Brief Thoughts on the Future of The United Methodist Church

When askes about the origins of Methodism and what priorities in the movement are crucial for the future people will undoubtedly place president on things like pluralism (room for diversity in theology and doctrine), connectionalism, women and minorities’ place in ministry, social action, and Christian perfection (sanctification).  While all of these priorities are crucial to the history of the Methodist movement, I believe the key to it's vitality in the future might hinge on an entirely different priority.

Gonzalez (2001) reports, “When the bishop of Bristol tried to limit his (John Wesley’s) activity, telling him that his itinerant preaching perturbed the order of the parishes, Wesley responded, ‘The world is my parish.’  This belief and its impact on the way ministry was done in the early Methodist movement was a major factor in its success.  The substantial growth of early Methodism in Great Britain is due in part to uniquely responding to new needs brought about by the Industrial revolution (Gonzalez, 2001).  Likewise, Asbury’s unique response to frontier settling led to the quick spread of the Methodist movement in colonial America.  An uncanny knack for meeting needs largely ignored by other religious institutions is what birthed The Methodist movement and led to the forming of the United Methodist Church.  Considering the declining participation in today’s Western world United Methodist church, this is a lost art that must be mastered again, if The United Methodist Church is going to continue to be a powerful force for the Kingdom of God.

Gonzalez, G.L. (2001). The story of Christianity: The early church to present day. 2^nd edition. Peabody, MA: Prince Press.

Cultural Tool Kits and the Obstacles to Racial Integration

Barnes (2005), Lincoln and Mamiya (1990), and Emerson and Smith (2000) all point out that segregation of communities and churches were originally imposed on blacks by whites, either legally, or forcibly in some other manor.  While it is true that many mainline black denominations initiated the splitting off from white counterparts it was generally in response to mistreatment and there was little resistance from the white denominations (Lincoln and Mamiya, 2000).  The results are clear, according to Emerson and Smith (2000), “The United States is indeed a racialized society, always was in the past, and in many respects is becoming more so” (17).  While the church should be the champion bridging the racial divide, it has, with few exceptions, perpetuated the problem. 

Black Church Cultural Tools

By in large, the Black church has responded to this racialized society with Creation of its own separate society (Emerson and Smith, 2000).  The church has often played in leading role in this development.  The Black church has use of symbols to giving meaning to this separate existence as well as past hardships (Barnes, 2005).  In essence the black society has looked to the church to find meaning and strength.  The black church has also been a driving force for cultural change (Barnes, 2005; Lincoln and Mamiya, 2000).  Whether the focus be racial equality or improvements within black society the black church has traditionally been at the center of the activity.

White Evangelical Church Cultural Tools

As previously stated the White church has either directly or indirectly (by failing to see their black Christian counterparts as their brothers and sisters in Christ) contributed to the formation of segregated faith communities, just as white society is responsible for the formation of the United States racialized society (Emerson and Smith, 2000).  Though the Jim Crow laws were overturned long ago, segregation is still very much a part of the United States landscape.  White society continues to create of mono-cultural environments (Emerson and Smith, 2000).  The white church mirrors society in this respect.  The United States does not legally require that the black community be separate from the white community but it expects that white people with means will chose (either subconsciously or intentionally) to use their economic standing to figuratively and literally separate themselves from the black community (Emerson and Smith, 2000).  The white church has followed suite, setting up shop in the middle of these mono-cultural communities.  The white church has responded to this situation with ignorance.  White Christians tend to ignore the cultural segregation altogether (Emerson and Smith, 2000).  

My Cultural Tools

I must confess that I am guilty of living a segregated life.  I live in a white suburb.  I was actually surprised to come across a black homeowner in our community while taking my children trick-or-treating on Halloween.  Rockford, Michigan, where I live and minister, is a poster child for the “great white flight.”  What little racial integration we have is in the safe “token black person” form.   I have attempted to combat this by intentionally creating cross cultural experiences.  This something I try to do with my family as well as myself by purposely expose my family to cultural diversity.  I resently started a traditional where my oldest son and I participate in a monthlydinner our church youth group puts on at a urban denominational community center.  Livermore (2009) points out the downsides of cross cultural experiences being one sided service, but I figure I need to start somewhere.  

Barnes, S. (2005). Black church culture and community action.  Social Forces, vol 84. Retrieved from httml: http://tinyurl.com/9hpv9gq.  

Emerson, M. (2000). Divided by faith. New York, NY: Oxford Press.

Lincoln, E.C. and Mamiya, L.H. (1990). The black church in African American experience. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Livemore, D.A. (2009). Cultural intelligence: Improving your CQ to engage our multicultural world. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.