This morning I came across a blog written by my friend, John Stephens, who is the Chair of the Order of Elders here in the South Georgia Annual Conference. In his piece, John asks some fundamental questions about the identity of The United Methodist Church displayed in and through the decisions being made at General Conference.
One paragraph in particular jumped out at me:
“While “making disciples for the transformation of the world” may be our espoused theory, is it really our theory in use? Is it really what we do? Does the whole denomination embrace it? Is the vision shared? Or, are we a collective of differing interests and priorities?”
Let’s push this reasoning a little further.
I’ve found as of late that the go-to answer in most circles of The United Methodist Church is “making disciples for the transformation of the world.” It’s simple, catchy and even sounds very theological. We throw this answer out whenever we discuss issues ranging from mission to money to church decline. We claim it as a mission statement and, by God, we hold ourselves to using the phrase on a regular basis.
What does it mean to “make disciples”? What does a disciple look like? How does one not only become a disciple but also continue to grow as a disciple? Why is discipleship important?
These are fundamental questions that I don’t think we have consensus on. So if there’s no consensus, does using that catchy phrase render it empty? In many ways I think it does.
The hard truth about The United Methodist Church is that along with much of mainline, Protestant America, we’ve been more concerned with forming good people — people who love their families, pay their taxes, go to church regularly, and try to be nice to others — than we have with forming disciples of Jesus Christ. Now that people have begun to figure out they can be all of those things without going to church, we’ve lost ourselves in the despair of decline.
We’ve done very little in the Church to distinguish Christianity as something unique and different. We’ve been comfortable in our perch as an American institution and we’ve done our parts to ensure that remain our place in society. Unfortunately the 21st Century has awakened us to the reality that were knocked out of that perch a while ago. We’re just now waking up to that reality.
I’ve heard leaders and advocates of various restructure plans say in one breath “this isn’t a magic bullet” and “we’re doing this to ensure we make our top priority the making of disciples” (my paraphrase). If we aren’t discussing the basic questions of discipleship — what it is, what it looks like, what changes are required to live into it — then plans of restructure are simply plans to grow the church and sustain viability. These aren’t bad things at all. Nor are they 100% mutually exclusive. But we simply can’t go on assuming that we all agree on the very basics of discipleship just because we all agree on a catch phrase.
I do hope there are some delegates present who will at least ask the tough questions of discipleship when they hear the catch phrase “making disciples for the transformation of the world.” If we don’t ask the tough questions, I fear we are, in fact, making a values statement by our lack of speech. We’ve got a long way to go if that statement is to reflect the reality of our lives together. It’s my hope that we begin the journey of a few thousand miles with a few tough questions.
Ben you have hit on a huge deficiency in the language and methodology of not only the Call to Action but pretty much any program by the General Church or Annual Conference in the past couple of decades.
We violate the first rule of logical thought: “define your terms”.
Great post.
Well done, Ben. Somewhere along the way we’ve allowed the definition of disciple to become good and conforming citizen–not that disciples aren’t good citizens. We do, however, have a different agendas and goals. In losing the language, we’ve lost identity.
[...] –Ben Gosden http://mastersdust.com/2012/04/28/general-conference-400-miles-away-the-danger-of-unasked-questions/ [...]
“The hard truth about The United Methodist Church is that along with much of mainline, Protestant America, we’ve been more concerned with forming good people — people who love their families, pay their taxes, go to church regularly, and try to be nice to others” …. sad thing is Ben, I’m not so sure we’ve even done a good job at this!! Keep asking the questions and pushing for answers.
Pax
And are we yet alive? As United Methodists, I’m not so sure. And that’s sad, really. Having grown up United Methodist and owing all I have become (for lots of reasons) to the denomination, sadly, I question if, in fact, we are alive. The United Methodist Church that reared me taught me to accept and respect people, question my faith regularly and find ways to “do unto others”. As I read through the GC “Restructuring” and other “issues” coming before the GC, I’m caught by the vast schism that, once again, exists in our church. Instead of looking at what’s best for the Denomination and its people, we are instead, headed towards a showdown of epic proportions. One that will result in more people leaving. Myself included. Will we be overtaken by political moral authority or seek to minister to ALL who have choosen to call themselves United Methodist?
Matt-
Thank you for such a thoughtful response! I’m with you. God is calling us to bigger and brighter things — “making all things new” (Rev 21). The question is: will we listen???
Matt, brother, what is the issue that would make you leave our denomination. I have read your comment three times now and need to ask you to name specifically (cuz’ I don’t read between your lines) what you feel is best for our denomination and its people. The reason I ask is because I avow my Wesleyan heritage from my very heart and soul, but I am not so very happy with where we are today. I am an advocate of truly ‘Open doors’, and I want to reply to your well-thought comment; but I am not sure you are being clear.