by Martin Thorne.
“To the People called Methodists with much affection and warm gratitude but in deep concern.”[1]
In this book we hear from one of the great Methodist preachers of the last century, Rev. Dr. W. Sangster and look at his concerns for the Church then. Sangster would have seen the rise of Methodism to its zenith in the early 1920s and then a decline which now has the appearance of a terminal dive. In 1938, as the 200th anniversary of Wesley’s ‘heart-warming’ – Aldersgate Sunday we celebrate today – he looked with deep concern, at the declining attendance in the Church. I wonder how he would feel now? To us 1938 seems like a golden age, now almost beyond living memory.
“If the people called Methodists, ministerial and lay, would humble themselves before the Almighty, not imputing blame to others but confessing their sins … God would bend to such faithful expectancy and use us again.” His point about the ‘cumbrous machinery’ (detailed in his previous pages) is still sharper today with its ever greater obligations for oversight and responsibility; also his remark that man-made obstacles are nothing to God and need not be insuperable to us if we – first, understand the problem and then have the wit and will to overcome. Of great importance, his comment on the class-meeting; where is that today? Elsewhere he makes observations about Denial and Defeatism to which is added here Passivity (‘wait & see’). Always easier to hopefully do nothing.
Today there are three internal failings in the Methodist Church in Britain which can be discerned:
1. Bureaucratised – “The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy” (attributed to Oscar Wilde). Bureau → Office → Officialdom. The Church has volumes of rules, the Pharisees would be envious.
2. Institutionalised – Meaning “less able to think and act independently”, to which the synonyms entrenched, regulated, orthodox and traditional may be attached – not in a positive sense but as an indication of an inhibiting structure.
3. Paralysed – “Incapable of movement”, not steadfast but more like petrified or ossified, bound by ties of its own making: The efforts of the few hampered by the inertia of the many.
Well, this is easy to say but these rather sweeping generalisations are of little use unless accompanied by two things; actual examples and suggestions to overcome the problems.
This is not to be dismissive of the serious efforts of intelligent, committed and concerned members whose hard work has produced enjoyable, edifying and worthwhile projects; such as the Bible Month studies of recent years. There have been many valuable contributions like this and yet despite the helpful resources produced by dedicated Christians the Church continues to decline. Given the wealth of enthusiastic and often successful initiatives we must ask – how is the Church is in such a steep decline? (see membership figures on the Methodist website).
Sangster concludes here with what amounts to a personal remedy for us all:
“I Accept God’s full and free forgiveness and take the Lord Christ as my Saviour.
By God’s grace I Offer myself to do whatsoever my Lord the King shall command.
I Vow (and here may follow any vow the disciple is ready to make. Do not let us pose, even to ourselves. Let it be a pledge that Grace and Resolution can fulfil; and if it is made for one year or one month at a time it will not overwhelm us and can be renewed. The following are intended only as examples which the disciple can use or vary as God leads him)
I will spend fifteen minutes (or thirty or an hour) in quiet with God every day.
In my prayers I will listen more than I speak.
I will commend my Saviour in simple conversation to at least one other person every week.
I will read the Bible daily.
I will join in some form of Christian fellowship weekly.
I will attend regularly the service of the Holy Communion.
So help me God.”
While these are surely all important it is that last, Communion, we shall consider in a second article next week.
[1] W.E. Sangster Methodism Can Be Born Again (Hodder & Stoughton, 1938, Repr 1958).
Theology Everywhere 
Hi Ian,
Thanks. I have searched in all the obvious and not-so-obvious places and I am sure it hasn’t come as it is weeks since I received one.
Marty
LikeLike
I would to attend communion regularly, but as a local preacher, I am often planned away. You may say block the dates, but we have enough LAs without not offering even smaller numbers of dates.
LikeLike
I’m in just the same position. If more LPs were licensed to conduct Communion
that would help but just getting one authorised in a Circuit is a major effort.
LikeLike
While the Methodist Church as a denomination clings to theology that derives from centuries ago and is expressed in such terms I fear that we will not be ‘born again’ because what is being clung to is to a great degree irrelevant to Methodists now, let alone people outside the church. Again and again I find people who, like myself, are ‘heretics’ because we don’t understand our faith in such traditional terms, but are not allowed to preach ‘anything contrary to Methodist doctrine’ – however out of touch the expression of those doctrines are for our time. We desperately need an apologetic that reinterprets our faith to the current generation instead of coming from many generations back; we also need congregations who are familiar with the bible, have at least some idea of what they believe and why and are able to express it. We need to find God, as I express it, ‘up to his elbows in the mucky washing-up water of everyday life’ – our life. Bureaucratised, institutionalised, paralysed – absolutely. This is not to apportion blame but to recognise a reality within our churches.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is hope. The current opening page of the Methodist website has “God loves you unconditionally, no strings attached. That’s the good news.”
LikeLike
In just a few years the Methodist Church as we know it will cease to exist; I’ve even heard senior Ministers admit as much. It can’t continue as it is; what will emerge ‘reborn’ will be something I hope will be closer to both Wesley’s and Jesus vision for the Church. Thank you for your comment.
LikeLike
It is worrying that an article wanting to encourage a reinvigoration of the church should focus so heavily on what Sangster wrote almost 70 years ago (or nearly 3 generations ago). The world has changed markedly over the intervening decades and there have been great advances in knowledge and understanding, from our insights into life at the microscopic level to our increasing awareness of the vastness of universe with its billions of galaxies. Yes, human interactions, spiritual problems and the need for a right relationship with God remain much the same, but they have to be expressed and addressed within a language that makes sense in people’s lives today. We have to take account of the developments in gender roles, of a much more diverse society, and of our diminishing ability to rely on our audiences having a grounding in the Greco-Judaic-Christian tradition.
People talk about revival, as if going back to what we had 75 years ago would be the answer to the church’s problems – as if the Spirit were not moving forward and responding to the current situation. We have to respond to God’s call to us in the here and now, and not assume that our response ought to be the same as the response our great grandparents gave in their day. Scientists have made such remarkable progress in recent decades because, although they recognise that they stand on the shoulders of the giant figures they honour from the past, they have not been afraid to question, to challenge and to move beyond what was assumed before. Where is the equivalent in mainstream Christianity? Just how far has thinking developed over the last 1700 years, if we still recite the Nicene Creed as the immutable doctrine of faith?
LikeLike
It is worrying that an article wanting to encourage a reinvigoration of the church should focus so heavily on what Sangster wrote almost 70 years ago (or nearly 3 generations ago). The world has changed markedly over the intervening decades and there have been great advances in knowledge and understanding, from our insights into life at the microscopic level to our increasing awareness of the vastness of universe with its billions of galaxies. Yes, human interactions, spiritual problems and the need for a right relationship with God remain much the same, but they have to be expressed and addressed within a language that makes sense in people’s lives today. We have to take account of the developments in gender roles, of a much more diverse society, and of our diminishing ability to rely on our audiences having a grounding in the Greco-Judaic-Christian tradition.
People talk about revival, as if going back to what we had 75 years ago would be the answer to the church’s problems – as if the Spirit were not moving forward and responding to the current situation. We have to respond to God’s call to us in the here and now, and not assume that our response ought to be the same as the response our great grandparents gave in their day. Scientists have made such remarkable progress in recent decades because, although they recognise that they stand on the shoulders of the giant figures they honour from the past, they have not been afraid to question, to challenge and to move beyond what was assumed before. Where is the equivalent in mainstream Christianity? Just how far has thinking developed over the last 1700 years, if we still recite the Nicene Creed as the immutable doctrine of faith?
LikeLike
Within the confines of c.750 words Sangster seems a good starting point (the original articles was 11 pages).
I can’t speak for ‘people’ but I’m not advocating going back 88 years; rather 2000 to the simple commandment of Jesus and the centrality of Communion. The importance of change was recognised in the article; I’d hoped the language was straitforward enough to make that clear.
Check out the Philemon piece for challenging assumptions.
LikeLike