Lay Servant/Speaker/Leader

[beforHim]

OK, so I wanna do the whole "Lay Leadership" thing but upon reading up on it (preceeded by some serious thinking via trying to become a LLP last year) I'm unsure about some things.



I don't really like, but can see the rational and justification behind: infant baptism, communion and baptism being "means of grace", and "Christian Perfectionsim/Entire Sanctification". OK, that being said, how far must my confirmation of these things go in order for me to be in actual lay leadership?

 

[beforHim]

Man, I can see how BROAD my question is, so I totally welcome your questions.

FYI- Also, I have tried to speak with my pastors about this, but man they must have the most packed minute-by-minute schedules ever! I never get anything longer than a few sentences and then they tel me to go to some website. Which I've done.

 

[circuitrider]

OK, so I wanna do the whole "Lay Leadership" thing but upon reading up on it (preceeded by some serious thinking via trying to become a LLP last year) I'm unsure about some things.



I don't really like, but can see the rational and justification behind: infant baptism, communion and baptism being "means of grace", and "Christian Perfectionsim/Entire Sanctification". OK, that being said, how far must my confirmation of these things go in order for me to be in actual lay leadership?

Depending on how far you mean by the above. If you don't support the basic doctrines of the UMC you shouldn't proceed into leadership in the UMC. I know that sounds blunt. But Baptism and communion as means of grace, for example, are at the heart of Wesleyan theology. If you read John Wesley's sermon on "Means of Grace" you can see how important it is to Methodist faith.

Infant baptism is also connected to Wesleyan understanding of Grace (prevenient, justifying, and sanctifying) and is supported in our doctrinal statement "By Water and the Spirit," by our Discipline, the Articles of Religion, etc.

Now if what you mean above is that you have questions about Methodist/Wesleyan doctrine that may be a whole different conversation. But I'd not encourage you to actually go so far as to pursue being a Licensed Local Pastor without getting these questions answered because you will be expect to affirm United Methodist doctrine to be certified by your District Committee on Ministry.

Please feel free to ask questions. There are several UMC Clergy on this forum including some Elders and LLPs.

 

[BryanW92]

OK, so I wanna do the whole "Lay Leadership" thing but upon reading up on it (preceeded by some serious thinking via trying to become a LLP last year) I'm unsure about some things.



I don't really like, but can see the rational and justification behind: infant baptism, communion and baptism being "means of grace", and "Christian Perfectionsim/Entire Sanctification". OK, that being said, how far must my confirmation of these things go in order for me to be in actual lay leadership?

I used to be a Certified Lay Servant/Speaker and was considering becoming an LLP. It takes a higher level of committment to the doctrines of the church to take on those kinds of roles. The fact that you "really don't like" some core doctrines is a warning that you aren't ready for any role that could place you in a pulpit.

However, there are plenty of roles that a Lay Servant can take. I would encourage you to pursue that, up to and including CLS, because the training and experience will possibly help to better understand and accept the beliefs of the church. The lifelong pursuit of Christian Perfection/Entire Sanctification is the greatest thing about Wesleyan beliefs. Talk to God and people about that until it makes sense for you.

 

[GraceSeeker]

If you are talking about leadership in the since of service in the local community (i.e. helping with Vacation Bible School, maintaining the building, serving on a committee or ministry team) then it is more about your relationships with others in that community than about being a sold-out Wesleyan. But, as others have said, if you aspire to an office, even one that is not ordained, such as Lay Speaker, then when you speak you are going to be expected by those who have invited you to speak to speak from a Wesleyan perspective. If you can't do that, then you really shouldn't do it.

Now, two caveats:
1) I served in the Lutheran Church (ELCA) as a United Methodist pastor when they and I both knew that there were some things in Lutheran theology that I could not quite affirm. And given that I was going to be teaching Lutheran youth in confirmation it was rather important that I teach Lutheran not Methodist theology. Even though I couldn't myself affirm them 100%, I still considered it Christian theology and I did recognize that it was Lutheran theology and understood how they arrived at those views. So, what I said that I could do if asked a question in that area was answer it by saying, "According to our best understanding in the Lutheran Church we believe _______________." That was sufficient for them. We each knew where the other stood, recognized the validity of having differing opinions, and were willing to accept each other as is. But I agreed that in a Lutheran setting I would teach Lutheran theology as the theology of the Lutheran Church to Lutheran youth. I was free to think differently on my own, and would sometimes have conversations with other pastors on those topics, but I played by the rules of the ballpark I was playing in.

2) If you can be willing to do the above, then you might want to go through the classes necessary for becoming a Lay Servant or a Lay Speaker where you will have more of a chance to explore the issues you are asking questions about with someone who might be able to guide you to a better understanding of why and where we are coming from. And who knows, perhaps even into more agreement than you currently feel on the subject.

 

[circuitrider]

GraceSeekers advice is good.

Part of the question you have to answer for yourself is what level of lay leadership are you aspiring to? If it is to be a Lay Servant/Speaker the responsibility to uphold UMC doctrine is still there but the expectation of you being asked to agree with our doctrine yourself isn't what it would be if you were to pursue being a LLP.

There is also a difference between doctrinal expectations and agreeing with them versus agreeing with Church law or rules.

There is no where in the Discipline which says even a UMC Elder has to agree with every Church law in the Discipline but that we are expected to follow the rules until such time as they are changed. The fact that The Discipline is changed every four years implies that people wanted different rules and voted to change them.

 

[beforHim]

I'm not going the LLP route anymore. I do Children's SS, VBS, and other Children's stuff. But why should all Children's volunteers just be random lay people? I mean, isn't it more important than that?

Anyway:

I can see anything as a means of grace, and it always play itself out in faith. We all have prevenient grace, that's probably the most obvious thing in reality. But after this ("after" in more of a logical than chronological sense), we either
1) impart faith, ie God acts indirectly and we then "do" faith via act or thought or whatever.
2) get imputed with faith. God can act on us very directly, giving us faith, and then again we "do" faith.

In both Case God is acting, but experientally in 1) we impart faith, and 2) we are given faith. And faith can be given/gotten in an infinite amount of ways. I see a word scratched on the wall in the restroom at a grocery store and it makes me think of God, or I see pictures of extravagance on TV and it makes me go out and feed the hungry, or I take communion and remember His death and resurrection. The thing giving me the faith is in itself the means. I guess communion and baptism get the "higher status" as "ordinance" because those are symbols/acts chosen by Jesus. So I can see how those would get "ordinance" status, but have a hard time as seeing them as the only means of grace. I definitely don't see them as Catholics seem to- do the sacrament and grace is given necessarily.


Maybe some clarification with this could help me out, thx for you guy's time

 

[circuitrider]

"Ordinance" actually isn't a term used in Methodist theology.

You actually are experiencing the Wesleyan idea that all of life is sacramental. I am a member of the UMC related Order of Saint Luke. We talk about the sacramentality of the Christian life often.

It isn't that Communion and Baptism are the only means of grace of the "highest" per se. But that Wesley call Holy Communion in particular the Grand Channel of grace. or the Ordinary means of Grace.

By ordinary Wesley means that it one of the surest and most available means of grace that God has provided us. Jesus has indead instituted the sacrament as a gift to us to offer us in a most regular and meanful way God's grace.

It does not mean there aren't other means. But honestly many Methodists have seriously neglected the means that God gives either through downplaying the value of communion, making it extremely infrequent so that it is hard to get on a regular basis, or down grading it to a memorial service when it isn't just a memorial but indeed celebration of the grace of God and the victory of the lamb!

That is why Wesley argued for not "frequent communion" but instead for the Duty of Constant Communion.

So just because you can receive grace in a sunset, or in nature, or from something you read doesn't mean you should ignore or downplay the clearest means of grace that God gives us to be one with Christ.

 

[GraceSeeker]

As circuitrider has said, communion and baptism are NOT our only means of grace. They are our only sacraments. But the means of grace are almost infinite in number.

 

[BryanW92]

I'm not going the LLP route anymore.

You really should pursue the Certified Lay Servant/Speaker route. It is a very rewarding thing to do for you and your church. I really enjoyed my time as a CLS and wish I could still be doing it.

 

[beforHim]

My bad, I meant "sacrament". I have no idea why i used ordinance, I meant to use sacrament. D'oh!


And glad top hear my thinking's lining up BUT- in some other threads I read on here, I saw you guys specifically refer to communion as a "means of grace".

I can agree that Communion is "The Grand" or the highest or clearest or whatever, because a)Christ gave it and b)I listen to Christ. It's a matter of authority.

OK, my wife's here and we need to leave, but next time I'll post about infant baptism.

EDIT: I'll actually ask about infant baptism later, this whole "means of grace" thing needs to be fleshed out a bit more for me.

 

[circuitrider]

My bad, I meant "sacrament". I have no idea why i used ordinance, I meant to use sacrament. D'oh!


And glad top hear my thinking's lining up BUT- in some other threads I read on here, I saw you guys specifically refer to communion as a "means of grace".

I can agree that Communion is "The Grand" or the highest or clearest or whatever, because a)Christ gave it and b)I listen to Christ. It's a matter of authority.

OK, my wife's here and we need to leave, but next time I'll post about infant baptism.

Yes, communion is most certainly a means of grace, just not the only means of grace.

 

[beforHim]

If God can can use any and everything as a means of grace, the difference between Communion&Baptism on the one hand, and everything else on the other, would be...?

Besides Jesus and the scriptures tell us to do these things and attribute to them special significance, is there anything else? I'm fine with "Jesus and the scriptures...special significance", but maybe Wesley and/or other Methodist theologians have given some other reasons. I mean, what can and does Communion and Baptism accomplish in the way of "means of grace" that other things don't? That is, they have special symbolic significance, but when we're speaking specifically of the "power" or of the "miraculous" stuff they do to/for us, what do they do that all these other things can't? Like I said, I'm fine with my answer above, but if there's more to it than that, it'd be good for me to know, right?


BTW, I am trying to get some good books on the subject, just fyi

 

[GraceSeeker]

If God can can use any and everything as a means of grace, the difference between Communion&Baptism on the one hand, and everything else on the other, would be...?

That they are sacraments, set apart as acts specifically commanded by Christ for us to do.

 

[GraceSeeker]

This is the image that I used to explain "the means of grace" to my congregation just 2 weeks ago...

I find it helpful to think of what we are saying when we speak of a "means of Grace." When one thing is the means of another, we are saying that it is a method or way by which we might experience another result. Trains, planes, and automobiles are various means of transportation because by utilizing them we can be transported from one place to another. An experience of God, his presence, his guidance, his mercy in our lives is a grace-filled moment. So, anything that allows for us to experience God, that convey's his presence, guidance or mercy to us is a means of grace. There are many of them, the above image names only a few. Sometimes they are experienced as individual believers, sometimes they are a part of our corporate experience as the body of Christ, but each one allows us to experience participating in the keeping of Jesus' answer to the greatest commandment to (1) love God and (2) love others:

Works of Piety

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Individual Practices – reading, meditating and studying the scriptures, prayer, fasting, regularly attending worship, healthy living, and sharing our faith with others [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Communal Practices – regularly share in the sacraments, Christian conferencing (accountability to one another), and Bible study [/FONT]
Works of Mercy

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Individual Practices - doing good works, visiting the sick, visiting those in prison, feeding the hungry, and giving generously to the needs of others [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Communal Practices – seeking justice, ending oppression and discrimination (for instance Wesley challenged Methodists to end slavery), and addressing the needs of the poor [/FONT]

 

[circuitrider]

I like it Graceseeker!

 

[GraceSeeker]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]"The means of grace can be roughly divided into three categories: sacraments, works (or acts) of mercy, and works (or acts) of piety. The sacraments are important means of grace for the Wesleyan tradition. In keeping with the teachings of the Church of England and most Protestant churches, the Wesleys affirmed two sacraments—baptism and holy communion—as practices ordained (thus often called “ordinances&#8221 by Christ himself as “outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual grace.” In other words, they believed that by the Spirit we are the recipients of grace through our obedient participation in the sacraments.36 So important was the celebration of communion to the Wesleys that they advocated daily attendance at the Lord’s Table and, in 1745, they published a collection titled Hymns on the Lord’s Supper that includes 166 hymns!37[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]"Works of Mercy are means of grace through which we extend God’s love to those in spiritual, physical, and material need. Both in Scripture and the Wesleyan tradition this includes caring for widows, orphans, strangers, and those who are naked, hungry, and imprisoned (Zech 7:10, Matt. 25:31-46).38 There are numerous ways in which the Wesleys and their followers participated in works of mercy. For example, it was the practice of the early Methodists to visit the sick weekly. They also regularly gathered alms (the money often saved by fasting or skipping meals or giving up tea for water) which they then distributed among the poor. Wesley himself would on occasion take to the streets and go door to door begging for money to provide food and clothing for the poor, one time doing so for an entire week through the snow filled streets of London. He was in his 80s! Early Methodists also regularly visited prisons to talk and pray with prisoners and to bring them food and clothing. Wesleyans engaged in acts of mercy as a means of participating in God’s love for those in need and in obedience to clear scriptural mandates. But they also understood acts of mercy as means of grace—means that God has established for our own growth in holiness. In other words, for us to grow in Christlikeness, as God has intended, we must engage in activities through which God’s mercy is conveyed to others.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]"Works of Piety are additional communal and individual practices that lead to growth in Christlikeness. Individual acts of piety are means of grace practiced by believers, such as prayer, Bible reading, devotional reading, and fasting, just to name a few. The Christian spiritual formation movement has been influenced by the theology and practices of the Wesleyan tradition and may be looked at as a rediscovery of the importance of disciplines for growth in holiness.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Communal works of piety are any means of grace that believers do together that inspires and empowers growth in holiness. We believe that the Holy Spirit is present and at work in us whenever we gather together in the name of Christ for worship, accountability, prayer, and Bible study. The Wesleyan tradition has been very creative in developing communal acts of piety, such as covenant renewals, love feasts, and watch night services.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]"Small Groups: Likely the most significant of the communal means of grace, especially in early Methodism, was participation in class meetings and bands. These were small groups into which believers were organized for growth in holiness. In these meetings, believers found weekly support, encouragement, and spiritual direction. These groups especially provided accountability for believers’ in their participation in all the means of grace. They formed the backbone of the early Methodist movement, and many scholars consider the formation of the network of such groups to be the chief reason for the success of early Methodism.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]"In this respect, the Wesleys held to an understanding of the sacraments quite different from the memorialist view of many contemporary evangelical Christians for which baptism and communion are events through which we remember and/or make testimony to what God in Christ has [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]already[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] done for us. So, for instance, they affirmed the practice of infant baptism as a legitimate means of salvific grace for children, with the proviso that they be raised to grow fully [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]into[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] their baptism through proper training, encouragement, and participation in the fellowship of Christ—the Church! They also advocated frequent attendance at communion for those believers earnestly seeking growth in holy love. The first Methodist group in Oxford, of which the Wesleys were a part, by rule sought communion a minimum of once daily. Later, in recognition that this was not possible for most believers, much less itinerant preachers such as themselves, the Wesleys adjusted the expectation for all Methodists to participation only once per week. Nevertheless, the Wesleys never ceased advocating both the duty and practical benefit of “constant communion.” Third, the Wesleys assumed that the Lord’s Supper would involve not merely words of institution, but also confession of sin, words of absolution, passing of the peace as signs of reconciliation with God and others, consecration of the bread and wine, and symbolic re-enactment of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Finally, in this instance out of step with Anglican teachings and practice, John Wesley advocated what today we call an open table—the belief that communion should be made available to both believers and nonbelievers alike. Because Christ is truly present at the table in the Lord’s Supper, he believed, even nonbelievers might come to the table and encounter the living God."[/FONT]

(source: Loma Point Nazarene University )

 

[beforHim]

I can agree that Communion is "The Grand" or the highest or clearest or whatever, because a)Christ gave it and b)I listen to Christ. It's a matter of authority.

That they are sacraments, set apart as acts specifically commanded by Christ for us to do.

So we're on the same page here. So this is the actual position of the Methodist church?

 

[beforHim]

Oh btw, thx for the big long explinations and chart above, I like it

 

[GraceSeeker]

So we're on the same page here. So this is the actual position of the Methodist church?

The *actual position* of the United Methodist Church can only be given by General Conference meeting in session. This only happens for 2 weeks once every 4 years. The results of that meeting are published in our Book of Discipline. Some things in the Discipline are the law of the United Methodist Church; some things are a record of our historical thinking or traditions from whence we came.

With regard to the sacraments, most of what is actually written in the Discipline falls into the latter category.

Article XVI [of the former Methodist Church] -- Of the Sacraments

Sacraments ordained of Christ are not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they are certain signs of grace, and God's good will toward us, by which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm, our faith in him.

There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel; that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord.

Those five commonly called sacraments, that is to say, confirmation, penance, orders, matrimony, and extreme unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel; being such as have partly states of life allowed in the Scriptures, but yet have not the like nature of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, because they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God.

The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon, or to be carried about; but that we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same, they have a wholesome effect or operation; but they that receive them unworthily, purchase themselves condemnation, as st. Paul saith.

Article VI [of the former Evangelical United Brethren Church] -- The Sacraments

We believe the Sacraments, ordained by Christ, are symbols and pledges of the Christian's profession and of God's love toward us. They are means of grace by which God works invisibly in us, quickening, strengthening and confirming our faith in him. Two Sacraments are ordained by Christ our Lord, namely Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

We believe Baptism signifies entrance into the household of faith, and is a symbol of repentance and inner cleansing from sin, a representation of the new birth in Christ Jesus and a mark of Christian discipleship.

We believe children are under the atonement of Christ and as heirs of the Kingdom of God are acceptable subjects for Christian Baptism. Children of believing parents through Baptism become the special responsibility of the Church. They should be nurtured and led to personal acceptance of Christ, and by profession of fiath confirm their Baptism.

We believe the Lord's Supper is a representation of our redemption, a memorial of the sufferings and death of Christ, and a token of love and union which Christians have with Christ and with one another. Those who rightly, worthily and in faith eat the broken bread and drink the blessed cup partake of the body and blood of Christ in a spiritual manner until he comes.

The above passages are from the Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church and the Confession of Faith of the Evangelical United Brethren Church which merged to form the United Methodist Church in 1968. They are both retained alongside each other in our present Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church and "deemed congruent if not identical in their doctrinal perspectives and not in conflict." Therefore, together they are part of our...

...doctrinal standards that shall not be revoked, altered, or changed. The process of creating new "standards or rules of doctrine" thus continues to be restricted, requiring either that they be declared "not contrary to" the present standards or that they go through the difficult process of constitutional amendment.

For further understanding of the "official" United Methodist way of thinking about these two sacraments, I refer you to the studies of them ordered and adopted by previous General Conferences:

This Holy Mystery: A United Methodist Understanding of Holy Communion

By Water and the Spirit: A United Methodist Understanding of Baptism

Since these were ordered and adopted by a General Conference, and have not been rescinded, they are effectly the "official" position of the United Methodist Church on these two issues.