Thank God for African Evangelicals
by Motte Brown on 04/24/2008 at 3:12 PM
I grew up attending a quaint United Methodist Church down South. The people were nice, the services were reverent, and music was worshipful. But I can't say the Bible was preached well there. Either that or I just didn't have ears to hear it then.
Maybe it was both.
I left the church when I left for college. But not with animosity or anything like that, I just wanted to do my own thing on Sundays. And I did my own thing for about the next 10 years.
When I was 27 years old and working in D.C., I decided I needed church again (in hindsight though, it was really the Lord beginning to call me). So I began attending a United Methodist Church very near my apartment. The female reverend took some getting used to, but other than that, I felt right at home there ... until I heard my first sermon on the beauty of homosexual love.
And that was enough to make this conservative good ol' boy head for the doors right in the middle of the service, never to return.
I became a Christian about a year after that through a U.S. Senate staff Bible study. A brother immediately took me under his wing and took me to a Bible believing, expositional preaching, reformed Baptist church (though he himself was a Presbyterian). And it was only then that I began to see my upbringing in a new light; to see the difference sound doctrine makes in denominations.
So today I was interested to read this article from The Daily Standard titled "Will Methodism Tilt Right?" It's about how plummeting membership among the liberal United Methodist Churches in America has left the door open for a "strongly evangelical" influence at this years quadrennial General Conference.
The African United Methodists are strongly evangelical. While U.S. church elites are confused by their declining influence and give their attention to fading political causes of the left, the Africans are quietly assuming wide influence over what was once almost an entirely American institution. Thirty percent of the delegates at the General Conference will come from Africa, the Philippines or Europe. In coalition with another 30 percent of delegates who are U.S. evangelicals, mostly from the South, there is likely for the first time in modern Methodist history a conservative governing majority. Just 4 years ago, U.S. evangelicals and overseas delegates comprised less than 50 percent.
The articles ends with a warning not to expect changes overnight like it did with the Southern Baptists in the late '80s. But still, it's encouraging.
Thank God for African evangelicals.
1. Tyler said the following at 3:24 PM on Apr 24:
Thanks for your post Motte! Good to see a return to Biblical doctrine in a denomination that has strayed for so long! I find it interesting how much Church denominations/associations look like the World's political process. While I think democracy is the best political system for now, the Church should not follow suit. First the Church's head is Christ and not any majority of votes. Secondly, those in the Church should be willing to lay down their opinion for others. Romans and Galatians focus heavily on the need for unity among believers even those with the best reasons to separate.
2. Rachael said the following at 3:50 PM on Apr 24:
From the post:
"And it was only then that I began to see my upbringing in a new light; to see the difference sound doctrine makes in denominations."
-->Interesting. I'd encourage any readers who may feel disillusioned or disatsified with their church life to rethink their theology (seeking to line it up with Scripture). Then, perhaps they can go to a church with that theology (Biblical).
I have been a Christian most of my life. From ages 0-17 or 18, I attended various types of churches. Generally, my mom was seeking a church that was Biblically based - she had some theological issues with the one we left when I was in Jr. High, and I'm thankful for her convictions. From ages 18-22 and 25-27 (part-way through - I'm still 27 :) ), I was mostly at a particular church with a wonderful, Biblically sound pastor. [ages 22-25 were mostly spent in Japan]. Also I think during part of this time I started to be introduced to seemingly sound theological ideas (from family members, friends, whatever) that I had not grown up with. And I'm thankful for that. Ultimately, I believe we should strive to line up our views with what the Bible says. I didn't change churches this last time because of theological convictions - I liked my past pastor. However, I do think some of the theological basics are consciously remembered and practiced in this church, and I really like that aspect a lot.
I know this comment is rambly, but I guess my point is that having a somewhat shaped theology might make a big difference in someone's church life.
I don't have all my theological beliefs 'down pat', but I'm really looking forward to growing more in my theological beliefs. And I appreciate that my beliefs now are more shaped than what they were when I was little.
I just really want to encourage people to take a look at their beliefs and consider their church from a theological standpoint.
Denominations aren't everything - as believers we are one in Christ, but it is really neat to be a part of a church that has several of the same theological ideas (though I must admit that my view on baptism is different from that of my church). It's just something incredibly special. I just like my church though :)
3. Aaron said the following at 5:01 PM on Apr 24:
It amazes me how "Bible believing" continues to be code for "gay people not welcome, women preaching are suspect." My "Bible believing" church comes to different conclusions on those matters. As a matter of common courtesy, perhaps you could use other terminology. I'd appreciate it.
4. Matthew said the following at 5:36 PM on Apr 24:
Aaron,
Even the more progressive folks who read and comment on the blog (like me) think that "Bible believing" churches generally believe that homosexual behavior is sin (but gay people are just as welcome as anyone else) and that having women as pastors is not consistent with Scripture. The hermeneutical gymnastics that you have to go through on those two positions (especially the first one) are so strenuous as to be unacceptable. Therefore, by saying "Bible believing" I think the blog is taking a stand about some things that we are very certain that it teaches. I'm sorry if you feel left out by the terminology, but that's where we stand. If you don't like it, bite your tongue and deal with it or or go to another blog. I don't like the disrespect that gets shoved my way whenever the question of evolution comes up because I think that's part of God's creation, but I've still stuck around because the blog is still very thoughtful otherwise.
5. Sarah said the following at 5:36 PM on Apr 24:
Aaron (#3) wrote: "It amazes me how 'Bible believing' continues to be code for 'gay people not welcome, women preaching are suspect.'"
It also amazes some people that some other people would be amazed that it continues to be code for this. It's a two-way street.
Also, no where in Motte's post did he say that women preaching are suspect or that gay people are not welcome. I don't know his actual views on this, but I do know that he did not say these things specifically.
Consider the possibility that there are some people who are fine with women preachers, but not having grown up under one would take a little bit to get used to the idea. And disagreeing with a sermon on the beauty of homosexual love is much different than not being welcoming to those who identify as homosexual.
6. PLH said the following at 6:53 PM on Apr 24:
To me, this illustrates the importance of the universal church. The African Methodists and US Methodists have to listen to each other and work out their theological differences. Both sides think they are "biblical" I am sure and working through the differences teaches everyone humility and to learn from different experiences.
7. Amir Larijani said the following at 7:52 PM on Apr 24:
Motte: It seems that the Episcopals are in a position to thank the South Americans for upholding the truth as well.
Could it be that the mainline denominations in America will experience a resurgence due to the spiritual prosperity of evangelicals in Africa and South America?
8. Tim said the following at 8:49 PM on Apr 24:
Motte - thanks for the post! This is really encouraging. I'm currently a part of a United Methodist church in north Georgia, which happens to be one of the "hotbeds" of conservative evangelicalism within the UMC. In fact, the North Georgia conference is currently (I've been told) first or second in the world right now among Methodists in new professions of faith! However, while I love my local church (which is very Biblically solid), I realize the tension that exists within the denomination between the evangelical and liberal wings. In fact, (along with the fact that I will probably be moving shortly) that is one of the reasons I have not felt comfortable officially joining the United Methodist Church. The developments among Methodists (and the Church in general) in Africa sure are encouraging!
9. Christina (in green) said the following at 6:54 AM on Apr 25:
Amir and Motte -
Most of the Episcopal churches that have left the Episcoapal conference have aligned with the African Anglican church...
So hearing that the methodist church (who I always found somewhat similar to the episcopal church) is going through the same shift is incredibly interesting.
I like it =)
10. Melody said the following at 8:05 AM on Apr 25:
Motte, I can totally identify with you on growing up in the Methodist church. I can honestly say that I have never heard a clear presentation or invitation to the Gospel in the church I grew up in. The sermons consist of a few verses being read at the beginning not being referred back to as the woman preacher gives more of a warm fuzzy speech as opposed to a Biblically based sermon. I accepted Christ at 18 and once I got on my college campus I immediately found a Bible teaching church to become apart of. Being apart of that church helped me to see how off my home church was, and also how off the theology of the Methodist church as a whole was. My heart hurts for my home church family as I have finally experienced the relationship part of being a Christian rather than the religion.
11. xeres said the following at 8:43 AM on Apr 25:
John Wesley would roll his grave if he knew what would become of the Methodist and Anglican Church 200 + years later :(. However, not all Methodist Churches are the same as far as social practices goes. Not all of John Wesley influenced Churches are the same.
12. EKB said the following at 8:47 AM on Apr 25:
As a Catholic, I can definitely say there is a parallel situation in the Catholic Church, where Africans tend to be more theologically conservative than their American counterparts. I wonder what is behind this trend, as it seems to hold for most branches of Christianity?
13. NeedACatchyName said the following at 9:29 AM on Apr 25:
What I am about to say is harsh, and I hope I don't offend anyone. I would like to preface this by saying that I am a member of a fairly conservative United Methodist congregation, so what I am about to say isn't coming from an outsider, but from someone who is all too familiar with United Methodist politics.
The United Methodist church in the United States is in deep, deep trouble. It has been weighed down by years of placing political correctness and nebulous definitions of "inclusiveness" ahead of Biblical doctrine, churches that preach feel-good pop psychology instead of the Bible, and a bloated, top-heavy bureaucracy that tries to offend no one at the expense of getting anything positive done. In addition, the denomination is shrinking rapidly due to way too many churches completely ignoring evangelism in order to do more socially oriented projects, that, while important, should be done in addition to preaching the Gospel, not instead of preaching the Gospel as is unfortunately too often the case. Granted, there are still quite a few solid, Bible believing churches in the denomination (mine certainly has been so far), but at the same time, there are also many churches that preach a weak, watered down social message that only marginally resembles the Gospel.
Please pray for the UMC this week. This conference will likely be a turning point, though whether it's a good turning point or a bad turning point remains to be seen. The conservatives are thought to have the upper hand, but their winning is not a forgone conclusion, and the liberals could still pull this out. The proposal (mentioned in the article) sponsored by the left side of the chruch to divide the US church from the world churches might stand at least a chance of passing if its backers can spin it the right way, and if that passes, it will be far easier for the more liberal US church to vote to start having homosexual pastors and other liberal causes that are currently blocked by the world churches.
OTOH, if the conservatives win, then it might finally signal the tilt to the right that many of us have been looking for in the denomination. While change won't happen overnight, it might at least initiate much needed reform in the denomination.
14. James said the following at 8:36 AM on Apr 26:
Motte, you could have swapped your name with mine and swapped Methodist with Episcopalian and your story would, at its core, have been mine.
I grew up going to an Episcopal church, and while it wasn't necessarilly WRONG, I didn't hear the bible preached well, or much (my mother doesn't see how I see this, as she heard it plenty and heard it right....I guess.....maybe like you say I just never recognized it). It just sounded like nice Jesus/God-drivel, and nothing of true substantial value.
My reasons for not going to church were the same. Not that I was mad or anything, but I just wanted to sleep in and/or do other things on Sundays while in college. Thankfully, that only lasted a year and a half. I was convicted to 'get right with God' about a semester into college (I was an unbeliever. churched, baptized as an infant, and believed in God and Jesus, but I never truly turned my life over to Christ.....and my life showed it.....the life I didn't allow my parents to really see), and a year later confessed Christ as my Lord and Savior. It was soon after (by a couple of months) that a friend started taking me to church (funny story as to how that happened, as I was resistant to go....I was still happy with doing my own thing on Sundays) which was a non-denominational, expositional, bible-believing-and-teaching church. It was like I stepped into an alien environment. I was used to church starting with a hymn and a processional, and then "The Lord be with you./And also with you/Let us pray/". And instead I got worship for about half an hour and then an hour and a half of sermon/lecture. It was odd, but I was hooked VERY fast.
Thank GOD for expositional teaching. Sounds like lost lambs like you and I were really needed that kind of teaching to cement us as true saints of our Lord Jesus Christ. Thanks for sharing your testimony, as I'm glad to have finally found someone else who went through the same thing I did.
15. BDB said the following at 1:40 PM on Apr 26:
Some similar things are happening in Asian churches. I got a job in Alhambra, CA for a while. I was stunned to drive the streets of the San Gabriel Valley and see all the Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese and other churches...in mainline denominations - Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian. It really brought home how the mainline denominations, with their practice of supporting full-time missionaries - are producing fruit abroad.
I know that FOTF and the ACLU are at odds a lot. But I wonder if God's plan isn't bigger than both: Americans pray for revival; and a lot of Christians from other countries emigrate to the U.S. The ACLU can't argue with how much Christianity is coming in - because they aren't doing it in English.
I remember a protest a few years ago when a Vietnamese guy put up a Ho Chi Minh flag. There was a huge outcry in the Vietnamese community because they were dead-set against communism. It was interesting to watch the befuddled white people try to decide which side should get freedom of speech. (The eventually arrested the guy for making bootleg videotapes and selling them without the proper copyright license fees.)
16. Rachael said the following at 2:56 PM on Apr 26:
Very off-topic, but vaguely related comment 15 that brought up communism...
You know, it was interesting, just on Friday in one of my classes the students were talking about culture, culture shock, etc...
And it was so interesting to me how one gal shared how here people openly bash the president, but how in her country (a communist one) people don't do that or children are told not to do that or something. Of course this tidbit's not surprising, but somehow when you see someone in one of your classes actually express the idea it puts a human face on it. (For the record, I hate president-bashing [if people disagree with the politics, I believe it should be discussed respectfully], but political spite is so rampant at least in my state).
Anyway and also this quarter, in another class I talked a bit with Chinese students about the Dalai Lama...and again I could feel that they were under a different media/political influence than the mainstream around here...just so...interesting when you actually know people who have received varying influences...and I wonder if sometimes the difference in education/media/politics is troubling to some...
Anyway...I guess teaching some students from communist countries just brings things home a bit more...
17. Nicole said the following at 8:54 PM on Apr 26:
Rachael #16
(nothing to do with the topic, but definitely with your comment). At the university I attend they recently has a monk from Tibet speak. There were a lot of Chinese protesters. It was rather interesting to hear their views on the entire history of the Tibet region, which aren't even true. But they believed it.
It was also interesting that one Chinese guy commented that the monk should "be arrested" for spreading such lies. It really brings home that they don't have the freedom of speech that we have in their countries. That would relate to things like bashing their leaders.
18. Rachael said the following at 10:21 PM on Apr 26:
Hi Nicole,
Yeah the Dalai Lama spoke here too. The comment about not bashing the leaders was not said by a Chinese person, but from a different communist country.
I get the impression that the media coverage is different in different countries. Tonight I spoke with a teacher somewhere else who told me that reports from a well-known source of news (not saying it here in case it's wrong) were wrong about something (not sure, perhaps that's what her students told her)...
Who knows what to believe when it comes to the media....I must admit that I'm not following the latest closely, though...
19. BDB said the following at 11:36 PM on Apr 26:
Regarding #17 and #18: so far, the most accurate English-language sourced I've seen are Amnesty International and the Christian Science Monitor. Both place a high value on accuracy.
Though it has recently changed ownership, the Wall Street Journal also has a very high standard for accuracy. What's interesting about this "credit crunch" is that the WSJ predicted it about three years before it started. Many of the CEOs who lost their jobs, such as the head of Fannie Mae, were hammered by the WSJ editorial pages years ago for taking too many risks. The CEO's ridiculed them. But the WSJ was right. They also broke the story about stock-options backdating that also cost a bunch of CEO's their jobs. (They did it with mathematical analysis of how unlikely it was for so many of them to be priced at the 52-week low.)
The WSJ is also a big fan of free-trade agreements with places like Africa, which would allow them to get out of poverty by sending their (relatively small) amount of exports to the U.S. market.
20. Nicole said the following at 11:07 AM on Apr 27:
#18 and #19:
Rachael, I've heard a lot of things baout their history books and media sources in communist countries being incorrect, and many of these students will claim quite loudly that ours is wrong.
Didn't mean to imply I thought your student was from China, that just happens to be the student base I am around mostly (more than Americans).
Oh, and it wasn't the Dalai Lama here, it was another monk from the Tibet region who actually escaped to India some years ago.
BDB -- actually Amnesty International was the group who invited the monk to my school. And I must say they did an excellent job of representing the truth and allowing both sides to speak.
Ah, and the WSJ is my favorite news source. My favorite part of the day is lunchtime when I sit at my desk and eat my lunch and read my WSJ. :)
21. BDB said the following at 10:48 PM on Apr 27:
Nicole (#20) wrote:
>>And I must say they did an excellent job of representing the truth and allowing both sides to speak. <<
I don't think I've been to one of their meetings in 20 years, but I'm glad they're still keeping up the same standards.
22. Leah said the following at 11:37 PM on Apr 28:
I don't know a lot about the methodist church, but it doesn't exist in Australia anymore. In the 70s, the Presbyterian and Methodist churches combined to create the Uniting Church. Methodist churches were not given a choice. Presbyterian churches were, and each church voted independently whether it wanted to join the union. Some did, many didn't.
The Uniting church is going down the same path this "United Methodist Chruch" appears to be going down. It accepts gay ministers, and in its creed, says the Word of God is contained in the bible- ie., it doesn't say the bible IS the Word of God.
That said, not all Uniting Churches are bad. My grandparents' church is a good one. Many have denounced the national Uniting Church's decision to include gay ministers, or left the Uniting Church when that happened.
Aaron, since when does "bible believing" = "gays not welcome"?? Nothing Motte said suggested that. Homosexuality is wrong. There is no debate about that. Exalting it, as the church Motte visited, is therefore wrong. That doesn't mean we don't welcome homosexuals!! Just like lying is wrong- and exalting it is also wrong- that doesn't mean we don't welcome liars!
So how about you don't put words into Motte's mouth- or into the article, as it may be- and leave the terminology well alone, because it's just fine. A true bible believing church does not extol the "beauty" of homosexual love.
Not to mention Motte never gave any opinion on female ministers, but either way, that's biblically wrong too, so a bible-believing church shouldn't be encouraging that either.
I can't believe you'd accuse Motte of using "bible believing" as code for "gay people not welcome, women preaching are suspect". Motte never suggested that. As a matter of common courtesy, how about stopping assuming the worst of people.