Summer 1991 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry

8/9/2019 Summer 1991 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry

1/116

VOL. 11, NO. 2 SUMMER 1991A Journal of Scholarly Reflection for Ministry

QUARTERLY REVIEW

Itineracy in the United Methodist Church Today

Fundamentalism A Challenge to the ChurchJames BarrPreparing to Preach from Ephesians to Northside Church

William H. WillimonNew Birth ThroughWater and the Spirit:

A Reply to Ted A. CampbellCharles R. Hohenstein

Plus Special Feature:Globalization in Theological Education


2/116

QUARTERLY REVIEWA Journal of Scholarly Reflection for Ministry

A publication of The United Methodist I*ublishing HouseRobert K. Feaster, President and Publisher

and the United Methodist BoardofHigher Education and MinistryRogerW . Ireson, General Secretary

Editor, Sharon J. HelsEditorial Director, J.Richard PeckComposition Editor, Sheila W . McGeeEditorial BoardLloyd R BaileyThe Divinity SchoolDuke Univeristy

Wilfred BaileyCasa View United Methodist ChurchDallas, Texas

George W . BashoreBishop, Pittsburgh AreaThe United Methodist Church

Pamela CoutureCandler School of TheologyEmory University

FredB.CraddockCandler School of TheologyEmory University

BriUiGill-AusternAndover Newton Theological SchoolJanice Riggle HuieMnnchaca United Methodist ChurchManchncn, TexasQuarterly Review (ISSN 0270-0287) provides continuing education resources for lay and

professional ministers in The United Methodist Church and other churches. QR intends to be aforum inwhich issues ofsignificance toChristian ministry can be raised and debated. Publicationof an article inQR does not imply endorsement of itsviews by the editors.

Articles for consideration nre welcome from lay and professional ministers, United Methodists,and others, and should bemailed tothe Editor, QR , Box871, Nashville, TN 37202. Manuscriptsshould be inEnglish and typed double-spaced, including notes. Writers are strongly encouragedto enclose acopy ofthe manuscript on 5.25" 25GKdiskette, MS/DOS format, ASCII document file.(To follow ASCII format, single-space text, double-space between pnragraphs, and remove specialtext styles.)

QR ispublished four times a year, inMarch, June, September, nnd December, by theUnitedMethodist BoardofHigher Education and Ministry and The United Methodist Publishing House.Editorial OfTices are at 1001 19th Avenue, South, Box 871, Nashville, TN 37202. Second-classpostage paid at Nashville, Tennessee.

QR isavailable at abasic subscription price of$15 for one year, $2G for two years, and $33 forthree years. Subscriptions may beobtained bysending a money order orcheck to the BusinessManager, QR, Box 801, Nashville, TN 37202.

Postmaster: Addres3 changes should besent toThe United Methodist Publishing House, Box801, Nashville, TN 37202.

Subscribers wishing tonotify publisher oftheir change of address should write to the BusinessManager, QR, Box801, Nashville, TN37202. An index isprinted inthe winter issue ofeach year(number 5 for1981 only; number 4thereafter). QR Is printed onacid-free paper.

lection* are taken from Common Lretionary: The Lections Proposed by theConaultstion on Common Text*(New York: Church Hymnal Corporation, 1983).

Scripture quotations unless otherwise notedare fromthe RevisedStandard VersionCommonBible,copyrighted 1973 by theDivision ofChristian Education of the National Council ofChurches ofChrist in theU.S.A., andare used by permission.

Quarterly Review; AJournal of Scholarly Reflection for MinistrySummer 1991

Copyright 1991 by TheUnited Methodist Publishing Houseand the United Methodist General Hoard of Higher Education and Ministry

Mary Ellen KilsbyFirst Congregational ChurchLong Beach, California

Robert C.NevilleBoston University School of Theology

Judith E.SmithGeneral BoardofHigher Education and MinistryThe United Methodist Church

Marjorie Hewitt SuchockiWesley Theological Seminary

John L. TopolewskiDistrict SuperintendentWyoming Conference

Donald II. TreeeeGeneral BoardofHigher Education and MinistryThe United Methodist Church

F. Thomas TrotterAlaska Pacific University


3/116

VOL.11, NO. 2 SUMMER 1991

ContentsIntroduction

Sharon J. Hels 2Itineracy in the United Methodist Church Today 4FundamentalismA Challenge to the Church

James Barr 30Globalization in Theological Education:

Religious Particularity in Muslim-Christian DialogueLamin Sanneh 40Implications for Interreligious Dialogueand Ecumenical Understanding

Jane Idleman Smith 61The Global-Contextual Matrix in theSeminary Classroom

M. Thomas Thangaraj 76Preparing to Preach from Ephesians to Northside Church

William H. Willimon 84New Birth Through Water and the Spirit:A Reply to Ted A. CampbellCharles R. Hohenstein 103


4/116


5/116

INTRODUCTION

West, he contends, has used interreligious dialogue as a liberalcause-it has promoted Western cultural superiority whilegiving ground onbasicChristian convictions. But the West doesnot possess Christianity, and dialogue does not pose a threat toauthentic Christian faith. On the contrary, he writes, "It is fromthe sense of commitment and obligation that dialogue and theother forms of mutual encounter arise, making conversationmeaningful rather than superfluous."

Let us say that we are committed to expanding the theological conversation in our seminaries to include non-Westernpeople, ideas, and values. Can it be done without a subtleviolence against the other, even in our perceptions of them?Jane I. Smith writes about the terminology of globalization andits hidden messages. She exposes the risks in the dialogueprocess but calls for us to take them in order to be trulyeducated and alive to our own faith tradition.

To be fruitful, global thinking must be combined with contextual thinking. That is, those of uswho read and think abouthumankind in general must constantly look for ways to showour partnership with members of local communities. ThomasThangany has worked successfully in this area for many years,and the fruit of his wisdom is included here.Northside United Methodist Church is the scene of ourlectionary study on Ephesians. Willimon used his own churchas the context in this study, written in 1982, which we havereprinted in this issue.

Finally, our review section is taken upbya spirited responseto an article on evangelical views of baptism in the fall, 1990issue of QR by Ted Campbell, Charles Hohenstein contendsthat evangelicals rightly point to repentance of sin and faith inGod's grace, but they must never forget that it is God whoinitiates new birth.

May you be empowered by the Holy Spirit to meet newchallenges in the months ahead!

3


6/116

QR 11/2 (1991) 4-29

Itineracyin theUnitedMethodist ChurchTodayA Quarterly Review Roundtable Discussion

O N OCTOBER 29-30, 1990, a group of United Methodistclergy men and women met to discuss the system ofitineracy. The participants are:Diane Luton Blum, TennesseeConference; Young Joon Cho, NewYork Conference; Jerome KDel Pino, Southern New England Conference; Daniel Garcia,Rio Grande Conference; Donald N. Griffith, South IndianaConference; John E. Harnish, Detroit conference; Thomas H.C. McArthur, California-Nevada Conference; Timothy A. Russell, Central TexasConference; Donald H. Treese, Central Pennsylvania Conference; Theodore Walter, South CarolinaConference. Sharon J. Hels, editor of QR, convened the panel.

Hels: Let's begin with aworkingdefinition of itineracy. Whatsort of experiences focus this system for you? What givesitineracy its meaning?Walter: I had everything working well in the church-all thefinances were in place, and the parsonage was in good shapewith new carpeting in the den-and then we moved. That'sitineracy! Thereal question is, why did I commit to that? I thinkI understood, relatively, what the covenant and the call toministry meant. I wanted to serve in the United MethodistChurch, under the system I grfewup in. Three of my sonswerehome for the weekend not long ago, and I was conscious of theinfluence that 32 years in the system has had on them. Theydon't have to live in it any longer, because they're out ontheirown. But it's really part of who I am.

Del Pino: I'm in mysecond year of a change of appointment.In my former appointment, everything was . . . all the sowinghadbeen done, the watering had beendone, and it was time for

4


7/116

ITINERACY

a great harvest. But somebody else is going to do that now, Ihope. As for my assignment now, itineracy made that possiblefor me. I'm quite certain I would not have it if I were in a callsystem. Itineracy brings home to me the extent to which, usingLuther's words, I am the freest person of all, and the mostbound. I am free to the extent that I can leave an appointment,but bound in being accountable for moving hearth and home,everything.

Russell: I moved to Waxahatchie two-and-a-half years ago.It's a place that Pd been occasionally because I have an auntwho lives there, but my children had never been to the town,and neither had my wife. But my grandparents are buriedthere. My mother and father were married there. Four of mysiblings were born just south of there. We've made our homein many great places, but there has also been the joy o f a familyhomecoming for us.

Cho: Since I became a minister in 1966, I've moved six timesand I'm looking forward to moving one or two times before myretirement. I've met all kinds of people, been to all kinds ofplaces, and I've learned a great deal, so I'm grateful for thesystem. On the other hand, when I look at my friends who haveachieved significant goals in ministry, like a growing membership of 2,000 or 3,000, building a huge church-I don't haveanything to show because I moved around so often! So, on theone hand I feel happy, but some days I think, Maybe I made amistake.

McArthur. I encounter itineracy now in the struggle withsome of the tough issues that arise from it. I served two yearson the Cabinet during a time when there was one church in theconference that we could not find leadership for. It got down tothe eleventh hour. The bishop consulted with the districtsuperintendent, and they concluded that if they couldn't findanybody out there, they had better make it one of their own.The bishop asked whether I would go , and I went. That was sixmonths ago, and now I'm beginning to wonder how that appointment was presented to the Cabinet. Wehave the trappingsof great secrecy around itineracy, so that if you are invited or

5


8/116

QUARTERLY REVIEW, SUMMER 1991

requested byabishop or Cabinet to go to a church, youmay notcontact the person who is there already. That means you haveto trust secondhand information.Garcia: What Tom is describing happens far too often acrossthe church. I am familiar with several conferences inwhich thePeter Principle is the rule of law. Because of the idea thatpastors should not take a cut in salary when they move, veryoften a personwhoshould not be in a church goes there anywayjust in order to stay at the same pay level. When the work getsbotched up in that church, he or she can just move to anotherone. This happens across the church; it's not just one conference.

McArthur: I think itineracy functions on four distinct levels.First of all, there's the theological level, wherewe link itineracywith mission of the church. The assumption is that we arefinding the best skills for the need at any given time. Thesecond level at which itineracy functions is an administrativelevel, where you begin taking into account issues like incompetent people. The third level is the one of values. That's onethat bothers me, because I have seen people being lied to andmanipulated. There are also things we aren't allowed to speakabout openly as clergy, like the desire for a bigger salary. Thefourth level is cultural reality. The itineracy grew up in acultural milieu in which men made decisions and women fol-lowed. There was also a time when the desire to sacrifice one'slife was primary. But people are no longer lining up to sacrificethemselves; they want to get something of value out of theirlives.

Russell: I think your perception as to whether the system isgood or bad is based onyour own experience. I never had a badappointment until my brothers and sisters in ministry told meI had one. Where I serve I think we've had all of the thingsyou've talked about. What concerns me most is the possibilityof deception on the part of, say, a superintendent in communicating what a church is really like. We tried to solve thatproblem by developing profiles of churches and pastors, byevaluating systems. But the appointment system doesnotwork

6


9/116

ITINERACY

the same for every individual, and people who think it will aregoing to be disappointed.

Blum: Most of us learn pretty quickly that the systemworksvery differently for different people. In the 70s, when I becameavailable for appointment, the system was subject to the law ofsupply and demand. What I heard was, "We don't have enoughchurches, so your availability is less important to us at thispoint." Living through the slow process ofbecoming a part ofthe covenant taught me that the systemworks very differentlyfor white men in my area than it does for white women, or forwomen and men ofcolor. Since that time I've had some excellent experiences with itineracy, particularly in the last half ofthe eighties, and my own family has come to live within thatvery effectively. But I received a powerful message in thoseearly years: that the system didn't need me and that missionseemed to be of fairly low value.

Harnish: For a definition of itineracy, I go back to the oldterminology of traveling orders-Fm a traveling member in fullconnection.My commitment is notjust to local church, but I'ma member of the annual conference. That took on meaning forme recently, when it came time for me to move. There werepeople in the conferencewhodidn't think I was a traveling elderin full connection because Fd been in one church for 10 1/2years-even though I took those years one at a time. SoI agreedto move, even though I didn't particularly want to. But thegeneral commitment was there, and the time seemed right.

Griffith: I thinkweought to demythologize the itineracy-it'sa management system, and that's all it is. It works as long asthere is trust and openness and honesty, but when webegin toplay games it breaks down. I recall a conversation that I hadwith my bishop several years ago. He called me into his officeand ranted and raved about why I preferred not to accept anappointment. I told him I would take it, but it didn't make senseto me and I told him why. Then he really got angry and endedup by making a vague threat. Sixmonths later he said, "By theway, such and such an appointment is comingup and I wasgoing

7


10/116


toput you there, but becauseyou turned me down on the otherappointment, I'm not going to."

Del Pino: It's important to hear what Don [Griffith] is sayingabout the administrative dimension of itineracy. But I don'tthinkwe can reduce itineracy simply to a management system.It was apparent to Wesley and very clear to Asbury that onesubmitted oneself to that systembecause it was the will of God.The system was an extension of the call to ordained ministry.If at any point it became antithetical to a person's overall pointofview, he couldwithdraw from it. Wemisunderstand itineracyif we talk about it simply as a management system. What is therelationship between your calling, your vocation, and the mission of the church?Treese: I suppose that we would all agree Wal-Mart department stores has one of the best management systems inAmerica today. Wal-Mart's mission issimple: to generate morestores and larger profits everyyear. If the Nashville store hasdonewell and the Knoxville store is not doingsowell, someoneneeds to figure out a way for the Knoxville store to increase itssales and make more money. The Knoxville store may be a bitsmaller. But with the right kind of person in there, it wouldtake off. So the head honcho says to the manager of theNashville store: 'You leave and go to the Knoxville store." Andthe person goes. Why will that work in a place like Wal-Martbut not in The United Methodist Church? Is it that Wal-Mart,as an organization, has a very clear sense of mission that issupported by its management system? The United MethodistChurch ought to decide whether it has a separate concept ofmission for each annual conference, district, or appointment,or if there is an overarching sense of mission that itineracysupports. If you don't have a clear sense of mission, then youdon't know what itineracy as a system is supposed to support.

Walter: Ifyou can say, "This is whywewant you to be there,"then I will be encouraged to go to where I'm sent. Not becauseit's going to be more salary-when I moved that last time I gotless salary. But if the Cabinet and the superintendent decide

8


11/116

ITINERACY

there's something that needs to be done there, and that I canmake a difference, then I will be eager to go .

Harnish: I agree that a critical part o f our problem is that welack a shared sense o f mission, of visionand purpose. One of mybest friends says, 'Well, why should I move? I've got thiswonderful church that's growing; there are great things happening; I have a beautiful house; my kids like it; my wife likesit....Why should I move?" I can't blame him. But if all 500-plusmembers of the Detroit Annual Conference hold a sharedunderstanding of our mission and task, then each one will to gosomeplace where he or she can contribute to that mission,rather than just to satisfy their personal calling.

Blum: I think that most of the leadership circles in thedenomination give us a clergyperspective on mission, and thatitineracy itself tends to place clergyneeds above congregationalneeds. The language we use is significant: wewill use the word"appointment," instead of "congregation." I am in a covenantrelationship o f mutual support with my brothers and sisters inthis annual conference. But veryfrequently we lose track of thesense of covenant that binds all of us to the life and ministry ofthe congregations and direct ministry units within thatgeographical area.

Harnish: I had a conversation with someo f my colleagues toprepare for our conversation today, and that was our big issue:is the system working to benefit clergy or to benefit churches?Somuch of the budget of an annual conference goes for the careand feeding of the clergy. When it comes to the appointivesystem, however, there is enough evidence to show that theCabinet and bishops are really trying to make the best matchfor a local church. They operate under constraints, and one ofthem is availability. There maybe somebody who isbetter thanI am for Court Street Church, but if that person moved lastDecember, they're not going to ask him or her to move again.

Griffith: I'm uncomfortable with saying the choice is betweenthe clergy and the local church. It seems to me that the missionis God's mission. And God's mission is much broader. We arenot talking about a local church but a charge.The gift of United

9


12/116


Methodist polity, as a management system, is that it looksbeyond the local church-it looks to the wider community.

Russell: Our theology is going to define what our mission is.I think that theology could inform all four levels, as Tomdistinguished them, in the itinerant system. It may be amanagement system, but I like that system because it fits mytheology. Weworship a Godwho sends, a God who goes beforeyou, a God who leads you through the wilderness, a God whocalls you to be disciplined and who disciplines you, a Godwhocalls for sacrifice. The church ismore than what any one personmight make it. There is a church in our conference calledBrother Jones' church, because he founded it. But after 20years, that church was determined to die because at the core itwas no more than one person.

McArthur: I'm not sure I want to let Don getaway with hisWal-Mart analogy. Ifyou want to work with any one of the fourlevels within itineracy, you have to be faithful to the principlesthat apply to that level. When we're talking about a management system, then I believe we need to evaluate that onmanagement principles. Your argument was that there's a cleararticulation of mission from that organization. I'm not altogether sure that's why that manager moves.Treese: Maybe he movesbecause if he doesn't, he'll be fired.But that's not the onlypossible motivation, and it's far from thebest one. I think the manager goes because in his experiencewith that company, if you stay inand behave yourself, you willgetyour reward. Soit's not really about Knoxville, but what liesbeyond Knoxville. And there's a trust that this is where I'mneeded; givenmy performance, this iswhere I belong, and I willgo.

Garcia: Doyou think some o f our folk receive appointmentswith a pay cut or a smaller congregation to prove their loyaltyso that they will be taken care of in the future?

Walter: ...then my suggestion is, "Don't go!"Garcia: I don't know if that happens... I just wondered.Cho: I think it does. Maybe not frequently, but it happens.

10


13/116

ITINERACY

Del Pino: This is a covenant issue. Itineracy cannot work ifthere is not a serious commitment to the covenant in the firstplace. That takes honesty and the ability to engage in theological talk about mission. When it came time for me to make thislast change of appointment, a cross-racial one, I said to them,'You are going to have to tell me what's compellingabout thisappointment. Why me?" There must be a purpose for thisbesides interesting social experimentation. What about thelarger strategy of the annual conference?

McArthur: I have no problemswith what you're saying, but Istill regard itineracy as a management issue. Someof the veryfinest clergy I know have come within a hair'sbreadth of beingdemoralizedby the fact that they went to a church with hopesand dreams based on what they understood about a situation.But it was onlyapart of the picture.When the situation doesn'twork, they feel a failure. I've alsoseen pastors give fiveyears toa church and leave it alive and vital and excited, to be followedby somebody else who wipes it out in six months! Now whatkind of management system do we have that allows this tohappen? And at what point do youdecide that this isn't working?

Blum: Research we did in our annual conference work areaonrevitalization showed a majority of the churches of all sizesin our conference have been in a pattern of decline in membership for over a decade. Most of the churches that I may servefrom now until I retire, in about 30years, I anticipate will needhelp in simply living and stabilizingtheir ministry. The otherside of it is this: I have a pictureof myelder's class aswe enteredfull connectiona decade later 8 of 13 are still serving in alocalchurch within our conference. Based on what I know about thepersonal stories of those people who have left, I wonder howmany of us will make it to retirement?Cho: I think we have exaggerated the failures too much.There are an equal number of success stories in the appointment system. As a Methodist pastor, I feel lucky to belong tothe itinerant systembecause, first of all, in 19661 wouldn'thavegotten an appointment if our church had been on the call

11


14/116


system. The authority of the bishop and Cabinet put me there.Today cabinet members are under all kinds of pressures likeguaranteed appointment, a minimum salary system.And it is anorm to move a person from one level to a higher level salary.All these things can take a clear sense of mission and make itmurky!

Hels: Let's pursue the link between itineracy and thechurch's mission in another way. Are there theological modelsfor itineracy in Scripture or tradition? Or ifyouprefer concepts,what is the nuyor idea that animates the itinerant system?

Russell: I would choose Abraham as a model of faith. Henever owned anything in the Promised Land for himself, Theonly piece o f property he ever bought was the cave where heburied his wife.

Blum: For me, Maiy is the model, because she was open andobedient before she even thought to protest what it meant forher life. I identify with that because my call came in my youth,before I had an idea that I could raise arguments against it.Moses objected to the demands placed on him in his call, andhis obediencecame onlyafter this struggle. But for Mary, thereis instant obedience, and when there was conflict it was only asshe lived out her call. I think of her whole life as a kind ofjourney that leads to the resurrection.Cho: Thewholeprophetic tradition in the OldTestament fitsfor me here. The first thing that came to my mind was theprophet Isaiah: "Here am I. Send me." Itineracy!

Garcia: The other day I was in Cape Girardeau. Wewent overto the old McKendree chapel, to the cemetery there. Back inthose tough times, what kind o f people were traveling aroundpreaching the gospel? And the people that were buried there-how did they receive those preachers? Even though I knewnothing about those people or their families, I began to dosomeimagining about what might have gone on. That, for me, is apicture o f itineracy.

Thomas Harwood is a significant figure for my understanding of itineracy. He was reluctant to go to New Mexico,but he finally went. When he reached Denver, he wondered

12


15/116

ITINERACY

how far the mission was to extend. Well, it was to extend as faras he could go. So he set off traveling again, and this time heheaded south. Interestingly enough, Hispanic churches hadalready been established by the time Harwood got there. Butthe brain behind that Methodistwork in New Mexico was nevergivenany leadership of that church. And we lost him--we don'tknow exactly how Benigno Cardinales ended up. But on Nov.20, 1853, in 1853, the first Methodist sermon in Spanish waspreached in Santa Fe. From there that man took off andestablished group after group. And that's itineracy. So when Ithink of roots, I think of a mixture of things. I'm grateful forthe people who brought the gospel. But I resent the fact thatmy father in the faith did not get achance toprovide leadership.He was passed over for any kind of recognition of his talents.And yet he showed them.

Griffith: For me the model would be the apostolic community. The apostles had a relationship with Christ that empowered them, and they took it to the known world.

Walter: I think about Francis Asbury-modern, relativelyspeaking. Early in my ministry three friends of mine and Igathered together at a church out in the country where FrancisAsburyhad come to preach. It was significant tobe in that placeand to sense something of that pioneer, circuit rider approach.I'm impressed with the sacrifice it took back then, and I thinkthat it is easy for us in comparison.

Del Pino: I think back on itineracy in terms of paradigms inmy own history~my recollection of what it was like in the daysof the Central Jurisdiction of the former Methodist Church.One of my father's associates used to say, "Well, it doesn't soundlike so-and-so really got much of an appointment this year. Iguess you could call that an '--urch'!" But I also heard theenthusiasm about appointments from people who reallywanted to be someplace to preach, to be pastor, to be engagedin the work of God. They had a hunger to serve, and it wouldhave made them literally sick to not do it.

I remember one Sunday morning in 1952, at Scott MethodistChurch in Detroit, Michigan, my parents received a new ap-

13


16/116


pointment. Bishop Wendall Kelly got up after the ordinationservice was finished. Usually he would have legal pads wherehis secretary had neatly typed all of the appointments. Thistime he just got up and said, 'T know that at this time of theconference there's great anticipation. I also know that there aremany of you who are depending upon all of the conversationsthat have occurred already. But the Lord spoke to me," And hepulled out a handwritten copy of appointments. At that pointmy father turned to my mom and said, "We're in trouble."Rather than having us move to Cleveland, Ohio, whichhad allbeen worked out, he moved us to St. Paul, Minnesota! Wewentthere for a visit before the move, and he asked me, "Doyouthink you're going to likeyour newhome?"And I said, "We don'tknow anybody there." Then he said, "Well, I'm sure that God isgoing to make a way for us." When I heard that, I knew thatthings weren't going to fall apart, because he really believedthat that's what God intended for his life--and for his family'slife.

Harnish: I remember as a child and as a teenager, at WesleyWoods camp in western Pennsylvania, and at camp meeting,pastors and missionaries who convinced me that being in theministry was the most wonderful thing in the world. For themit meant moving around, and they'd tell their stories of wherethey'd been. Long before I ever gave a thought to itineracy,there was that underlying conviction that this isa great way tospend your life.

McArthur: With the possible exception of the hymnbook, I'mnot sure that anything inMethodism has primary significancefor me. The call to obedience, the call to proclaim, to be priest,the call to create order out of which life becomes possible-that's where the fervor comes from. I'm pretty clearthat I coulddo that as a Catholic, as an Episcopalian, as a Presbyterian, asa Congregationalist, or as a United Methodist. So when youcome to talk about being a United Methodist, for me the issueis much more pragmatic: How do you do your business? Thechoice is not between management or no management. It'sbetween good management and poor management. I am com-

14


17/116

ITINERACY

mitted to the church, and therefore I go . And if I were Presbyterian, I would do it in that way, or Episcopalian, I would doit in that way. I see nothing magical about what we do asMethodists.Treese: Historically, we have a lot of romantic notions aboutitineracy, and yet in the days of Asbury it was really a systemthat presumed a lot of single white males were going to be sentall over the place. Marriage came along and Asburydidn't quiteknow how to deal with it. Lots of people complained and manydropped out. Then came station appointments, and peoplewanting to stay longer, and being moved every two or threeyears, and all of that. There have always been a lot of complaintsover our system. And yet there has been a free, open choice tobe in the itinerant ministry of the United Methodist Church,and people stay with it. Now why? Is it that, as Churchill said,"Democracy is the worst form of government, except all therest." Is itineracy the worst system of deployment except all therest?

McArthur: It's become home. It happens to be the arena inwhich I grew up, and within which the call came. But I'm clearin my own mind that I could have done much the same in adifferent denomination. As far as denominations are concerned, I feel really pragmatic about that. I have a great com-mitment-I'm wedded to the Christian Church.

Blum: The sense of "home" is certainly a factor in my decisionto be a United Methodist. But my call-which came to me andthen was something I learned to understand and to follow--wassimply a call to congregational ministry. I had to start all overagain to decide whether my home denomination was the bestplace to realize that. My mentor, who retired a month before Igave birth to my first son, told me that her call also had beento congregational ministry. But the Methodist Church inwhichshe had grown up had closed its doors to her parish ministry.She was able to fulfill her call in another denomination formany years before the United Methodist Church was ready toreceive her gifts. Mysense is that there are many persons who,because of history and particular circumstances, cannot possib-

15


18/116


19/116

ITINERACY

generation to a vital experience o f congregational ministry andmission and personal life in Christ?"

Treese: Ten days ago in St. Louis, 700-plus high school andcollege-age young people made a commitment to full-time,ordained ministry. Before they go very far in candidacy theyshould be asked to give evidence that they understand theobligations and the responsibilities of the itinerant system.That waywe get people thinking that nobody comes into thischurch to do as they please. This would be ideal. But most ofthe time, wewait until problems arise and people start to rebelagainst the demands and obligations of itineracy.

McArthur: Methodist tradition is important but not a revelation of divine will. You can't change or adapt the system if youclose off discussion as if the system were some holy thing. Atsome point you have to agree to look at it. And on what basisshould we dothat?

Harnish: I would say that if we dismiss the question ofchange by saying that the system is sacrosanct, or that this isGod's will and therefore we can't talk about it, then we havestopped being truly Methodist. Why did Wesley start fieldpreaching? Not because the Lord told him to. It wasn't like hehad a vision. Whitfield talked him into it; and even thoughWesley didn't like it, he found out that it worked! WhatMethodismsays is, 'Yes, weshould take a lookat it. And changeit if we need to."

Hels: What troubles you most about modern society andcontemporary events, and what impact does this have on thelife o f an itinerating clergy man or woman?

Garcia: One of the most important social trends is highmobility. Pastors aren't the only ones who itinerate-theirspouses do, too. On many occasions pastors will not have anappointment because they are in transition from one annualconference to another. Or the pastor stays where he or shewas,pending transfer to an annual conference. This has certainlyput pressures on the itinerant system, and I think we're goingto see more o f it in the future.

17


20/116


McArthur: For me the issue o f the spouse's career is primary.Myspouse is a respiratory therapist,and she spent eight yearsbecoming manager in the department in which she worked inthe Bay Area. We then left and went to Fresno, which meantshe quit that job and started at the bottom. After two years inFresno she quit because I wasmoved and started at the bottomagain. That's had a devastating effect on our marriage. Shemade a commitment to move with me in the early years of ourmarriage, but now it means that she will never be able to dowhat she's trained to do,

Harnish: I'm anxious to see what impact the children of the70s and 80s will have on ministry as they become ordained.These are members o f what wehave called the "me generation,"who have shown little sense o f altruism or concern about otherpeople, about the world. Younger clergy who are just cominginto our conference are not interested in district meetings,clergyclusters, annual conference committees, task forces, thatsort of thing. They say, "Just let me do my thing in my localchurch." They just don't seem to understand the value of theconnection. When they hear bishops and superintendentssaying they need to be more committed to the connection, theydon't hear a spiritual call to service; they hear bureaucratstrying to run their lives.

Treese: They base their sense of self-worth and value theirpeers according to cultural norms-salary, how much free timethey have, housing. And they got that, either consciously or not,from us. But the idea of finding your value and your worth inservanthood, going where you're sent to meet a need, and soon-I think there was more of that when we were beginningministry.

Griffith: But the "me generation" helped some of us learnthat commitment to our children and to our spouses is important and that workaholism will detract from a healthy andwhole life. I think the question is, What's going to be themission of the mainline churches in an increasingly secularworld? How are we going to find out what God is calling us todo to be faithful?

18


21/116

ITINERACY

Blum: Our most pressing problem is keeping up withdemographic change. I've seen congregations closed in recentyears incities where the population has increased, but it was adifferent kind of population. I've seen the decline of apredominantly older congregation just by natural mortalityrates. We need longer pastorates so that we can find ways toreach these new people; we have to be able to staywhen peoplein the parish are coming and going too fast. These dayseconomicchanges have youngadults enteringand leavingcommunities within two years. The pastor is more likely to be theanchor that provides some security in the midst of this ebb andflow.

Russell: Anumber of people enteringmy district are second-career peoplewhowent out to find their fortune, got the home,got the money, and found there wasn't awhole lot there. Theyleft it and went back to school to become United Methodistministers. And they are committed to the itinerant system. Ihave a former Baptist who left the Baptist Church, came intothe United Methodist, was a member for a year; and he followsthe Discipline. I mean he calls me and says, "Why don't we doit thisway? Isn't thatwhat the Discipline says?"And I say, "Sure,but I do bend it a little bit here and there!"

Cho: In my view the itineracy will become slower and lessefficient, unless something is done about it soon. Salary hasbecome such an important factor. My personal feeling is thatwehave toraise maybe several million dollars in the conferenceso that we can compensate pastors according to experience andgifts. Then we can really deploy them where they're neededand where they can do the most effective service.But we're notdoing that. The local church salary assumes too much importance because the conference subsidizes up to the minimumlevel-that's all! And unless that changes, I don't think we cando effective deployment. We have to remove the financialburden of accepting that challenge.

McArthur: My generation assumed that the last questionthat you asked when you entered was questions about salary,housingallowance, or car. Simply to be appointed in the church

19


22/116


was agiddy experience. The new generation seems to have lostthat. On the other hand, it seems as if a new generation haspermission to ask "Why?" that my generation didn't have, andas a result became codependent and angry with the church.Sometimes I think they trust their ability to raise that questionmore than they trust the appointed authority.

Blum: Those of uswhoare "thirty-something" questioned theright of the authorities to send persons off to war inVietnam.We grew up in a denomination that has been in significantdecline for several years without much perception about whatto do about it. We've also had a generation of youth groups thathave entertained our young, at times without discipliningthem. Our churches produced most of the young people whoare enteringordained ministry today. I'm grateful that we havedeveloped a candidacyprocess that provides a lotmore spiritualguidance than I was offered in the early 70s when I was exploring a call to ministry. So there hasbeen some renewal in thelast decade. I think this is constructive and supportive ofitineracy in the future..

Treese: One would hope that in our ecumenical discussionsand dialogues that the distinct mission of United Methodismwouldbecome clearer. But weare movingwith deliberate speedto blend it all together, and in the end all we have is rathertasteless pudding. What a heritage we have to bring, and whata distinct mission! I had a seminary professor who told me, "Mr.Treese, the essence of Methodism in the modern day is theSalvation Army. Are you going to lead your denomination backthere?"

Russell: I don't want to blame the system for my not asking"Why?" There were those of my generation who asked thosequestions, but we didn't pick up on that. We had a tremendousneed to be patted on the head, given the promotion, and so on.

Harnish: I think it's OK to ask the question "Why?"Butthere'sa difference between the ordained personwho says, T mwilling to move, but I would like to know why"and the one whosays, T m not going to move unless you prove to me that Ishould."

20


23/116

ITINERACY

Griffith: When I came into ministry, we had the same questions. I wanted to know where I was going to go. And thequestion was, Is it going to be a single point or is it going to betwo? And when I got a single point-wow, that was great! And Iknew that I was going to "work my way up the system."

Harnish: The itinerant systemworks best when the generalassumption is, 'Yes, I will go. Just tell me why I'm neededthere." Now the assumption seems to be, "No, I want to stayhere, unless you can prove to me that another place needs memore." The burden of proof is on the Cabinet. Some of thereasons to stay are good: a longer pastorate, a commitment tofamily stability. But it is making itineracy almost unworkable.

Griffith: Is it just a stubborn attitude or a desire to makeevery appointment significant? If we will have four or fiveappointments in our ministry, wewant them all to count. WhatI'm really saying is, I want my life to count!

Blum: But we need to serve the community through thechurch, and not just serve the church. We can plant newcongregations, or transform and redeem congregational alternatives in certain places where the opportunities for missionabound. Our system is very slow on this right now. I'd love tosee it freed up spiritually to respond and come into a new formof being, The itineracy could be effective on the urban frontierin the same practical ways that it was on the rural frontier of acentury or more ago.

Russell: But.one way we've gotten around that business ofserving the community is that we have bought too much intoH. Richard Niebuhr's concept of enabling the saints. I'm notsaying that this is not part of our ministry-it is. But we're alsosent there to convert and to promote vital piety and scripturalholiness wherever we can in that community.

Harnish: When I was in seminary, from 1969-1972, one ofthe emerging issues we talked about a lotwas "burn-out." It wasa newword then, a corrective that needed to be heard. But thatconcern has produced a generation of people whose first wordis, "I'm going to take my day off every Wednesday. Don't callme. I'm not available for funerals. I'm not available for wed-

21


24/116


dings. I'monlygoingtowork forty hours aweek, because I don'twant to burn out."

Del Pino: There are a great many lay members of the churchwho want decision-making parity but don't want to study theBible or do basic theological reflection. The other problem isthat people assume that all ministry has to be publicly acknowledged, consecrated, or ordained to have any significance. Thatleaves the itinerating pastor in a weak position, as a kind ofcaretaker, and keeps lay people from seeing what they do asgenuine ministry. If baptized people think they have to beordained to engage in the mission of the church, they havemisunderstood their baptism.

Griffith: I think it is almost heretical to say that ministryflows from baptism. Ministry flows fromcommitment, whetheryou call commitment conversion or affirmation of faith. Inbaptism, you are included in the community, but you have notaccepted ministry.

Del Pino: I think that there is a response of commitment toGod's prevenient grace, whether by the one baptized or bythose who are going to assume that responsibility until thatperson comes ofage. Being included in the community is notfundamentally our own action, but a response to God. It istherefore a public acknowledgement that, if I am not alreadyconverted, I am certainly allowing myself to be open and vulnerable to that in the life of this community.

Treese: I recently had a conversation with a bishop-one ofthe most sensitive and talented I know-who said the mostdominant factor in appointment-making today in his area is thematter of dual careers. When I pushed himon how the itinerantsystem might ultimately deal with this, he said that the coupleitselfneeds to come to termswith the itinerant system. According to him, the system cannot resolve all the difficulties in atwo-career household. Is it unreasonable to ask people to makehard choices to honor their commitment to ministry or theirspouse's commitment?

Blum: The dual-career issue didn't exist untilwomenstartedhaving careers, so I think that's something to celebrate. For

22


25/116

ITINERACY

generations, nobody worried much over the pastor's spouse,because her role was pretty much understood and taken forgranted. But now, if the pastor is a woman, the church worriesabout her husband's career! Myhusband made a decision veryearly on to follow me in the itineracy. Superintendents seem towant to protect his career interest-when we made no requestfor it.

God has enabled us to experience a sense of real partnershipin the ministry to which I've been appointed, and the two of ushave been called to, according to our particular skills, gifts andgraces. One bishop said clearly to us, "Make your familydecision, and then we'll simply work with the person wh(> is inthe covenant." That is the waywe have lived.

Harnish: I still think it's a serious issue, Diane. And I don'tthink it's serious only for female clergy, but for all of us. In mygeneration, both men and women were raised with the understanding that you should go to college and then have a career.Soourwives have been raised with the understanding that theycanhave a career, too. The church has been sayingyou can haveit all, but there is no way to make that happen consistently.Early in the process we need to tell candidates, "Let's be clear.This is an itinerant system.We cannot accommodate all of yourfamily needs. And ifyou'regoing tocommit to this system, thenyou and your spouse are going to have to wrestle with thatcommitment at some point."

Blum: It's a spiritual journey to itinerate as a family. It's notthat I trust the system; I trust God. Ironically, it took difficultexperienceswith the system tohelpme togrow into that. WhenI took the vows at ordination, I didn't know whether my husband would follow me. If we take the opportunity to addressthis as a spiritual issue with candidates, we will let them seethat trust in God lets them put one foot in front of the other inministry.

Russell: Then perhaps the consultation process should notjust include the local church and what their needs are, whattheir characteristics are, but what the need is and what God iscalling us to do in that particular community.

23


26/116


Harnish: Could I take the other side of this now? Many ofour spouses make much more money than we do, right at thepoint when there are high family costs, like college educations.Let's be real about this. Whose career is going to be accommodated?

Hels: What are the essential needs of congregations andclergy that we must plan for in the next century? What is ofthe essence, as you think about Christian ministry now and inthe years to come?

Griffith: As I look at the future, I think the first thing weneed to do is change our attitude and just relax. The next thingis to clarify what our mission is, because until wedo that wewillhave difficulties. I've only got about ten more years, and I'mexcited about what I'm doing. I feel good about where theUnited Methodist church is, and I'd like to translate some ofthat into everyday living.

Russell: I agree that we need to relax, but let's make itintentional. We should encourage spirituality-prayer, meditation, and spiritual formation-for the clergy and for the church.

Harnish: And I'd like to look at what it means to be Wesleyanin the twentieth century. There's been a tendency for thesecurrentstudy commissionsto ignore our heritage from Wesley,Asbury, Otterbein, and Albright. This is what makes us distinct.This is what webring to ecumenism. Itineracy isone expressionof that distinctiveness.

Del Pino: I think the future calls us to rediscover personalsacrifice. This is the way to restore integrity to covenantalrelationships. Church leaders at all levels must be prepared tofind out what is non-negotiable, simply not part of a contract.The biblical paradigm of covenant requires us to resist crasscultural values, leave them behind for the sake of the gospel.Wemust replace individualism with a real sense o f community.We must learn how to exercise the teaching office in a moreresponsible, consistent way. And we have to order the life o f ourcongregation for our mission in the world.

Blum: I believe that the church will comeback to life the verymoment that it discovers and claims its original mission, bibli-

24


27/116

ITINERACY

cally based find empowered by the HolySpirit. If the itineracyis engaged in that process, then it will bring localchurches thathave been asleep, or quietly dying, back to life. The other thingis that local churches need to reconnect with the immediatecommunity, as it now exists. Many of our churches have beenallowed or even encouraged to stay connected to commutingpopulations while ignoring people in their immediate vicinity.Then we must take another look at the longer pastorate inthose cases, and not just for the senior minister o f a very largechurch. I also want to mention the covenant groups that I amin with other clergy.That'swhere I see the connectional systemreally coming to life as a support and as a guidance system forconnecting more directly with God's will.McArthur: I can't think about the future without running upagainsta simple question: What drives us?In the past therewasthe vision of scriptural holiness. It was so clear and simple thatother things fell into place around it. Episcopacy fell in placearound it, and sodid itineracy. Another example: William Boothcouldn't sleep at night because he was hauntedbythe footstepsof people going to hell. That simple image really became thegenius, the heart, the soul of the Salvation Army.

Russell: Vital piety and scriptural holiness may not soundexciting anymore. Today, you have to find other words for thesame things. It makes sense to me to speak of God's prevenientgrace, God's living grace, being worked out in myand your dailyliving. If that won't meet the needs of our society, then wemight as well give up the ship.

Del Pino: I minister to a community that is drowning inoptions. But underneath it all, the people who are in thatcommunity are there because they really do love God. Theymay not know how to express it, but it's there. When I askmyselfwhat drives me, I have to finally answer the same thing.If I didn't do what I was doing as an expression of that love, Ireally would be an incomplete person. That also applies to thelaypersons whom I endeavor to serve and serve with in myparish.

25


28/116


Blum: In myreading iVe comeacross the stories and writingsof St. Francis de Sales, a bishop in the sixteenth century whowas quite adept at spiritual direction with women. The reasonfor this bishop's success, one historian observed, was that hehad learned to address the issue o f self-worth before he startedasking them to make sacrifices. In that day and age, a womanwas first and foremost the property of husband, father,household and had no independent value in the legal,economic, or social system. You have to know that sense ofself-worth before one can genuinely, out of love and gratitude,serve. There will be a different spirit among us as participantsin the system if wegenerally feel that we're valued by God andby those sending us. And then the ability to serve and offerourselves without reserve will become more prevalent.

Cho: I think that itineracy will be there so long as it workswith integrity. If not, there will be rebellion. I don't see anyreason why we should idolize or worship certain church structures in the system. There are cases in our sister churches inwhich they left itineracy and adopted the call system, and theythink it's working beautifully. The churches are growing andblossoming-inKorea, Pastors are putting their lives onthe linebecause unless they succeed here there is no future for them.Inmy conference, agroup of ministers are looking into the ideaof ding awaywith superintendents, because the systemcosts somuch to maintain. In Korea, the superintendents have theirlocal church bases and the smaller district.

Griffith: It's closer to the New Testament model.Cho: Andwhat's wrongwith that? The local church bears the

burden of a top-heavy system with all those apportionments. Ifpeople want to rebel, I understand why.

Russell: I think part of the reason for that is that we havedivorcedwhat wegive to the total church from our mission. It'sno longer our mission, It's a tax, it's a franchise that we have topay in order to operate on this corner. We don't see it as awayto live out the mission and purpose in the life of the church.

Garcia: One o f the things that is happening far too often isthat bishops and superintendents do not really take time to26


29/116

ITINERACY

know congregations, to know people, to spend time in knowingwho those folk are. And bishops mayknow clergy-or they maynot! I heard one bishop say in jest that now that the conferencehad a pictorial directory, he would know whom he was appointing. But it was a fact: he didn't know because he hadn't takenthe time. Now that I'm in an appointment beyond the localchurch, we have this annual meeting with the bishop. But it'sa lunch meeting, and it's optional, and maybe four out o f twentyABLC's show up. We have around twenty people in thatcategory. But if itineracy as we know it is going to have value,it will require that those who are in position to fix the appointments know who they are dealing with, both congregations andpastors.

Del Pino: Let's put that into context. Even since 1968, thiswhole denomination has been in a frenzy of restructuring. Iknow it is all intended for the good. All these structures havetobemaintained correctly, so wespend time and energywatching each other. I'm not saying let's throw out accountability.But United Methodists don't trust each other, and they don'thave a sense of the common good beyond their own localchurch. It's a variation on the idea that when my kids are notin school, why should I support public education? The task ofoversight in this church takes place in an atmosphere ofmistrust and suspicion. The fact is we select bishops in thewrong way, and we overload district superintendents with interminable administrative duties.

Russell: The fact is that in the Discipline there's very littleabout the work of the bishop and lots about the work of thesuperintendent. You're right. It is by and large defined as anadministrative office. But when the bishop called me and askedme tobea superintendent, his first criteria was preaching skill.That's what he wanted. Someone who was seen as a preacherin the conference.

McArthur: If our organization runs us instead of the otherway around, then the work of the D.S. will continue toproliferate around maintenance. I think that there is someevidence that we will be experiencing increasing pressures to

27


30/116


become more and more parochial in the future. That's unfortunate, because most o f our problems, even those outside thechurch, can only be solved regionally. Think about urban pollution and mass transport. Why can't we get beyond self-interest on this?

Hels: What do you think is the biggest piece of unfinishedbusiness in the church when it comes to the itinerant system?

Blum: I think that personswho serve on the Cabinet need tobe the very brightest, most committed, and spiritually maturepeople in the annual conference, so that they can exercise atrue leadership role with regard to itineracy. We need to sensethat there is a real God-given authority at work in our appointive system, and not simply that things are being managed.Harnish: It seems like in all we've talked about we keepcoming back to the need for a sense of mission. We need theHoly Spirit to break in and give us a new shared vision of whatwe're about and where we're headed. Then issues of deployment might not be quite as awkward and difficult, becausepeople would be more willing to go where they were needed inorder to accomplish that vision.

Cho: I think that the next step isyou have to really look intothe character and vision o f those who are exercising the superintending authority of the annual conferences. Weneed to havepeoplewith vision, not just peoplewho canmaintain the statusquo.

Walter: I amconcerned thatwehave, in ourannual conferences and, I think, for the general church almost tried to divestthe bishop and the cabinet of any kind of opportunity to beleaders in the annual conference. And if we can free thesuperintendents and bishops to be preachers, teachers, andspiritual leaders in an annual conference, I think it would behelpful to us.

Del Pino: I think that an outstanding issue and concern forme would be how we go about articulating the call for conversion for individuals in our communities of faith, includingpastors, candidates, and those who supervise.

28


31/116

ITINERACY

Treese: This panel has added evidence to my belief thatitineracy has a reed future and much potential in our church.But that future and potential depends mightily on severalimportant factors. It needs a covenant theology to sustain it. Itneeds a mission to serve. And it must have certain assumptionsinplace, one of which is a clear understanding of the obligationsand responsibilities of itineracy. The supervisors of our systemmust make that understood at every checkpoint. The otherassumption is that we must not expect it to take away theresponsibility to make our own personal, family, and careerdecisions. Todo that disables the system. There issomuch thatI think has to be worked out by individuals and by families.Finally, ifwewant agood, flexible system in the future, we muststop using it as a therapeutic system to deal with ineffectiveand incompetent pastors. There are other ways-humane ways-available to deal with them. But overall, this is what I thinkabout the itineracy: it is not a good system. It's just better thanany other system that we know.

29


32/116

QR 11/2 (1991) 30-39

FundamentalismAChallenge to the ChurchJames Barr

FUNDAMENTALISM IS NOT a new thing. In its mostfamiliar form it has been with us for a century or so, andbefore that it had a long prehistory out of which its modernform emerged. So, we might say, most of us have plenty ofexperience o f it and how it works. And it is not surprising thatit has survived and continued to gain new adherents. What isnew about fundamentalism, however, is the fact that it may becoming to be the main problem for religion, the most seriousand difficult challenge to the churches in our time and in thecoming hundred years or so. It is notjust a marginal difficultyaffecting only a limited few, but aworldwide problem, affectingnot only Christianity but many different religions.

Though the word "fundamentalism" was coined to designatea particular form of narrow and sectarian Protestantism, thephenomenon can now be clearly seen to be a large-scale one,supported by literally millions o f people. At the same time it isa small-scale problem, for it affects individuals in their innerspiritual struggles, it tears families apart, it is the center ofviolent emotional reactions.

And yet it cannot be said that the churches have yet takenstock of the situation in this regard. People are aware of theproblem but do not know how to grasp it, and our moderntheologies have failed to give a lead in the matter. Many of ourJamesBarr is Professor of Hebrew Bible at Vanderbilt University, TheDivinitySchool, Nashville, TN 37240; and Regius Professor of Hebrew, Emeritus, atOxfordUniversity, England,

30


33/116

FUNDAMENTALISM

scholars seem to think that the opinions o f fundamentalists liebeneath their own intellectual level, and the populist dialogicalstyle of fundamentalist rhetoric is one with which they cannotcope. But this lofty stance cannot continue much longer. As aworld problem, fundamentalism is becoming just too large tobe ignored; and, quite apart from what church leaders andtheologians may think, a flood of books and articles by historians, sociologists, and literary critics, as well as by biblicalscholars and theologians, is beginning to throw light on thesubject. Let me refer to one particular piece of work, theFundamentalist Project centered in the University o f Chicago,which is engaged in a five-year study and will produce fivevolumes on the subject from every angle, with specialists fromevery continent and concerned with every religion and everyculture.

The Power of FundamentalismFOR US IN THE CHURCHES, fundamentalism presents problemson two different fronts. One is internal and the other is external. The internal one lies within the churches. Why is fundamentalism so powerful nowadays? Why is it apparentlygrowing in influence and success? Why do people take theirimage of Christianity, as they think it ought to be, so largelyfrom the fundamentalist style of living and talking? What canthe churches say or do that might balance the attraction o f thefundamentalist approach? The external problem is this: fundamentalism within Protestant Christianity is to most of us afamiliar enough phenomenon.We know roughlywhat it is like,we know how fundamentalists talk and we have some experience of their impact on church life. But what relation dothese Protestant fundamentalists have to the powerful currents so visible in other religions? Is there something similarin certain trends of the Roman Catholic church? What aboutfundamentalism in Jewish life, or the almost universal fundamentalism of Islam, most aptly exemplified in the sweepingpower of the Shiite form of that religion? Perhaps there is

31


34/116


something comparable in the religions of India and the FarEast. Is fundamentalism of some kind a universal phenomenonof human nature? Is the familiar Christian Protestant fundamentalism of the southeastern United States only a localvariant of something going on all over the world?And, whetherhere or in other lands, what impact is this "natural fundamentalism," possibly innate in a great variety of peoples and cultures, likely to have on matters o f publicpolicy: on questions ofhealth and medicine, on the chances for the development ofdemocracy, on the position of women in society, and on theevaluation of life and death, the likelihood of peace and war?Fundamentalism, then, today is not only a challenge to thechurch, it is a challenge to society also; and the church has tolook at it in both aspects.

Fundamentalism DescribedTHE FOLLOWING ARE SOME characteristic features of fundamentalism, seen on the widest scale. Firstly we may namethe attachment to a central symbol, and in the most familiarforms of fundamentalism that symbol is a book: the Bible, theQur'an, also (if you count political fundamentalism) the RedBook, the Thoughts o f Chairman Mao. Thebook is centralandinfallible, all truth flows from it, everything depends on it. Inall forms of Christianity the Bible is regarded as holy, as acommunication from God, as the fundamental resource forteaching and doctrine. But in fundamentalism this fact, whichis general in our religion, is elevated and made into the absolutely dominant factor: belief in the authority of scripture isthe ultimate controlling agency, and unless you have it andhave it clearly all the other realities become vain.

Now essential to fundamentalism is that the truth is non-negotiable. It is not a matter of discussion under the rules ofjustice or free speech. The essence of religion is not somethingthat has to be worked out through consultation with others.The fundamentalist knows the truth. He or she maybe a quiteignorant person in other regards, but in the ultimate religious

32


35/116

FUNDAMENTALISM

questions he or she knows where the answer lies, and knowswhat the answer is. Fundamentalists have an answer to everything: nothing is more familiar in our experience of Christianity than this fact. And the fact that one book contains allthe ultimate truth makes it easier to have an answer to everything. Because truth is nonnegotiable, fundamentalists cannotseriously cooperatewith others of the same religion. Relationswith others, even within the same religion, are normallypolemical.

Another feature that goesalong with this ismilitancy. Whilesome fundamentalism is quietist, content to follow its ownprinciples, not mixing with others, most fundamentalism ismilitant: it wants to convert, to change others to its ownopinions. Evangelism is the core activity of fundamentalismand the great individual evangelist is its hero. Speaking at leastof Christian fundamentalism, its real militancy is directedagainst other kinds of Christians, or peoplewho are onlyvaguely Christian. Thus most of the converts to fundamentalistChristianity come from within the vaguely Christian culture.

This militancy can also take the form that we may callrestorationist That is to say, fundamentalism wants to restorethe world to a state which it has been in, or a state which thefundamentalist believes it has been in, at some time in the past.Thus fundamentalism ischaracteristically anti-modern. It mayuse modern means, like television, it may find a place formodern ideas, such as psychology, but deeper down it wants torestore an older world. And this shows itself when, as is verymuch the case in our times, fundamentalism becomes politicallyactive. It may seek, for instance, to restore a world in whicheveryone had to do, very simply, what God required of them, aworld in which human schemes and ideas about improvementof the world, apart from fundamentalist evangelism, would nothave a place.

Now the militancy of fundamentalist religion depends oncertain forms of operation. One of these is agreement amongthe members. They have to think the same thing. The revivalcampaign depends on the assumption that all those taking part

33


36/116


arebasicallyagreed; if there are disagreements, and there maybemany, they canbeput aside or hidden for practical purposes.It's noticeable among some of the fundamentalisms of moderntimes how all the people look alike, dress alike, make the samegestures: the Red Guards, the Shiites in Iran-the unity of styleand mind seems to give strength.

And this is important, becausefundamentalism, in the formsthat are most conspicuousand important, is a mass movement.It is not an affair of a tiny group hidden away somewhere: todayit is working in literally many millions. And for this purposethere needs to be a certain simplicity of ideas. All fundamentalisms have many ramifications, and are very complicatedwhen you try to go into all the questions; but there tends to besome one central symbol that is the essence of the confessiono f the total movement. In Protestant fundamentalism it is theinspiration and total infallibility of the Bible. For this you don'thave to have worked through all the problems, considered allthe arguments, gone into the history of the matter; you don'tneed even to have read the Bible all through. No, all you needis to be sure that this simple truth, that of the inspiration andinfallibility of the Bible, is absolute and beyond doubt. Andthat's how it works.

If you ask the question, so often put to me, why it is thatfundamentalism seems towork sowell and succeed sowell, I'vegiven you part of the answer. It is a form of religion that has apowerful mass appeal and is able to get large numbers of peopleworking personally, devotedly, and militantly, in its favor. Itisn't a religion where a small professional class, the clergy orthe priesthood, alone candothe work, where all questions haveto be referred to the experts; rather, it is one where the largeconstituency can be mobilized to work, to give, to speak, to live,to exercise pressure on others, according to the requirementsof fundamentalist society. That is one of the secrets of itssuccess.

Psychologically, and more personally, the other side of thesame coin is the certainty that fundamentalists feel they enjoy,and which they make very plain to other people. Religion

34


37/116

FUNDAMENTALISM

should not be shadowed by doubt or uncertainty. The truth isknown, why should one hesitate about it? But, looked at morecarefully, one may wonder if this certainty is not itself a consequence of doubt, a reaction to a feeling that faith is slippingaway. It is not anaccident that many forms of fundamentalismhave their origin in the time when a religious tradition wassplitting, was becoming disrupted. Thus the real enemy, formost fundamentalists, is not the heathen, the distantpeople,not even the atheists and irreligious: it is those who claim tobelong to the same religion but differ from the fundamentalists. The Shia arose from a traumatic split in Islam, thetrauma of the Reformation still lies at the back o f much Protestant fundamentalism, and one m^jor catalyst of modern fundamentalism was the feeling that biblical criticism wasdamaging the ultimate citadel of faith. Fundamentalism is thusnot a different religion, it is a force that depends upon splitswithin existing religions and builds upon these splits.

Fundamentalism and the ChurchNow, IFALL THIS IS A CHALLENGE to the church, what are weto say that may offer some suggestions about what to do aboutit? It isn't easy to offer any clear and simple plan o f what maybe done to face the realities of fundamentalism. One or twoindications have been given already. The first is to recognizethat this isa mqjor problemor challenge, which has to be facedand studied with all the intellectual and spiritual resources thatthe churches can deploy. One of the good signs o f the presenttime lies in the rising pace of academic attention to the question.

The second m^jor need is for clear command of the Bible.Fundamentalists persuade people through the use of the Bibleand the endless quoting of it because people do not know theBible very well. Very few of those who have been well trainedin biblical studies and have studied theology become fun-damentalists-probably none at all. Among students and otherpeople trained in the subject the movement is all away from

35


38/116

QUARTERLY REVIEW. SUMMER 1991

fundamentalism. Often it was fundamentalism that broughtthem into the subject, but the subject itself soon moves themaway from it. When modern study of the Bible began, thechurches were too afraid to face the questions that arose. Theminister agonized over them in his study, but he did not sharethem with his people. The result is that, a hundred years later,wehave a widespread Christian laity that has less control of theBible than was possessed a century ago, and young men andwomen enter courses for the ministry having nomore readinessto face modern Bible study than their predecessors possesseda hundred years ago.

The churches need to show the fundamentalist public thatthey, and the scholarship with which they work, are trulydeeply involved in the Bible, are confident in its authority, andare steeped in a rich tradition of its interpretation. That tradition is far more genuine than the unhistorical, often artificial,often contradictory and ultimately sectarian interpretationthat fundamentalism depends upon to achieve its appearanceof consistency. But in order to do this the ministry shouldlighten the very heavy burden which it has to bear by relyingmuch more heavily upon the Bible for its preaching, by makinguse of the Bible so that everyone can see how much we use it.On the other side the churches should take their entire peopleinto their confidence by sharing with them the fullness ofknowledge about the Scriptures and their background.

In the last resort there are two irresistible arguments againstthe way fundamentalists handle Scripture: firstly, there is noauthority of the Bible unless there is freedom in the interpretation of the Bible. By denying the freedom of scholarly inter-pretation, fundamentalism is insisting on its owninterpretationand making that interpretation, rather than theBible itself, into the final authority. By doing so it underminesthe very authority of Scripture which it seeks to uphold.Secondly the reliance of fundamentalism on the infallibility ofthe Bible is an illusion. For, even if the Bible is infallible, it stilldoes not provideunique support for the fundamentalist kind o freligion. An infallible Bible can still point in a Catholic direc-

36


39/116

FUNDAMENTALISM

tion, it can point in a moderate, liberal direction, it can point ina socially liberationist direction, it can point in a unitarian,universalist direction. Thus, even if seen from the viewpoint offundamentalism itself, reliance on biblical infallibility is anillusion. But the churches have to make more express theirreliance on the Bible: not on some particular theory of Scripture, but on the reality of Scripture itself.

Experience in the variety of religious viewpoints withinChristianity has made one thing clear to me: that the Bible iscuriously weak as a force to convince people and form theirbeliefs. What people really believe in, generally, is a fairlysimple set of dogmaticprinciples that they have been taught orthat they have inherited from someone at some time. Whatthey know about the Bible, they fit into the framework of thesebeliefs. Only with the greatest difficulty can people come toaccept that the Bible does not, after all, teach what they themselves have always believed.

Where then does this lead us? It means that, evenwhere theBible is the final authority, the actual force that constrainspeople's understanding is normally doctrinal--in fundamentalism as in other forms of Christianity. The church needstherefore tobedoctrinallyconscious, sothat its ownframeworkof belief is constantly re-clarified, related to the present-dayneeds and understandings of people, and related to the Bibleitself with reference to the way inwhich scholarship handlesthe Bible. The problems of fundamentalism can never be fullydealt with byarguing on the basis of the Bible itself; for one hastoshownot only that the Bible means something different fromwhat fundamentalists believe, but also that from it therecangrow a doctrinal clarity and luminosity which greatly surpassesin quality all that fundamentalism can offer.

But this also calls for yet a further amplification. I have notedhow fundamentalism seeks to establish a foundation in thepast, in the way things used to be, and sometimes also seeks torestore things as they were in that far-off time. It looks, therefore, as if it was a historical question, a question of knowinghowthings used to be. But fundamentalists are seldom historically

37


40/116


conscious; the world when things were better is a world theyimagine. Apart from the very occasional and exceptionallyhistorically-conscious fundamentalist, they don't know anythingabout it. Their world-view is anachronistic-the situations andideas that they read back into the past are based on theirowntimes. Their own principle, that the Bible alone is the sourceo f truth, takes its revenge in that they don't read about pasthistory of the church or the way in which doctrine hasdeveloped. On the whole the Protestant churches haveneglected this; but the time may now have come when, facedwith the power of fundamentalism, an increased attention tothe history o f the church and its doctrines will be required.

Lastly, the central problemwill always be, as it has been sincefundamentalism began, one of communication. As I said, fundamentalists consider truth to be nonnegotiable. Central totheir way o f life is the setting up o f barriers which will preventthe hearing of opinions, the reading of books, the meeting ofpersons, that will present a different point of view. Thesebarriers are there in the social organization o f fundamentalistlife, its societies, its groups, its press; and they are therepsychologically, in the difficulty the individual has in openinghis or her mind to any alternative version o f Christianity oranyalternative understanding of the Bible. I write books aboutfundamentalism, but I know that very few fundamentalists willread them. If I go to a campus to talk in a situation wherefundamentalism is a problem, it is likely that no fundamen-talists-or one or two isolated persons-will come to the meeting, and that is how it usually turns out.

On the whole fundamentalism follows a strategy that is bothaggressive and cowardly. They don't want to discuss unless theycan win. With people whose faith isweak and whose knowledgeo f the Bible is slight, they use the Bible as a weapon to overcome; but if you really know the Bible, and have a solid viewpoint to put forward, then they don't want to meet you. That iswhy it is very much a task and a challenge for the church: itisn't something that the scholars and theologianscan perform,even if they wanted to do it. But everyone in the church can do

38


41/116

FUNDAMENTALISM

something. And Methodism, with its great tradition of layexposition and o f popular involvement, can do an outstandingservice to all the churches of the world.

BibliographyAchtcmcicr, Paul J. The Inspiration of Scripture. Philadelphia: Westminster,

1980.Barr, James. Fundamentalism. Philadelphia: Westminister,1978.Beyond Fundamentalism. Philadelphia: Westminister,1984.The Bible in the Modern World, (reissue) Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990).Barton, John. People of the Book? The Authority of the Bible in Christianity.

London:SPCK, 1988.Boone, Kathleen C. The Bible Tells Them So: The Discourse of ProtestantFundamentalism. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1988.Caplan, Lionel. Studies in Religious Fundamentalism. Albany, N.Y.: StateUniversity of New York Press, 1987.Cohen, Norman J., cd. The Fundamentalist Phenomenon. Grand Rapids:Eerdmans,1990.

Johnston, R.K. The Use of the Bible in Theology: Evangelical Options. Atlanta:John Knox Press, 1985.Marsdcn, George M. Fundamentalism and American Culture. New York:Oxford, 1980.

McKim,D.K TheAuthoritative Word:Essays on the Nature of Scripture. GrandRapids:Eerdmans, 1983.Weber, Timothy P. Living in the Shadow of the Second Coming: American

Premillennialism 1875-1925. New York: Oxford, 1979.

39


42/116

QR11/2 (1991) 40-60

GlobalizationinTheological Education:Religious Particularityin Muslim-Christian Dialogue

Lamin Sanneh

THE MODERN WESTERNENCOUNTER with Muslimsmaybe characterized by three m*yor trends. Beginning inthe early 19th century, Western Christian missionaries weresent to Muslim countries, supported by a sense of optimismabout the sheer number of potential Christian converts. Thesecond trend, beginning in the late 19th century, is the studyo f Islam in Western universities as onebranch o fwhat has beencalled Oriental Studies. At first, this study was motivated by asense of confidence in the Western ability, as a child of theEnlightenment, to understand Islam with a detached, rationalperspective. After the collapse of the European colonial empires, however, Western guilt became a powerful motivatingforce behind the academic study of Islam. The third m^jortrend is Muslim-Christian dialogue. In the post-World War IIperiod, primarily in Western Europe, dialogue became themain channel for discharging a lingering Western guilt over theabuses of colonialism and for stirring Christian repentance athaving denigrated Muslim religious views and practices.Lamin Sanneh is Professor of History and of Missions and WorldChristianityat YaleUniversity in New Haven, CT 06510.

40


43/116

MUSLIM-CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE

The shift to dialogue, while the most recent, isalso the mostpainful stage in the Western encounter with Muslims. BothChristian mission and Western orientalism were buoyed by asense of optimism: missionaries and academics anticipated success, whether it was based on premillennialism or on socialDarwinism. By contrast, the shift to dialogue coincided with aWestern liberal pessimism about the value of religion ingeneral and Christianity in particular. In this perspective,religion amounted to no more than a phase in the ongoinghuman enterprise. Western theologians, for the most partProtestant, engaged in dialogue in an attempt to transcendreligious differences, which were seen as vestiges of a lessenlightened mode o f being.

Dialogue and Western SecularityHOWEVER, THE WESTS ATTITUDEwas not necessarily shared bythe rest of the world. By using dialogue to overcome religion,the West in its liberal phase once again intruded on otherpeople's religious inheritance. How did it accomplish this?Christian liberals, strongly influenced by Western secularphilosophicalvalues, had the habit of taking liberties with theirown declining church. This hardened them towards otherreligions, leading them to make faulty assumptions on theirbehalf. But the irony is this: in discounting the affirmations ofChristianity, the liberal West constituted itself into the arbiterof all other religious affirmations. Thus, in spite of its widelycelebrated decline, Christianity continued to shape liberal in-terreligious discourse. This dialogue proceeded to ignore theempirical religious situation in favor o f ideological assertions.Western anti-religious rationalism constituted itself as theuniversal paradigm: if non-Christians were consistent theywould be convinced of the Western position, and that wouldvalidate Western intellectual ascendance; if they were not, itwould show the gap in the West's favor.1

At its simplest, the secular liberal disavowal of religion erectsa wall that obstructs all enlightened efforts towards the goal o f

41


44/116


global understanding. Religious distinctiveness, and the diversity it fosters, is indispensible to the cause of human solidarity.Allow people their sense of ultimate trust and loyalty and theywill most likely reciprocate with gestures of goodwill. It is fromthe sense of commitment and obligation that dialogue and theother forms of mutual encounter arise, making conversationmeaningful rather than superfluous. As the African proverbhas it, a one-legged person does not dance. Interreligiousdialogue without distinctive claims based on ultimate truth isa lame creature indeed.

In spite of indubitable evidence of a global religious revival,the modern secular West is set on a relentlessly antireligiouscourse, intending to sweep the rest of the world into thewasteland of a religionlessworld. Abandoning distinctive Christian claims, however, diminishes from the total pool o f religioustraditions and restricts the scope of diversity. It also putspressure on others to do likewise, drawing them into a circle ofmutual likemindedness. The time may be right to urge a different kind of pluralism in which neither the Muslim nor theChristian should be required to disown his or her particularityas a precondition for dialogue.

A New Model for MissionIN ORDER TO TURN THIS ONE-SIDEDNESS, we need to look at theconciliatory work of Kenneth Cragg. In the second edition ofhis epochmakingbook, The Call of the Minaret, Kenneth Cragginvites us to take a fresh view of mission, seeing it not as theinsensitive imposition of Western Christianity or Western culture on others but as the crucible for challenging the Westerncultural monopoly on Christianity. In this connection, hewrites, "The Gospel as such has no native country . . . Christbelongs to us only because he belongs to all."2

Cragg suggests that faithfulness in mission constitutes animportant safeguard against the "vulgar universalizing" ofWestern culture. Mission brings us within range of othersbesides ourselves. As long as we are prepared to communicate

42


45/116

MUSLIM-CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE

to others an "account for the hope that lies in us" (1 Pet. 3:5),we will remain within striking range, so to speak, of newdiscoveries and fresh possibilities. Mission is--and has alwaysbeen-Christianity's credibility option. It is not simply thatChristians perpetuated Wester

Documents

Summer 1991 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources for Ministry