Francis Asbury
(Photo courtesy of Marston Memorial Historical Center)

BY MARK ALAN LESLIE

Other than American Indians, most residents of the American colonies were immigrants in 1771.

With no Ellis Island, Castle Garden or Citizen and Immigration Services, immigrants sailed here and went their way.

Into this America seething with talk of revolution sailed the British Francis Asbury. His call from John Wesley and God: Spread the gospel.

Asbury, 26, immediately encountered what he termed “cityitis.” Preachers were ensconced in the cities where most of the colonists lived.

Having cut his teeth walking a circuit in England, he took to the countryside on horseback — first stop: Westchester, N.Y. He never stopped riding.

When the American Revolution broke out, Wesley called all preachers home. Only Asbury refused, asking: Who will care for the spiritual needs of God’s people? At the end of the war, George Washington personally thanked Asbury for his steadfast support of the colonists.

When elected the American co-bishop with Thomas Coke in 1784, Asbury established circuits across the colonies. He spoke to every state legislature and was close friends with several governors, but he refused an easy life.

He rode on despite sometimes being stalked by hungry wolves and chased by highwaymen and American Indians. He fought pleurisy and arthritis so severe that he could not always stand to preach or kneel to pray.

Whether on “highways” or Indian trails, he traversed the Allegheny Mountains dozens of times. The Holy Spirit rode with Asbury, converting the lost wherever he went.

Under his leadership, the Methodist Church grew from 600 to more than 240,000. Because Asbury traveled 5,000 to 6,000 miles a year on horseback or carriage, he became better recognized than any of the founding fathers. Mail addressed only “Bishop Asbury, America” found him.

Imagine all this from one British immigrant.

Mark Alan Leslie (markalanleslie.com) is the author of “Midnight Rider for the Morning Star” about Francis Asbury.

Faith drives many immigrants. Even if faith does not imply religious belief, it becomes the source of hope to help immigrants persevere and face all kinds of difficulties in the desire to better their fate in any situation.

This faith builds in them a sense of understanding in life. When they have reached their destination and feel lost with no one to help them, faith brings the most in them and the understanding on what the new culture and its policies demand of them. At the same time, faith provides the necessary hope to assimilate their new reality, behavior and perception.

Immigrants may face the possibility of being discriminated against, living in inhumane conditions, losing their dignity and becoming slaves of a job from a consumerist culture.

However, by faith, immigrants come in the name of opportunity and to give their families hope to exist with dignity. The decision to migrate is a very difficult one. In the midst of despair and after exhausting alternatives, faith becomes the driving force that helps them withstand situations during and after arrival at their destination. This faith guides them through their search for a better future.

Immigrants’ faith enables them to achieve the seemingly unattainable and to realize their hope of reaching their goal and destination. Imagine what the redemptive work of Christ in their lives can do. They must know that sin is a powerful force in people, but do they know that God’s grace is most abundant? The faith of immigrants may not be of religious origin, but it is our duty to discern and recognize God’s purpose in them.

As a Wesleyan denomination, Free Methodists need to focus on John Wesley’s interest in needy people. In his sermon, “A Farther Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion,” Wesley said, “Only leave us alone with the poor, the vulgar, the pariahs of men,” according to “The Impact of John Wesley in the Latino Free Methodist Church” by Guillermo Flores.

Let’s not forget that Wesley’s ministry not only was focused on helping those whose needs were food and clothes, but he also helped with a very essential factor: preparing people to find the economic means that would help them perform as individuals with dignity who are worthy of opportunity.

Fredy Caballero is the associate pastor of Light and Life Christian Fellowship in Sylmar, Calif., and a student at Fuller Theological Seminary.

GROUP DISCUSSION:

[1] As a church, what’s needed to understand the suffering, discrimination, endurance and sacrifice of immigrants leaving everything behind?

[2] Following John Wesley’s example, what would be the best way to communicate the message of faith and hope?

I am a Free Methodist. But I only realized that recently.

When I was young, my mother told me stories of her Free Methodist upbringing – her father’s commanding presence as First Free Methodist’s enduring song leader before instruments and choirs were used; the annual summer camp meeting, where congregants gathered for spirited singing and messages by visiting evangelists; and the way she painted a black line up the back of her bare suntanned legs to simulate nylon stockings in daring rebellion against the strict rules of her day.

I knew that her family was steeped in FM tradition and history and that three of my faraway uncles were pastors in the church. I attended an FM university where one of my uncles was chaplain. But my own upbringing was nondenominational, and over the course of my nomadic life, each move meant a new church. I attended Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Congregationalist, Vineyard, Foursquare, Anglican, Assemblies of God and Quaker churches. My spiritual director is Catholic. I really took that nondenominational thing to heart.

When a pastoral change in the church I was attending brought an unwavering view against women in leadership, I sadly began my most recent search for a new church home. I landed at Foothill Community Church, a local Free Methodist congregation.

The church was unlike anything I had experienced, which is saying a lot, and I soon felt at home. Their beliefs and practices resonated with my own: God’s love is central and all-inclusive, yet we can choose to reject him; spiritual maturity is taken seriously; the life of the mind is valued; compassion for the poor and efforts to abolish oppression are part of the DNA; connectedness to the wider church is celebrated by following the liturgical year and lectionary; Jesus’ sacrifice for us is remembered each week through Communion; and women are encouraged, recognized and ordained in leadership. I was a Free Methodist after all!

As this new community became my church home, I began wondering about my own Free Methodist heritage. Thanks to research done by Uncle Don, I began reading about my ancestry.

Not only was my mother’s immediate family Free Methodist, but so were her grandparents, her great-grandparents and her great-great-grandparents. According to family tradition, my ancestors may have been present at the 1860 signing of the charter that formed the Free Methodist denomination. One relative missed the signing because she was in the kitchen preparing food for the founders, the story goes.

My ancestors were among those expelled from the Methodist Episcopal Church and served as lay leaders in the newly formed denomination. My great-great-great-grandfather and grandmother Goodenough were “read out” of the mother church in 1859. A great-great-great-aunt, Mary Abigail “Granny” Bacon, is said to have joined the original Pekin Church in 1860, and was a deaconess. And, according to Benson H. Roberts’ book, “Benjamin Titus Roberts: A Biography by His Son,” my great-great-grandfather, John E. Randall, a local lay preacher and elder, opened his home to the visiting evangelist and Free Methodist Church founder: “At Collins he [B.T. Roberts] held a four days’ meeting [February, 1861] in Brother John Randall’s house, who, by throwing the upper story into one room, had a church in his own house capable of holding 200.”

I had no idea!

Now my mother’s stories are not just hers, they are mine as well. No wonder I feel at home. Free Methodism is in my blood.

Moses’ Blessings, © Light and Life Press

BY CLIFF RAPP

Some of God’s best friends were immigrants. Abraham, named the “friend of God” three times in the Bible, relocated to Haran and then to Canaan. Moses, who spoke with God “face to face,” fled to Midian for 40 years and finished his life wandering in the wilderness.

God took on the role of protector of foreigners in Israel (Psalm 146:9). Some foreigners were “God fearers” who did not go through full conversion. Others converted and were circumcised.

Some converts assimilated into Israeli culture, like Ruth the Moabite and Uriah the Hittite. Others, like the Gibeonites and the Kenites, remained distinct subcultures. God seems to have approved of either decision. He worked through Gibeonites, Kenites, Ruth and Uriah.

The covenant of Moses insisted there was one law for both Israelites and foreigners (Numbers 15:15–16). A key command was: “The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 19:34).

Similar to the Golden Rule, God’s charge for Israel was to treat immigrants as they would have liked to have been treated in Egypt. Oppressing a foreigner was strictly forbidden in the Law (Leviticus 19:33), but Jesus takes us further and warns us against the failure to act compassionately (Matthew 25:43). Our faith must show itself in active, generous love for those in need.

What needs do immigrants have? Assistance with English, registering children for school and filling out forms are among ways to help others connect to a new culture. Friendship is essential for everybody. All need to know Jesus and be enfolded into a church where they experience God’s love and protection.

Cliff Rapp has served as a pastor in the Pacific Coast Japanese Conference for 36 years. He has overseen the Asian-American Christian Fellowship on two university campuses.

SCRIPTURE:

Psalm 146:9
Leviticus 19:33–34
Numbers 15:15–16
Matthew 7:12
Matthew 25:43

Culture implies a group of people existing in a given geographic space. Each culture is identified by ideas, values and perceptions.

In recent decades due to socioeconomic, social-diversity and physical crises, entire cultures have migrated to the United States as a mass exodus, bringing cultural diversity to our communities. Members of some groups may lose their identities and become the target of dangers, extreme poverty, corruption and violence.

To build a more peaceful, just and Christian society with more solidarity, we have to go to the only place that presents the solution — holy Scripture.

The Jewish people throughout history had little difficulty understanding this truth. For example, Jonah is commissioned to announce God’s judgment on Nineveh, but he refused and tried to escape from God’s presence. Prejudice caused him not to want to have any contact because Nineveh was considered pagan and contaminated, deserving to be punished by God.

In the New Testament, the church was mainly composed of Jewish Christians in its early days. Because of misunderstanding of the gospel, they thought that the Gentiles needed to be Jews before becoming Christian.

The divine intervention of God is revealed when Peter is asking to lift up, kill and eat animals that were considered unclean by Jews. Purified by God, the animals become fit to eat, showing Peter not to discriminate against any people calling them “impure or unclean” and that the message of the gospel is for all nations and cultures (Acts 10:28, 34–36).

Billy Graham made a very personal reflection in 1974. He declared that one of the constant temptations of his career as an evangelist had been the thinking that Christianity was synonymous to the “American way” or that it belonged to some program or political party.

Sadly, this message continues to be communicated by imposing our culture over other cultures, denominations or political platforms. The application of the gospel should be to protect those who seek to be redeemed, presenting the message of God’s kingdom without imposing over cultures by falsifying the message of the gospel.

In Matthew 5:48, the word “perfect” has been seen as the key to the Sermon on the Mount in how to live a perfect life without failures. However, this expression has been poorly used. Both Matthew 5:48 and Luke 6:32–36 imply that God does not discriminate, and His followers are called not to discriminate.

In our present time, we cannot allow for this temptation to monopolize other cultures with our cultural concepts and preconceived ideologies. It is our duty to always be prepared not to bring confusion with the gospel by imposing our traditions, lifestyles and socio-culture as if they were the only ways of expressing and spreading the gospel.

Therefore, we are called to receive immigrant cultures coming to our communities without discriminating against them. We must not forget that the gospel is the message focused and incarnate in Christ, where the fulfillment of the promise of salvation is to free mankind from the oppression of sin and power. Do not confuse the gospel message through false presentation imposing our own culture over other cultures and diluting the true purpose of the message of Christ.

Fredy Caballero is the associate pastor of Light and Life Christian Fellowship in Sylmar, Calif., and a student at Fuller Theological Seminary.

GROUP DISCUSSION:

[1] What are unnecessary or counterproductive ways in which some U.S. Christians try to impose their cultural values on immigrant believers?

[2] How can we celebrate different cultures while sharing a common faith in Christ?

In the arguments surrounding immigration matters, a fundamental tension exists between our desire to care for all people and our respect for the state’s rights to establish laws and economic policy. This tension is augmented by the Judeo-Christian belief that all people are created in God’s image. While the state tends to protect its citizens’ economic interest, the church tends to side with protecting all people’s economic
interests.

The gospel reveals important principles that relate to this tension. Scriptural principles include how we treat foreigners, the gospel’s leveling aspect, the instructions to be hospitable, the admonition to work and the admonition to submit to the state.

Treatment
God has consistently and persistently commanded His people to treat sojourners and foreigners with justice and compassion. From the Mosaic commandments through the New Testament, God pushes His people toward care for those who do not “belong.”

He reminds Hebrews they had once been homeless immigrants and, therefore, should empathize with others. Hebraic history includes extended periods as immigrants: 430 years in Egypt and years of exile in Babylon and Assyria.

Out of that collective memory, God gives instructions to treat foreigners with justice:

“Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt” (Exodus 22:21).

“The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 19:34).

“The community is to have the same rules for you and for the foreigner residing among you; this is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. You and the foreigner shall be the same before the Lord: The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the foreigner residing among you” (Numbers 15:15–16).

The gospel takes us beyond contemporary migration movements’ economic and political causes to see God’s plan for all peoples and how God’s people should respond in compassionate service. In the suffering and hopes of immigrants and refugees, we discover the unity of the human family, the dignity of every person and the presence of the Lord who made Himself one with the immigrants when He said, “I was a stranger and you invited me in” (Matthew 25:35).

David Roller is a Free Methodist Church – USA bishop.

The followers of this stranger, Jesus, distinguish themselves by disproportionately caring for other strangers and the vulnerable classes (widows and fatherless). When no one else defends them, the church stands in their defense.

Leveling Aspect
In the Great Commission, Jesus sent His followers to make disciples of all ethnicities. Although routinely misunderstood as only for missionaries, these instructions apply to the church, which is sent to all people groups.

Jesus mandates the church to make disciples across the boundaries of us/them. This is a core identity issue. No legitimate church avoids breaking the boundaries of ethnicity, because that is how our Lord defined us and where our Lord sent us.

Citizenship concerns are of secondary importance because Christians are on a mission that functions above the temporal boundaries of state and economies. The mission overrides smaller concerns, like migratory status, and elevates caring for people (making disciples).

Bruce Cromwell is the lead pastor of Lansing (Mich.) Central FMC.

Hospitality
Peter, Paul and John urge us to be hospitable (Romans 12:13; 1 Timothy 5:10; Hebrews 13:2; 1 Peter 4:9; 3 John 1:8) both to strangers and the household of faith.

The church has historically emphasized hospitality’s role with the saying, “When a guest comes, Christ comes.” We welcome every guest to our door, church and country with the same hospitality with which we would welcome Christ.

Hospitality goes beyond entertaining acquaintances. It is an offering to those unable to reciprocate. As Jesus said, “And you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous” (Luke 14:14).

Hospitality has overtones of the hospital — of care for the weak, broken and diseased. As Jesus said, “I was sick and you looked after me” (Matthew 25:36).

Hospitality is other-serving, not self-serving. It involves sacrifice, risk and identification with strangers. We translate “hospitality” from the Greek word philoxenia, which literally means “love of strangers.” Biblical hospitality involves how we treat needy strangers.

Work
From Adam and Eve’s original duties of working and caring for the garden, we have been charged with having productive lives. Government should allow and encourage work in keeping with God’s purposes for humankind.

Impediments to work contradict God’s desire that we work. If jobs are available in one country and not another, we desire immigration policy that allows access to jobs.

Inviting foreigners to work is part of the American experience. The United States welcomed those yearning to breathe free, work and provide for their families. U.S. history is also filled with reactions against immigrants upon whose backs the country was built. From the “exclusionary” immigration laws in 1875 to the Secure Fence Act of 2006, the nation has often restricted the immigration of particular sets of foreigners.

The United States includes a large class (probably 11 million) of undocumented immigrants, primarily because of the quota system that limits menial-worker visas by country of origin. Despite some criminals and scoundrels, the vast majority of undocumented workers have braved untold dangers and risked meager savings to come to the United States to work for us. They are caught in inconsistencies between U.S. law, which criminalizes them, and the U.S. economy, which depends on them as a labor source. They are largely forced into an invisible world in which people are afraid to access health care, police protection, schools, retirement programs, the welfare system and churches. In this world, human trafficking thrives.

Legislation has been proposed several times during the past decade to provide a guest-worker program with a legal pathway for temporary workers (like the Bracero Program from 1942 to 1964), but the proposals have not succeeded. Undocumented workers fill many of our least-desirable jobs, which birthright Americans often will not take at any wage.

Submission
Law-abiding citizens often feel uneasy when confronted with undocumented workers or encouraged to challenge immigration policy. Some are unsure how to apply scriptural admonitions about care for foreigners if such care conflicts with public policy.

Peter and Paul call for submission to the state (1 Peter 2:13–14; Romans 13:1–2), but both apostles disobeyed the state when it conflicted with God’s higher principles. They understood that we always submit to the state, but we obey the state only when policies do not conflict with higher principles.

For Christians, all laws are subject to a higher law understood through Scripture. World history contains examples of unjust laws designed for economic exploitation. The Christian does not accept law uncritically. Our view of right and wrong corresponds to a higher set of values that may set us in opposition to state laws.

The Christian is in the Hebraic tradition, which welcomes and cares for immigrants. Free Methodists recognize the tensions between immigration policy and the church’s theology and historic practice. Christian citizens will often feel the friction and will call governments to God’s principles. Meanwhile, we minister to all people, especially the foreigners among us.

Action Steps
With regard to serving immigrants, we:

• assist with language acquisition.
• provide food in cases of hunger.
• help with basic needs, such as furniture, appliances, toilet paper, toothpaste and soap.
• give guidance in navigating governmental realities, such as obtaining drivers licenses and health care, translating documents, and completing residency and citizenship classes.
• promote cultural awareness by teaching and learning about cultural differences.
• focus on soul care, ensuring immigrants can worship and hear Jesus’ story.
• willingly serve all people we encounter, regardless of migratory status, because of spiritual equality.
• provide venues to interact with immigrants to understand their stories, needs, hopes and dreams.
• celebrate when church members reach people “not like themselves” with the good news of Jesus.
• invite immigrants into our homes and spend time in their homes.
• care for children who have been distanced from family by the deportation of undocumented parents.

With regard to work, we:

• establish two-way communication between people engaged in multiethnic ministries.
• supply one another with contact information for immigration lawyers, social workers and supportive agencies already in use across the denomination.
• inform ourselves about economic systems that use migrant workers as an unregulated labor source.

With regard to the state, we:

• respect governments’ rights to restrict immigration, but we also are eager to extend opportunities to people whose countries have had poor governance.
• advocate for creating conditions in native lands that would make immigration unnecessary.
• understand that God, not the state, grants ecclesial functions. We offer the sacraments, conduct marriages, perform funerals and ordain ministers without consideration of immigration status.
• submit to the state, including its right to punish us when we believe and act on principles of a higher order that bring us into nonviolent conflict with state policy.
• advocate for public policy that increases the embracing mechanisms of immigration law without draining other countries of highly skilled people needed to lift those countries to a higher state of well-being.
• oppose public policy that unintentionally creates a class of undocumented workers by restricting immigration of workers on whom sections of our economy rely.
• communicate with our legislators and in the public forum to advocate for immigration reform.

Greenville President-Elect Ivan Filby

Affirming the recommendation of the presidential search committee, the Greenville College board of trustees unanimously elected Ivan Filby as the college’s 12th president. Filby, who currently serves as dean of the Fermanian School of Business at Point Loma Nazarene University in San Diego, officially begins his presidency on July 1. Filby previously served from 2005-12 as professor and chairman of the management department at Greenville College, a member of the Association of Free Methodist Educational Institutions.

“On behalf of the the FMCUSA, we offer our congratulations to Dr. Filby and assurance of our prayers for him and Greenville College during this time of transition,” Free Methodist Church – USA Bishop David Kendall said.

Filby succeeds Larry Linamen, who resigned after a three-year tenure at the end of the 2011-12 academic year, and former Greenville College Provost Randall Bergen, who has served as acting president during the 2012-13 academic year.

“Filby’s signature style of innovation and excellence will engage the educational community of Greenville College,”  Presidential Search Committee Chairman Craig Tidball said. “His international experience, passion for people, and expectant hopes for Christian higher education make him our choice to lead this institution.”

Filby admitted that he was humbled by the search committee’s decision to recommend him as the next president of Greenville College. “It is an amazing place,” he said, “and I believe we have a very exciting future indeed. We have outstanding faculty, very bright students, skilled staff and administrators and extremely loyal alumni.

“While other colleges make similar boasts, Greenville College is unique in its ability to develop critical thinkers, clear communicators and creative problem solvers in a Christ-centered educational environment. We help students understand not only the ‘how-to’s’ that advance their careers, but also the ‘whys’ that give their lives meaning and direction.”

Visit Greenville College’s website for the college’s full announcement.

When people are divided into “immigrants” and “citizens,” we may assume natural or good reasons explain the difference between those labels. But the difference and the divide are neither natural nor good.

Immigrants are more likely to be exposed to a host of negative living conditions that include danger, suspicion and violence. Crimes committed against immigrants are less likely to be prosecuted.

According to Fuller Theological Seminary assistant professor Tommy Givens, two principal factors falsely naturalize and mythologize the border between citizens and immigrants. One is the way we remember history without repentance or detail.

“The U.S.-Mexican border, for example, is legitimized by the collective refusal to remember and act redemptively upon the violent U.S. aggression and exploitation by which it came to be. And so we assume that it just has to be there rather than resisting its presence in the service of Christ,” Givens states in “Christians Without Borders: A Christian Call to Denaturalize,” which can be read online at fmchr.ch/tgivens.

A second factor is how we view the difference between citizens and immigrants. We incorrectly assume that “foreigners” in the Bible are neatly equivalent to foreigners in our communities and in every other time and place. In the Bible, people were never only foreigners or only the home population.

In biblical times, the home populations of God’s people were once foreigners and, therefore, were connected and beholden to foreigners (Deuteronomy 10:19; Ephesians 2:11–13). Givens states that foreigners had “the same beginning as the home population and a destiny at the table of Abraham’s blessing by the worldwide power of Christ” (Genesis 12:3; Matthew 28:18–20).

Fredy Caballero is the associate pastor of Light and Life Christian Fellowship in Sylmar, Calif., and a student at Fuller Theological Seminary.

GROUP DISCUSSION:

[1] What does the Bible teach about creating equality for all humanity?
[2] How can we remove borders that divide communities to teach and enact God’s Word?