Bishop Matthew Thomas's Blog

The word recalibrate is often used in church circles today. We use it in the FMC to describe what it looks like when a church rediscovers its purpose and elevates its effectiveness. It does not cast aspersions upon the church that was. It just acknowledges that language, culture and appeal changes in time. And, so the timeless truths of Scripture will find new garments and wineskins to relate in better ways to the world around.

There is much to celebrate about our ministry family- the FMC. We often emphasize, remember and reinvigorate our commitment to freedom and equality (abolition as well as race and gender equality); freedom from the encumbrance of purchased seats and elitist, secret societies; freedom of the Spirit to move within and among us and the full equality of lay and clergy to lead and have voice in our family. We have a history of being an evangelistic, discipling and socially conscious and engaged church. I cannot think of anything but good in all of that.

Yet as often is the case, foci, people and values change from time to time if we are not careful and observant of the tendency to allow slippage to creep into our theology and practice. Hebrews 2-4 addresses what slippage looks like better than I am able. But it happens. What I mean by slippage is imperceptible movement or alteration from core values and commitments.

Two such macro changes have taken place in the FMC over the past 160 years. The first involved a redefinition of holiness in both intellectual and practical terms. Holiness somehow came to be defined less by the shaping of the believer’s character to conform to the character of our loving God, but more by certain tangible, and measurable patterns of dress, speech, activity, singular and clearly defined spiritual experience and manner of behavior that may or may not have been part of character transformation. The “otherness” that is implicit in holiness ceased being as much about becoming more like God who is “Other” and instead about being “other” as separate from the world around. In short, the emphasis was not to become more like God but less like the world around. It was based more upon a negative- what we are not and who we are not- than a positive- what we are and who we are to become.

I was fortunate to not be caught in the most troubling part of that alteration of holiness. That was due in part to the fact that I was neither old enough to be part of the church when that mindset was at its peak nor raised in a Free Methodist or Christian family that had that pattern of belief, behavior and expectation. I am not at all saying that having no heritage in the family is advantageous. It is not. I can give many illustrations why it is not but will refrain. The benefits of being part of this family far outweigh the historic hazards in my estimation. My wife, Marlene, carries the very best in her from being a multi-generational Free Methodist. I have ridden her coattails in more ways than I can tell and enjoyed the fruit of her full experience in the church as a child.

The second macro change is one that we are experiencing at present. Holiness, if the term is used at all (it is less popular than terms like “fully devoted follower of Jesus” or “totally committed believer”), or its corollary value has been redefined by many in our movement as having more to do with social (which becomes confused with political and economic) change than personal, character reformation or transformation. Again, when this happens the movement is not necessarily about becoming more like God in image or love, but supporting the right cause and having the right level of indignation and counter-balance to authority, power and structures that influence the degradation of people.

Along with the first shift generations ago, neither are bad in intent or fully in outcome. Good behavior and predictably good speech is a blessing. It only becomes troublesome when grace, love and true transformation are not undergirding and accompanying it. Similarly, to be concerned about injustice, oppression and degradation are very admirable, even biblical. We have expressions of them in the very founding of the FMC. However, it is not only possible, but common for people to be concerned about injustice, oppression and the like without pursuing grace, love and transformation as followers of God. In the case of the formation of the FMC, its leaders were actually quite fruitful in evangelism, discipleship all while modeling winsome, holy living. It was out of those that they did and responded to the other matters addressed above. Personal transformation and becoming more like God bleeds through their writings more than expressions of and concerns about governments and economic imbalances. One might not know that based purely upon the parts of their writings that are favored over others. One personal anecdote comes from the fact that I have heard quotes hundreds of times from the FMC founder, B.T. Roberts about gender equality and societal engagement in his writings and yet I have not heard one quote from his books, Fishers of Men or The Earnest Christian over the past decade. The latter books demonstrate Roberts motivation to address all other matters. It was about seeing more and better disciples of Jesus; to increase and improve the church to be more like Jesus.

In both the more modern and more historic shifts in our movement, holiness became refocused upon some external measures that may or may not emerge from a desire to be more like our Savior than to simply right the wrongs that we see around us. “Otherness” could be arguably concluded in both cases to be based upon negatives. It is either about being “other” than the world around us as in the first shift or being “other” than the systems and structures in the world around us in the second. And, again, it is possible to be “other” in either sense and not be like the “Other” who is qualitatively different in love and grace, sparing no expense to bring people into the light of His presence and eternity.

As Marlene and I step away from positions of high leadership in the church, we are hoping to see a church passionate about holiness based upon the positives of character transformation, love and seeking to increase the number of people who have shared experience. Of course, as we become more holy in our pursuit of God, our behaviors and causes we seek to support to bring about change will follow. They simply must. But, we are going with great support for our new leadership in the FMC rather than suspicion of them. Our newly elected bishops are godly people with godly focus. Our superintendents and area directors are among my modern-day heroes. Marlene and I are diving back into the support of local FMC ministry with our greatest desire to be closer to and more like Jesus as we bring the good news to people who need to be close to and more like Jesus. I invite you to seek God and yearn for His holiness with us. Let’s recalibrate our Holy focus.

We live in an uncertain world. Though many folks are entrenched in their beliefs- political, religious, social- being entrenched is different than being certain. Even the most entrenched and convinced to whom I speak are often uncertain as to what will happen if the economy collapses, governments fall, their expectations fail or climate change wreaks havoc. Their uncertainty is not only about the future. The future always has a measure of the unknown. It is about the hope placed in predictions and predilections. Uncertainty is not as much about the future, as it is about confidence in the world and our hopes as we hold fast to them. That uncertainty is accompanied by trepidation, hesitancy and conflicted emotions.

Certainty that is truly certain settles at least the latter part. The certain might not be able to predict or completely grasp the future in detail. No one can. But, they can know what the wins and losses are and have confidence in being on the winning side. Those who have unquestionably deep faith in Jesus Christ possess a certain certainty. Enough evidence, assurance, fulfilled promise and God-dependability weigh into a confidence and certainty that renders doubt, helpless. The Scriptures detailing the Christian life of Jesus’ disciples after His resurrection from the dead, do so with unwavering certainty of God’s triumph in the past and reliability of things to come.

Thomas ceased his doubting. Peter was done with denying he knew Jesus. James was good to go wherever he was supposed to go, which led to his untimely death. Paul used words like “confidence”, “boasting” and “knowing” in ways that make the most wishful thinker envious. All the lesser known players (Timothy, Barnabas, Lydia, Phoebe, Mark, Titus, Aristarchus, Tychicus) seem about as certain in what they were doing and for whom they were doing it than is imaginable.

In the Old Testament, Job was a man assailed in unequaled ways. He lost health, family, wealth, friends, property and standing. His wife was bitter and encouraged him to withdraw from his confidence in God. However, his certainty in God and God’s ultimate solution were quite strong, even when his understanding waned and his friends tried to correct what they perceived to be his errant theology. He said at one point, “Oh, that my words were recorded, that they were written on a scroll, that they were inscribed with an iron tool on lead or engraved in rock forever! I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God; I myself will see him with my own eyes— I, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!” (Job 19:23-27).

Job used the first person, personal pronoun 10 times in just a handful of verses. He wanted to leave the reader no doubt that his faith was strong and personal. His confidence was not frail though his body was. His faith was strong even though his relationships were fragile. He was not thinking that somehow there might be some second-hand experience that someone else might have on his behalf proving that God would come through. It was more robust and personal than that. He did not hedge his bets. He not only knew about God; he new God. His certainty was certain. God is his redeemer and they would meet face to face. He took that to the bank and God cashed it later.

As surely as I write this, there is a reader saying or thinking, “That’s arrogant” or “It’s wishful thinking” or “The bishop is naively ignoring the uncertainty in the world” or something similar. It is understandable that people with haunting questions, frustrating experiences, fragile faith or nagging doubts might demur at this. It is the very core of the matter. People who are uncertain, are uncertain about certainty. For those who have seen, tasted, experienced and been lavished with God’s forgiveness and love, their very real relationship with the person of Jesus Christ through the presence of God’s Spirit is the raison d’etra for the certainty.

My prayer for the church is that she grows more certain in the Redeemer even as the times become more uncertain. My prayer is that this is not displayed or conveyed as arrogance or annoyance. It is instead a prayer for our faith to grow and our confidence to match that of Job though our suffering fall far short of his. If someone reading this is asking, “How can I get this degree of certain faith?” You have just given yourself the subject or your ongoing prayer until it is fully realized. God will certainly give you certainty. I am certain about it.

 

An active shooter in Virginia Beach killing a dozen coworkers and seven coordinated suicide bomb attacks on Easter in Sri Lanka killing 258 have something beyond the tragic loss of life in common. There was nothing that tipped off workers, worshippers and vacationers of the impending attack. In each case, some unremarkable people, unremarkably stood close to others and carried out their horrific rampage.

There are always clues: baggy clothes concealing weapons, lack of eye contact, sunglasses or hats with brims pulled low. However, surprise attacks only occur when people are surprised. In order to surprise, the persons involved- their behaviors and their appearances- are best suited for attack when they blend in and keep from drawing attention to themselves. In other words, often, there is not really anything to see.

A common plea today from law enforcement is if we see something, we should say something. Great advice. More of us should do more of that. If there are cues or clues or anything suspicious, we are now encouraged to refrain from polite distance. We should not respect private space if public safety is at risk. Safeguarding someone’s private space is no longer viewed as important as safeguarding humanity.

But, how did we get to the place where we need to tell people to report observable anomalies in the first place? The fact is, especially with global urbanization, we do not see much of anything to say something about. That is because we now live in a world filled with distance in proximity. The world is filled with crowds of the invisible. We are closer, physically, to people than ever before and yet farther away relationally from people with whom we literally rub shoulders than ever before. We pay less attention because we are too close to too many people too much of the time. The crush of urban populations has placed us closer to people than we have ever been and less aware of our neighbors.

I have experienced this first-hand all over the world. Whether it is in a Japan or Hong Kong subway during rush hour, the Elephanta Festival at the Gateway of India in Mumbai, anywhere near Quiapo (Manila) during the Procession of the Black Nazarene and in Times Square or Yankee Stadium on a holiday, the crowds can be impressive or depressing depending upon your outlook. I have seen crowds that visually affirm the idiom, “a sea of people.” Privacy is impossible. Security is laughable.

Fact is, there is too much to see to see anything specific or out of place. There is so much to see that it is easy to see nothing. When the forest is overwhelming, trees seem to disappear. The problem is that there is too much to see. It is impossible to notice anything unusual when everything is unusual- a circus of bizarre acts and unusual appearances. In order to say something if we see something, we will need to start seeing again.

The new human response to others is to not see much of anything at all. Disengagement was once considered a vice. Now it is urban virtue. When I was young, it was incredibly impolite to not smile at someone when eye contact is made or say “thank-you” to the person kind enough to hold the door open. Engagement was clearly a virtue. Now, engagement can get you in trouble with authorities or parents if you have the audacity to smile at a child or vulnerable person. Kindness is viewed with particular suspicion by those who are troubled, abused, angry, abandoned, isolated or depressed. And, this is precisely the point. Most of the active shooters in many of the modern massacres have been described as troubled, abused, angry, abandoned, isolated or depressed. Simultaneously, they have been described as unremarkable and people who did not draw attention to themselves. In other words, those who do not engage when we try to engage them are often the same folks who struggle with issues that make them susceptible to taking desperate measures out of their desperate lives or frames of mind. Many, certainly not all, who are troubled, abused, angry, abandoned, isolated or depressed are more likely to hurt themselves or others than those who are not.

What if we were to engage more people more of the time? What if we became human again, even in the crowd? What if we would demonstrate moment by moment care, politeness, courtesy from a desire to make our world more humane? Perhaps in the process, we will be more astute and helpful along the way. When we see nothing but blank stares, hollow expressions and deaf and muted responses by those who are neither deaf nor mute, our prayers should kick in and our concern should follow suit. If we see nothing, we should say something. When we see nothing, perhaps we should see if there is something troubling the person and attempt to engage with human love and care. Perhaps when we see nothing, we might realize that something terrible might be brewing- either with them or perhaps others around them.

We see too much of nothing every day. I have often found the most visible and unusual things in the crowd are generally attempts to draw attention- a sidewalk salesman, a street performer, a human billboard. These are not dangerous; just annoying. The most dangerous among us are not the most visible. Perhaps we should revive common courtesy and kindness and say something when we see nothing. In so doing, we might alleviate hurt and possible devastation.