Category Archives: Christian Living

One Thing Is Needful

18 Friday Sep 2009

Posted by in Christian Living, Life, Methodist History, Ministry, Wesley

≈ 4 Comments

Try this mental exercise:

Imagine that an intelligent being, who had no previous experience with human beings or our world, were to observe human interactions and the way that we spend our time. What conclusions would that intelligent being come to about what is most important for human life, survival, and happiness?

Now imagine that the same intelligent being, instead of observing humanity in general, were to observe your life. What conclusions would this intelligent being come to about what is most important for your life, your survival, and your happiness?

One of my favorite sermons by John Wesley, “The One Thing Needful,” begins with this very mental exercise:

Could we suppose an intelligent being, entirely a stranger to the state of this world and its inhabitants, to take a view of their various enterprises and employments, and thence conjecture the end of their existence, he would surely conclude that these creatures were designed to be busied about many things. While he observed not only the infinite difference of the ends which different men were pursuing, but how vast a multitude of objects were successively pursued by almost every different person, he might fairly infer that for all these things were the sons of men placed upon the earth, even to gratify their several desires with sensual pleasure, or riches, or honour, or power. (I.1, p.34)

Wesley then notes “how surprised” this being would be “to hear their Creator declare to all, without distinction, ‘One thing is needful!’ But how much more when he knew that this one thing needful for me, their one business, the one end of their existence, was none of all those things which men were troubled about… Nay, that it was an end not only distinct from but contrary to them all – as contrary as light and darkness, heaven and hell, the kingdom of God and that of Satan!” (I.2, p.34)

The intelligent being, then, would assume that these people must have an infinite amount of time. In other words, they are not doing the “one thing needful” because they are guaranteed to have enough time to get to it. But Wesley wonders when this being realized that “all men were placed on a narrow, weak, tottering bridge, whereof either end was swallowed up in eternity…” how would it respond? He asks, “How would he express, how would he conceive the senselessness, the madness, of those creatures who, being in such a situation, could think of anything else, could talk of anything else, could do anything besides, could find time for any other design, or care, but that of ensuring the one thing needful!” (I.3, p.35)

So what is the one thing needful from Wesley’s perspective? He vividly describes it:

To recover our first estate, from which we are thus fallen, is the one thing now needful – to re-exchange the image of Satan for the image of God, bondage for freedom, sickness for health. Our one great business is to rase out of our souls the likeness of our destroyer, and to be born again, to be formed anew after the likeness of our Creator. It is our one concern to shake off this servile yoke and to regain our native freedom; to throw off every chain, every passion and desire that does not suit an angelical nature. The one work we have to do is to return from the gates of death to perfect soundness; to have our diseases cure, our wounds healed, and our uncleanness done away. (I.5, p. 36)

I find that this sermon is worth reading on a regular basis, because it so powerfully asks us if we have our priorities in check. Another way of getting at the same basic point that Wesley is making is that you can tell someone’s priorities by the way that they spend their time and their money.

Wesley believed that it was absolutely essential that God’s priorities were our priorities. And this was not just a platitude that he often repeated. As a result of his conviction that one thing is needful – being renewed and remade in the image of God – he used anything that he could find to help people constantly be reminded of what was most important. And so Wesley urged his followers to use the means of grace – to pray, read Scripture, receive Communion, and fast – and to watch over one another in love through various forms of communal practice. As many others have pointed out, the goal was not to create the ultimate bureaucracy, or to create anything for its own sake. Rather, the goal was to fan the flames that God had lit in people’s hearts and lives. The goal was to help every Methodist keep their eyes on God and to keep them attentive to nurturing and growing their relationship with God.

So, what conclusions would that “intelligent being” come to about what is most important in your life? Or for that matter, what do other people in your life think are most important in your life, based on the way that you are actually living?

It seems like we often think it is acceptable and normal to believe that our true priorities can’t be that easily seen. The idea is that if you want to know what my deepest priorities are, you would have to be able to talk to me and ask me, so I could explain them to you.

There may be some truth to this way of thinking. Convictions, ideas, and beliefs certainly do matter. But so does the way that we spend our lives. What are you spending your life on? What are you investing your life in? As we consider these questions, Wesley reminds us that there is only one thing that is needful.

How Can This Blog Help You Use Blueprint for Discipleship?

31 Monday Aug 2009

Posted by in Christian Living, Ministry, Technology

≈ 2 Comments

I have been considering different ways that this blog can be used as a further resource for those who are using A Blueprint for Discipleship: Wesley’s General Rules as a Guide to Christian Living in a small group setting this fall. I have considered a series that works through the book chapter by chapter. I have also wondered if it might be fruitful to accept questions from readers or group leaders and each week I could post a video response to the question. I am open to other possibilities as well.

If you will be using the book this fall, or if you have experience leading small group studies, how do you think this blog could best be used to make the experience that people who use the book have even better? I am very interested in your thoughts.

Surrendering the Legacy of Entire Sanctification

28 Friday Aug 2009

Posted by in Book Review, Christian Living, Methodist History, Wesley

≈ 17 Comments

In The Holiness Revival of the Nineteenth Century, Melvin E. Dieter discusses the tension that developed as the holiness revival progressed amongst its Methodist adherents over “come-outism.” This term referred to Methodists who left (or came out of) Methodism to pursue a purer form of holiness fellowship or association. Dieter argued that there were many Methodists who were advocates of the importance of holiness and who felt that it was essential that this movement stay connected with Methodism. In fact, some seemed to have seen this connection as crucial to Methodism’s future vitality.

Dieter goes on to discuss a parallel debate within Methodism over whether entire sanctification was Wesleyan. According to Dieter, “critics of the revival often had charged that the preaching of the Christian perfection which became characteristic of the revival was un-Wesleyan because the context of American revivalism tended to create significant variations from Methodism’s standard teachings of the doctrine” (256).

Interestingly, though, this argument was actually not all that persuasive or effective. Dieter argues that the holiness movement was “so closely identified with traditional Methodism and Wesleyan doctrine and life that Methodist opponents of the revival were forced to distance themselves from Wesley and the standard authors of prevailing Methodist theology to resolve the struggle with the holiness elements within the church” (256). In other words, those who opposed the holiness revival recognized that they could not win the argument by appealing to Wesley’s authority, so they looked for other sources of authority, and even a new heritage.

The Methodist Episcopal Church and the Methodist Episcopal Church South, then, shifted strategies. Instead of looking back to their heritage and the tradition that they were living out of, they looked forward “to the new and greener pastures in more modern teachers and theologies” (256). And so Dieter argues:

The legacy of entire sanctification, with whatever modifications may have been made to it during the course of the American deeper life revival, was now being surrendered, in large part, to the holiness movement; it had become difficult for the tradition to survive within its original Methodist Episcopal Church and Methodist Episcopal Church South home. (256)

Oddly, or perhaps hopefully, the MEC and MECS did not entirely officially abandon its connection to the doctrine of entire sanctification. For example, this morning I verified that the historic examination questions for admission into Methodist ministry are included in every MEC Discipline from 1884 until union with the MECS and Methodist Protestant Church in 1939. These are the very questions that are asked today of every person who presents themselves for ordination in the United Methodist Church as an elder or deacon. The second, third, and fourth questions are: Are you going on to perfection? Do you expect to be made perfect in love in this life? Are you earnestly striving after it?

Yesterday, I asked the students in my United Methodist History class if any of them had ever heard a sermon preached on entire sanctification or christian perfection. Not one of the nineteen students present had. As United Methodists, we seem to be living in a strange tension. In many ways we seem to have surrendered the doctrine of entire sanctification to other Wesleyan holiness groups, while still officially holding to the teaching in our doctrine and Book of Discipline. Or perhaps we have not surrendered the doctrine, just our commitment to teaching and preaching it. Somewhere along the way the very thing that Wesley believed to be one of the very reasons God raised up the people called Methodists became an embarrassment to later generations of Methodists.

I wish more ordained United Methodists would become uncomfortable with the fact that they have publicly affirmed their commitment and expectation that, by God’s grace, they expect to be made perfect in love in this life. United Methodists should not become familiar with this teaching only if they go to seminary. It should be preached in every Methodist pulpit, as the result of every UM pastor’s wrestling with what Wesley did and did not mean by “perfection,” and their efforts to present this to their parishioners in a way that they can understand. May we reclaim this “grand depositum” that God has entrusted to those who faithfully live out of the Wesleyan heritage.

Campus Ministry

18 Tuesday Aug 2009

Posted by in Christian Living, links, Ministry

≈ 1 Comment

For those who are not either college students, or campus ministers, campus ministry can sometimes be easier to take for granted than to actively support. Yet, it seems to me that it would be very difficult for a committed Christian to make an argument that campus ministry is irrelevant or unimportant.

Ashlee Alley and Creighton Alexander have given us the opportunity to actively support United Methodist campus ministries through prayer. Yesterday began forty days of prayer for United Methodist campus ministries as they begin a new year of ministry with college students across the country.

You can read Ashlee’s post about it here.

You can find the prayers each day here, or follow them on twitter here.

Will you join me in praying for United Methodist campus ministries?

Strong Convictions of Sin: Earnestly Inquiring after a Savior

27 Monday Jul 2009

Posted by in Christian Living, Methodist History, Ministry, Wesley

≈ 3 Comments

Saturday was a good mail day. The copies of volumes 2 and 3 of A History of Evangelicalism arrived (The Expansion of Evangelicalism: The Age of Wilberforce, More, Chalmers, and Finney, and The Dominance of Evangelicalism: The Age of Spurgeon and Moody). I was prepared to be let down by volume 2, because I enjoyed volume 1 so much, and volume 2 is not written by the same author (vol 1 is written by Mark Noll and vol 2 is writte by John Wolffe). However, I am really enjoying The Expansion of Evangelicalism. The purpose of this post, however, is not to review the book. It is to point to a thought that I had as I was reading the second chapter which describes revivals which occurred in Britain and the United States from 1790-1820.

Wolffe cites several primary sources that report the ways that folks experienced the revivals that they were a part of. As I was reading a few of these brief quotations, I began to feel as if I had read all of this before. Yet I knew I hadn’t, because Wolffe was writing about revival in a part of Britain (Scotland) that I have not studied much. (As Wolffe notes, the revivals in Scotland “owed nothing to Methodism which… remained a small movement with barely 1,000 members and did not expand at all during the 1790s” (53). Wolffe cites Alexander Stewart’s account of these revivals in Scotland:

“Seldom a week passed in which we did not see or hear of one, two, or three persons, brought under deep concern about their souls, accompanied with strong convictions of sin, and earnest enquiry after a Saviour” (54).

This process of becoming concerned about one’s spiritual state, then becoming convinced of one’s sin, seems to have led to “earnest enquiry after a Saviour.” Part of the reason this sounds familiar to me is because it does seem to be a common refrain for people who were describing the revivals of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. This was the language that they spoke. John Wesley used similar language in the “General Rules” when he wrote, “There is only one condition previously required in those who desire admission into these societies, ‘a desire to flee from the wrath to come, to be saved from their sins.'”

It seems to me that part of the reason that there were periods of revival in Britain and North America during this period was because there was general agreement on the basics of the Christian message, at least among those who were involved in the revivals. Traveling preachers who could not agree on other things, were able to agree that it was essential to wake people up to the reality of their standing before God and to lead them to sorrow for their present state. All of this was so that these preachers could point people to the hope of salvation, to the one who is both able and willing to save.

In public settings, from field preaching, to camp meetings, and other venues, there seems to have been a broad consensus and a deep passion for the importance of convincing people of the basic truth of this message. Historians have pointed to other factors that contributed to the potency of the evangelical revivals, but this seems, at least, to be one key factor.

Today, there seems to be broad consensus that renewal, even revival, would be a wonderful thing for United Methodism to experience. A difficult question facing United Methodists, however, may be: Are we able to agree on what the basic message is that we should hope to share with those who have not heard the good news? Indeed, it seems that we even sometimes disagree about whether or not we should even try to share our faith.

For those who yearn for renewed vitality in our denomination, we may have something to learn from our spiritual forebearers. They seem to have had passionate and convicted answers to these questions: Why is salvation important? What do I need to be saved from? What do I need to be saved for? How can I be saved? It seems to me that an important initial step to our efforts to find renewal and reverse the recent pattern of decline in our denomination will be to decide what our message to a broken and hurting world is and to share it with excitement, passion, and conviction.

Great Article at UM Portal

12 Friday Jun 2009

Posted by in Christian Living, links, Wesley

≈ 8 Comments

Thanks to Steve Manskar for drawing my attention to a wonderful article on the emergent movement and United Methodism at the United Methodist Portal. The article particularly highlights the difference between the missional focus of emergent as opposed to the attractional model of many churches which offer emergent worship as a way to attract a particular demographic.

The second half of the article makes a fantastic comparison between early Methodism and what is happening in some emergent settings. Taylor Burton-Edwards is a key voice in the article, discussing his understanding of what Wesley was doing in early Methodism and what seems to have potential for Methodism today.

There are some things in the article that seem to be a bit overstated. There is, for example, a quote from Burton-Edwards that Wesley was ‘absolutely horrible as a pastor.’ This is, of course, a very subjective claim that depends on what one considers to be the traits of a “horrible” or “magnificent” pastor. From the work that I have been doing for Dr. Ted Campbell on the next volume of Wesley’s Letters for the Bicentennial Edition of Wesley’s Works, I cannot help but be amazed at the sheer volume of Wesley’s correspondence. There were certainly times when he seemed to be very blunt and tactless. Yet, he also frequently encouraged people to continue doing the work God had called them to, and to continue moving toward holiness. My guess is that the stark contrast between “absolutely horrible” pastor and “tremendous community organizer” is more the result of editing for the article, than Burton-Edwards’ view of John Wesley.

The article also states:

Mr. Burton-Edwards believes the whole system began to bog down and lose its distinctive edge when Methodists started forming congregations in America in 1784. Wesley’s rules required active participation in both the class meeting and the society meeting. But by 1850, there were essentially no class meetings left in the church.

Again this doesn’t seem quite right. The time period that is identified is almost exactly the period when Methodism saw its most explosive and dramatic growth. While there do seem to be many different things going on during this period of seventy years, some of which led to the decline of Methodism – there also seems to have been something about the way in which American Methodists formed congregations in the last years of the 1700s that has some explanatory power for why Methodism grew at such an astonishing rate. This is simply a way of saying that it seems odd to say that Methodism lost its distinctive edge during the time that it was spreading throughout America. Despite this qualm, I think Burton-Edwards is onto something crucial when he points to the decline of the class meeting in the 19th century as a loss of something particularly distinctive of Methodist identity.

This article raises many interesting questions, and it provides intriguing answers to many of these questions that are worth exploring further. I am excited to see this kind of analysis by United Methodists and eagerly anticipate more from Burton-Edwards, David Reid (who wrote the article) and the UM Reporter.

(By the way, I would like to partially remedy one major oversight of the article. It mentions that Taylor Burton-Edwards has started a blog for emergent United Methodists, but it does not provide a url or a link to the blog. The blog is emergingumc and the url is http://emergingumc.blogspot.com. I would encourage you to go there and join in the conversation if these issues are of interest to you.)

Thoughts from Oklahoma Annual Conference

01 Monday Jun 2009

Posted by in Christian Living, Life, Ministry

≈ 8 Comments

Annual Conference has occasionally been difficult for me to attend. I have sometimes been much too cynical and easily disillusioned. I have occasionally thought that we were like kids fascinated with the explosive power of fireworks when we are surrounded by dynamite.

This post, however, is not intended to be a lament. It is meant to be a testimony. Last week, I saw felt the Spirit of God at work throughout Annual Conference. I prayed during my drive to Annual Conference each morning. This was truly a means of grace for me. As a result, I arrived at Annual Conference each morning expecting to see God at work in some way during the day. Here are a few glimpses of where I saw God at work:

On Monday, I felt the privilege of being able to vote on those who would be commissioned and ordained at this Annual Conference. I was reminded of the blessing and responsibility that comes with being a member of the order of elders in ordained ministry in the United Methodist Church. I was also convicted by hearing the ordinands answer the same questions that I answered just last year. I was reminded that I made these same vows last year. And I was reminded that these vows are ongoing. We did not promise to do this until we were ordained. Rather, we took these vows as part of our entrance into ordained ministry with the expectation that we would uphold them as long as we are in this order. I found myself looking around and thinking about all the people at the clergy session who had previously made these vows, praying that we were all reminded of the promises we have made before God and one another.

(One slight suggestion: I love the questions about Christian perfection. We should not only keep them, but should take them more seriously. I think one way of more honestly answering these questions would be to respond “Yes, by the grace of God.” Rather than simply saying, “Yes.”)

On Tuesday I had dinner and a wonderful conversation with Brandon Blacksten. Brandon was in the youth group when I was working with the youth at McFarlin Memorial United Methodist Church when I was in college at the University of Oklahoma. He has just finished his first year of seminary at Vanderbilt and is a candidate for ordained ministry in the United Methodist Church. I will resist putting words in Brandon’s mouth, but I left our conversation refreshed and thankful for the interaction.

I was also very apprehensive about the debate about the proposed constitutional amendments. The actual discussion and debate, I thought, went very well. It seemed to me that people were trying to understand and love those who seemed to be on opposite sides of some of these issues. (I would also highly recommend the format that was used at our Annual Conference. We had round table discussions and spent about 15 minutes discussing the amendments – they were clustered into four groups. After the table discussions people were able to speak to the entire gathering for or against the amendments. We agreed to allow 3 one minute speeches in favor and 3 against each amendment. As I recall, only one amendment actually had three people speak for it and three against it – the amendment concerning membership that would affect paragraph 4 in the Book of Discipline. This format seemed to give everyone a chance to speak their mind, but also to avoid it becoming an unnecessarily polarizing and divisive occasion. The entire process took about two hours. I think this is as close as you could come to genuine Christian conference when there are 32 Constitutional Amendments under consideration. The folks who planned this discussion did a wonderful job.)

There were several other conversations that were means of grace to me. More than any Annual Conference I had previously been to, at this Annual Conference I was frequently part of conversations which challenged me, inspired me, gave me hope, and made me realize that there are many, many people in Oklahoma who I am thankful to be in ministry with.

If your Annual Conference is coming up and it is often a negative or neutral experience… I would encourage you to find a meaningful amount of time to pray each day. As obvious as this insight is, it had a profound impact on my Annual Conference experience. This does not mean that I have put my hope in the Annual Conference to save the United Methodist Church. But it does mean that I was reminded that God is still able to work within the United Methodist Church, just as God is still able to work without the United Methodist Church.

Doing is Harder than Knowing

18 Monday May 2009

Posted by in Christian Living

≈ 1 Comment

In my recent article for the Covenant Discipleship Connection, I wrestled with a thought that I have had rattling around in my mind for awhile now: Doing is harder than knowing. This may seem obvious. But it seems to go against many of the experiences I have had in the church and the academy. From an early age I remember hearing things like, “knowledge is power.” Which like most cliches, has a good deal of truth to it. In church, the idea often seemed to be that the key to mature Christianity was mastering the content of the Bible.

Lest you misunderstand me, I am not suggesting that either reading the Bible or education are unimportant. What I am suggesting is that we sometimes overemphasize the importance of knowledge and underemphasize the importance of putting what we have learned into practice. This may be most obvious in Christianity. We often seem anxious to learn more about our faith, believing that the reason we are not “better” Christians is because we don’t know enough. We sometimes seem to think that the reason we are not more faithful is because we don’t know what faithfulness is.

And yet it seems to me that it is not all that difficult to know what faithfulness in the Christian life looks like. Jesus said that the greatest Commandment was to love God and neighbor. John Wesley outlined an approach to keeping these commandments known as the “General Rules.” In the General Rules, Wesley had three rules that he believed would guide Methodists towards deeply committed discipleship. First, those who want to love God and neighbor should do no harm. Second, they should do all the good that they can. And finally, they should attend upon the ordinances of God, or practice the means of grace. These practices are: praying, reading scripture, receiving the Lord’s Supper, fasting. Wesley also often talked about the importance of watching over one another in love for growth in the Christian life.

In many ways, that is what someone who is already a Christian needs to know about how to practice their faith. Knowing what to do is not all that hard. Doing this, however, is much more difficult.

Charles Wesley argued for the importance of “uniting… knowledge and vital piety.” This, it seems to me, is a key emphasis that Methodists ought to reclaim, and with a sense of urgency. The information that we give and receive in our churches, should always lead to transformation. The goal of the Christian life is not to know what to do. The goal of the Christian life is to allow ourselves to be transformed by God’s grace so that we do what we know we should – so that our beliefs are consistent with our actions.