Sometimes the eyes of an outsider can help you see things in an entirely new light.
A couple of years ago, our District — the Charlotte District of the Western North Carolina Conference of the United Methodist Church to be precise — held a continuing education event in which the focus was recapturing John Wesley’s legacy for 21st Century churches.
It’s the kind of subject that, if you’ve been a Methodist any length of time, makes perfect sense.
I brought a couple of our staffers to the event. One of them had not grown up in any church, much less a Methodist one, had come to faith as an adult, and as a result had spent most of her Christian study time focusing on Jesus, Paul, and Moses rather than John Wesley.
As we listened to the various presentations, I asked her what she thought.
“It sounds like a cult,” she answered. “I’ve heard a lot of talk about Wesley and none about Christ.”
Wow.
Because she didn’t share the presuppositions and language of most Methodist clergy — Wesley is the best example of lived out theology we have — our gathering sounded to her ears like the Christian Scientists talking about Mary Baker Eddy or the Mormons talking about Joseph Smith.
Now I went to a seminary that loves Wesley the most of all (so they say), and I became a Methodist as a result of looking for someone who was smart, biblical and believed in free will. Mr. Wesley was the guy, and here I am.
But language, presentation, and presuppositions matter.
If you assume your audience already shares your presuppositions and understands your insider language, you can come off sounding much crazier than you really are.
As we minister in the midst of a culture largely ignorant of Wesley and his genius, I suppose that means we’ll focus more on doing the kinds of things Wesley did rather than quoting at length the kinds of things he said.
There are 7 comments
Your last sentence reminds me of the old cliche’, “Actions speak louder than words”! The 10,000 who showed up in the field kinda proves that, huh?
At Good Shepherd, the outreach ministries actions speak louder than the words “ABOUT” Good Shepherd.
Sure, but if we don’t teach and talk about the Methodist history, theology, and distinctives, then we encourage more ignorance.
If we fail to instruct Methodists about why we have a cross and flame on our church – for instance – then we create the very condition that makes them unlikely to appreciate the legacy and traditions.
Of course John Wesley is not more important – or even in the ballpark of – Christ, but if we teach and preach in the tradition of Methodism, then we at least owe people some honesty about who helped create these practices and beliefs.
To be Methodist but ignore Wesley is a little bit like plagiarism.
Ha, I can appreciate what your friend thought. One problem we have in The United Methodist Church – and this is a bit difficult to articulate well – is that we sort of have our own language that nobody else speaks.
We throw around acronymns like anyone should be in on the meaning, we talk about “Wesley’s theology of grace” as a shorthand for a whole constellation of beliefs, not about Wesley but about the Bible and Jesus and Salvation and the world.
I think we need to become better at “unpacking” for the “uninitiated” in our midst. Plain language for plain people, and all that.
And having fewer boards and agencies and committees would also make it possible to have fewer acronymns!
What is the reason for the cross and flame? I always thought it was a cross and robe. Obviously I am not a Methodist, but I do attend your church faithfully.
Anonymous —
The UMC logo of cross and flame is meant to symbolize the intersection of the life and sacrifice of Jesus (cross) with the power of the Holy Spirit (flame). The flame = Holy Spirit idea comes from the Day of Pentecost described in Acts 2.
The UMC has had the cross & flame logo since about 1968. In that time, the denomination has dropped from 11 million members to 8 million. While there are dozens of reasons for this decline, the implication is that our denomination’s logo has not been a good “branding” tool like McDonald’s Golden Arches.
There is one other major problem with it: cross & flame. Burning crosses. And we wonder why most United Methodist churches are all-white? It’s an example of the law of unintended consequences.
So we don’t use the denomination’s logo at the church, except for a small one on the road sign constructed in 1996. We’re in the process of getting a new church logo – replacing the Shepherd/Sheep one we’ve had for 15 year – and hope to update our road sign as well. The updated sign will have a new logo specific to Good Shepherd United Methodist Church.
I actually was curious to see if James-Michael–the guy with a dog named Wesley–would have commented on this one.
It so often bothers me the misconceptions people have about the Methodist Church. I love our denomination and what it stands for, but sometimes we can get lost in the shuffle of squeaky wheels. I once had a long-time member of GS tell me that we as a church don’t emphasize the association with the Methodist church because the Methodist church believes in gay marriage. It made me cringe because of how wrong that statement is.
Wesley is an example… if people really knew what he stood for and that the Methodist Church was founded around many of his principals, they would probably be very shocked. That’s the problem with mainline sometimes… we get so wrapped up in the politics that we miss the point.
Good post, and good discussion, Talbot.