Outsourcing Ministry to and with the Poor:A Dangerous Trend in Modern American Methodism

Erin CloningerDec. 12, 2013

Directed Study: Dr. Russ Richey

In his 2001 article ‘Visiting the Poor’: Wesley’s Precedent for Wholistic Mission, Dr.

Randy Maddox outlines six changes in modern American Methodism that have led to the

fracturing of how the denomination understands discipleship. One change Maddox cites is the

way in which Methodists have increasingly viewed ministry to and with the poor as a

“specialized task for a select group of properly gifted and trained persons” rather than a mission

for all Christians.1 This paper seeks to explore this development in greater detail and to argue

alongside Maddox that the appointment of specialized groups to ministries to and with the poor

fails to embody the scriptural imperative for all Christians to care for those on the margins. It

will begin with an overview of three groups that Methodists commissioned to serve as

ambassadors to the poor in the early and mid-twentieth century: deaconesses, the Women’s

Division of the Board of Mission, and the Methodist Federation for Social Service. It will then

review Wesley’s thoughts concerning the call for all Methodists to engage in the ministry and

practices that these groups embraced, including a commitment to live communally, visit the

poor, advocate on their behalf, and engage in evangelical economic practices. It will close with a

discussion of the tendency of Methodists to outsource these practices and the need for the United

Methodist Church (UMC) to reverse this trend and reengage local congregations in regular,

sustained ministries to and with the poor.

Ambassadors to the Poor: Deaconesses, the Women’s Division, and the MFSS

One of the strengths of American Methodism is the way in which men and women across

the denomination’s history have tirelessly engaged in ministries rooted in deep relationships with

the poor. At the turn of the twentieth century, the order of deaconess, the Women’s Division of

the Board of Mission, and the Methodist Federation for Social Service (MFSS) were three

1 Maddox, Randy L. "'Visit the Poor': Wesley's Precedent for Wholistic Mission." Transformation: An International Dialogue on Mission and Ethics 18, no. 1 (January 2001): 37.

1

organizations charged with the task of ministering to and with the poor on behalf of the

Methodist church. Deaconesses served as beacons of compassion and hope amidst the crime-

ridden ghettos of Chicago and New York. The members of the Women’s Division endured as

leaders in the growing campaign for racial and civil justice, and the members of the MFSS stood

as denominational pillars against the rising tide of capitalism and the destructive power of the

profit motive. The following is a brief overview of the origin, work, and significance of these

mission-oriented ministries within Methodism.

The Order of Deaconess

Since Methodism’s founding, women have played an integral role in carrying out the

denomination’s vision of reforming the continent and spreading scriptural holiness across the

land.2 One of the most notable organizations involved in this effort at the turn of the twentieth

century was the order of deaconess. The deaconess movement began through the impetus of

Lucy Rider Meyer, a vivacious Methodist woman who opened the Chicago Training School for

City, Home, and Foreign Mission in October 1885 and the Chicago Deaconess Home in 1887.3

Meyer sought to prepare young women for ministry among the urban poor by offering them

courses in theology, church history, church discipline, nursing, and evangelism.4 By 1888, the

MEC recognized her efforts and made the role of deaconess a consecrated ministerial position.

According to the guidelines set forth by the MEC, women could seek consecration as a

deaconess if they were 25 years or older, single, willing to live communally, and willing to

2 Maddox, 41. The mission of the MEC in 1784 was to “reform the continent and spread scriptural holiness across these lands.”3 Russell E. Richey, Kenneth E. Rowe, Jean Miller Schmidt. "Rethinking Mission(s): 1884-1939." In

American Methodism: A Compact History. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2012: 135.4 Pope-Levison, Priscilla. "A 'Thirty Year War' and More: Exposing Complexities in the Methodist

Deaconess Movement." Methodist History 47, no. 2 (January 2009): 110

2

submit to the authority of a nine-member Conference Board of Deaconesses at the annual

conference level.5 By 1920, some 1,000 women joined the order of deaconess under these terms

and served in over 90 institutions throughout the United States.6

The work of a deaconess typically involved visitation or nursing, though over time

women began to take part in ministerial efforts aimed at alleviating not only the short-term needs

of the urban poor, but also the long-term causes of poverty. They wrote against the use of child

labor by New England manufacturers in a 1902 edition of the Deaconess Advocate; opened

coffee houses as alternatives to saloons in an attempt to curb the alcoholism fueling domestic

violence; and offered their services as “Traveler’s Aides” to newly arrived women at railroad

depots, many of whom were susceptible to schemes aimed at luring vulnerable women into

prostitution.7 Each of these tasks extended from the desire of deaconesses to respond to the

growing needs of an industrializing society and a capitalism that appeared to ignore the health,

safety, and wellbeing of the poor. According to historian Mary Agnes Dougherty, the hope of

many deaconesses was not to abolish capitalism, but rather to reform and “Christianize” it.8

Many believed that by hearing the cries of the poor and implementing just labor practices, the

wealthiest members of American society—many of whom claimed to be Christian—could create

a system where, in the words of one radical deaconess, “one man’s success shall not mean the

failure of hundreds of his weaker brothers, but in which his gain shall mean the good of all.”9

The Women’s Division

5 Richey et al., 1366 Richey et al, 1377 Dougherty, Mary Agnes. "The Social Gospel According to Phoebe: Methodist Deaconesses in the Metropolis, 1885-1918." In Perspectives on American Methodism: Interpretive Essays, edited by Russell E. Richey, Kenneth E. Rowe, and Jean Miller Schmidt. Nashville, TN: Kingswood Books, 1993: 364.8 Dougherty, 3679 As quoted in Dougherty, 367

3

Between 1884 and 1939, the order of deaconess was the only group of Methodist women

commissioned to full-time, life-long service to and with the poor; however, other women

engaged in works of mercy regularly through their involvement in the Women’s Division of the

Board of Mission and its predecessor organizations. One of the noblest (and controversial)

efforts of the Women’s Division at the turn of the twentieth century was its commitment to anti-

lynching and civil rights reform. In the years following the Civil War, many Methodist women

worked via missionary societies to extend charity to struggling African American families

largely through the provision of food and blankets.10 By 1913, however, Methodist women

wanted to do more. Inspired by a desire to care not for only the health, but also the safety and

dignity of their African American brothers and sisters, Southern women began a fervent

campaign to end lynching. They formed the Association of Southern Women for the Prevention

of Lynching (ASWPL) in 1930 and worked diligently to secure signatures from leading citizens,

police officers, and governors in support of anti-lynching legislation at the local, state, and

federal level.11

By 1939, the Women’s Division had joined their deaconess counterparts in moving

beyond charitable works of mercy to discussions of the root causes of poverty and the

transformative potential of the Gospel within the social sphere. They opened schools, hospitals,

and children’s homes for the urban poor and began interracial conferences with African

American women.12 Historian Alice G. Knotts argues that these interracial conferences were

integral in transforming the mission work of women in the early twentieth century. Whereas

Methodist women had previously engaged their African American sisters as teachers,

10 Knotts, Alice G. Fellowship of Love : Methodist Women Changing American Racial Attitudes, 1920-1968. Nashville, Tenn.: Kingswood Books, 1996: 9611 Knotts, 7512 Knotts, 43

4

missionaries, and service-providers, many began greeting them as co-laborers and friends in the

budding campaign for civil rights.13 Under the leadership of Thelma Stevens, white and African

American Methodist women began hosting District Institutes, interracial workshops in which

women spent several weeks discussing a particular social concern together.14 They read George

Hayne’s The Trend of the Races, a book detailing India’s struggle for independence, and

sponsored civil rights activists like James Lawson, a young African American Methodist known

for his contribution to the nonviolent strategy of the civil rights movement.15 Thanks to the

financial assistance of Methodist women, Lawson spent three years in India studying Gandhi’s

nonviolent tactics. Upon his return, he became a field secretary for the Fellowship of

Reconciliation (FOR) and a key leader in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee

(SNCC).16 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would later refer to Lawson as “the greatest teacher of

nonviolence resistance in America.”17

The Methodist Federation for Social Service

Select groups of Methodist men also worked tirelessly to further the interests and

wellbeing of those affected by burgeoning industrialization and laissez-faire capitalism at the

turn of the twentieth century. Two particularly influential leaders in this effort were Frank Mason

North and Harry F. Ward. Together, these men joined a group of 25 Methodists in forming the

Methodist Federation for Social Service (MFSS) in 1907. The stated goal of MFSS was “to

deepen within the Church the sense of social obligation and opportunity to study social problems

13 Knotts, 5214 Knotts, 14915 Knotts, 5316 Knotts, 22017 Dreier, Peter. The 100 Greatest American of the 20th Century: A Social Justice Hall of Fame. New York:

Nation Books, 2012: 343.

5

from the Christian point of view, and to promote social service in the spirit of Jesus Christ.”18

Ward led the group in drafting what was originally known as “a Methodist platform on social

problems” and later the “Social Creed” in anticipation of the 1908 General Conference.19 The

Conference approved the creed, which at the time consisted of 11 points detailing mostly

industrial concerns. North drafted a second version of the document shortly after and presented it

to the denominations associated with the newly formed Federal Council of Churches of Christ in

America. The revised creed contained four additional statements concerning the rights of

workers and poverty, and by 1912 nearly every mainline denomination had embraced it. The

document had grown to a total of 16 points and discussed issues ranging from family and child

development to liquor trafficking and property.20

Over the next sixty years, North and Ward continued to support the evolution of the

Social Creed and the implementation of its principles on the ground. Much of Ward’s attention

centered on the efforts of the MFSS, which he led as General Secretary from 1911 to 1944.21

Ward also dedicated much of his time to teaching seminary students about the ethics and practice

of social service and publishing countless books on economics and critiques of the capitalist

order. In one of his most renowned works, The Labor Movement (1917), Ward argues that the

fundamental sin of capitalism is that it places the wellbeing of human beings below the

production of goods and profit and consequently exalts the very self-interest that Jesus preached

against in the Gospels.22 Ward’s other works similarly detail the dangers of capitalism, as well as

18 Lacy, Creighton. Frank Mason North: His Social and Ecumenical Mission. Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1967: 130.

19 Gorrell, Donald K. "The Social Creed and Methodism Through Eighty Years.” In Perspectives on American Methodism: Interpretive Essays, edited by Russell E. Richey, Kenneth E. Rowe, and Jean Miller Schmidt. Nashville, TN: Kingswood Books, 1993: 388.20 Gorrell, 39021 Craig, Robert H. "An Introduction to the Life and Thought of Harry F. Ward." Union Seminary Quarterly Review XXIV, no. 4 (1969): 336.22 Craig, 337

6

the merits of socialism and the developments in Soviet Russia. For Ward, Russia was not a social

or political ideal, but rather an economic experiment in what a society rooted in mutual aid could

look like. While he publically opposed the violence of the Bolshevik Revolution and the

authoritarian nature of the Russian state, his two trips to Russia and glowing reviews of socialism

drew considerable attention. Eventually, rumors stirred regarding his commitment to

communism, and in 1939 and 1953 the House of Representatives Committee on Un-American

Activities (HUAC) conducted investigations regarding Ward’s activities and writings. Each time

Ward appeared before HUAC, he explained that his commitments to the socialist experiment

were rooted in the social vision and teaching of Jesus Christ and not a particular political party.23

North’s work also centered on efforts to curb the profit motive in American society and

address the root causes of poverty through the Methodist church. Unlike Ward, however, North’s

efforts focused more on the practical nature of missionary work in the city than on the

publication of books or lectures. North is best known for his leadership on the Federal Council of

Churches where he championed the adoption of the Social Creed by denominations across the

US, as well as his efforts in the “institutional church” movement within the New York City

Church Extension and Missionary Society. Through his leadership and oversight, so-called

“missionary churches” began responding to the needs of the urban poor through the construction

of nurseries, gymnasiums, and community centers, as well as the provision of courses in English,

sewing, and the skills needed for work in manufacturing.24 North viewed such efforts as

necessary in translating the tenets of the Social Creed into concrete action and for evangelizing

the city, which North viewed as a mission field all its own. Like Ward and other Social Gospel

23 Craig, 351. Ward stated the following in a radio address over the Columbia network in September 1939: “My judgments and actions concerning political and economic issues are derived from the basic ethical principles of the religion of Jesus of which I am minister and teacher. At the beginning of this ministry I made the decision that it required complete independence of all political parties and I have never deviated from this position.” 24 Lacy, 117

7

visionaries, North believed that all people deserve to hear the Good News, but that this mission

consisted not merely of preaching about Jesus and the forgiveness of sin. It also entailed “such

redress of the community ills and reconstruction of the social order as shall secure for him to

whom the Kingdom of God has come” the “protection and development for his new found

spiritual powers.”25

Life with the Poor: A Call for All Methodists

As evidenced by the above review, the deaconesses, Women’s Division, and MFSS all

embraced John Wesley’s commitment to perform regular “works of mercy” and did so on behalf

of or, in the case of the MFSS, in loose affiliation with the Methodist church.26 What is

interesting, however, is that while many Methodists appear to have admired and even supported

the work of these organizations in the early and mid-twentieth century, few followed their

example of regular and sustained engagement with the poor and, more specifically, their

commitments to communal living, regular visitation with the poor, social justice advocacy, and

evangelical economics. Given that John Wesley preached that these practices were essential to

the wholistic discipleship of all Methodists—not merely those “commissioned” or “sent” by the

denomination—it is crucial that Methodists rethink the dangers of outsourcing concern for the

poor to specialized groups and recommit themselves to living out the tenets of the Social Creeds

and Social Principles in their everyday lives.

Wesley’s Vision for Holistic Discipleship

25 North, Frank Mason. "Federation in City Evangelization." Federation, Volume 2, 1902: 127.26 The Methodist church financially sponsored the work of deaconesses and the Women’s Division. While it did not sponsor the MFSS, the 1908 General Conference recognized the MFSS as the “executive agency to rally the forces of the church in support of social reform” (Richey et al., 142). The Women’s Division also encouraged Methodist women to use the MFSS research findings in their daily work (Knotts, 135).

8

An examination of Wesley’s life and works reveals a deep-rooted commitment not only

to ministry to and with the poor, but to the wide range of commitments that accompany it,

including communal living, regular visitation, advocacy, and a willingness to engage in

evangelical economic practices. Regarding communal living, Wesley made clear in his preaching

and teaching that all Methodists should aspire to live the kind of communal life detailed in Acts

2:41-47 and 4:32-37. Wesley believed that the church existed in its purest form following

Pentecost when the Spirit descended on those gathered and so filled them with “holiness of heart

and life” that they unanimously and voluntarily shared all things in common.27 Wesley

encouraged Methodists of his day to embody this same kind of Pentecostal living by joining

“select societies,” small groups of men and women committed to communal living and radical

hospitality. Wesley hoped that these communities would embody scriptural holiness so vividly

that they would inspire other Methodists to do likewise. Sadly, few Methodists were willing to

commit to the terms of life in “select societies” during Wesley’s lifetime, but he nonetheless held

out hope that people would aspire to this kind of holy discipleship.

Wesley also preached regularly about the relationship between discipleship and frequent

visitation to and with the poor. An examination of Wesley’s writings suggests that he viewed

visitation as beneficial to Christian discipleship for three reasons. First, it sanctifies individuals

by cultivating the spiritual tempers of love, compassion, patience, and generosity.28 It is far better

“to carry relief to the poor, than to send it,” writes Wesley, as doing so is “far more apt to soften

our heart, and to make us naturally care for each other.”29 Second, frequent visitation with the

poor dispels the myth that poverty results from laziness or moral deprivation. In Thoughts on the

27 Maddox, 4128 Maddox, 4629 Jennings, Theodore W. Good News to the Poor : John Wesley's Evangelical Economics. Nashville:

Abingdon Press, 1990: 54. Wesley wrote these words in a journal entry on Nov. 24, 1760.

9

Present Scarcity of Provisions (1773), Wesley argues that the poor of England “have no meat,

because they have no work.”30 He continues by detailing how political and economic factors (e.g.

the diversion of grain to distilleries, the aggressive policies of farm monopolies, and high levels

of taxation to support wasteful government spending)—not wantonness on the part of the poor—

contributed to unemployment and hunger in eighteenth century England.31 Third, regular

visitation with the poor provides a means through which Christians become aware of where the

church needs to be more active. The majority of Wesley’s ministerial work grew out of years of

listening to the hopes, fears, and needs expressed by those living in extreme poverty. His

development of sewing collectives, lending stocks, and free health clinics were not general forms

of outreach, but particular responses to the needs articulated by those with whom he visited.32

Wesley’s thoughts on slavery towards the end of his life also demonstrate a belief that

discipleship entails advocating on behalf of and alongside the poor and the oppressed. While

much of Wesley’s preaching and teaching focused on the transformation of the social order

through individual conversion and sanctification, his understanding of mission and the nature of

discipleship appear to have broadened as a result of his experiences with the abolition movement

between 1772 and 1791. After spending nearly 15 years preaching to captains, merchants, and

slaveholders in an attempt to sway them from participation in the slave trade, Wesley conceded

that the conversion of individuals made “little stand” against slavery in comparison to the work

of the Abolition Committee, which Wesley felt “strikes at the root of it.”33 From 1788 onward,

Wesley encouraged Methodists everywhere to lobby Parliament for the eradication of slavery as

an extension of their call to Christian discipleship. Wesley ceased referring to planters as merely

30 Jennings, 6731 Jennings, 6832 Jennings, 6133 Wesley as quoted by Brendlinger, 143.

10

souls in need of conversion (though he still desired their confession and sanctification) and began

describing them as “a numerous, a wealthy, and consequently a very powerful body” that would

give “rough and violent opposition” to those standing between them and the profits reaped from

slavery.34 So powerful was Wesley’s call for advocacy that Methodists continued to engage in

legislative lobbying even after his death. By 1832, some 95.2% of Wesleyan Methodists had

signed petitions in favor of abolition—the highest rate of any Christian denomination.35

In addition to encouraging Methodists to engage in advocacy on behalf of and alongside

the poor, Wesley believed that all Christians should commit themselves to an economics rooted

in stewardship and radical generosity. Wesley believed that all material goods are gifts from God

for the sustenance of all humankind. Christians are therefore called to steward these gifts by

earning all they can through just means, saving all they can by living simply, and giving all they

can to those who are in need. On the matter of defining wealth, Wesley writes that a person is

rich if they have “food to eat, and a raiment to put on, with something over” or “any more than

will procure the conveniences of life.”36 Wesley asserted that the accumulation of any more than

this gives way to the distortion of holy tempers, such as humility and patience, and encourages

the development of vices like contempt, resentment, anger, pride, and sloth.37 It also leads to

corruption and sin within the Church, as well as violence and greed on the part of the State.38

Consequently, Wesley advised all Methodists to give away their “wealth” as quickly as they

acquired it, so as to foster a discipleship rooted in the kind of radical generosity of Christ. He

also discouraged any economic practice that undercut the dignity of workers. Reflecting on the

34 Brendlinger, Irv A. Social Justice through the Eyes of Wesley: John Wesley's Theological Challenge to Slavery [Guelph, Ont.]: Joshua Press, 2006, 145.35 Brendlinger, 16936 John Wesley as cited in Jennings, 106 37 Jennings, 3838 Jennings, 44

11

slave trade and its relationship to the economic order, he writes, “Better no trade, than trade

procured by villainy…Better honest poverty, than all the riches bought by the tears, and sweat,

and blood, of our fellow creatures.”39

The Danger of Outsourcing Discipleship

Wesley’s thoughts on what constitutes holistic discipleship are convicting when one

examines the everyday practices of most Methodists throughout the twentieth and twenty-first

century. While small groups of men and women have continually lived out Wesley’s call to

communal living, visitation with the poor, advocacy, and evangelical economics, many have

chosen to leave these tasks to those who have been specially “trained” or “commissioned” to

perform them. One need only consider the relationship between the members of the deaconess

movement, Women’s Division, MFSS and other Methodists to observe this phenomenon. While

countless twentieth century Methodists expressed verbal and financial support for the communal

living practices of the deaconess and their visitation of the poor, few opted to follow their

example of sharing all things in common and visiting communities mired by alcoholism,

prostitution, and disease. Many Methodists also voiced admiration towards the advocacy efforts

of the Women’s Division, but the denomination itself lagged in embracing desegregation within

its own structures and many hesitated to join the civil rights struggle for fear that it would

jeopardize their social or financial position.40 Even the initial support of many for the work and

vision of the MFSS eventually gave way to suspicion and fear regarding Ward’s efforts to bring

about an economic order rooted in the voluntary redistribution of wealth.41 39 Brendlinger, 52 40 The Methodist church dissolved the Central Jurisdiction in 1968, though the Methodist church has yet to integrate fully. Many Methodist women also hesitated to join the civil rights movement for fear that it would jeopardize the business standing of their husbands (See Knotts, 77-78).41 Thanks to the lobbying efforts of a group of Chicago businessmen, the General Conference removed the Social Creed from the Book of Discipline in 1936. Though it was later restored, the temporary removal of the creed was symptomatic of growing discontent with the tenets and mission of groups like the MFSS and, I would argue, the

12

What modern Methodists do appear to have done fairly consistently is express concern

for the poor through ever-expanding denominational statements like the Social Creed and Social

Principles, while outsourcing actual ministry to and with the poor to specialized groups. Today,

deacons are deemed by many to be the social justice diplomats of the United Methodist Church.

The role of the deacon, as stated by the UMC, is to connect “worship with service to God in the

world,” and many ordained deacons do so by working in social agencies dedicated to the

alleviation of social ills.42 Another organization delegated to overseeing the needs and wellbeing

of the poor is the General Board of Church and Society (GBCS). Founded in 1968, the GBCS

serves as the advocacy arm of the UMC and the organization responsible for implementing the

articulated sentiments of the Social Principles, a denominational resource that has expanded from

a series of specific statements to an encyclopedia detailing the official UMC position on social

issues ranging from the environment and eugenics to gun violence and child welfare.

The unfortunate result of this increased departmentalization and specialization of ministry

to and with the poor is that the average Methodist has become distanced from the kind of holistic

discipleship Wesley envisioned for all Christians. Many Methodist churches today look to

deacons and the GBCS in much the same way that they looked to deaconesses, the Women’s

Division, and the MFSS, viewing them as men and women uniquely “called” to ministry on the

margins. The truth of the Gospel, however, is that all Christians are called to ministries rooted in

relationship and concern for those who are vulnerable, oppressed, hungry, naked, and sick. The

UMC must acknowledge this truth if it is genuinely committed to its mission of “making

disciples for the transformation of the world.”43 This is not to say that the denomination should

kind of economic order that Wesley envisioned (i.e. an economy rooted in simplicity and the voluntary redistribution of wealth) (See Gorrell, 393). 42 Description of diaconal work, as described on the General Board of Higher Education website (http://www.gbhem.org/ministry/deacons-diaconal-ministers). Note that not all deacons work in social service ministries. Many specialize in chaplaincy, youth ministry, music ministry, Christian education, etc. 43 The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church. Nashville, TN: The United Methodist Church Publishing

13

cease commissioning specific groups and agencies to perform specific tasks within the life of the

church. There is a strong biblical precedent for setting aside certain individuals for certain

consecrated acts of ministry (cf. Acts 6 and the commissioning of deacons to care of Hebrew

widows). It is to say, however, that Christ’s call in Matthew 25 to clothe the naked, look after the

sick, and visit those in prison is not a suggestion for some, but a biblical mandate for all seeking

to enter the kingdom of God. The UMC should therefore encourage each and every Methodist to

form real and lasting relationships with the “least of these” (Matthew 25:45), rather than

commissioning ambassadors to the poor who serve on the denomination’s behalf.

Reinvigorating Wholistic Discipleship within the UMC

There are several ways in which United Methodists could facilitate more holistic

discipleship on the part of each and every member of the denomination. One is to reintroduce the

role of the transitional deacon for elders seeking ordination. The recent bifurcation of elder and

deacon tracks has created a generation of elders who have gone straight into ministries of

preaching, administration, and pastoral care without ever experiencing full-time ministry to and

with the poor. Reinstating the transitional deacon role would help these men and women regain a

critical step in understanding the role “works of mercy” play in Christian discipleship and human

sanctification. Another way to recommit the denomination to ministries to and with the poor is to

create space within annual conference budgets for the sponsorship of more full-time deacons in

local congregations.44 Most deacons today work a 40-hour workweek outside the local church in

an effort to afford health insurance, a pension, and housing. Offering deacons more opportunities

to work inside the local church itself—whether part time or full time—would free these

House, 2012, ¶120. 44 Equalizing clergy salaries and redistributing the money previously allocated to the highest paid elders would be one way to support more diaconal ministers. Another option would be to pronounce a moratorium on church building and consolidate churches in areas where congregations are small. The money saved and made by selling church property could be allocated for ministries to and with the poor.

14

individuals to lead local congregations in ministries of mercy and justice more extensively. A

third way to increase general Methodist understanding of and participation in ministries with the

poor would be to develop additional resources (e.g. Sunday school, small group, and workshop

curriculums) that educate local congregations on the work of the GBCS and the denominational

positions outlined in the Social Creed, Social Principles, and Book of Resolutions. Too few

Methodists are aware of these denominational statements and the work that GBCS is doing.

Conclusion

In summary, the UMC must take action to reclaim a wholistic understanding of

discipleship and reverse the trend of outsourcing ministry to and with the poor to specialized

groups. With dwindling numbers, aging congregations, and impeding bureaucratization, the

denomination needs to concentrate its efforts on relearning what it means to be the hands and

feet of Christ. It must reclaim Wesley’s call for all Methodists, not merely those “qualified” or

“commissioned,” to be in relationship with the sick, hungry, and neglected and encourage every

member of the denomination to reflect the kind of servant leadership that the deaconesses,

Women’s Division, and MFSS modeled in the twentieth century. This means encouraging all

members to embrace, as much as possible, a commitment to the practices of communal living,

regular visitation with the poor, advocacy, and evangelical economics—all of which Wesley felt

were essential to wholistic discipleship. While Wesley himself admits that such practices are

neither easy nor convenient, they are ideals to which all Christian disciples should aspire if they

are to serve as a witness to the world, rather than a reflection of it.

15