II: Encourage Developments Toward Autonomous and/or Union Churches
For the Methodist Church, consideration of autonomy as the goal toward which we should move in our structural relationship was given fresh impetus at the Asian Consultation in Park Dickson, Malaysia, November 1963. This consultation said:
“We believe that the Methodist Churches in Asia are called to give serious consideration to becoming autonomous churches or, in some countries, where it seems to be God’s will, uniting with other churches to become united churches. Development of Methodist autonomy will still be in the direction of church union which is an autonomous state. Any changes which contemplate autonomy will prepare the way for union. Such a step will also make eventual union easier to achieve be removing many of the present hindrances in our policy.
“Autonomy does not mean severance of our ties with Methodist churches in other lands or an unbiblical accommodation of the church to nationalistic sentiments present in some of our countries. It does not mean becoming self-supporting immediately or breaking the close relationship our churches have had with the Board of Missions in the U.S.A.
“Autonomy does mean becoming fully responsible for administration and legislation, for faith and practice with the Central Conference or its equivalent as the supreme governing body. The Methodist Church would become free to have, under God’s guidance, that form of church structure through which the mission of the church can be served best in each country. Realizing self-hood through self-government, an autonomous church will become more able to accept its place alongside other churches in the area and be free to establish church to church relationships throughout the world, participating fully in the ecumenical movement. With roots in the soil and a structure suited to the people, the autonomous church would be able to work and witness more effectively in its national and cultural environment.”
Autonomy is seen as necessary in order that people in each nation may visualize the church as an indigenous body—in order that the church may adequately fulfill its mission to and responsibilities for the life of the people in that particular nation—that the church is not seen as a foreign body. It is seen as a means to further church unity at the local level. It is the expression of a genuine maturity in the life of the church, and therefore the proper goal in church-mission structural relationships. It was suggested that autonomy is necessary “in order that Christ’s presence shall be truly and fully realized in each place where his body is.”
COSMOS: Maintain and Modify the Present Central Conference System
The following is a justification of the first of four main alternatives for how to structure the Methodist Church internationally that were considered by COSMOS, the Commission on the Structure of Methodism Overseas. The text is taken from a COSMOS document generated in 1965. The original is held by the General Commission on Archives and History in Drew, NJ.
Alternative I: Modification of the Present System.
The Methodist Church now has a world-wide structure. This is in keeping with its heritage, its emphasis upon universal grace and its missionary drive. This structure has proven useful and fruitful in carrying the gospel to other parts of the world and in bringing together new Christians into churches. We ought not lightly to disregard a rich heritage if for no other reason that that it may be a structure with value to bequeath in due season to the whole church.
Now is no time to dismantle a world-wide structure. During a period of such extreme nationalism, is it wise to put aside an international fellowship? At a time when at political and economic and social level [sic], we are seeking ways and means to embody a world fellowship, is this time for the church to dismantle what world ties it does have. Do not isolated churches run the risk of becoming their tools of nationalism? Is it not possible that there is a danger in exchanging one form of disunity for another – that is national for denominational?
Methodism and its structure has [sic] been flexible in its approach to problems arising from its world-wide connections. The initial creation of the central conferences inaugurated for India and China in 1884, was an effort to deal creatively with the demands for greater freedom on the part of churches in each area and yet within [a] framework it [that?] maintained world-wide relationships. Therefore, now that there are further strains upon the connection, is it not possible to make further modifications as we have in the past to meet the needs? Where there is demand for greater freedom to write a discipline, would it not be possible under [the] present system to meet this need? Other objections would also be met through similar modifications. It may well be too late to consider such a drastic re-organization of the Methodist Church as is envisioned in the proposal for a decentralized international church. However the central conference can be modified at any meeting of the General Conference. Further the church is not prepared for such a drastic move. Would it not be better to maintain the present system until such time as the way into larger ecumenical union is seen more clearly?
Has the Methodist heritage made its larger and fullest contribution to the ecumenical movement? Is confessionalism necessarily inimical to church union? It may well be argued that Methodism has not yet finished its task, and it may be a betrayal both of Methodism and of the universal church if we dissipate our heritage before presenting it in its fullest form to the ecumenical movement.
But the aim and goal of all this is that Methodism may present itself more fully and more completely to the larger ecumenical movement and may work for this unity and pray for it.
Alternative I: Modification of the Present System.
The Methodist Church now has a world-wide structure. This is in keeping with its heritage, its emphasis upon universal grace and its missionary drive. This structure has proven useful and fruitful in carrying the gospel to other parts of the world and in bringing together new Christians into churches. We ought not lightly to disregard a rich heritage if for no other reason that that it may be a structure with value to bequeath in due season to the whole church.
Now is no time to dismantle a world-wide structure. During a period of such extreme nationalism, is it wise to put aside an international fellowship? At a time when at political and economic and social level [sic], we are seeking ways and means to embody a world fellowship, is this time for the church to dismantle what world ties it does have. Do not isolated churches run the risk of becoming their tools of nationalism? Is it not possible that there is a danger in exchanging one form of disunity for another – that is national for denominational?
Methodism and its structure has [sic] been flexible in its approach to problems arising from its world-wide connections. The initial creation of the central conferences inaugurated for India and China in 1884, was an effort to deal creatively with the demands for greater freedom on the part of churches in each area and yet within [a] framework it [that?] maintained world-wide relationships. Therefore, now that there are further strains upon the connection, is it not possible to make further modifications as we have in the past to meet the needs? Where there is demand for greater freedom to write a discipline, would it not be possible under [the] present system to meet this need? Other objections would also be met through similar modifications. It may well be too late to consider such a drastic re-organization of the Methodist Church as is envisioned in the proposal for a decentralized international church. However the central conference can be modified at any meeting of the General Conference. Further the church is not prepared for such a drastic move. Would it not be better to maintain the present system until such time as the way into larger ecumenical union is seen more clearly?
Has the Methodist heritage made its larger and fullest contribution to the ecumenical movement? Is confessionalism necessarily inimical to church union? It may well be argued that Methodism has not yet finished its task, and it may be a betrayal both of Methodism and of the universal church if we dissipate our heritage before presenting it in its fullest form to the ecumenical movement.
But the aim and goal of all this is that Methodism may present itself more fully and more completely to the larger ecumenical movement and may work for this unity and pray for it.
Friday, June 21, 2019
Blair Trygstad Stowe: The History of the Global Connection, Part 2
Today’s post is by Rev. Blair Trygstad Stowe. Rev. Stowe is Lead Pastor at First United Methodist Church of Ontario, CA, and Community Cultivator of Open Space Inland Empire. It continues a series on the historical attempts to consider global structure of the United Methodist Church. You can find entry 1 here.
The American Methodist Church has investigated the question of our global structure and representation several times throughout recent history. Rev. Bruce W. Robbins in his 2004 book, A World Parish? Hopes and Challenges of the United Methodist Church in a Global Setting,[1] outlined the first two major investigations of an improved global ecclesiology by the UMC.
The first was shortly after the inaugural Central Conference episcopal election in 1930. The Committee on Central Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC) returned with three options for possible ways forward:
1) The Central Conferences could all be developed into independent General Conferences, giving each church autonomy for self-governance without oversight, but not demanding that missional commitments between Conferences end.
2) Form a Central Conference in the United States as a regional body. All the Central Conferences would then relate in a smaller General Conference to maintain the connection and handle Methodist relations with other church bodies.
3) Maintain the structure as it stands with the American General Conference as the final authority and the Central Conferences as mission bodies of the “mother church”[2]
The Committee claimed the voices of Central Conference representatives spoke most strongly for the final recommendation, to maintain the current polity (option #3) for the time being until more transition could take place in the organization of the Central Conferences.[3]
It does us well while reflecting on this first discernment process to remember that American missionaries were often the representative delegates from the Central Conferences they were serving during this era of Church history, and it benefited the missionaries to remain connected to the American processes. Whether this was an implicit preference or an explicit act of colonialism we can not know, but it resulted in retention of an American-centric system into the next era of Methodism.
In 1948, the Commission on the Structure of Methodism Overseas (COSMOS) replaced the Committee on Central Conferences in managing the connections of the international Methodist Church post-World War II.[4] The decolonization process saw a preference for ecclesial autonomy, as peoples in newly established countries sought to have their churches reflect developing nationalism.[5]
In 1951, the World Methodist Conference, started by the British Methodist Church, responded to decolonization by reorganizing as the World Methodist Council and relocating its headquarters to the United States.[6]
But economic stability did not follow political independence for much of the world, making autonomy financially inviable, and political tensions between Capitalist and Communist powers added further tensions to international loyalties[7].
Responding to the changing climate of international governance, COSMOS began a major investigation of international structures in 1960[8]. For the first time in 1964, Central Conference representatives were invited to partake in every meeting of COSMOS, rather than just the meeting preceding General Conference[9].
With the unification of the Methodist Church and the Evangelical United Brethren (EUB) at the 1968 Conference, an unprecedented 25 international Annual Conferences requested autonomy, a majority from Latin America[10].
The COSMOS recommendations to the 1968 Conference proposed familiar options for the future structure of the UMC:
1) Encourage autonomy for international conferences
2) Support regional General Conferences in the place of Central Conferences, each of which would create their own Discipline and organization, including a Regional Conference for the United States
3) Create a World Conference of the autonomous General Conferences for discussing global needs and continued mission partnerships
All of these suggestions were adopted by the 1968 General Conference and consultations were planned for the development of the World Conference.
However, by 1972, somewhat inexplicably, COSMOS reported its belief that the World Methodist Council would become a sufficient body for handling the connectional needs of global Methodism and that the establishment of a separate World Conference should be discontinued.
COSMOS also proposed its own discontinuance and the reestablishment of a Committee on Central Conference Affairs to deal with legislation relating to the Central Conferences and Autonomous Affiliating bodies[11]. Over a decade of study, conferencing and relationship building between the most diverse decision making body of the UMC to date was simply dissolved. Additonal information on COSMOS will be provided in future posts.
A new directive to study the Global Nature of the United Methodist Church was given by General Conference in 1992,[12] yet few substantive changes have been seen at the General Conference over the last seven quadrennia.
The Committee on Central Conference Affairs was re-established in 2008 as the Standing Committee on Central Conference Matters,[13] chaired for the first time by a Central Conference Bishop, and has begun to undertake global investigation with a seriousness resembling the broad study initiatives of COSMOS in the 1960’s.
The designation of a Global Book of Discipline was established in 2012, and the Standing Committee is working in consultation with groups of clergy and laity across the connection on further revisions and simplifications to make the BOD more accessible and applicable cross-culturally[14].
Previous inquiries into the global structure of the church seem to have held an underlying assumption that the church in the United States would always maintain the majority at the General Conference, thus creating no need for the American Church to be designated as its own Central or Regional Conference. While it was recognized by members of COSMOS that issues at General Conference were unfairly weighted on American issues, this was not impetus enough to modify the structure.[15] The focus on American issues at General Conference was considered an inconvenience for the 10% of delegates from outside the United States. The members of COSMOS likely could not have imagined that in just over 50 years 42% of delegates would come from outside the United States.[16]
This global expansion is of course to be celebrated, but it has created a structure that may now be threatening the missional activities of the church in the American context. The Central Conferences maintain autonomy to modify decisions made by General Conference in their local context. No such process is afforded to the UMC in the US.
Within a few more quadrennia, the American UMC may become the minority at General Conference. Without a serious resurgence in action to reconsider the global structure, this could result in a flipped disadvantage where the mother church is left to carry out decisions made by her children, with no autonomy of her own.
The American Methodist Church has investigated the question of our global structure and representation several times throughout recent history. Rev. Bruce W. Robbins in his 2004 book, A World Parish? Hopes and Challenges of the United Methodist Church in a Global Setting,[1] outlined the first two major investigations of an improved global ecclesiology by the UMC.
The first was shortly after the inaugural Central Conference episcopal election in 1930. The Committee on Central Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC) returned with three options for possible ways forward:
1) The Central Conferences could all be developed into independent General Conferences, giving each church autonomy for self-governance without oversight, but not demanding that missional commitments between Conferences end.
2) Form a Central Conference in the United States as a regional body. All the Central Conferences would then relate in a smaller General Conference to maintain the connection and handle Methodist relations with other church bodies.
3) Maintain the structure as it stands with the American General Conference as the final authority and the Central Conferences as mission bodies of the “mother church”[2]
The Committee claimed the voices of Central Conference representatives spoke most strongly for the final recommendation, to maintain the current polity (option #3) for the time being until more transition could take place in the organization of the Central Conferences.[3]
It does us well while reflecting on this first discernment process to remember that American missionaries were often the representative delegates from the Central Conferences they were serving during this era of Church history, and it benefited the missionaries to remain connected to the American processes. Whether this was an implicit preference or an explicit act of colonialism we can not know, but it resulted in retention of an American-centric system into the next era of Methodism.
In 1948, the Commission on the Structure of Methodism Overseas (COSMOS) replaced the Committee on Central Conferences in managing the connections of the international Methodist Church post-World War II.[4] The decolonization process saw a preference for ecclesial autonomy, as peoples in newly established countries sought to have their churches reflect developing nationalism.[5]
In 1951, the World Methodist Conference, started by the British Methodist Church, responded to decolonization by reorganizing as the World Methodist Council and relocating its headquarters to the United States.[6]
But economic stability did not follow political independence for much of the world, making autonomy financially inviable, and political tensions between Capitalist and Communist powers added further tensions to international loyalties[7].
Responding to the changing climate of international governance, COSMOS began a major investigation of international structures in 1960[8]. For the first time in 1964, Central Conference representatives were invited to partake in every meeting of COSMOS, rather than just the meeting preceding General Conference[9].
With the unification of the Methodist Church and the Evangelical United Brethren (EUB) at the 1968 Conference, an unprecedented 25 international Annual Conferences requested autonomy, a majority from Latin America[10].
The COSMOS recommendations to the 1968 Conference proposed familiar options for the future structure of the UMC:
1) Encourage autonomy for international conferences
2) Support regional General Conferences in the place of Central Conferences, each of which would create their own Discipline and organization, including a Regional Conference for the United States
3) Create a World Conference of the autonomous General Conferences for discussing global needs and continued mission partnerships
All of these suggestions were adopted by the 1968 General Conference and consultations were planned for the development of the World Conference.
However, by 1972, somewhat inexplicably, COSMOS reported its belief that the World Methodist Council would become a sufficient body for handling the connectional needs of global Methodism and that the establishment of a separate World Conference should be discontinued.
COSMOS also proposed its own discontinuance and the reestablishment of a Committee on Central Conference Affairs to deal with legislation relating to the Central Conferences and Autonomous Affiliating bodies[11]. Over a decade of study, conferencing and relationship building between the most diverse decision making body of the UMC to date was simply dissolved. Additonal information on COSMOS will be provided in future posts.
A new directive to study the Global Nature of the United Methodist Church was given by General Conference in 1992,[12] yet few substantive changes have been seen at the General Conference over the last seven quadrennia.
The Committee on Central Conference Affairs was re-established in 2008 as the Standing Committee on Central Conference Matters,[13] chaired for the first time by a Central Conference Bishop, and has begun to undertake global investigation with a seriousness resembling the broad study initiatives of COSMOS in the 1960’s.
The designation of a Global Book of Discipline was established in 2012, and the Standing Committee is working in consultation with groups of clergy and laity across the connection on further revisions and simplifications to make the BOD more accessible and applicable cross-culturally[14].
Previous inquiries into the global structure of the church seem to have held an underlying assumption that the church in the United States would always maintain the majority at the General Conference, thus creating no need for the American Church to be designated as its own Central or Regional Conference. While it was recognized by members of COSMOS that issues at General Conference were unfairly weighted on American issues, this was not impetus enough to modify the structure.[15] The focus on American issues at General Conference was considered an inconvenience for the 10% of delegates from outside the United States. The members of COSMOS likely could not have imagined that in just over 50 years 42% of delegates would come from outside the United States.[16]
This global expansion is of course to be celebrated, but it has created a structure that may now be threatening the missional activities of the church in the American context. The Central Conferences maintain autonomy to modify decisions made by General Conference in their local context. No such process is afforded to the UMC in the US.
Within a few more quadrennia, the American UMC may become the minority at General Conference. Without a serious resurgence in action to reconsider the global structure, this could result in a flipped disadvantage where the mother church is left to carry out decisions made by her children, with no autonomy of her own.
[1] Bruce W. Robbins, A World Parish? Hopes and Challenges of the United Methodist Church in a Global Setting. Nashville: Abingdon, 2004.
[4] R. Lawrence Turnipseed, “A Brief History of the Discussion of The United Methodist Church As a ‘World Church,’” The Ecumenical Implications of the Discussions of “The Global Nature of The United Methodist Church”: A Consultation on the Future Structure and Connection of the UMC (New York: General Commission on Christian Unity and Interreligious Concerns, 1999).
[5] Robert J. Harman, From Missions to Mission: The History of the United Methodist Church, 1968-2000 (New York: GBGM Books, 2005).
[6] “History of the World Methodist Council”, World Methodist Council: Who We Are, http://worldmethodistcouncil.org/about/, accessed 26 March 2015.
[13] Bishop Minerva C. Carcaño, interviewed by Blair Trygstad, in person, Pasadena, California, 12 March 2015.
[14] Heather Hahn, “Plans Underway to Make Discipline Truly Global,” United Methodist News Service, Published 16 March 2015, accessed http://www.umc.org/news-and-media/plans-under-way-to-make-discipline-truly-global, 26 March 2015.
[15] Lawrence Turnipseed, “New Structures for Methodism Overseas,” 10 February 1966, accessed from the United Methodist Church General Archives, 15 May 2019.
[16] “2020 General Conference delegate distribution by annual conference now available,” Commission on the General Conference, Published 26 January 2018, accessed http://www.umc.org/who-we-are/2020-general-conference-delegate-distribution-by-annual-conference-now-avai, 20 June 2019.
Wednesday, June 19, 2019
Jacqueline Ngoy Mwayuma - African Women and Mission, Part I
Today’s post contains remarks prepared by Rev. Jacqueline Ngoy Mwayuma for the panel “African Women and Mission” at the Methodist Mission Bicentennial Conference. Rev. Mwayuma is administrative assistant to Bishop Mande Muyombo of the North Katanga Episcopal Area. Rev. Mwayuma’s remarks are translated from French.
Introduction and History
In debates about "feminism," too often one confronts abstract and simplified theses. It is worth the trouble of going to the field to see how things went yesterday and go today. Despite their marginalization, African women are creators and actors in several sectors: social, economic, political, religious and cultural. A woman’s identity is more determined by roles in the secular social that limit her rather than by her understanding and acceptance as a child of God who can exercise ministry in the world.
Most of the statistics available today report the presence of three women among every five missionaries, all countries considered together. That is to say, that the role of women in the mission is far from negligible. However, it has not always been so, as a quick historical glimpse highlights.
During the post-Reformation period, Christian missionaries emphasized the family. Women going out in mission had, as their primary responsibility, to care for their homes and to support their husbands in prayer (1 Corinthians 14.33 -36).
The difficulties faced by women in the mission of the church in Africa start with the fact that the acceptance of the missionary woman was not easy in the society where she worked.
Within African society, in a traditional approach, women could neither teach men nor exercise any authority over man. Another more current approach states that the woman could teach, but she was not allowed to occupy a position of authority.
The woman was poorly perceived by those around her, which points to discrimination on the part of men. Women encountered serious depression in the face of cultural arrangements where women in primitive society were considered second class.
On the one hand, knowing that a leader is necessary and that one has the gifts for assuming this function, but that the leadership role has not been offered because one is a woman, led to a lot of frustrations.
On the other hand, accepting such a position in a cultural situation where the woman did not usually occupy a place of leadership can cause strong tensions that will often be very difficult to manage. A woman assigned to a leadership position in mission can easily be judged badly, even by her own colleagues. If she makes an error, it will be judged more severely than a male colleague occupying the same position. If under her direction certain aspects of the work are not as satisfactory as expected, the fact that she is a woman will often be blamed, sometimes quite wrongly.
After several decades, the missionary movement had a great impact in Africa, where women played a large role in this mission, in accordance with the opinion that men and women are equal according to Galatians 3:28.
Men and women, youth and adults, rich and poor, all have understood their baptism as the basis for service in the Christian ministry. Historically, the Methodist movement has given women the opportunity to assert their callings to their duties and to ensure roles of ecclesial leadership for them.
Thus, The United Methodist Church in Africa involves women in all activities – evangelical, spiritual, material, financial and social. Therefore, in Africa, women perform all the same functions as a man; they are actively involved in the functions with which they have been entrusted, according to their gifts.
Over time, the opinion that men and women are equal in the church is spreading more and more nowadays, especially within the major denominations: Reformed, Methodist, Lutheran, and others. This is how John Wesley, the organizer of the Methodist movement, used the biblical foundation to encourage all people.
The church is aware of the importance of the contribution of women to its mission in Africa, which would be less dynamic, less ready to welcome education and generous service without them. They have helped the African church to clarify the understanding of proper service due the power of evangelism. This is particularly true from the point of view of dedication, self-giving, welcoming, listening, concrete attention to people small and large, rich and poor. It is a perspective capable of helping people to challenge certain mental patterns, prejudices or ways of understanding and to organize ecclesial life.
The challenge today in Africa is to give many more places to women in the management of ecclesial affairs. The voice of women continuing the mission must be heard in the same way as the voice of men, because the church is not for men only but also women, especially in Africa where our churches are 70% filled with women.
Bibliography
Mady Vaillant, “Les femmes dans la mission,” Fac-Réflexion 49 (1999), 24-36.
Ruth A. Tucker, “A Historical Overview of Women in Ministry,” Theology News and Notes (Fuller Theological Seminary, March 1995), quoted by Dr. Saphir Athyal.
E. M. Braekman, Histoire du Protestantisme au Congo, (Bruxelles: Librairie des Eclaireurs Unionistes, 1961).
Delia Halverson, Kabamba Kiboko, M. Lynn Scott, and Laceye Warner, Women Called to the Ministry: A Six-Session Study for The United Methodist Church, (Washington, DC: General Commission on the Status and Role of Women, The United Methodist Church, 2015).
Leevy Frivet, “Femmes pasteurs et femmes de pasteurs: Porte-voix des femmes,” Gender Links (March 30, 2013), https://genderlinks.org.za/classification/themes/femmes-pasteurs-et-femmes-de-pasteurs-porte-voix-des-femmes-2013-03-30/
The United Methodist Church, Le Quotidien du Défenseur Chrétien, Vol. 2: Ministères Globaux (Nashville, TN: [n.d.]).
Introduction and History
In debates about "feminism," too often one confronts abstract and simplified theses. It is worth the trouble of going to the field to see how things went yesterday and go today. Despite their marginalization, African women are creators and actors in several sectors: social, economic, political, religious and cultural. A woman’s identity is more determined by roles in the secular social that limit her rather than by her understanding and acceptance as a child of God who can exercise ministry in the world.
Most of the statistics available today report the presence of three women among every five missionaries, all countries considered together. That is to say, that the role of women in the mission is far from negligible. However, it has not always been so, as a quick historical glimpse highlights.
During the post-Reformation period, Christian missionaries emphasized the family. Women going out in mission had, as their primary responsibility, to care for their homes and to support their husbands in prayer (1 Corinthians 14.33 -36).
The difficulties faced by women in the mission of the church in Africa start with the fact that the acceptance of the missionary woman was not easy in the society where she worked.
Within African society, in a traditional approach, women could neither teach men nor exercise any authority over man. Another more current approach states that the woman could teach, but she was not allowed to occupy a position of authority.
The woman was poorly perceived by those around her, which points to discrimination on the part of men. Women encountered serious depression in the face of cultural arrangements where women in primitive society were considered second class.
On the one hand, knowing that a leader is necessary and that one has the gifts for assuming this function, but that the leadership role has not been offered because one is a woman, led to a lot of frustrations.
On the other hand, accepting such a position in a cultural situation where the woman did not usually occupy a place of leadership can cause strong tensions that will often be very difficult to manage. A woman assigned to a leadership position in mission can easily be judged badly, even by her own colleagues. If she makes an error, it will be judged more severely than a male colleague occupying the same position. If under her direction certain aspects of the work are not as satisfactory as expected, the fact that she is a woman will often be blamed, sometimes quite wrongly.
After several decades, the missionary movement had a great impact in Africa, where women played a large role in this mission, in accordance with the opinion that men and women are equal according to Galatians 3:28.
Men and women, youth and adults, rich and poor, all have understood their baptism as the basis for service in the Christian ministry. Historically, the Methodist movement has given women the opportunity to assert their callings to their duties and to ensure roles of ecclesial leadership for them.
Thus, The United Methodist Church in Africa involves women in all activities – evangelical, spiritual, material, financial and social. Therefore, in Africa, women perform all the same functions as a man; they are actively involved in the functions with which they have been entrusted, according to their gifts.
Over time, the opinion that men and women are equal in the church is spreading more and more nowadays, especially within the major denominations: Reformed, Methodist, Lutheran, and others. This is how John Wesley, the organizer of the Methodist movement, used the biblical foundation to encourage all people.
The church is aware of the importance of the contribution of women to its mission in Africa, which would be less dynamic, less ready to welcome education and generous service without them. They have helped the African church to clarify the understanding of proper service due the power of evangelism. This is particularly true from the point of view of dedication, self-giving, welcoming, listening, concrete attention to people small and large, rich and poor. It is a perspective capable of helping people to challenge certain mental patterns, prejudices or ways of understanding and to organize ecclesial life.
The challenge today in Africa is to give many more places to women in the management of ecclesial affairs. The voice of women continuing the mission must be heard in the same way as the voice of men, because the church is not for men only but also women, especially in Africa where our churches are 70% filled with women.
Bibliography
Mady Vaillant, “Les femmes dans la mission,” Fac-Réflexion 49 (1999), 24-36.
Ruth A. Tucker, “A Historical Overview of Women in Ministry,” Theology News and Notes (Fuller Theological Seminary, March 1995), quoted by Dr. Saphir Athyal.
E. M. Braekman, Histoire du Protestantisme au Congo, (Bruxelles: Librairie des Eclaireurs Unionistes, 1961).
Delia Halverson, Kabamba Kiboko, M. Lynn Scott, and Laceye Warner, Women Called to the Ministry: A Six-Session Study for The United Methodist Church, (Washington, DC: General Commission on the Status and Role of Women, The United Methodist Church, 2015).
Leevy Frivet, “Femmes pasteurs et femmes de pasteurs: Porte-voix des femmes,” Gender Links (March 30, 2013), https://genderlinks.org.za/classification/themes/femmes-pasteurs-et-femmes-de-pasteurs-porte-voix-des-femmes-2013-03-30/
The United Methodist Church, Le Quotidien du Défenseur Chrétien, Vol. 2: Ministères Globaux (Nashville, TN: [n.d.]).
Monday, June 17, 2019
Blair Trygstad-Stowe: History of the Global Connection
Today’s post is by Rev. Blair Trygstad Stowe. Rev. Stowe is Lead Pastor at First United Methodist Church of Ontario, CA, and Community Cultivator of Open Space Inland Empire.
In the wake of the Special General Conference in St. Louis, American United Methodists, particularly the laity, are talking about the global structure of our church with new vigor. This has led to a lot of questions and confusion about how we arrived at the current global structure, which gives some rights and privileges to Central Conferences outside of the United States which are not afforded to the American Church.
One primary question is how the Central Conferences are able to make adaptations to the Book of Discipline for their local context, yet adaptations to the Book of Disicpline which the American church must live under can only be made at the General Conference, with the influence and vote of global voices. There is currently no structure for the American church to make missional or cultural adaptations to the Book of Disicpline with the influence of only American voices.
Posts over the next several days will explore how this current situation came to be, and how we might approach our Global Structure moving forward.
Central Conference structures outside of the United States pre-date the uniquely American Jurisdictional structure as the level of regional organizing between the Annual and the General Conference. In the 1880’s, the Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC) had two active Annual Conferences in India, which interacted with each other in an official capacity only when together at the General Conference meeting in the US. The missionary and national Indian leadership created a regional delegated meeting to encourage cooperative ministry in their context.
In 1884, the General Conference of the MEC recognized this gathering as a Central Conference.[1] Additional Central Conferences were created, and General Conference permitted these regional bodies to elect their own bishops beginning in 1928[2]. The Methodist Episcopal Church, South (MECS) first adopted the designation of Central Conference in 1934, allowing for the management of church organization by missionaries and nationals in the field, with relatively little oversight from General Conference[3].
When the branches of American Methodism reunited in 1939, the expanded rights of the Central Conferences from the MECS tradition were added to the MEC tradition of supervised episcopal election. The rights of Central Conferences came to include electing bishops (under supervision and direction of General Conference); setting the length of tenure for bishops; providing courses of study; making adjustments to the BOD to reflect local ministerial needs, legal structures and land ownership; and allowing the Central Conferences to fix the borders of the Annual and Mission Conferences within their region[4]. The main duties (and restrictions) created in 1939 remain in our current BOD, including the ability to make adaptations to the Book of Discipline for local application.
A representative Committee on Central Conferences proposed the addition of the Autonomous Affiliated designation in the 1940 Conference[5]. Autonomy had become the best course of action for some missions outside the United States for reasons including political circumstance which required separation from any American relations (Mexico in 1930), the need for a national unified front (Japan in 1907 and Korea in 1930) complicated by the the separation of the Northern and Southern American Churches prior to 1939, or the desire for greater local control than the parameters of the Central Conference structure allowed (Brazil in 1930)[6].
These Autonomous churches sought to maintain amicable and missional relationships with the “mother church,” and so the Board of Missions managed relations, and the churches honored non-voting delegates at their respective General Conference meetings[7].
Autonomous Affiliated Churches and United Affiliated Churches still maintain representative delegates to General Conference with full rights of the floor except for the right to vote[8]. Today there are over 50 Autonomous Affiliated bodies related to the UMC.
Both of these designations, the Central Conference and the Autonomous Affiliated Church, were unique contributions to Methodist polity by American Methodist mission work. Yet they also created new complications. The majority view of missiologists throughout most of modern mission history has been that mission work in international settings should be undertaken with the goal of establishing local churches which are self-governing, self-supporting and self-propagating[9].
What was unclear in the early development of Central Conferences and Autonomous Affiliated churches was whether the establishment of “three-selfs” churches was still the intention of American Methodist missions overseas when maintaining Central Conferences with American oversight, rather than encouraging autonomy, or if this new connectional polity might be of greater benefit for the spread of the Gospel.
Our next post will investigate several attempts in our history to alter the global structure to wrestle with the competing goals of autonomy and maintained connection.
Alfred W. Wasson, The Influence of Missionary Expansion Upon Methodist Organization, (New York: Commission on Central Conferences, 1947).
Lud H. Estes, editor, “Central Conferences”, Journal of the Uniting Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Methodist Episcopal Church South, and Methodist Protestant Church, 26 April-10 May 1939, 23-27.
Lud H. Estes, editor, “Committee on Conferences”, Journal of the First General Conference of the Methodist Church, 24 April-6 May 1940, 490-507.
Wasson, Missionary Expansion.
Wasson, Missionary Expansion.
BOD Para. 527
World Missionary Conference 1910, “The Church in the Mission Field”, Report of Commission II, 16 June 1910.
In the wake of the Special General Conference in St. Louis, American United Methodists, particularly the laity, are talking about the global structure of our church with new vigor. This has led to a lot of questions and confusion about how we arrived at the current global structure, which gives some rights and privileges to Central Conferences outside of the United States which are not afforded to the American Church.
One primary question is how the Central Conferences are able to make adaptations to the Book of Discipline for their local context, yet adaptations to the Book of Disicpline which the American church must live under can only be made at the General Conference, with the influence and vote of global voices. There is currently no structure for the American church to make missional or cultural adaptations to the Book of Disicpline with the influence of only American voices.
Posts over the next several days will explore how this current situation came to be, and how we might approach our Global Structure moving forward.
Central Conference structures outside of the United States pre-date the uniquely American Jurisdictional structure as the level of regional organizing between the Annual and the General Conference. In the 1880’s, the Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC) had two active Annual Conferences in India, which interacted with each other in an official capacity only when together at the General Conference meeting in the US. The missionary and national Indian leadership created a regional delegated meeting to encourage cooperative ministry in their context.
In 1884, the General Conference of the MEC recognized this gathering as a Central Conference.[1] Additional Central Conferences were created, and General Conference permitted these regional bodies to elect their own bishops beginning in 1928[2]. The Methodist Episcopal Church, South (MECS) first adopted the designation of Central Conference in 1934, allowing for the management of church organization by missionaries and nationals in the field, with relatively little oversight from General Conference[3].
When the branches of American Methodism reunited in 1939, the expanded rights of the Central Conferences from the MECS tradition were added to the MEC tradition of supervised episcopal election. The rights of Central Conferences came to include electing bishops (under supervision and direction of General Conference); setting the length of tenure for bishops; providing courses of study; making adjustments to the BOD to reflect local ministerial needs, legal structures and land ownership; and allowing the Central Conferences to fix the borders of the Annual and Mission Conferences within their region[4]. The main duties (and restrictions) created in 1939 remain in our current BOD, including the ability to make adaptations to the Book of Discipline for local application.
A representative Committee on Central Conferences proposed the addition of the Autonomous Affiliated designation in the 1940 Conference[5]. Autonomy had become the best course of action for some missions outside the United States for reasons including political circumstance which required separation from any American relations (Mexico in 1930), the need for a national unified front (Japan in 1907 and Korea in 1930) complicated by the the separation of the Northern and Southern American Churches prior to 1939, or the desire for greater local control than the parameters of the Central Conference structure allowed (Brazil in 1930)[6].
These Autonomous churches sought to maintain amicable and missional relationships with the “mother church,” and so the Board of Missions managed relations, and the churches honored non-voting delegates at their respective General Conference meetings[7].
Autonomous Affiliated Churches and United Affiliated Churches still maintain representative delegates to General Conference with full rights of the floor except for the right to vote[8]. Today there are over 50 Autonomous Affiliated bodies related to the UMC.
Both of these designations, the Central Conference and the Autonomous Affiliated Church, were unique contributions to Methodist polity by American Methodist mission work. Yet they also created new complications. The majority view of missiologists throughout most of modern mission history has been that mission work in international settings should be undertaken with the goal of establishing local churches which are self-governing, self-supporting and self-propagating[9].
What was unclear in the early development of Central Conferences and Autonomous Affiliated churches was whether the establishment of “three-selfs” churches was still the intention of American Methodist missions overseas when maintaining Central Conferences with American oversight, rather than encouraging autonomy, or if this new connectional polity might be of greater benefit for the spread of the Gospel.
Our next post will investigate several attempts in our history to alter the global structure to wrestle with the competing goals of autonomy and maintained connection.
[1] “The Central Conference”, Official Journal of the Africa Provisional Central Conference of the Methodist Church, 4-16 June 1943, 28-31.
[2] Rex D. Matthews, Timetables of History for Students of Methodism, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2007).
Lud H. Estes, editor, “Central Conferences”, Journal of the Uniting Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Methodist Episcopal Church South, and Methodist Protestant Church, 26 April-10 May 1939, 23-27.
Lud H. Estes, editor, “Committee on Conferences”, Journal of the First General Conference of the Methodist Church, 24 April-6 May 1940, 490-507.
Wasson, Missionary Expansion.
Wasson, Missionary Expansion.
BOD Para. 527
World Missionary Conference 1910, “The Church in the Mission Field”, Report of Commission II, 16 June 1910.
Friday, June 14, 2019
Is Being a World-Wide Denomination an American Aspiration?
On Monday, I published a rough typology of world-wide denominations. It is worth noting that most of the examples of more centralized and well-connected world-wide denominations are American in origin. This leads to a question: Is the desire to be a world-wide denomination a particularly American desire?
In asking this question, I'm not suggesting that only Americans as individuals want to be part of world-wide denominations. In order for there to be world-wide denominations, there needs to be individuals from many countries willing to belong to such groups.
Rather, what I'm asking is whether the desire to be a world-wide denomination is grounded in peculiarly American experiences of and assumptions about the world and the church.
To begin an answer, it may be worth reviewing the examples of world-wide denominations. As I suggested in the initial post, the Roman Catholic Church is the most world-wide denomination (if it can be called a denomination; there's debate over that). Beyond Roman Catholicism, the other examples of denominations with global decision-making regarding all matters of church life include nine denominations with an American background and three denominations with backgrounds in the global South (one Brazilian, one Ghanaian, and one Filipino). Of the four traditions with world-wide theological consultation, two are American in origin, and two are European in origin.
Thus, two-thirds of what might be considered world-wide denominations are American in origin. By contrast, only half of world-wide denominational traditions based on national or congregational autonomy are American in origin.
There are several possible explanations for why the United States as a religious context has given rise to so many world-wide denominations.
First, it is worth noting that the United States, with its traditions of separation of church and state and vibrant voluntary associations pioneered denominationalism as a form of organizing church life. Thus, the United States is the source of many denominations of all forms and all ways of thinking about national, regional, and world-wide connection. Perhaps the United States has given birth to many world-wide denominations just because it has given birth to many denominations.
Second, it is also worth noting that most of the world-wide denominations with an American background are Wesleyan, Holiness, and/or Pentecostal traditions. (The Mormon Church and Jehovah's Witnesses are the two notable exceptions.) Thus, another possible explanation for why so many world-wide churches come from the US is that the US is the context in which Wesleyan, Holiness, and Pentecostal traditions developed most fully, and there is something about these traditions that fosters a desire for a world-wide church.
To some extent, however, this is just to rephrase the question: Why have Wesleyan, Holiness, and Pentecostal traditions (which developed in the United States) aspired to become world-wide denominations? Here is it important to point out that other expressions of Wesleyanism and Pentecostalism that have developed outside the United States have not aspired to world-wide organizational unity in the same way that their American counterparts have.
Third, it is possible that the key explanatory factor is not American origins per se but rather globalization as a framework for world-wide expansion. Because of the time frame in which these US-originated traditions spread to the rest of the world (late 19th century to present) and because of the distinctive American experience of economic and cultural rather than political colonialism, it is possible that these denominations think of themselves as world-wide because of their (positive) experiences with globalization.
European traditions, on the other hand, have roots either in the Peace of Westphalia or the European experience of political colonization and de-colonization, both of which have emphasized national autonomy.
The inclusion of three denominations from the global South on the list of world-wide denominations, each of which has developed through global migratory diasporas and/or global media distribution, gives further credence to the notion that what is at the root of this desire is globalization more so than American origins.
It is worth noting, however, that the two - globalization and American origins - are not possible to entirely separate. The United States has had a significant role in creating and shaping waves of globalization in the past 150 years. Thus, a globalization explanation may also be a US explanation.
Fourth and finally, it is possible that there is some particular about how Americans have thought about the world that has impelled them to create world-wide denominations, bringing in others who have either adopted this way of thinking from Americans or have been willing to participate in world-wide denominations for their own reasons.
This explanation is not mutually exclusive with the prior explanation. It is quite possible that this peculiarly American way of thinking about the world is tied to American experiences of and ways of thinking about globalization. In that regard, it is possible that American experiences of economic globalization and the creation of multinational corporations and organizations like the World Bank or cultural and governance globalization and the creation of world-wide organizations like the Red Cross and UN have served as models, implicitly or explicitly, for how American denominations have thought about their relationships with their co-religionists around the world.
Another version of this explanation might instead look at American notions of American exceptionalism and the American national mission for the ideological sources of the desire for American denominations to become world-wide denominations. The notion of America as a city on a hill and a country with a mission to the world has been explored in books such as William Hutchison's Errand to the World and Ian Tyrrell's Reforming the World.
One concluding comment seems appropriate here. To the extent that the desire to be a world-wide denomination is tied to an American background, that does not necessarily make it an invalid desire. The belief that denominations should be organized at a national level also usually comes out of particular historical and cultural experiences.
But while such a socio-historical view of the desire to be a world-wide denomination doesn't invalidate that desire, it does open it up for further reflection. Are there theological arguments to be made for such a view? What are the relationships between organizational unity and other forms of unity? Does seeing this aspiration as historically-rooted make being a world-wide denomination optional? If it is option, what are the other options, and what are the arguments for and against them?
In asking this question, I'm not suggesting that only Americans as individuals want to be part of world-wide denominations. In order for there to be world-wide denominations, there needs to be individuals from many countries willing to belong to such groups.
Rather, what I'm asking is whether the desire to be a world-wide denomination is grounded in peculiarly American experiences of and assumptions about the world and the church.
To begin an answer, it may be worth reviewing the examples of world-wide denominations. As I suggested in the initial post, the Roman Catholic Church is the most world-wide denomination (if it can be called a denomination; there's debate over that). Beyond Roman Catholicism, the other examples of denominations with global decision-making regarding all matters of church life include nine denominations with an American background and three denominations with backgrounds in the global South (one Brazilian, one Ghanaian, and one Filipino). Of the four traditions with world-wide theological consultation, two are American in origin, and two are European in origin.
Thus, two-thirds of what might be considered world-wide denominations are American in origin. By contrast, only half of world-wide denominational traditions based on national or congregational autonomy are American in origin.
There are several possible explanations for why the United States as a religious context has given rise to so many world-wide denominations.
First, it is worth noting that the United States, with its traditions of separation of church and state and vibrant voluntary associations pioneered denominationalism as a form of organizing church life. Thus, the United States is the source of many denominations of all forms and all ways of thinking about national, regional, and world-wide connection. Perhaps the United States has given birth to many world-wide denominations just because it has given birth to many denominations.
Second, it is also worth noting that most of the world-wide denominations with an American background are Wesleyan, Holiness, and/or Pentecostal traditions. (The Mormon Church and Jehovah's Witnesses are the two notable exceptions.) Thus, another possible explanation for why so many world-wide churches come from the US is that the US is the context in which Wesleyan, Holiness, and Pentecostal traditions developed most fully, and there is something about these traditions that fosters a desire for a world-wide church.
To some extent, however, this is just to rephrase the question: Why have Wesleyan, Holiness, and Pentecostal traditions (which developed in the United States) aspired to become world-wide denominations? Here is it important to point out that other expressions of Wesleyanism and Pentecostalism that have developed outside the United States have not aspired to world-wide organizational unity in the same way that their American counterparts have.
Third, it is possible that the key explanatory factor is not American origins per se but rather globalization as a framework for world-wide expansion. Because of the time frame in which these US-originated traditions spread to the rest of the world (late 19th century to present) and because of the distinctive American experience of economic and cultural rather than political colonialism, it is possible that these denominations think of themselves as world-wide because of their (positive) experiences with globalization.
European traditions, on the other hand, have roots either in the Peace of Westphalia or the European experience of political colonization and de-colonization, both of which have emphasized national autonomy.
The inclusion of three denominations from the global South on the list of world-wide denominations, each of which has developed through global migratory diasporas and/or global media distribution, gives further credence to the notion that what is at the root of this desire is globalization more so than American origins.
It is worth noting, however, that the two - globalization and American origins - are not possible to entirely separate. The United States has had a significant role in creating and shaping waves of globalization in the past 150 years. Thus, a globalization explanation may also be a US explanation.
Fourth and finally, it is possible that there is some particular about how Americans have thought about the world that has impelled them to create world-wide denominations, bringing in others who have either adopted this way of thinking from Americans or have been willing to participate in world-wide denominations for their own reasons.
This explanation is not mutually exclusive with the prior explanation. It is quite possible that this peculiarly American way of thinking about the world is tied to American experiences of and ways of thinking about globalization. In that regard, it is possible that American experiences of economic globalization and the creation of multinational corporations and organizations like the World Bank or cultural and governance globalization and the creation of world-wide organizations like the Red Cross and UN have served as models, implicitly or explicitly, for how American denominations have thought about their relationships with their co-religionists around the world.
Another version of this explanation might instead look at American notions of American exceptionalism and the American national mission for the ideological sources of the desire for American denominations to become world-wide denominations. The notion of America as a city on a hill and a country with a mission to the world has been explored in books such as William Hutchison's Errand to the World and Ian Tyrrell's Reforming the World.
One concluding comment seems appropriate here. To the extent that the desire to be a world-wide denomination is tied to an American background, that does not necessarily make it an invalid desire. The belief that denominations should be organized at a national level also usually comes out of particular historical and cultural experiences.
But while such a socio-historical view of the desire to be a world-wide denomination doesn't invalidate that desire, it does open it up for further reflection. Are there theological arguments to be made for such a view? What are the relationships between organizational unity and other forms of unity? Does seeing this aspiration as historically-rooted make being a world-wide denomination optional? If it is option, what are the other options, and what are the arguments for and against them?
Wednesday, June 12, 2019
Betty Spiwe Katiyo – African Women and Mission
Today’s post contains remarks prepared by Mrs. Betty Spiwe Katiyo for the panel “African Women and Mission” at the Methodist Mission Bicentennial Conference. Mrs. Katiyo is an active laywoman in the West Zimbabwe Annual Conference.
What stories of United Methodist history and mission history are important for your own personal sense of religious and spiritual formation?
Let me start by quoting an excerpt from Glory E. Dharmaraj, Concepts of Mission (New York: Women’s Division, General Board of Global Ministries, 2005).
What is “Mission”? “Mission is the goal and the purpose of God for us.”
What are “Missions”? “Missions are the human objectives by which we respond to God’s love for us.”
Reflecting on the above definitions, my personal sense of religious and spiritual formation is strengthened in our missions as the United Methodist body. Knowing that from the time of the Acts of the Apostles (when the likes of Priscilla started mission work) to John Wesley (who together with his brother Charles established missional and philanthropic enterprises to promote social change in society) forming the church, embarking on “missions,” and then leading up to The United Methodist Church mission as per the Book of Discipline paragraph 120, which reads “The mission of the church is to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.” These are timelines in which we see the “missions” undertaken by humans and by His grace keep growing globally as a testament of His “Mission” for us.
What is the role of African women in those stories?
African women’s missions are as diverse as the continent, and my fellow panelists will attest to that in sharing their missions and experiences.
It is important at this point to highlight that prior to colonization and the coming of the gospel to Africa, we had our own way of carrying out missions within our societies with women very much involved.
To highlight the role of African women in these stories, I would like to share the story of the pioneer of the Methodist women’s group in Zimbabwe, Mbuya (Granny) Lydia Chimonyo, nee Duri, who was born in 1894. She was at risk of a forced marriage to a married man and ran away to Old Mutare Mission for refuge among the missionaries. She worked for missionaries as a helper and the missionaries’ wives took her under their wings to teach and mentor her spiritually and life lessons. In 1914 she got married to Obedia Chimonyo, a pastor/teacher who was attending theological training with other male pastors. It is believed that the foreign missionaries set them up and officiated the nuptials.
Lydia formed a group of local pastors’ wives whose husbands were in theological training. The purpose of this group was to pray for their husbands’ missions. They identified a meeting place at a nearby mountain named Chiremba at Old Mutare Mission under a special tree called Chin’ando, where they met and prayed as early as 4.00am. This was the birth of Rumuko (“early morning prayer before morning chores”). They continued meeting as a group of pastors’ wives and also with the missionary wives who mentored them in various disciplines of womanhood and life in general. They later started wider outreach to include other women for these prayers and meetings. Till today Rumuko has been vibrant, and men and children have joined in making it a family ritual. People meet in homes, sanctuaries or any place of choice. Chin’ando shrine has become a place where people visit regularly for prayer and inspiration.
Women’s clubs were also formed then to teach and do a number of things like adult literacy, cooking, baking, crocheting, nutritional gardens, sustainable farming, poultry, keeping rabbits (coined “butcher in the backyards”), leadership empowerment and many more. These programs are still going on, and many more have been incorporated to suit the current times, e.g. lessons on climatic change.
How can the church globally tell stories of mission history that give more weight to the experiences of African women?
To give more weight to the experiences of African women in mission history, the church should actively capture, document and globally share the African women’s stories in church literature. It would also be worth noting, researching and archiving historical African mission stories.
To enhance existing exchange programs locally, regionally and internationally so that there is first-hand experiences and appreciation to their experiences.
What contributions do you see African women making to the United Methodist mission today?
There is no mission in Africa without women. In Africa, women make up about 70% of the church, which makes them the strength and vitality of the African church and society. Their major contribution to the mission starts with nurturing their children into spiritual environments. This provides a base for the continuity and growth of the church, as missions are passed down from generation to generation.
Other contributions towards the missions are prayer, evangelism, assisting the needy, empowering women in various disciplines (club formations, cooking, business development, home economics, education, etc.), leadership development and mentorship.
What resources have they drawn upon in making these contributions?
They draw upon resources that include:
- Great leadership skills of the regional and local woman coordinators of UMW
- The use of clergy women as resource persons
- Personal experiences
- Funding, both local and international
- Networking with other women groups and women in government offices
- Professional experts (local, regional and international)
What has hindered their contributions?
Hinderances include:
- Limited economic resources
- Limited physical access to remote areas
- Patriarchy, which inhibits some women from pursuing active roles in mission work
- Lack of self-esteem and self confidence
And what has helped?
- Improvement in the mobility and access to information through the internet has opened a gateway to information that would otherwise not be readily available.
- Open doors in government programs have expanded access to subject matter experts.
- Church programs and meetings help stimulate participation and exposure.
- The Global Ministries missionaries program has helped with human and expertise resources.
Mission has historically included many activities: evangelism, health, education, social justice, development, etc. As you think to the future of the United Methodist mission, what components of mission do you hope will continue?
All of them are critical, especially social justice and inter-generational transmission of skills and experiences. There is a need to thoroughly document the various programs and archive them for future generations.
Economic empowerment, especially with the failing economies and several catastrophes and wars, is needed for self-reliance and sustenance.
Consistent monitoring and evaluation of mission programs for effectiveness is also needed.
What do you think the relationship between these components should be?
The relationship of these components should continue to be intertwined, as they are all threads that bind our society. We need to identify synergies, with clear and effective goals to adequately implement our missions.
How do you think African women will lead in carrying out these components of Gods mission?
They will lead in carrying out these components through their dedication and deep understanding of the church’s mission and how it relates to the different components. In addition, due to the growth of the church in Africa partly because of women’s evangelism, I see African women playing a pivotal role in assisting the church at large and being a point of reference for evangelism and mission work in the global community.
God has used the church through Christ to save persons, heal relationships, transform social structures, and spread scriptural holiness. African women have created a safe space where the church is a place of refuge and a place of purpose. Mbuya Lydia’s “missions” started under a tree, and now Rumuko (Communal Sun Rise Prayers) is practiced in homes and churches all over Zimbabwe, becoming a major source of evangelism up to date as witnessed when they hold their annual conventions and souls are won to Christ. The women’s clubs they started have progressed into various mission activities within the church. This is a testament of the power of African women missions.
I close with a quote from Glory E. Dharmaraj: “God’s mission outlives individual or denominational missions; it does not end.”
What stories of United Methodist history and mission history are important for your own personal sense of religious and spiritual formation?
Let me start by quoting an excerpt from Glory E. Dharmaraj, Concepts of Mission (New York: Women’s Division, General Board of Global Ministries, 2005).
What is “Mission”? “Mission is the goal and the purpose of God for us.”
What are “Missions”? “Missions are the human objectives by which we respond to God’s love for us.”
Reflecting on the above definitions, my personal sense of religious and spiritual formation is strengthened in our missions as the United Methodist body. Knowing that from the time of the Acts of the Apostles (when the likes of Priscilla started mission work) to John Wesley (who together with his brother Charles established missional and philanthropic enterprises to promote social change in society) forming the church, embarking on “missions,” and then leading up to The United Methodist Church mission as per the Book of Discipline paragraph 120, which reads “The mission of the church is to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.” These are timelines in which we see the “missions” undertaken by humans and by His grace keep growing globally as a testament of His “Mission” for us.
What is the role of African women in those stories?
African women’s missions are as diverse as the continent, and my fellow panelists will attest to that in sharing their missions and experiences.
It is important at this point to highlight that prior to colonization and the coming of the gospel to Africa, we had our own way of carrying out missions within our societies with women very much involved.
To highlight the role of African women in these stories, I would like to share the story of the pioneer of the Methodist women’s group in Zimbabwe, Mbuya (Granny) Lydia Chimonyo, nee Duri, who was born in 1894. She was at risk of a forced marriage to a married man and ran away to Old Mutare Mission for refuge among the missionaries. She worked for missionaries as a helper and the missionaries’ wives took her under their wings to teach and mentor her spiritually and life lessons. In 1914 she got married to Obedia Chimonyo, a pastor/teacher who was attending theological training with other male pastors. It is believed that the foreign missionaries set them up and officiated the nuptials.
Lydia formed a group of local pastors’ wives whose husbands were in theological training. The purpose of this group was to pray for their husbands’ missions. They identified a meeting place at a nearby mountain named Chiremba at Old Mutare Mission under a special tree called Chin’ando, where they met and prayed as early as 4.00am. This was the birth of Rumuko (“early morning prayer before morning chores”). They continued meeting as a group of pastors’ wives and also with the missionary wives who mentored them in various disciplines of womanhood and life in general. They later started wider outreach to include other women for these prayers and meetings. Till today Rumuko has been vibrant, and men and children have joined in making it a family ritual. People meet in homes, sanctuaries or any place of choice. Chin’ando shrine has become a place where people visit regularly for prayer and inspiration.
Women’s clubs were also formed then to teach and do a number of things like adult literacy, cooking, baking, crocheting, nutritional gardens, sustainable farming, poultry, keeping rabbits (coined “butcher in the backyards”), leadership empowerment and many more. These programs are still going on, and many more have been incorporated to suit the current times, e.g. lessons on climatic change.
How can the church globally tell stories of mission history that give more weight to the experiences of African women?
To give more weight to the experiences of African women in mission history, the church should actively capture, document and globally share the African women’s stories in church literature. It would also be worth noting, researching and archiving historical African mission stories.
To enhance existing exchange programs locally, regionally and internationally so that there is first-hand experiences and appreciation to their experiences.
What contributions do you see African women making to the United Methodist mission today?
There is no mission in Africa without women. In Africa, women make up about 70% of the church, which makes them the strength and vitality of the African church and society. Their major contribution to the mission starts with nurturing their children into spiritual environments. This provides a base for the continuity and growth of the church, as missions are passed down from generation to generation.
Other contributions towards the missions are prayer, evangelism, assisting the needy, empowering women in various disciplines (club formations, cooking, business development, home economics, education, etc.), leadership development and mentorship.
What resources have they drawn upon in making these contributions?
They draw upon resources that include:
- Great leadership skills of the regional and local woman coordinators of UMW
- The use of clergy women as resource persons
- Personal experiences
- Funding, both local and international
- Networking with other women groups and women in government offices
- Professional experts (local, regional and international)
What has hindered their contributions?
Hinderances include:
- Limited economic resources
- Limited physical access to remote areas
- Patriarchy, which inhibits some women from pursuing active roles in mission work
- Lack of self-esteem and self confidence
And what has helped?
- Improvement in the mobility and access to information through the internet has opened a gateway to information that would otherwise not be readily available.
- Open doors in government programs have expanded access to subject matter experts.
- Church programs and meetings help stimulate participation and exposure.
- The Global Ministries missionaries program has helped with human and expertise resources.
Mission has historically included many activities: evangelism, health, education, social justice, development, etc. As you think to the future of the United Methodist mission, what components of mission do you hope will continue?
All of them are critical, especially social justice and inter-generational transmission of skills and experiences. There is a need to thoroughly document the various programs and archive them for future generations.
Economic empowerment, especially with the failing economies and several catastrophes and wars, is needed for self-reliance and sustenance.
Consistent monitoring and evaluation of mission programs for effectiveness is also needed.
What do you think the relationship between these components should be?
The relationship of these components should continue to be intertwined, as they are all threads that bind our society. We need to identify synergies, with clear and effective goals to adequately implement our missions.
How do you think African women will lead in carrying out these components of Gods mission?
They will lead in carrying out these components through their dedication and deep understanding of the church’s mission and how it relates to the different components. In addition, due to the growth of the church in Africa partly because of women’s evangelism, I see African women playing a pivotal role in assisting the church at large and being a point of reference for evangelism and mission work in the global community.
God has used the church through Christ to save persons, heal relationships, transform social structures, and spread scriptural holiness. African women have created a safe space where the church is a place of refuge and a place of purpose. Mbuya Lydia’s “missions” started under a tree, and now Rumuko (Communal Sun Rise Prayers) is practiced in homes and churches all over Zimbabwe, becoming a major source of evangelism up to date as witnessed when they hold their annual conventions and souls are won to Christ. The women’s clubs they started have progressed into various mission activities within the church. This is a testament of the power of African women missions.
I close with a quote from Glory E. Dharmaraj: “God’s mission outlives individual or denominational missions; it does not end.”
Monday, June 10, 2019
Varieties of World-Wide Denominations
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology at the General Board of Global Ministries. The opinions and analysis expressed here are Dr. Scott's own and do not reflect in any way the official position of Global Ministries.
The recent turmoil in The United Methodist Church has re-ignited conversation about the church’s global nature and whether it might be possible to structure the church globally in some other way.
Looking ecumenically shows us there are many different ways of organizing a church that is to some extent “global,” “world-wide,” or “international.” I do not distinguish between the three terms in this piece. What follows is a rough typology of these different ways of being a world-wide church, from most centralized to less centralized.
1. Centralized world churches
2. Democratic world churches
3. Centralized nationally-based churches with global reach
4. Democratic nationally-based churches with a global reach
5. World-wide theological communions
6. World-wide cooperative fellowships of national churches
7. World-wide cooperative fellowships of local churches
It is worth noting two things about the churches described above: 1) The Roman Catholic Church is the largest, most globally distributed, and most cohesive of global churches. 2) The overwhelming majority of world-wide Protestant bodies are Pentecostal or holiness in their theology and background. Arun Jones has written fine pieces on UM & Global about the Catholic and Pentecostal approaches to being a global church.
Finally, a disclaimer: I am not an expert in the polity of all forms of Christianity. It is quite possible that some of the specific examples cited above are mischaracterized. I encourage readers to do their own research into the specific polity arrangements of the churches mentioned.
The recent turmoil in The United Methodist Church has re-ignited conversation about the church’s global nature and whether it might be possible to structure the church globally in some other way.
Looking ecumenically shows us there are many different ways of organizing a church that is to some extent “global,” “world-wide,” or “international.” I do not distinguish between the three terms in this piece. What follows is a rough typology of these different ways of being a world-wide church, from most centralized to less centralized.
1. Centralized world churches
- Church members see each other as fellow members of the same church, spiritually and organizationally.
- Decisions affecting all aspects of church life, including doctrine, practice, personnel, and program are made by a centralized individual or small group, though those decisions may be implemented at subsidiary levels, and subsidiary levels may have additional decision-making authority.
- Polity structures are the same for all regions, regardless of proximity to the centralized decision-makers or historical homeland, with perhaps some variation in areas of new church development.
- Examples: The Roman Catholic Church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons), Jehovah’s Witnesses
2. Democratic world churches
- Church members see each other as fellow members of the same church, spiritually and organizationally.
- Decisions affecting all aspects of church life, including doctrine, practice, personnel, and program are made democratically by a body including equal or proportional representation from all areas, though those decisions may be implemented at subsidiary levels, and subsidiary levels may have additional decision-making authority.
- Polity structures are the same for all regions, regardless of proximity to the centralized decision-makers or historical homeland, with perhaps some variation in areas of new church development. Some areas may be privileged because of membership size or financial resources, but not because of variations in polity.
- Examples: The Church of the Nazarene, the Seventh-day Adventist Church, the African Methodist Episcopal Church, the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee)
3. Centralized nationally-based churches with global reach
- Church members see each other as fellow members of the same church, spiritually and organizationally.
- Decisions affecting all aspects of church life, including doctrine, practice, personnel, and program are made by a centralized individual or small group, though those decisions may be implemented at subsidiary levels, and subsidiary levels may have additional decision-making authority.
- Polity structures are different in the church’s historic homeland than they are elsewhere in the world. These differences tend to reinforce the power and centrality of the church in the homeland.
- Examples: Universal Church of the Kingdom of God, the Apostolic Church – Ghana, Jesus is Lord Church Worldwide
4. Democratic nationally-based churches with a global reach
- Church members see each other as fellow members of the same church, spiritually and organizationally.
- Decisions affecting all aspects of church life, including doctrine, practice, personnel, and program are made democratically by a body including equal or proportional representation from all areas, though those decisions may be implemented at subsidiary levels, and subsidiary levels may have additional decision-making authority.
- Polity structures are different in the church’s historic homeland than they are elsewhere in the world. These differences tend to reinforce the power and centrality of the church in the homeland.
- Examples: The United Methodist Church, International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, Church of God in Christ
5. World-wide theological communions
- Church members see each other as fellow members of the same tradition, but may or may not think of themselves as members of the same organization.
- Decisions about central church doctrines are made by a group of representatives from regional units including equal or proportional representation from all areas. A central body may also help foster cooperation in ministry among regional units, but it has no decision-making authority over personnel and programs in those regional units.
- National or regional units function as autonomous churches, making their own decisions about personnel, program, practices, and internal structures.
- Examples: the Anglican Communion, the Free Methodist Church, the Wesleyan Church, the Moravian Church
6. World-wide cooperative fellowships of national churches
- Church members see each other as fellow members of the same tradition, but do not think of themselves as members of the same organization.
- A central body helps foster cooperation in ministry among regional units, but it has no decision-making authority over theology, practices, personnel and programs in those regional units.
- National or regional units are autonomous churches, making their own decisions about theology, personnel, program, practices, and internal structures.
- Examples: the Lutheran World Federation; the World Communion of Reformed Churches; Alliance World Fellowship (Christian and Missionary Alliance); World Assemblies of God Fellowship
7. World-wide cooperative fellowships of local churches
- Church members see each other as fellow members of the same tradition, but do not think of themselves as members of the same organization.
- A central body helps foster cooperation in ministry among regional units, but it has no decision-making authority over theology, practices, personnel and programs in those regional units.
- Local congregations are autonomous churches, making their own decisions about theology, personnel, program, practices, and internal structures, though congregations also band together into national or regional units for cooperation in ministry.
- Examples: Baptist World Alliance, Mennonite World Conference, Calvary Chapel
It is worth noting two things about the churches described above: 1) The Roman Catholic Church is the largest, most globally distributed, and most cohesive of global churches. 2) The overwhelming majority of world-wide Protestant bodies are Pentecostal or holiness in their theology and background. Arun Jones has written fine pieces on UM & Global about the Catholic and Pentecostal approaches to being a global church.
Finally, a disclaimer: I am not an expert in the polity of all forms of Christianity. It is quite possible that some of the specific examples cited above are mischaracterized. I encourage readers to do their own research into the specific polity arrangements of the churches mentioned.
Friday, June 7, 2019
A Primer on Board and Agency Organization
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology at the General Board of Global Ministries.
The opinions and analysis expressed here are Dr. Scott's own and do not
reflect in any way the official position of Global Ministries.
As recent posts on this blog about apportionments make clear, the uncertainty about the future of The United Methodist Church extends to its boards and agencies. Thus, it seems useful to provide a brief overview of how boards and agencies are organized and governed. This post will examine the variety of authorizing documents and supervising authorities for church boards and agencies.
United Methodists might think that boards and agencies exist because the Book of Discipline says they should exist, right?
That’s true in part, but the Book of Discipline in only one of three or four foundational documents for boards and agencies that also include a legal charter or articles of incorporation and by-laws, perhaps accompanied by a constitution. These three sources – the Book of Discipline, the articles of incorporation, and the by-laws and constitution – cover, respectively, the agency’s status under church law, its status under secular law, and its internal organizational rules. Thus, each of these documents stipulates distinct but overlapping aspects of an agency’s existence, structure, and purpose.
The Book of Discipline recognizes and regulates the existence of the boards and agencies in Chapter 5 of Part VI of the BOD, titled “Administrative Order.” The BOD includes often lengthy descriptions of the purpose, objectives, and responsibilities of the boards and agencies. The BOD may contain additional programmatic stipulations and/or stipulations about the work of certain sub-units of boards or agencies.
The Book of Discipline also stipulates how the members of the board of directors for each agency are to be chosen, including geographic, gender, and other forms of representation. It may also specify how senior agency leadership is to be chosen, including board officers and senior staff. Finally, the Book of Discipline stipulates in general terms how each of the boards and agencies is to be funded.
The provisions of the BOD regarding boards and agencies are, like most of the rest of the BOD, subject to change by a simple majority vote of the General Conference when it is in session. Thus, General Conference has authority under church law to recognize agencies, to prescribe in general terms what those agencies should do, and to indicate where agencies should generally get their funding.
The agency’s charter or articles of incorporation is a legal document filed with a state government. This legal document recognizes the agency as a non-profit corporate entity with the authority to own property and conduct business.
The articles of incorporation tend to be brief and broad. Articles of incorporation spell out the purpose of the agency in very general terms, specify what group or individual has legal authority to act on its behalf (usually its board), and defines the agency’s relationships with other legal entities, including predecessor groups and designated successor groups.
The articles of incorporation may specify the United Methodist General Conference as a supervisory entity for the board or agency. They may also indicate that the members of the agency’s board of directors must be United Methodist. Thus, the connection between an agency and the UMC may be written into secular law as well as church law, even though the legal existence of an agency is not a function of its recognition by church law. Put another way, an act of General Conference could not automatically dissolve an agency under secular law without additional legal paperwork being filed.
The articles of incorporation can be amended by filing legal paperwork with the appropriate state authorities. Such changes are usually authorized by the agency’s board of directors, with the work carried out by staff and/or hired attorneys. Articles of incorporation must fit within the standards of state law governing non-profit corporations, but beyond those broad parameters, state governments don’t have much of a say in the actual content of the articles of incorporation.
Finally, each agency has by-laws and may also have a constitution. The by-laws and/or constitution will include items such as the name and general purpose of the organization. But most importantly, these documents specify in greatest detail how the agency and its board of directors should be structured to carry out their work.
They indicate what the officers of the board of directors should be and how they are to be chosen. They may specify aspects of the board’s work, including standing committees, timeframes for meetings, criteria for quorum, etc.
They may stipulate the existence of certain senior staff roles such as General Secretary and Chief Financial Officer. They may also specify relationships with other agencies, such as local or annual conference auxiliaries.
The by-laws (and constitution, if there is one) can be changed by the agency’s board of directors. The exact procedure varies and may be different for the constitution, if there is one, than for the by-laws. Generally, a majority of board members, and perhaps a super majority, must vote for by-law changes.
While the responsibility for amending the by-laws and revising the articles of incorporation technically rests with the board of directors, it is worth noting the importance of senior agency staff in suggesting by-law changes and changes to the articles of incorporation. Members of the board of directors sometimes may not be familiar with, may not have strong opinions about, or may not have sufficient time to learn about the technical and legal issues at stake.
Thus, boards of directors will frequently (though not always) defer to senior agency staff who make requests for legal and organizational changes, assuming that senior staff possess the technical expertise and familiarity with the agency necessary to determine how the foundational documents should be changed. Of course, the extent to which this is true depends upon the personalities and abilities of and relationships between senior staff and board leadership.
What does this approach to structure mean for current debates in The United Methodist Church? It means that some changes to how boards and agencies operate could be unilaterally passed by General Conference. However, really substantive changes in how the boards and agencies are set up and their relationship to the denomination (and/or its successors) would likely require agreement among General Conference, the board of directors, and senior staff, or at least a willingness by the board of directors and senior staff to accede to the wishes of General Conference.
If there is significant disagreement between General Conference and the board of directors of an agency on its future, this way of organizing and authorizing the boards and agencies also sets up the possibility of a situation in which the status of the agency under church law and its status under secular law may be in conflict with one another. In that instance, its secular status as determined by its board of directors may (though not necessarily) have an advantage over its church status, since any disputes about the status of the organization and its resources would be resolved in secular courts.
As recent posts on this blog about apportionments make clear, the uncertainty about the future of The United Methodist Church extends to its boards and agencies. Thus, it seems useful to provide a brief overview of how boards and agencies are organized and governed. This post will examine the variety of authorizing documents and supervising authorities for church boards and agencies.
United Methodists might think that boards and agencies exist because the Book of Discipline says they should exist, right?
That’s true in part, but the Book of Discipline in only one of three or four foundational documents for boards and agencies that also include a legal charter or articles of incorporation and by-laws, perhaps accompanied by a constitution. These three sources – the Book of Discipline, the articles of incorporation, and the by-laws and constitution – cover, respectively, the agency’s status under church law, its status under secular law, and its internal organizational rules. Thus, each of these documents stipulates distinct but overlapping aspects of an agency’s existence, structure, and purpose.
The Book of Discipline recognizes and regulates the existence of the boards and agencies in Chapter 5 of Part VI of the BOD, titled “Administrative Order.” The BOD includes often lengthy descriptions of the purpose, objectives, and responsibilities of the boards and agencies. The BOD may contain additional programmatic stipulations and/or stipulations about the work of certain sub-units of boards or agencies.
The Book of Discipline also stipulates how the members of the board of directors for each agency are to be chosen, including geographic, gender, and other forms of representation. It may also specify how senior agency leadership is to be chosen, including board officers and senior staff. Finally, the Book of Discipline stipulates in general terms how each of the boards and agencies is to be funded.
The provisions of the BOD regarding boards and agencies are, like most of the rest of the BOD, subject to change by a simple majority vote of the General Conference when it is in session. Thus, General Conference has authority under church law to recognize agencies, to prescribe in general terms what those agencies should do, and to indicate where agencies should generally get their funding.
The agency’s charter or articles of incorporation is a legal document filed with a state government. This legal document recognizes the agency as a non-profit corporate entity with the authority to own property and conduct business.
The articles of incorporation tend to be brief and broad. Articles of incorporation spell out the purpose of the agency in very general terms, specify what group or individual has legal authority to act on its behalf (usually its board), and defines the agency’s relationships with other legal entities, including predecessor groups and designated successor groups.
The articles of incorporation may specify the United Methodist General Conference as a supervisory entity for the board or agency. They may also indicate that the members of the agency’s board of directors must be United Methodist. Thus, the connection between an agency and the UMC may be written into secular law as well as church law, even though the legal existence of an agency is not a function of its recognition by church law. Put another way, an act of General Conference could not automatically dissolve an agency under secular law without additional legal paperwork being filed.
The articles of incorporation can be amended by filing legal paperwork with the appropriate state authorities. Such changes are usually authorized by the agency’s board of directors, with the work carried out by staff and/or hired attorneys. Articles of incorporation must fit within the standards of state law governing non-profit corporations, but beyond those broad parameters, state governments don’t have much of a say in the actual content of the articles of incorporation.
Finally, each agency has by-laws and may also have a constitution. The by-laws and/or constitution will include items such as the name and general purpose of the organization. But most importantly, these documents specify in greatest detail how the agency and its board of directors should be structured to carry out their work.
They indicate what the officers of the board of directors should be and how they are to be chosen. They may specify aspects of the board’s work, including standing committees, timeframes for meetings, criteria for quorum, etc.
They may stipulate the existence of certain senior staff roles such as General Secretary and Chief Financial Officer. They may also specify relationships with other agencies, such as local or annual conference auxiliaries.
The by-laws (and constitution, if there is one) can be changed by the agency’s board of directors. The exact procedure varies and may be different for the constitution, if there is one, than for the by-laws. Generally, a majority of board members, and perhaps a super majority, must vote for by-law changes.
While the responsibility for amending the by-laws and revising the articles of incorporation technically rests with the board of directors, it is worth noting the importance of senior agency staff in suggesting by-law changes and changes to the articles of incorporation. Members of the board of directors sometimes may not be familiar with, may not have strong opinions about, or may not have sufficient time to learn about the technical and legal issues at stake.
Thus, boards of directors will frequently (though not always) defer to senior agency staff who make requests for legal and organizational changes, assuming that senior staff possess the technical expertise and familiarity with the agency necessary to determine how the foundational documents should be changed. Of course, the extent to which this is true depends upon the personalities and abilities of and relationships between senior staff and board leadership.
What does this approach to structure mean for current debates in The United Methodist Church? It means that some changes to how boards and agencies operate could be unilaterally passed by General Conference. However, really substantive changes in how the boards and agencies are set up and their relationship to the denomination (and/or its successors) would likely require agreement among General Conference, the board of directors, and senior staff, or at least a willingness by the board of directors and senior staff to accede to the wishes of General Conference.
If there is significant disagreement between General Conference and the board of directors of an agency on its future, this way of organizing and authorizing the boards and agencies also sets up the possibility of a situation in which the status of the agency under church law and its status under secular law may be in conflict with one another. In that instance, its secular status as determined by its board of directors may (though not necessarily) have an advantage over its church status, since any disputes about the status of the organization and its resources would be resolved in secular courts.
Wednesday, June 5, 2019
Laura Wanza Nyamai – African Women and Mission
Today’s post contains remarks prepared by Rev. Laura Wanza Nyamai for the panel “African Women and Mission” at the Methodist Mission Bicentennial Conference. Rev. Nyamai is Director of Connectional Ministries for The United Methodist Church in Kenya.
What stories of United Methodist history and mission history are important for your own personal sense of religious and spiritual formation? What is the role of African women in those stories? How can the church globally tell stories of mission and mission history that give more weight to the experiences of African women?
In 1968, The Evangelical United Brethren and The Methodist Church united. Full clergy status for women was included in the plan of union. Since then, an increasing number of women have been admitted to the ordained ministry, appointed to the district superintendency, elected to positions of denominational leadership, and consecrated as bishops. In 1980, Marjorie Matthews was the first woman elected to the Church’s episcopacy
The Church globally can tell stories of mission and mission history through celebrations and events like these, music concerts, medical camps, road shows, gathering together to sing and tell stories while we celebrate the legacy of the African Women who made significant contributions to The United Methodist Church. Through such initiative, we can learn more and get inspired. I pray to be that woman that will be celebrated in 100 years to come.
We appreciate the fact that these stories from the past are relevant today and will remain relevant forever.
What contributions do you see African women making to United Methodist mission today? What resources have they drawn upon in making these contributions? What has hindered their contributions, and what has helped?
African women are contributing tremendously to United Methodist mission today through their skills and talents. This has resulted in an increased number of the clergy women than before. According to United Methodist News, before 2004 in some conferences in Africa women were not allowed to join pastoral ministry, but today we have the first female bishop in Africa, Bishop Joaquina F. Nhanala. Clergy women continue to develop their leadership capabilities as highlighted by the African United Methodist Clergywomen Leadership Development Conference held in July 2018 at Africa University, Zimbabwe, which I was privileged to attend. Besides being clergy, women have contributed as missionaries serving not only in their own African countries but also in other countries.
Efforts are being continuously made to improve the state of communities through addressing various problems faced by people. In countries like Kenya, despite the Embargo, women have been at the forefront challenging domestic violence. We have been empowered with the Word of God, and we have also become activists in our own capacity. We are in the front line fighting for the rights of the children. We are also doing an operation called “Mama Linda Toto” (meaning “Mama, protect children”), a registered organisation where we advocate for children's rights, education, health and social status. In Liberia, United Methodist Women also protested against the abuse of women and girls. It can be noted that African women continue to challenge various forms of social injustice as part of the ministry.
Women make use of the existing resource systems to be able to make valuable contributions. Firstly, they are guided by the Holy Spirit in making these tremendous contributions. More so, the skills they have are important assets in mission. We have a lot of women equipped and educated in areas of education, social justice, health and development who are using their skills to improve the wellbeing of various communities. With good education, evangelism will be very easy to spread. One can never go to war without proper weapons. Our weapon is to learn and understand the Word of God. Women are so much aware of and alert to the hardships and challenges that people go through. This is because God has made our hands for war that we can even bend an iron bar (Prov. 18:23). This means that we can do almost anything and endure any circumstance.
We also use our skills, experience and talents to demonstrate God’s love and mercy in furthering the kingdom of God. This made me to be in a position to freely showcase my music talent, and I have recorded several gospel music albums to date, with songs that are transforming lives. For instance, my royalties go to a special programme that I have founded of starting off school for vulnerable children. More so, music has brought communities together and has also been a key to happiness that transcends above material issues of every-day life.
Even though people are not coming to church as they used to, music is still the key to bringing people together.
Mission has historically included many activities: evangelism, health, education, social justice, development, etc. As you think to the future of United Methodist mission, what components of mission do you hope will continue? What do you think the relationship between these components should be? How do you think African women will lead in carrying out these components of God’s mission?
The church is aimed at ensuring people’s complete state of wellbeing. Thus, despite focusing on the spiritual aspects, mission now involves health, education, social justice and development. This approach enables people to effectively contribute in mission while assisting vulnerable members of the community. The United Methodist mission needs to continue with components such as evangelism, health, education, social justice and development. These components are the backbone of most societies. Thus, they must complement each other in representing the spreading of God’s love. If we look at our focus areas, notably engaging in ministry with the poor, improving global health, developing principled Christian leaders and creating new and renewed congregations, it can be noted that they are cross cutting from spiritual and social issues to health issues; hence, they must continue to complement each other.
African women play an important role in African communities, and their contributions are being accepted more as they continue to showcase their talents. Women can lead by occupying various leadership roles and be part of the mission in various components. For example, we have women playing pivotal roles in the health field the likes of Olusimbo Ige from Nigeria, who was the director of Global Health at Global Ministries.
Besides leading from the top, with all these components of God's mission, anybody would borrow from African women. The world is under the impression that we are so poor and weak, yet we are so rich and strong.
Today the family of a widow is much stronger than a family of a widower. It is to us women children cry to. Hear them, Mama, they cry for food, proper education, they cry that you end corruption, you end domestic violence, they cry for protection, Mama. Diseases should no longer kill our children. Let us ARISE and SHINE, for the glory of God has come. A woman's voice is louder than anything. Let's move from social boundaries and become inclusive. Women are known to be knowledgeable of what is happening in their communities; thus, they can use this to identify people in need of spiritual, health and academic support, then use their resourcefulness to link these people with the resources they might need, thereby bringing more people to Christ.
What stories of United Methodist history and mission history are important for your own personal sense of religious and spiritual formation? What is the role of African women in those stories? How can the church globally tell stories of mission and mission history that give more weight to the experiences of African women?
In 1968, The Evangelical United Brethren and The Methodist Church united. Full clergy status for women was included in the plan of union. Since then, an increasing number of women have been admitted to the ordained ministry, appointed to the district superintendency, elected to positions of denominational leadership, and consecrated as bishops. In 1980, Marjorie Matthews was the first woman elected to the Church’s episcopacy
The Church globally can tell stories of mission and mission history through celebrations and events like these, music concerts, medical camps, road shows, gathering together to sing and tell stories while we celebrate the legacy of the African Women who made significant contributions to The United Methodist Church. Through such initiative, we can learn more and get inspired. I pray to be that woman that will be celebrated in 100 years to come.
We appreciate the fact that these stories from the past are relevant today and will remain relevant forever.
What contributions do you see African women making to United Methodist mission today? What resources have they drawn upon in making these contributions? What has hindered their contributions, and what has helped?
African women are contributing tremendously to United Methodist mission today through their skills and talents. This has resulted in an increased number of the clergy women than before. According to United Methodist News, before 2004 in some conferences in Africa women were not allowed to join pastoral ministry, but today we have the first female bishop in Africa, Bishop Joaquina F. Nhanala. Clergy women continue to develop their leadership capabilities as highlighted by the African United Methodist Clergywomen Leadership Development Conference held in July 2018 at Africa University, Zimbabwe, which I was privileged to attend. Besides being clergy, women have contributed as missionaries serving not only in their own African countries but also in other countries.
Efforts are being continuously made to improve the state of communities through addressing various problems faced by people. In countries like Kenya, despite the Embargo, women have been at the forefront challenging domestic violence. We have been empowered with the Word of God, and we have also become activists in our own capacity. We are in the front line fighting for the rights of the children. We are also doing an operation called “Mama Linda Toto” (meaning “Mama, protect children”), a registered organisation where we advocate for children's rights, education, health and social status. In Liberia, United Methodist Women also protested against the abuse of women and girls. It can be noted that African women continue to challenge various forms of social injustice as part of the ministry.
Women make use of the existing resource systems to be able to make valuable contributions. Firstly, they are guided by the Holy Spirit in making these tremendous contributions. More so, the skills they have are important assets in mission. We have a lot of women equipped and educated in areas of education, social justice, health and development who are using their skills to improve the wellbeing of various communities. With good education, evangelism will be very easy to spread. One can never go to war without proper weapons. Our weapon is to learn and understand the Word of God. Women are so much aware of and alert to the hardships and challenges that people go through. This is because God has made our hands for war that we can even bend an iron bar (Prov. 18:23). This means that we can do almost anything and endure any circumstance.
We also use our skills, experience and talents to demonstrate God’s love and mercy in furthering the kingdom of God. This made me to be in a position to freely showcase my music talent, and I have recorded several gospel music albums to date, with songs that are transforming lives. For instance, my royalties go to a special programme that I have founded of starting off school for vulnerable children. More so, music has brought communities together and has also been a key to happiness that transcends above material issues of every-day life.
Even though people are not coming to church as they used to, music is still the key to bringing people together.
Mission has historically included many activities: evangelism, health, education, social justice, development, etc. As you think to the future of United Methodist mission, what components of mission do you hope will continue? What do you think the relationship between these components should be? How do you think African women will lead in carrying out these components of God’s mission?
The church is aimed at ensuring people’s complete state of wellbeing. Thus, despite focusing on the spiritual aspects, mission now involves health, education, social justice and development. This approach enables people to effectively contribute in mission while assisting vulnerable members of the community. The United Methodist mission needs to continue with components such as evangelism, health, education, social justice and development. These components are the backbone of most societies. Thus, they must complement each other in representing the spreading of God’s love. If we look at our focus areas, notably engaging in ministry with the poor, improving global health, developing principled Christian leaders and creating new and renewed congregations, it can be noted that they are cross cutting from spiritual and social issues to health issues; hence, they must continue to complement each other.
African women play an important role in African communities, and their contributions are being accepted more as they continue to showcase their talents. Women can lead by occupying various leadership roles and be part of the mission in various components. For example, we have women playing pivotal roles in the health field the likes of Olusimbo Ige from Nigeria, who was the director of Global Health at Global Ministries.
Besides leading from the top, with all these components of God's mission, anybody would borrow from African women. The world is under the impression that we are so poor and weak, yet we are so rich and strong.
Today the family of a widow is much stronger than a family of a widower. It is to us women children cry to. Hear them, Mama, they cry for food, proper education, they cry that you end corruption, you end domestic violence, they cry for protection, Mama. Diseases should no longer kill our children. Let us ARISE and SHINE, for the glory of God has come. A woman's voice is louder than anything. Let's move from social boundaries and become inclusive. Women are known to be knowledgeable of what is happening in their communities; thus, they can use this to identify people in need of spiritual, health and academic support, then use their resourcefulness to link these people with the resources they might need, thereby bringing more people to Christ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)