A group of United Methodist leaders, including eight bishops, has issued a statement sharing its vision for a global traditionalist denomination focused on evangelism and the “primacy of Scripture.” Among the group’s essential doctrinal beliefs is defining Christian marriage as between a man and a woman.

Two of the bishops who signed the statement told UM News they would depart The United Methodist Church for such a new denomination. One other said he is considering it.

The Protocol of Reconciliation & Grace Through Separation, endorsed by a range of advocacy groups and some General Conference delegations, is due to be considered at the 2020 General Conference.

It calls for allowing traditionalist churches and conferences to leave with their properties to form another denomination, while also getting $25 million in United Methodist funds.

“Although no one yet knows what The United Methodist Church will look like following the 2020 General Conference, it is clear that our denomination is no longer unified in its beliefs,” the more than two dozen traditionalist leaders said in a press release accompanying their March 12 statement. “Therefore, some sort of separation is probable. As such, we felt it necessary to begin conversations about what the new traditional expression of Methodism might look like.”

Texas Conference Bishop Scott Jones joined the Rev. Keith Boyette, president of the Wesleyan Covenant Association, and Patricia Miller, executive director of the United Methodist Confessing Movement, in convening a recent meeting in Atlanta that led to the statement.

Jones said he’s a part of other conversations about The United Methodist Church’s future and added that his signature on the document the group released did not guarantee he would be joining the new denomination, should the protocol pass.

“I have not made any commitments because I don’t know what my options are,” Jones said. “I helped convene this meeting because I have heard from many traditionalists that they were looking for a diverse, traditional option, and thought that a broader, wider conversation would be important.”

He added: “I am interested in serving faithfully in a vibrant Methodist church going forward. Exactly what shape that will take after General Conference is yet to be determined. We need good options that people can consider. This is certainly one of the options.”

Eurasia Area Bishop Eduard Khegay signed the statement and said by email that he plans to join the new denomination if the protocol passes.

“I am forever grateful to God and our UMC sisters and brothers around the world and hope to continue our friendships. But now I want to spend my time on expanding our mission and making disciples rather than figuring out how our denomination can please everyone,” Khegay said.

Upper New York Area Bishop Mark J. Webb also signed the statement and told UM News that if the protocol passes he intends “to follow God’s call upon my life and be a part of the formation of a global traditional expression of Methodism.”

He added, “My prayer is that in this season of uncertainty and discernment we will engage deeply in prayer and respectful conversation with one another to hear God’s call and honor one another’s response to that call.”

Bishop Mike Lowry, who leads the Central Texas Conference, is scheduled to retire this year but added that he is considering joining the new denomination if the protocol passes.

“As things stand, I think that’s a real possibility,” said Lowry, who also plans to be bishop-in-residence at United Theological Seminary in Dayton, Ohio.

“I’d want to pray about it and think about it. I participated in it, so I’m inclined to think I would. But I also know the protocol could get amended in ways that would change my answer.”

He said he does not see his job to either lead the Central Texas Conference out of the denomination or lead it to stay.

“I am not going to start a campaign for it to stay or leave,” he said. “I’ll leave that to the prayerful discernment of the people of the Central Texas Conference.”

Bishop James E. Swanson Sr., another signer, plans to retire this year and does not expect to depart The United Methodist Church.

“Now if the protocol passes in its current form then the Mississippi Annual Conference will make its own decision in keeping with the legislation consistent with the protocol,” he told UM News.

Other episcopal leaders who signed the statement include Nigeria Area Bishop John Wesley Yohanna; Baguio (Philippines) Area Bishop Pedro M. Torio Jr. and retired Bishop Young Jin Cho.

Under the protocol, an annual conference could leave The United Methodist Church with a majority vote of at least 57 percent.

Khegay predicted the Eurasia Area would vote to depart.

Jones said, “I will preside over the Texas Annual Conference and help it reach its own decision. I am committed to fairness of process and helping the conference make its own decision.”

Ian Urriola is a lay General Conference delegate from Upper New York. He said that if Webb and some clergy leaders want to leave, he’ll give them his blessing. But he hopes the conference will remain in The United Methodist Church.

Source: United Methodist News

All Content & Images are provided by the acknowledged source

Dr. Allen Yeh is Associate Professor of Intercultural Studies & Missiology at Biola University, Cook School of Intercultural Studies.

In the past couple of days, it feels like the coronavirus crisis has escalated to an unprecedented level. In reality, statistics of the spread have not changed that drastically. However, the response has generated some swift and drastic measures such as the NBA and NCAA sports being suspended, conferences being canceled, Disneyland and cruise ships closing, and universities shutting their campuses and moving all classes online for the rest of the semester.

This just happened with my university, and now all of us professors have a steep learning curve to transition to an entirely new platform mid-semester (many of us have never taught online before).

What is often lost in the midst of all this, however, is not just the left-brain, scientific, practical ways to handle the pandemic; it is the emotional intelligence side of all of this.

To continue with the university example, it is very easy for professors to get immersed in the logistics of how to suddenly learn to deliver online classes. But in the meanwhile, we may forget that our students are worried about things like losing their on-campus job, which leads to their inability to pay off their tuition, which means they might not graduate.

Being a good professor means that we not only become good deliverers of online content, but good shepherds of our students’ well-being. Ironically, teaching an online class actually requires us to be more pastoral than teaching in-person.

What is driving much of these drastic responses is emotions and fear.

Fear and emotions can be good things, as they are designed to protect us from things that may harm us (in fact, I do think that using the “sledgehammer to kill the fly” approach may actually be warranted right now to “flatten the curve” of the spread of the coronavirus—but that’s a whole other conversation).

But fear and emotions can also be drivers for unhelpful behaviors, such as panic and self-destruction. So, sometimes we need to actively fight against the way we’re biologically wired, because what is ‘natural’ is sometimes actually tainted by our sin nature.

One unfortunate side-effect of this global pandemic is racism. Rather than something like this bringing the world together to unite against a common enemy, it is easy to make some people the scapegoat; in this case, people of Asian descent.

True, the coronavirus originated in Wuhan, China, but the virus is not a discriminator of persons. Anyone could have it and anyone can transmit it. There have been documented cases (even captured on video and photos) of people spraying Febreeze on Asians in a New York subway to “disinfect” them; people posting memes (this even happened at my university) on social media of people making disgusted faces at Asians when they sneeze or cough; people avoiding Asian-owned businesses or restaurants; Dutch students wearing Chinese clothes and conical hats and pulling up the corners of their eyes, posing for a Instagram photo with a sign that read “Corona Time”; and the hashtag #kungflu trending; among many others.

“But for many people, having someone specific to blame, or an action specific to do, helps them make sense of this world or give them a sense of control, even if the fear is unwarranted or irrational. Take the hoarding of toilet paper, for example: while it does nothing to actually address the situation at hand (hand sanitizer or face masks make much more sense), it does hurt others.” Some of the positive pushback has been, for example, manufacture of buttons that say: “Wash your hands and don’t be racist.”

But more needs to be done. And we, as Christians, need to not only avoid discrimination, but we need to stem the tide of the racism, as much as cancellation of mass events is helping to quell the physical spread of the virus.

So what can Christians do?

First, there are two mantras that we can live by: you are the best advocate of a group if you are not part of it; and conversely, you are the best critic of a group if you are part of it.

Regarding the first principle, Jesus even said in Matthew 5:46-47, “If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?”

We as Christians must demonstrate the radical love of Jesus, one that even exceeds that of non-Christians. If you can support groups that you do not have vested interest in, that will cause the secular world to sit up and take notice. “America first” or “my own race first” is not living out the Parable of the Good Samaritan, where Jesus defined our neighbor as the one who is most hated. In times of fear, take this as an opportunity to defend and support those who are most targeted and marginalized.

Source: Christianity Today

All Content & Images are provided by the acknowledged source

Kutter Callaway is associate professor of theology and culture at Fuller Theological Seminary and co-director of Reel Spirituality. His most recent book is The Aesthetics of Atheism: Theology and Imagination in Contemporary Culture.

A few years ago, Fuller Seminary hosted a public screening of the Sundance award-winner The Birth of a Nation. Afterward, a handful of faculty and students gathered for dinner to reflect on the film and engage in a conversation about racial dynamics in our country, city, and seminary.

As we went around the table and shared our various experiences with race and racism, I voiced what I thought at the time was a fairly “woke” perspective regarding my growing awareness of racial inequalities. I admitted that I would never be able to know the true depths of the black experience in America. I confessed that, on a conceptual level, I was able to recognize the daily struggle of my sisters and brothers of color, but I would never be able to know it on a visceral level.

My friend and colleague, Joy J. Moore, an associate professor of biblical preaching at Luther Seminary, was clearly frustrated with my comments and pressed me to consider the deeper implications of what I was saying. For example, she asked if, since I, as a male, could never fully know what it meant to encounter the world as a woman, but then witnessed a woman being assaulted, would I hesitate to intervene because I couldn’t understand? She pressed further: Would I be incapable of knowing that it was wrong for a woman to be treated unjustly and be able to respond accordingly?

Through her analogy, Moore not only reframed my understanding of a movie but fundamentally altered the way I see the world. I experienced a similar kind of paradigm shift when I first watched the newly released film Burden, which debuted at the 2018 Sundance Film Festival. I wasn’t alone. The film won an Audience Award that year, along with a number of lengthy standing ovations for its depiction of love prevailing over the most insidious kinds of hate.

Inspired by the real-life story of Mike Burden (played by Garrett Hedlund), the narrative begins in 1996 with Mike and his fellow KKK members opening a Klan museum and neo-Nazi merchandise store in Laurens, South Carolina.

Judy, a young, white, single mother who wagers on loving Mike in spite of his racist ties, eventually gives him an ultimatum: Choose between her or the white nationalist family who adopted him as an orphan. In response to his girlfriend’s prompting, Mike chooses to leave the Klan. Shortly thereafter, the Rev. David Kennedy (Forest Whitaker)—who had been organizing and leading peaceful protests of the KKK museum—discovers that the Klan has driven Mike, Judy, and her young son to homelessness and hunger. In what can only be described as a radical and daring act of love, Kennedy is filled with compassion for their plight and invites them all to live in his home.

By telling the story of a hate-filled white nationalist and the African American reverend who chose to love him, Burden bears witness to the gospel writ large. It’s the kind of good news that traffics not in power or privilege, but in something that looks a whole lot like weakness and vulnerability. Indeed, some might even call Kennedy’s actions toward Mike Burden utter “foolishness” (1 Cor. 1:25). After all, what husband, father, or pastor in his right mind would allow a member of the KKK with a history of violently assaulting people of color to live in his home, eat with his family, and sleep in his son’s bed?

Yet, in more ways than one, Kennedy is simply doing what Jesus told his disciples to do:

Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you. (Luke 6:27–35)

It’s all fairly straightforward and simple. But that doesn’t make it any easier. In real life, Kennedy’s decision to provide food and shelter for a KKK member was not condoned by everyone within the African American community in Laurens, and the relational fallout the reverend experienced by caring for Mike Burden continues to this day.

Likewise, in the film, Kennedy struggles to convince members of his own family that what he is doing is right or even necessary, much less something that Jesus would ask of him. Frustrated and bewildered by the sudden appearance of a Klan member in her home, Janice Kennedy (Crystal Fox) offers a brutally honest assessment of her husband’s actions: “I share your faith in God, but I don’t share your faith in man.”

It is hard to have faith in humanity when there is so much evidence suggesting that we shouldn’t. For instance, after a recent Reel Spirituality screening of Burden, Andrew Heckler, the film’s director, shared a particular anecdote that was as sobering as it was unsettling. According to Heckler, during the movie’s filming in 2016, numerous strangers would daily appear on the set of Burden to check out the neo-Nazi merchandise store that had been created as part of the film’s set. These interested shoppers weren’t curious to learn more about the inner workings of film production. They came because they thought it was a functioning retail store and were hoping to purchase KKK memorabilia.

Stories like these reinforce the fact that the primary reason Burden is a challenging movie is because it is about current events. It isn’t a film about slavery in the 18th and 19th centuries, or the civil rights movements of the mid-20th century—rather, the film takes place in 1996. As both Burden and the story upon which it is based make painfully clear, it’s one thing to accept that America has a racist past. It’s quite another to acknowledge our racist present.

Before it is anything else, Burden is a film about the here and now. As such, it lays bare the dark heart of contemporary racism in America and asks us not to look away, even when our first instinct may be to flinch.

Source: Christianity Today

All Content & Images are provided by the acknowledged source

… Read More

Click here to read the rest of the story from our content source/partners – Christian Headlines.

قالب وردپرس

After badly bungling and then covering up its handling of the coronavirus outbreak, China is now in full spin control mode, blaming the United States and trying to take advantage of this global epidemic.  

At his press briefing Wednesday, President Trump again called coronavirus “the Chinese virus,” in response to the latest moves by China. “I would like to begin by announcing some important developments in our war against the Chinese virus,” Trump said.

And while he is being criticized for it, China knew about the existence of coronavirus as early as last November, but the communist regime stopped Chinese labs from testing for it and even threatened health care workers like the late Dr. Li Wenliang, who tried to warn the outside world, and later died from the virus.

By January, China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention declared on state television that the risk of transmission was low, and the government was arresting citizens who were trying to sound the alarm. Then with the coronavirus outbreak in full swing, Chinese officials allowed a lunar new year banquet to go ahead in Wuhan province – the epicenter of the pandemic – with tens of thousands of people sharing food dishes; then let millions travel out of Wuhan and China, spreading the disease across the world. 

There was no quarantine in Wuhan until a week before February.  

“The Chinese are directly responsible for all we are confronting right now,” says Frank Gaffney, executive chairman of the Center for Security Policy, “for having both precipitating this, for having taken actions that have made this worse, and now for lying about the fact that it was anybody other than them that was responsible.”

Beijing is now trying to rewrite the narrative of how coronavirus started. A Chinese foreign ministry spokesman suggested in a tweet last week that visiting American soldiers brought the coronavirus to China. 

And a new report by the open source intelligence organization Horizon Advisory says China intends to profit from the chaos it has sown into the world economy. Nate Picarsic of Horizon Advisory says a post-virus economic strategy by Chinese leaders is already underway. 

“It’s clear that there are thinkers in China who see this as an opportunity,” Picarsic says. “Having gone through this crisis already, they’re thinking about where there are opportunities to get an unfair advantage, vis-à-vis global competitors.” 

With western economies still in free fall, the Horizon report says Chinese leaders see a chance to replace the US as the top economic power and control the world economy. 

And in the blame game, China has doubled down. 

It’s now kicking out American journalists. And a Chinese tycoon who called Chinese President Xi a “clown” for making the coronavirus a pandemic through his ineptitude, has disappeared. 

All Content & Images are provided by the acknowledged source

… Read More

Click here to read the rest of the story from our content source/partners – Christian Headlines.

قالب وردپرس

… Read More

Click here to read the rest of the story from our content source/partners – Christian Headlines.

قالب وردپرس

China’s health ministry says the virus epicenter of Wuhan and its surrounding Hubei province have reported no new cases. 
  
The ministry said Thursday that results over the past 24 hours showed 34 new cases, all detected in people arriving from abroad.
  
Eight new deaths were reported, all in Wuhan. 
  
Wuhan at the peak reported thousands of new cases of coronavirus infection daily, overwhelming its health care system.
  
Of those new cases of infection, 21 were in Beijing, nine in the southern manufacturing powerhouse of Guangdong, two in Shanghai and one each in coastal Zhejiang and Heilongjing in the far northeast. 
  
China has only just begun loosening draconian travel restrictions within the country, but has stepped-up 14-day quarantine regulations on those arriving in Beijing, Shanghai and elsewhere from overseas, amid expectations of a new influx of students and others returning home. 
  
China has now recorded a total of 80,928 confirmed virus cases with 3,245 deaths. Another 70,420 people have been released from hospital and 7,263 remain in treatment.
  

All Content & Images are provided by the acknowledged source