• About Me

Kevin M. Watson

Kevin M. Watson

Category Archives: Book Review

The Wesley Study Bible

16 Tuesday Dec 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review, links, Wesley

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Methodism, Wesley, Wesley Study Bible

I have recently learned that Abingdon Press will be publishing in early 2009 The Wesley Study Bible. From what I have read, this sounds like an excellent resource. It is edited by Joel B. Green and William H. Willimon and has over 150 contributors. I am hoping to get my hands on a copy so I can review it in detail here.

You can view an update at the Wesley Report and learn about how to join the facebook Wesley Study Bible group as well.

The retail price of the Wesley Study Bible will be $39.95, but it can be pre-ordered for $24.95.

Death Is Dead

23 Tuesday Sep 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa, Resurrection

Yesterday, I turned in my first paper for my History of Doctrine class. The PhD students in the class have to write five preceptorial papers and one major research paper. The readings for the paper were Athanasius’ On the Incarnation and Gregory of Nyssa’s An Address on Religious Instruction. In my paper I focused on Athanasius and Gregory’s discussion of the resurrection and how Christ’s resurrection impacts the meaning and significance of death for Christians. During my time as a local pastor, I was often frustrated by the discrepancy between what I believe Scripture says about life after death and what many people in my congregation believed about life after death. This was one of the main areas where I tried to graciously communicate the good news of the gospel, in hopes that we would allow the gospel to transform our understanding of life, death, and life after death. In any case, the paper itself follows if you are interested in reading it… Continue reading →

UMC in Decline: Fact or Fiction?

19 Friday Sep 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review, links

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

7 Myths of the United Methodist Church, Craig Miller

The most recent issue of the Contact, the newspaper for the Oklahoma Conference of the United Methodist Church, mentions Craig Kennet Miller’s book 7 Myths of the United Methodist Church. I have not read the book, but find the list of myths to be interesting, especially the “myth” that the church is dying. At first glance, this book seems to be marketing itself to make the argument that the United Methodist Church is doing fine and we shouldn’t be so worried about things. However, looking a bit more carefully, the arguments of the book seem to be more subtle and it actually looks as if Miller may be attempting to strip away some of the myths that prevent United Methodism from being renewed.

If nothing else, I am interested, and will make a note to check this book out in the future. It would seem to be a vital contribution to our UM context if it helps the Church to recognize that we are not in great shape and we need to overcome some of the myths that have led to the, if nothing else, numerical decline of the denomination. However, there seems to me to be a significant group in contemporary United Methodism that stubbornly insists, in the face of all the evidence, that United Methodism is not in decline and people are worrying about nothing. In fact, I might be tempted to argue that given how far United Methodism has moved away from its heritage (Where is the method in United Methodism?) that if it is not dying, it is at least turning into something that would be unrecognizable by the early Methodists.

Have you read 7 Myths of the United Methodist Church? What was your reaction to the book? How would you characterize what Miller is trying to do in the book?

Background on the Explanatory Notes (Part II)

04 Thursday Sep 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review, Ministry, Wesley

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Explanatory Notes, John Wesley

In my reading today, I came across more information about the Explanatory Notes:

During the previous decade, John had hoped the publication of his Bible commentary, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, would provide doctrinal help for his preachers. The first edition, in 1755, had been prepared more hastily than Wesley had hoped. The second edition the following year was essentially a reprint, though with the errata incorporated. In 1760, however, he and Charles had embarked on a major revision of the work, further refining the biblical text and expanding the notes. They finished this new edition in 1762 and, combined with the collected Sermons on Several Occasions John had published (four volumes by 1760), it provided basic doctrinal guidelines for the preachers.

By the late summer of 1763, Wesley had firmly fixed these two resources as the measure of proper Methodist preaching. (Heitzenrater, Wesley and the People Called Methodists, 212-3)

Heitzenrater goes on to argue that the Model Deed, which controlled access to Methodist pulpits, stipulated that preachers must preach “‘no other doctrine than is contained in Mr. Wesley’s Notes Upon the New Testament, and four volumes of Sermons.’ By this stipulation, the Sermons and Notes became the doctrinal standards for the Methodist preachers.” (Heitzenrater 213)

If you are still reading, you will see that we are starting to get somewhere… The Explanatory Notes were part of the doctrinal standards of early Methodism because they were considered to be an important way of ensuring that the people who preached in Methodist pulpits were preaching a doctrine that Wesley would approve of. Thus, the Explanatory Notes were intended to play an important role in defining what was acceptable Methodist teaching.

This still leaves open for discussion the role that they do actually play today and the role that they should play today.

Background on the Explanatory Notes

03 Wednesday Sep 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review, Ministry, Wesley

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

Explanatory Notes, John Wesley, United Methodist Church

In a previous post I mentioned that I am reading through John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes on the New Testament. Today, in re-reading Richard Heitzenrater’s Wesley and the People Called Methodists, I came across this passage:

The notes were largely a collation of material from John Heylyn’s Theological Lectures, John Guyse’s Practical Expositor, Philip Doddridge’s Family Expositor, and Johannes Bengel’s Gnomen Novi Testamenti. The latter was one of the first works of modern critical biblical scholarship, and Wesley adopted many of Bengel’s principles of textual criticism. Although the predominance of the material in the notes comes from these sources, Wesley wove them together in such an editorial way that he could own the combined whole. Having acknowledged his debt to these authors in the preface, Wesley chose not to document particular borrowings, as as not to ‘divert the mind of the reader from keeping close to the point in view’ (JWW, 14:235-39). (Heiztenrater, 188)

In a sense then, it would seem that one could argue that our doctrinal understanding of the New Testament comes from John Heylyn, John Guyse, Philip Doddridge, and Johannes Bengel as filtered and collated by Wesley. It is likely that I will not have time in the near future to learn more about these four men, but I would be very interested to explore this further at another time, as I do not know much about any of them, and only recognize Doddridge’s name.

The more I think about the Explanatory Notes and read them, the more surprised I am that they carry the weight of Doctrine for United Methodists. One could ask whether it is necessary to have a Doctrine for the interpretation of the New Testament, but perhaps more to the point, one could ask whether the Explanatory Notes continue to make a relevant contribution to the life of the United Methodist Church.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

Mainline or Methodist?

05 Tuesday Aug 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Book Review, Mainline or Methodist, Scott Kisker

Discipleship Resources has just released Mainline or Methodist? by Scott Kisker. I got a copy of the book in the mail yesterday and couldn’t stop reading it until I ran out of pages. My initial interest was largely due to the fact that Scott was one of my teachers and mentors at Wesley Theological Seminary. He is one of a handful of people who have had a major impact on who I am, and who I am becoming. (Fair warning: this might be the least objective comments I have ever written about a book.) So, I was initially excited about the book because of the person who wrote it. However, as I began reading it, I got really into it because of what was being said, not who was saying it.

In Mainline or Methodist? Scott Kisker argues that “real Methodism declined because we replaced those peculiarities that made us Methodist with a bland, acceptable, almost civil religion, barely distinguishable from other traditions also now know as ‘mainline.’ Like the Israelites under the judges, we wanted to be like the other nations. We no longer wanted to be an odd, somewhat disreputable people. And we have begun to reap the consequences” (13). Kisker argues that authentic Methodism does not seek to solve its own problems, it does not see itself as the answer. Instead, it looks to God’s grace and God’s power to save us. After outlining the hole that the contemporary UMC has dug for itself, and the distance it has wandered away from its Wesleyan roots, Kisker argues that true Methodism offers a vision, message, method, conversation, and a way forward for the United Methodist Church. Bold yet graceful, Mainline or Methodist? challenged me and also stimulated my thoughts about what it means to be a pastor in the United Methodist Church and where I hope our church is heading. My hope is that people like Scott Kisker will be used by God to impact the future and direction of Methodism.

I commend this book to you and would be interested in your thoughts if you have a chance to read it.

Seeing Gray, Adam Hamilton – A Review

22 Tuesday Jul 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam Hamilton, Seeing Gray

“Christianity has become a wedge that drives people from Christ, rather than drawing them to him. And Christians have, in their political involvement, acted to divide our nation rather than serve as the balm that can heal it” (xv). It is the desire to provide a more helpful and healthy approach to Christian dialogue on moral, political, and religious issues that provides the impetus for Adam Hamilton’s latest book, Seeing Gray in a World of Black and White: Thoughts on Religion, Morality, and Politics. Believing that “any issue about which thinking Christians disagree likely has important truth on each side of the debate,” Hamilton seeks to “draw upon what is best in both fundamentalism and liberalism by holding together the evangelical and social gospels, by combining a love of Scripture with a willingness to see both its humanity as well as its divinity, and by coupling a passionate desire to follow Jesus Christ with a reclamation of his heart toward those whom religious people have often rejected” (xvii).

Adam Hamilton is burdened to try to find a way forward past the polarizing and often destructive ways that Christians have too often related to one another. He writes, “part of the polarization we are experiencing in our country today is a result of pastors and church leaders who have abandoned the teachings of Jesus and the apostles regarding the way we speak of those with whom we disagree. Part of the healing of our nation must come from the church modeling for our society how we are to love those with whom we disagree. Right now we’re modeling for society how we destroy with our words and actions those we disagree with” (22-23).

Hamilton passionately argues that Christians often try to force us to make a choice between things that we don’t need to choose between. For example, “do we really have to choose between pursuing our faith with the intellect… or enjoying a deeply emotional, passionate, and heartfelt faith that moves us” (53). Thus, Hamilton seeks to outline the depth of the problem in the black and white world we live in, while making the case for seeing grey instead of choosing one or the other. Hamilton connects this desire with John Wesley whose “movement, Methodism, was born out of the theological conflicts that preceded him, and rather than finding himself drawn to the extremes, Wesley drew from them all as he articulated a gospel of the middle way” (4).

Seeing Grey is divided into three parts that are preceded by a foreward by Jim Wallis and an Introduction, “Are Jerry Falwell and John Shelby Spong Our Only Options?”, that vividly sets the stage for the major argument of the book. Part I makes the case for Seeing Gray in a world that is often black and white. This is where Hamilton lays out the reasons why it is necessary to begin to see things differently than we often have. Part II discusses the grey area in specific issues related to the Bible, Theology, and Christian Spirituality. Here Hamilton deals with issues such as Evolution, Heaven, Hell, the Problem of Evil, and Doubt. Part III “Politics and Ethics in the Center” deals with issues that are more political in nature, including: abortion, homosexuality, war, and how Christians should approach voting.

Hamilton is at his best when he is making the case that “Jesus preached one gospel that has, unfortunately, been split by the church into two: the social gospel and the personal evangelical gospel” (93). He convincingly shows that in many scenarios that are presented as either/or, the answer that is most faithful to the witness of Scripture is both/and. Hamilton also proved to be prophetic in his concerns about the War in Iraq that he wrote about March 1, 2003, just before the invasion of Iraq.

Having read much of his other work, I was disappointed at times that he seemed to largely reproduce what he had previously written elsewhere. In both the chapters dealing with homosexuality and abortion, he seemed to be largely rehearsing arguments that he had already made in his previous book Confronting the Controversies. He also used some of the same (albeit very powerful) illustrations. I was also intrigued that towards the end of the chapter “Will There be Hindus in Heaven?” by his offhanded comment:

Before ending this chapter I thought, for the Evangelicals reading this book, that a few other witnesses to this idea of inclusivism might be helpful. In the early church Jusin Martyr was said to have been an inclusivist. Ulrich Zwingli of the Reformers and, later, John Wesley, were inclusivists. C.S. Lewis held an inclusivist perspective, as was beautifully illustrated in the judgment scene in The Last Battle in the Chronicles of Narnia (110).

I am guessing that there are people who disagree with the way that some of these witnesses are characterized. I was surprised to see Wesley’s name in the list, as that would not have been my immediate impression of someone who talked so frequently of hell and described the first Methodist societies coming together because people wanted “to flee from the wrath to come.” Aside from referring to a fiction story that C.S. Lewis wrote, Hamilton offers no citations or evidence to support these claims. He maybe correct, but I wanted to hear more, especially regarding John Wesley. Perhaps, given the scope and purpose of his book, the best thing to do would have been to simply omit this passing reference.

Ultimately, I enjoyed reading this book. Adam Hamilton seems to have Midas’ Touch, from the standpoint that everything he says receives widespread attention. As an outside observer, my perception is that he is genuinely trying to use his power and influence in the most faithful way that he can. In his own denomination, the United Methodist Church, people on different sides of many issues do seem to be talking past one another more and more and even beginning to despise one another. We sometimes seem to be a very divided church. If Seeing Gray is able to succeed in helping people to take a deep breath, step back, and recognize that the people they disagree with have sane reasons for their beliefs and convictions, then it will have made a substantial and much needed contribution to United Methodism’s ability to stay united.

The Crisis of Younger Clergy – A Review

21 Monday Jul 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review

≈ 14 Comments

Tags

Ann Michel, Crisis of Younger Clergy, Lovett Weems

At Annual Conference I had an interesting conversation with a few pastors about the state of the United Methodist Church and young clergy leadership. The conversation started when I asked someone if they had seen or read The Crisis of Younger Clergy by Lovett H. Weems Jr. and Ann A. Michel. I was surprised by the response which was something to the effect of, “I don’t really buy into stuff like that.” The explanation was that they did not believe in the myths of scarcity that are often perpetuated in the UMC relating to the absence of young clergy and the general decline of the church. At this point someone else joined in and agreed that they thought all of that stuff was overdone.

After reading Weems and Michel’s presentation of the research done by the Lewis Center for Church Leadership, it seems to me that refusing to believe that there is a crisis of younger clergy is ignoring or avoiding the evidence. Here are some of the things that Weems and Michel reveal:

  • In the United Methodist Church and many other denominations, the percentage of clergy under the age of 35 has dropped to below 5 percent. (vii)
  • The percentage of United Methodist elders age 35 and under has decreased from 15.05 percent in 1985 to 4.92 percent in 2007. (2)
  • The total church membership in the United Methodist Church declined between 1985 and 2005, as did the total number of elders, the number of churches, and the number of pastoral charges. But the decline in the number of young clergy has been proportionally much greater than any of these other changes. (9)
  • From 1985 to 2007, the total decline in the number of elders was 3,578. The decline in the under-35 age bracket was 2,343, or 73 percent of the total. (9) [I think there should be an exclamation point after that one!]
  • The Constitution of the United States affords 25-year-olds the right to serve the United States House of Representatives. At 21, a physician can be licensed to practice medicine in the state of New York. Yet 28 is generally the youngest age at which one can be ordained elder in The United Methodist Church; and those who are elders in their 20s or early 30s often are thought not to be ready for particularly challenging assignments. (22)
Ultimately, Weems and Michel demonstrate very convincingly that there is a problem. However, the major strength of their book is not that they are able to convince the reader that there is a problem; rather, after getting your attention, they take advantage of the opportunity to make some concrete suggestions about what to do about it. And, their suggestions are based on an extensive survey of young UM clergy, where they received responses from almost half of all elders in the UMC who are under 35 (ix).

As a young clergy in the UMC, it is often very frustrating to hear people lamenting the absence of young people in the church (whether pastors or laity) and then refuse to seek guidance from young people themselves. In my own Annual Conference, I have been blessed to get to know several pastors whose gifts and grace are overwhelmingly evident. Unfortunately, I do not see any of those people being given the chance to exercise significant leadership within the Annual Conference. Sometimes it seems that too many people are panicking because they don’t see enough young people in church, but for whatever reason, they are unable or unwilling to ask the few young people who are in the church what they think about how the church (and the ordination process) can become more hospitable to younger folks.

I mention this, because it seems to me that one of the most valuable contributions of The Crisis of Younger Clergy is that it models taking seriously the perspectives and wisdom of young people when trying to figure out how to solve the “problem of young people.” For the most part, the prescriptions that the authors make about what to do in order to address the crisis of younger clergy is based in the actually responses that they got from younger clergy. This is so obvious as to be almost absurd that everyone hasn’t already figured this out. But, when Weems and Michels found that their research showed that there was a serious lack of young clergy and they decided to ask what can be done to address this problem, instead of assembling a team of experienced pastors, or instead of polling every cabinet in the UMC, or asking tenured academics, they asked the people who were in the demographic that they were studying! Nobody knows the strengths and weaknesses of the journey to ordination in the UMC, and life as a younger pastor in the UMC better than the younger pastors who are going through the process.

If you are interested in getting a glimpse at what younger pastors think about things like the appointment process and the road to ordination, this is the book to read — because it is based in what young pastors themselves have said about these very things. Here are some of the things that they found:
  • The emerging generation of United Methodist elders does not think the system of itinerancy works well. Less than 5 percent of young elders responding to the Lewis Center’s survey strongly agreed with the statement, “Itineracy as practiced today is working well” (69).
Here are some more insights related to the itineracy and the appointment process, as it relates to younger clergy:
  • Lyle Schaller argues (and the authors research shows that many younger clergy would agree) that “talented ministers are ‘set up to fail’ by being invited to serve churches where their gifts, skills, experience, personality, and other characteristics do not match the needs and culture of that congregation at this point in its history” (61-2).
  • “More strategic deployment of young clergy is arguably the best way the denomination can use the scarce resource of young leadership to enhance its outreach among younger generations, while at the same time helping young clergy survive and thrive in ministry. In the opinion of those responding to the Lewis Center’s survey, the single most important thing conferences can do to support young clergy is to pay more attention to first and second appointments” (62).
  • “Today most clergy come from large membership or suburban churches. Congregational life in many of the churches to which they are assigned bears no resemblance to what they have previously experienced” (64).
The authors also found that “many of today’s young clergy express disillusionment with the ‘pay your dues’ and ‘wait your turn’ mentality that governs clergy advancement” (78). I would add a few things to this. This is especially frustrating, when younger clergy often observe middle-age second career pastors being “fast-tracked” to leadership positions in the Annual Conference. It makes me wonder, why are younger clergy given the message that they have to pay their dues, while older clergy don’t just because they are closer to retirement? In many ways, we seem to have an appointment process that rewards second career pastors and gives less attention and support to younger clergy who enter seminary immediately after completing college. Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised that we are getting what the system seems set up to encourage.

The authors also discussed salaries and debt related to going to seminary. 69% of clergy under 35 who responded to the survey have debt from seminary. 52% have more than $10,000 of debt, and 15% have more than $30,000! (86).

Ultimately, this book is worth reading for people who want to understand what younger pastor’s experience of ministry in the United Methodist Church is like. It raises some very important questions that I hope the UMC will take seriously, and I hope we will spend more time and energy not just investing in younger clergy, but in listening to them, and giving them a meaningful voice in our Annual Conferences.

A New Kind of President

14 Monday Jul 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Chris Haw, Jesus for President, Shane Claiborne

Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw envision a new kind of President in their book Jesus for President: Politics for Ordinary Radicals. There have been many books published this year that attempt to provide a guide to voting in the upcoming Presidential elections (See my previous reviews of Tony Campolo’s Red Letter Christians, and Jim Wallis’ The Great Awakening . Claiborne and Haw seem less interested in helping Christians figure out whether they should vote for the Republican or Democratic candidate than in encouraging Christians to think more carefully and deeply about their primary loyalty to Jesus Christ. Claiborne and Haw explore the lordship of Jesus Christ in fresh, creative, and engaging ways.

Jesus for President is divided into four main sections: Section 1 looks at the problem that has come from human sin and the need that we have to be saved from ourselves; Section 2 looks at Jesus as the Prince of Peace and the ironies surrounding his life and the kingdom he is ushering in; Section 3 asks what disciples of Jesus Christ should do when the “empire” seems to have been baptized , or what to do when “two Kingdoms” collide?; Section 4 argues that the greatest challenge facing Christians “is to maintain the distinctiveness of our faith in a world gone mad… all of creation waits, groans, for a people who live God’s dream with fresh imagination.”

Claiborne and Haw are currently in the midst of a “Jesus for President” tour where they continue to campaign for a very different Presidential candidate. Check out their website to see if Claiborne and Haw are coming to a city near you.

I really appreciate Claiborne and Haw’s efforts to take seriously the teachings of Jesus. Claiborne talks about his experiences with Simple Way, a community in inner Philadelphia in his previous book, Irresistible Revolution. Claiborne is tough to categorize, because his stubborn insistence of living the kind of life that Jesus taught his followers to live makes him seem “conservative,” while his obvious identification with the poor and oppressed makes him seem equally “liberal.” This book is worth the read, ultimately, because Claiborne and Haw aren’t working to get either a conservative or a liberal into the White House, they are working to get those who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ to care more about loyalty to the Kingdom of God than the government of the United States. Amen. Jesus for President!

N.T. Wright on the Colbert Report

25 Wednesday Jun 2008

Posted by Kevin M. Watson in Book Review

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

Colbert Report, N.T. Wright, Surprised by Hope

If you haven’t seen N.T. Wright’s appearance on the Colbert Report, you should check it out. You can see the video here.

I was struck by two things as I watched this interview: 

  1. Colbert seemed genuinely interested in what N.T. Wright had to say.
  2. While I do not regularly watch the Colbert Report (we don’t even have cable at the moment), this interview seemed to be longer than most of the interviews I have seen him do.
Bishop Wright was on the show to talk about his new book: Surprised by Hope. I was given a copy of the book for my birthday and am really enjoying it so far. I may write more about it later, but after reading roughly a 1/3 of it, I would already strongly recommend it to any Christian who wants to have a more solid grasp of what the Bible teaches about the resurrection, death, and heaven.
(Thanks to Will at Ramblings from Red Rose for making me aware of this interview.) 
← Older posts
Newer posts →

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Kevin M. Watson
    • Join 369 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Kevin M. Watson
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar