Due to differences in our understanding of the gospel's power to restore, we find ourselves seeing differences in our churches, our discipleship, and our mission. This divide is yet another indicator that we're not better together.

• What are some examples of division on missions?

• What role does seeking social justice play in discipleship?

• What practical ways is the UMC currently equipping disciples?

• Will a progressive gospel win a progressive culture?

• Is our discipleship difference surface issues or much deeper?

• Is it better to stay in the UMC to preserve global mission agencies?

• Will we be more effective in linking arms with those in our denomination or those who believe the same as us?

Grant Caldwell: We are looking at chapter four of Are We Really Better Together, "Divided on Mission." 

This chapter talks about missions, discipleship, the role of the local church, and understanding how some of the issues we've discussed previously directly affect making disciples for the glory of God. 

We begin with the first few pages of this chapter. I feel like the authors give examples and then repeat them with a similar phrase that you see as a concluding phrase, "When blank happens, we're not together." It repeats over and over again.

First, we need to validate the mission of any New Testament church. Jesus said, "Make disciples." 

We also need to define: What is a disciple? A disciple is a fully devoted follower of Jesus. What's encompassed in being a disciple is a commitment to discipleship. This means as a disciple, I'm committed to making new disciples. 

We even find this in the phraseology of the mission of the United Methodist Church, and I'm lifting part of the phrase, "Making disciples for the transformation of the world." What we find when we pop the hood and begin drilling down what we see happening systemically within United Methodism is, once again, we are sharing a vocabulary, but we're using different dictionaries in what it means to be or make disciples.

This will obviously be a thread running through our conversation today, but as was noted in the book, we have boards and agencies within our church within United Methodism. The General Board of Global Ministries, Church, and Society. These were cited in the book. 

What wasn't cited, we also have a general Board of Discipleship. But these boards and agencies often propagate materials that illustrate what I would call half the gospel. Half of the gospel is rooted in expressing social justice. Please understand I think it's important for the reader to be reminded that John Wesley was deeply committed to social justice with racism in his era. He labored and advocated for the abolishment of slavery with William Wilberforce. He advocated for the orphan and for the imprisoned.

We want to be very clear that coming out of the root system of the gospel and in the things that Jesus expressed, we want to labor and expressions of mercy ministry missionally, locally, and globally. 

But what's often absent in the propagation of what comes out of boards and agencies for the sake of equipping the local church is an expression of the core expression of the gospel of Jesus Christ that redeems. 

So let me give you an example. Before, I want to clarify that when I use evangelical, I'm not referencing the word as it has been hijacked politically. I'm using that term to describe a traditional understanding of orthodoxy and core evangelical theology. 

There are United Methodist churches all across the nation, and I don't know of a single traditionally evangelical church that uses United Methodist resources for sharing the gospel for the intentional development of maturing of disciples defined in a classical way. 

I would lovingly submit, even though that's anecdotal, that there's a huge tinge of malpractice in that lens. I'm going to refer to this later, but I'm aware of a United Methodist Church that has reached thousands of people, but their equipping and understanding of how to go about reaching people with the gospel did not come out of a lens of a Methodist board of agency equipping them to do so.

You mentioned something, and it triggered a thought that I'd love just to explore a little bit deeper under this concept of discipleship. This idea of seeking justice. That those that might see this from another side would say that our failure to approach topics such as human sexuality is a justice issue and that, therefore, we're not passionate or seeking justice in our city and world.

We recognize that Jesus, in Matthew 25 and in other places, spoke to us about the least of these. Whatever you've done to the least of these, you've done it unto me. 

We are also aware that threads out of the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, talk about being an advocate for the fatherless, the widow, and the orphan. Throughout history, but certainly in an hour like this, as followers of Jesus, we're never to be indifferent to the poor, the oppressed, or the abused. We are to advocate for what is true. 

When we, as Christ followers, advocate for social justice, it does take courage. But the reason it takes courage is that it takes courage to stand for what is true. You will be misunderstood when you're standing for what is true. 

The reason I am heightening the relationship between courage and truth through the lens of social justice is what truth do we stand on as we're advocating? So a traditionally orthodox follower of Jesus, again, wants to treat people with dignity and honor because they're made in the image of God, all people. 

You mentioned the issue of human sexuality related to social justice. For a traditionally orthodox Christian, we feel the conviction to stay anchored to the truth of how marriage has been defined in the Scripture. Yet, for those who see that differently, we respect and love but respectfully disagree. 

We choose to stand in what we would call the mainstream of 2,000 years of Christianity and stand in the mainstream of how this and other issues are looked at, as I noted in the previous conversation, in the mainstream of where the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the overwhelming representation of Protestantism historically and around the world. 

So we stand in the mainstream of how these issues have been looked at since, really the originating impulses that emanate out of the New Testament.

I think that's so good to connect justice and truth together. I feel like justice inherently is the making a right of a wrong. It's connected to truth, and aligns things that are broken, and returns to God's standard of truth and the intentions that God has for them. So, therefore, to seek justice is to conform lives, societies, and the world back towards God's vision of truth and flourishing and righteousness. 

I love the way you frame that. 

I want to round things out and go back to the core gospel. The gospel itself is a justice issue. God was just. He was demonstrating love and justice at the cross. What that brings us to is if God is seeking to reconcile all of humanity to himself through the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, the greatest injustice that we could participate in as Christians is not being committed to sharing that news out of a love motive with all people.

Right now, in United Methodism, there's a verbal narrative that we want to reach the world. But there's no practical equipping in how to go about reaching the world. I lovingly submit that that is an expression of malpractice. 

Let me illustrate it this way. I spend a lot of time, Missy and I, in context in different parts of the world. One of the reasons that the global church is growing rapidly is when there are gatherings in many parts of the world. There are gatherings to equip in specific practices for sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ and developing patterns of discipleship with your neighbor.

I have worked, I think I can say, at a pretty deep level in parts of India, and I've seen this up close. I've participated with the underground church in China and seen this up close in parts of Africa. 

The reason I need to cite these examples is when we talk about the glory of the global church growing in the majority of the church in today's world. It's not some mystical thing that, "Oh, suddenly we just see people open to the gospel in these other parts of the world." There is something different in the DNA. There is intentionality among people to share the good news of Jesus Christ with their neighbors. 

Right now, the fastest growing church in the world is in the nation of Iran and it's mostly led by women. What you will find characteristically in the DNA is not only gospel intentionality, but those who are underground leaders are intentional in equipping people in the practical and tactical steps of gospel sharing and how to develop disciples with my neighbors and the people around them.

There's no strategic plan in United Methodism emanating from any board and agency that is moving on district levels across our nation or certainly on annual conference levels. And much of that is rooted in the fact that we can't agree on what the gospel is or what a disciple is. 

So once again, I want to say, how did we get here? Two degrees at a time. It's been so subtle that many aren't even aware that something's wrong. This is one of the deep core matters that really should be alarming to us. But we've subtly moved into a reality that really is not a healthy reality at all for any expression of Christianity.

The next thing from this chapter that I'd love to discuss, and it's that there seems to be a lot of discussion about this idea: contextualization and cultural engagement. 

By contextualization, I mean, how can the gospel be presented in a way where it's able to be heard, understood, and responded to by a specific population? 

As the authors pointed out, anecdotally, we don't have consistent examples of a progressive gospel penetrating a culture. I would invite the reader to go back and read what was cited in the book about the CalPac Conference in California, which is a very progressive conference compared to the North Georgia Conference. You have progressives, as well as persons who are traditionally orthodox there. 

What the authors do is cite the differentiation of these intense population bases, but the effect of progressive theology on local churches and the severe decline. I believe the one in California was in the 300,000 range of United Methodists in 1970, and now it's around 68,000-69,000. Whereas North Georgia, while the numbers may be similar, they've seen an increase. I believe that around 380,000 Christ followers are members of the United Methodist Church.

Yes, that's anecdotal, but let me also say, if we read history, I like what Leslie Newbigin, the Anglican missionary, said, "Polytheism (multiple belief systems) is not a new challenge for Christianity." 

When we're looking at the Western context where there's progressive theology, there's certainly an increase of what I would call people to realize they have choices and the closer. Please understand, I'm not picking on an area of the country; this is just statistically true. When I move toward West Coast, it's more pervasive to have multiple mindsets or world views. It's not like the Southeastern region of the United States.

Christianity was birthed out of the context of polytheism. It's important that we don't lose sight of that. When we look at the originating impulses of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the church was birthed and sustained and propagated in the midst of persecution and great dependence on the Holy Spirit's power and confidence in the gospel.

Paul talked about the gospel being "foolishness" in the eyes of some. Nothing's new under the sun, and that's still true today. But let's remember, John Wesley's theology of prevenient grace, which was based on these words that Jesus said, "No one comes to son unless the father draws them." 

The point I would submit, we need to reawaken in Western culture, not just the United Methodist Church, is a rebirth of confidence in the gospel of Jesus Christ. That is, when you share with your neighbor or your friend, there are some who are not going to open their heart and begin to believe. But there are those that God is working on, and when we share and express faith in what God is doing, God honors his gospel.

I have seen this, so I know many readers have as well. We've seen this happen in our church family. I've seen this happen in our nation, but we need more people who are willing to trust in the gospel itself. 

One thing, and I know I'm taking a bit of time here, but one more comment. Dr. Mike Pasquarello, who is the Chair of Methodist Studies at Beeson Seminary, said, "I'm afraid that a people called United Methodist have become ashamed of the gospel." 

What he's saying is that his perspective is that when people think about sharing the love of God through what Jesus has done for all people, in saving and redeeming power, we've actually become ashamed to share this with our neighbor or our friend.

That's a paradigm shift that needs to take place in western culture among Christians and certainly among a people called Methodists. We need to be aligned in a way, and this is a part of why we need to separate. We need to be aligned in a way where any church structure serves to equip people in disciple-making and gospel sharing out of love for God and people. 

It's nothing to fear; it's a liberation. It's a beautiful day to move into. But it was also characteristic of early Methodists is out of those bands, classes, and society meetings, people were being transformed, then they went, and they shared with people the good news of Jesus Christ because they could not keep the good news to themselves.

It's good to focus back on the gospel. I think it's tempting to approach this idea of contextualization at a surface level of looking only at externals of, "Well, this is just about approach, right?" 

Some may believe that this conversation about contextualization is no different than just surface-level disagreements within a church of a contemporary service or a traditional service, a small group model versus a Sunday school model. 

We're saying that this isn't a matter of preference or of strategy. This is a matter of belief, identity, and truth of the gospel. That the roots of these trees are completely different. We have differing beliefs about the gospel, and we have different beliefs about its necessity to change lives. We have different beliefs on the role that the gospel plays in reaching the lost and transforming our city. 

That's so good. Grant, that stirs a thought in my heart and mind. 

People sometimes share their stories of coming out of deep fundamentalism. Where they've been wounded by the church, where churches have taken the truth and become very brash, I grieve that with people. I validate the pain that comes out of that. 

Now, the reason I share that is that I came out of an opposite tradition. I was raised in a large liberal United Methodist church that I'll leave unnamed right now, but I never heard the gospel. My pastor nor a Sunday school teacher ever shared how to have a saving and redeeming relationship that's personal and deep with God. 

My coming to Christ took place outside the church. It was influenced by two people when I was a sophomore at the University of Alabama in a fraternity I had pledged. We didn't bring our Bibles to church. We sat around and analyzed pop songs, so that's the tradition that I grew up with. 

The reason I go there is that we need to acknowledge that we don't want to embrace extreme fundamentalism. God helps us because we see the damage this does to people. But at the same time, we can't abandon not only our historical roots as Methodists, but we're Christians first. What makes us Christians is the gospel of Jesus Christ. 

The Scripture says, "To as many as received him to them. He gave the power to become children of God." That's one of the microcosm Scriptures of the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is the core impulse of Christianity. 

All I'm trying to validate is that yes, we need to move into a new day, and I do believe that the right step for us today is to recognize that we have deep differences and we need to divide as lovingly as possible, as amicably as possible and move forward.

I do not. Let me explain. 

You can support UMCOR, and you don't have to be United Methodist to support UMCOR. Hypothetically if Christ Church Memphis joined the Global Methodist Church or any other entity, you could continue to support UMCOR if you choose to. So when you use the logic that somehow we're not able to participate in that specific expression of mission, that's not totally substantive. 

But I think the concern falls into other areas. Let me express it this way. We have a what's called General Board of Global Ministries. This is said in the book; I agree that they've improved some in terms of being willing to work and labor in certain areas of the world, where there's church planting and disciple-making going on. 

But there's no intentional equipping at a level that is stirring church planting or disciple-making movement at a level that we see in other parts of Asia and Africa. That a lot of the learning and equipping is happening in spite of the United Methodist General Board of Global Ministries equipping, conscientious equipping and disciple-making, and church planting. The reason I said that is cause I want to be fair. They've improved a little. 

But let me give you an anecdote. I will leave the country and names out just to honor as the best I can. As we've worked around the world, there have been times where we're working with persons who are with the General Board of Global Ministries, and I know that what I'm about to say is not isolated, but when our team has gone in, we're given the opportunity to paint a building or help maybe build a new church structure, which is good. That's a great opportunity. 

Then we say, "Listen, is there any plan while we're here to go out and share the love of God with the gospel and help cultivate new disciples?" There's no strategic plan, and what we've done with some of our teams is ask for the blessing to share the gospel.

We've even invited senior pastors of some of those church plants to go with us. Sometimes they say yes; sometimes, they say no. Then we've gone out into villages with translators, and sometimes these are oral cultures, and sometimes they're cultures where people can read and write. 

But every time, not sometime, every time, there are persons that God speaks to and draws into a relationship with Him through Christ. What's fun is when the senior pastor sees new people showing up in his or her church and asks, "What did you all do?" 

It's not complicated. It's simple. 

Reader, you may be asking, "Paul, where are you going?" Here's where I'm going: There is such a deep permeation that the gospel is only social, that we have lost the commitment that the gospel is for everyone, and it clearly involves the justice issue, as we noted earlier, of people coming into relationship with the person of Jesus Christ in redeeming power.

As John Wesley said, "One of the mandates of the church, offer them, Christ." But what we find permeating so much of United Methodism is an indifferentism that surrounds being compelled to go out and share the good news. 

So sharing with the reader anecdotally that I'm not impugning every missionary. There are missionaries that we have that I'm sure are committed to sharing the gospel, but we have found anecdotally that there are many who, when we have come in and would team with someone, "Yes, you can go do that," almost like, "Yeah, I'll tolerate you sharing the gospel." But then they recognize that "Well, wait a minute. Something did happen with the team that you brought. There were new people who showed up." 

So, that opens up some good conversations in some of the global contexts that we have journeyed in.

I feel within this global context, it's worth saying that God is doing so much around the world, and we currently, as a church, are connected with believers from around the world. Some of those connections are through the Methodist world, but many of those are not through the Methodist world. 

That's exactly because of what we see on page 78, "However, conservative evangelicals, actually find that we do better when we're together with people who firmly believe Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life and who feel no need to compromise the teachings of the Bible regardless of denomination." 

Grant, that is so true. 

Now, I'm going to share one more anecdote. I want to concede on the front end that it could come across as self-aggrandizing. If I'm guilty of that, then I guess, I'll say, I'm guilty as charged. But there's also a lens that we should look through, and that this is, is what I'm saying, true or not? That matters. 

Here's what I want to share. I had the honor of pastoring Christ Church Birmingham for 15 years, and at one point in her journey, the lay people, not the pastoral staff, the lay people, had participated in leading over 14,000 people into a relationship with Christ. 

Now, you might ask the question, "What?" 

This took place through teaming with indigenous leaders within some of the most challenging areas of the world, equipping intentional disciple-making, gospel sharing, and going out in teams and sharing the gospel with many people who actually had never heard the name of Jesus before. And this is over a period of years. 

The reason I'm sharing this is because that kind of intentionality is rooted in the originating impulses of Methodism. Also, because it involved the laity, it's the equipping of the saints to do ministry. It's an empowered church. This was not the clergy. These are CEOs, CFOs, educators, blue collar, white collar people who are going and sharing the love of God with people they recognize or unreached. 

Because of the love of God, these servants recognized that Jesus Christ is worthy of propagation and that the glory of God really should fill the whole earth. The reason I share that example: What if every local church in the Methodist movement began to develop that kind of DNA? Would the world look different? Yes. Emphatically, yes. Now, I know in this present reality that's not possible.

It's not possible because there's no agreement around what the gospel or disciple-making is. I'm not convinced that everyone believes that Jesus is worthy of the propagation of time, energy, prayer, and resources. I'm not convinced that pastors feel convictionally in that way, and I'm not sure all our leaders feel conventionally around those patterns. 

My point is I don't believe we're better together. I don't mean that in a way that it's rooted in a mean-spiritedness. It's rooted in that our convictions are simply not aligned. We are not on the same page. 

We need to bless one another and move forward and embrace what we both believe conventionally is what it is that God has called us to do. But I want to be a part of birthing a new movement that has that kind of conviction burning in her DNA for the glory of God.