Methodist Federation for Social Action

I recently attended a meeting in Atlanta that used as its theme: “Voices of Faith: New Life in the Christian Church.” It was described as a conference for “progressive United Methodists,” a category familiar to me. During my many years in ministry I have alternated between calling myself an “evangelical progressive” and a “progressive evangelical.” Fortunately, others were there who would use none of these “umbrella” descriptions to define themselves; after all, what’s in a name? We came together because of our love of God expressed through Christ, through Scripture and through the church.

A highlight of the conference was the release of a new book, United Methodism @ Risk, A Wake-Up Call*, written by Leon Howell and containing a study guide prepared by retired Bishop C. Dale White and the Rev. Scott Campbell. As a member of the advisory committee that guided its publication, I was aware of the book. In addition, I was honored that the author included a submission of mine related to the positive consequences of affirmative action in United Methodism.

Why was it appropriate for this book to be released at a meeting of United Methodists that also included in its conference theme the words, “New Life in the Christian Church”? First, as the hymn says, “new occasions teach new duties, time makes ancient good uncouth.” Second, the call to newness is deeply embedded (where have we heard that word before?) in Scripture.

The words in the book’s title, “…@ Risk…,” were particularly appropriate to the gathering because not too many of us there believed that our beloved United Methodism is where God wants us to be at this crucial moment for the U.S. and the world. The fulfilling power of our worship services, energized by liberating music, sermons, lectures, workshops and fellowship touched many of us where we needed to be touched and erased the despair that some may have brought to the gathering.

In what ways do some of us feel that United Methodism is “at risk”? Here are a few:

• We are still learning to dialogue, debate and disagree in ways that cohere with our understandings of God’s intention. At times, “winning” and even “controlling” seem to be more important than faithfulness.

• Our declarations that some individuals and their actions are “incompatible with Christian faith” not only have implications for the present and the future, they have retroactive implications. One of the most effective leaders of our denomination (now deceased), whom I got to meet at national meetings, was deeply steeped in his love of Christ, the sacredness of Scripture and The United Methodist Church. He was unashamed of his conservative, evangelical faith. He was white, I am African American, and we shared more than once our differing perspectives on race in church and society. We were in unity, although not uniformity. My regret is that we as a church were not able to allow him to be open in his testimony and in his struggles. Some would, in retrospect, label him “incompatible.” Many of us could not do so, however, because we know that in some respects all of us are “incompatible.”

• We are at risk and therefore in need of new life because we have not yet understood how insensitive we are on matters of race, culture and authentic diversity. This is a matter of concern for all of us, whether we label ourselves progressive or conservative, theologically or politically. Our inability to acknowledge our national struggles around race, ethnicity and culture is evident as we now relate to the world as the single super power. We seem to be exporting in our foreign policy the cultural insensitivity that still plagues us domestically, and the lives of the young women and men who represent us in war and occupation are being changed forever.

“New life” in many mainline church bodies begins in the spring and summer as church members meet in annual regional and national gatherings; in The United Methodist Church, delegates will be elected to represent their annual conferences at the 2004 General and Jurisdictional Conferences. We cannot and should not expect uniformity of thought among those whom we elect. But, as members of the body of Christ, is it too much to expect a cooperative unity among them?

Our annual conferences will be meeting just before, during and after the observance of Pentecost. Might that be providential? Consider these words: “On the day of Pentecost all the Lord’s followers were together in one place” (Acts 2:1, CEV). In the distant past one of our United Methodist periodicals carried the name Together. Its title emphasized the meaning of the verse from Acts. Being “together” is more than physical. It is a description of sisters and brothers daring to be “in one accord” as they prepare for the coming of the Holy Spirit. May we allow its Presence to shape how and whom we select to represent us to bring “new life” to the church we all love.

Gilbert H. Caldwell
Denver, Colorado

Books available from The Genesis III Group, (888) 829-2947