Season of Creation - Year B (2021, 2024, 2027, 2030 etc.)

This year at church we will be following the 'Season of Creation' lectionary in September.

 Year 2. Series B: The Word Series (year of Mark)

The second series focuses on those texts where the Word is the impulse that summons forth creation, evokes praise from creation and stirs life in creation.

Earth Sunday (5 Sept 2021)
Genesis 1:1-25
Psalm 33:1-9
Romans 1:18-23
John 1:1-14

Bible Readings

Humanity Sunday (12 Sept 2021)
Genesis 1:26-28
Psalm 8
Philippians 2:1-8
Mark 10:41-45

Bible Readings

Sky Sunday (19 Sept 2021)
Jeremiah 4:23-28
Psalm 19:1-6
Philippians 2:14-18
Mark 15:33-39

Bible Readings

Mountain Sunday (26 Sept 2021)
Isaiah 65:17-25
Psalm 48:1-11
Romans 8:28-39
Mark 16:14-18

Bible Readings

2 Minute Bible Studies - 1 Timothy 1

 People don't have time for long Bible Studies - so I'm trying this...

See how it goes:

1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the command of God our Savior and of Christ Jesus our hope, 

To Timothy, my loyal child in the faith: 

Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. 

I urge you, as I did when I was on my way to Macedonia, to remain in Ephesus so that you may instruct certain people not to teach any different doctrine, and not to occupy themselves with myths and endless genealogies that promote speculations rather than the divine training that is known by faith. But the aim of such instruction is love that comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, and sincere faith. Some people have deviated from these and turned to meaningless talk, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions. 

Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. This means understanding that the law is laid down not for the innocent but for the lawless and disobedient, for the godless and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their father or mother, for murderers, 10 fornicators, sodomites, slave traders, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to the sound teaching 11 that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me. 

12 I am grateful to Christ Jesus our Lord, who has strengthened me, because he judged me faithful and appointed me to his service, 13 even though I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and a man of violence. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief, 14 and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. 15 The saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the foremost. 16 But for that very reason I received mercy, so that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display the utmost patience, making me an example to those who would come to believe in him for eternal life. 17 To the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen. 

18 I am giving you these instructions, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies made earlier about you, so that by following them you may fight the good fight, 19 having faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have suffered shipwreck in the faith; 20 among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have turned over to Satan, so that they may learn not to blaspheme. 

I got bumped in the parking lot - But I'm OK

When I was young my dad had a little orange beach buggy bakkie that had a dent in its side panel.  It had a clever bumper sticker:  

I got banged in the parking lot by some other trucker.

Well I got banged in the parking lot the other day.

Our parking lot at Table View Methodist has some stories to tell.  

On Wednesday afternoon I noticed that someone had been sitting in his car for an hour or so in the parking lot so I went to see if he was OK.  I noticed he had a bunch of cans of lighter gas / butane on the seat next to him and when I asked him if he was OK he said he would go somewhere else.

But he was clearly high and very sluggish in his movements so I said "no" stay here.  You don't have to move.  When he tried to start the car I grabbed his keys out of the ignition and dropped them on the ground.  He quickly jumped out of the car and attacked me.

I laid a charge of Common Assault against him at the police station.  

And after doing some research today I went to the doctor for a medical examination and ask him to fill in a J88 (Get a J88 form here if you are ever assaulted).

I had to phone the police station again today to find out my case number and who the detective is who is investigating the case.  I also had to do some research to see what needs to be done to make sure that justice is done.

Apparently many cases are dismissed because there is no J88 form.  The sergeant who took my statement said nothing about getting one.  The only reason I knew about the J88 is a friend of mine who is in the dentist business said I must get one (lucky I'm already short of teeth on my right bottom jaw!)

Those who know me know that I love peace and hate conflict.  It disrupts my spirit and over the past few days I found myself going through the anger and grumpiness that comes of these things.  

I've felt listless and struggled to focus on my work.  It has made me aware of how lucky I am to be able to talk to my bishop / superintendent and tell them what happened.  I am able to go to the police and lay the appropriate charges.  And find out via the internet and friends the correct ways to make sure that justice gets done.

I am convinced that the young man who attacked me should face the consequence of his actions.  I know that having a criminal record will be a burden to him - but if when these things happen we don't take action we will allow bullies to have their way in the world.

Things I've learned:

You have to follow up with the police to get a case number etc. 

You have to have a medical examination and get a J88 if you are physically assaulted.

There are a lot more websites dedicated to getting away with assault than there are about how to proceed if you have been assaulted. 

A criminal record will make it hard to get a job or a Visa etc.  But it can be expunged after 10 years if you have been well behaved.

It is tempting to act all tough and not do anything about it but how will the person who attacked me get the help he really needs if he doesn't face the consequences of his actions. 

I can also see how justice systems lean towards helping those who have privilege... I have the time, the means and the support to make sure that the case is pursued.  If I judge by the online world there is a lot more reward in helping the bad guys get away than helping the good guys get justice.

So, my body is healing quickly - I have thick bones.  My mind and spirit are adjusting to what happened - I need to keep my optimistic outlook on life and never lose it.  Next time I see someone getting high in the parking lot I'll be a bit more 'strategic' in the help I offer.

Notes for Services on 2020-06-14

Reflecting on Matthew 9:35-10:10 with Rev Angus Kelly and Rev Mpumelelo Masoabi.

Audio Link to 845am Service (Will expire after a few weeks)

Excellent TED Podcast. How to be anti-racist 


Matthew 9:38 "Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field.”

Is not just about getting people 'saved' it is about working for the Kingdom of God to come.

mourning takes a knee

 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
“Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
-       Matthew 5:4-5

I can’t breathe.
a knee

On the neck
of the meek

too deep

to deep

burns in tongues

but waterfall justice
is dammed

speaks in tongues

tear the heavens

mountains tremble
flood justice

skip like slain lambs

ransom a kindom of priests
to serve
and lead to justice.

- Angus Kelly (1 June 2020)

Render to Caesar (The worthship of money.)

Render to Caesar (The worthship of money.)

Rev Angus Kelly
19 Show me the coin used for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. 20 Then he said to them, “Whose head is this, and whose title?” 21 They answered, “The emperor’s.” Then he said to them, “Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
- Matthew 22:19-21
The cost of living moves up and down from time to time and its quite something to see what some people count as the ‘cost of living’.  From the cost of paying for luxury vehicles and palatial villas to the cost of keeping children fed on a diet of daily pap and gravy (on good days).  Covid-19 prompted a spectacular reaction – a sudden awareness of the price of a human life.  Or human lives.  I’ve never liked being called a ‘human resource’ it sounds too much like an oil reserve – and I wonder what I’d be worth if I was no longer a ‘resource’ for someone else’s benefit.

Pharisees plot to entrap Jesus (Matthew 22:15) and so they send their disciples “along with the Herodians” (16) to ask a tricky question. Judea was under the rule of Pilate, a Roman prefect.  The Herodians preferred Herodian rule to the Roman prefecture.

The delegation represents diverse political desires and experiences:  Pharisees who for the most part believed that proper worship and observance of the Jewish law would restore the Kingdom of Judea to a rightful heir. Herodians, a political movement who wanted the Herodian line back on the throne of Israel. Jesus and his disciples who represented a religious movement essentially from the countryside – in some ways removed from the political intrigue of Jerusalem where all of this took place but who saw Jesus as the rightful “King of the Jews” as a rightful heir to the Davidic throne. It is no secret that the Pharisees had worked out how to live with their Roman rulers and existed as an important class of people who controlled the temple and religious life of Jerusalem and thus influenced control of Jews in Judea. Herodians probably longed for the patronage of the Herodian royal family as massive infrastructure projects funded by taxes leveraged from the citizens of Judea had created patronage networks that simply didn’t flow under the Roman prefecture.

The question: “17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?” (Matthew 22:17)

Jesus clever answer: “Show me the coin used for the tax” (Verse 19).

The coin for paying taxes bore the image of the emperor – in the example above the emperor Tiberius Claudius.  On the reverse of the coin a picture of the mother of Tiberius depicted as a goddess of peace with an inscription reading PONTIF MAXIM (high priest).

When Jesus asks: “Whose head is this, and whose title?” (Verse 20) they have to say “The emperor’s.”

“Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Verse 21)

I don’t think Jesus is just saying that people should pay their portion to Caesar.  I think he might be suggesting that they take every coin that bears his image and send it back to him.  This would fit with Jesus usual advice about what to do with wealth.  “…go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me” (Mark 10:21). Jesus measures worth differently. Jesus asks questions like: “For what will it profit them to gain the whole world and forfeit their life?” (Mark 8:36).

Money is only valuable when it is useful.  If Jesus decrees that all of Caesar’s money be loaded up in ships and taken back to Rome it will spell the end of Judean occupation.  Rome knew that you couldn’t rule a country by oppression and violence alone. They were clever enough to insist that a region like Palestine planted Barley and only Barley, meaning that they’d need to trade with other regions to get the goods they needed and thus pay taxes on (for example) Barley sales and olive imports.  Roman globalization meant that economies were enslaved by greed for Roman coins – the book of Revelation paints a picture of the destruction of Rome:  “Alas, alas, the great city,
where all who had ships at sea
grew rich by her wealth!
For in one hour she has been laid waste.” (Revelation 18:19)

The next part of Jesus answer about giving is the demand that we give “to God the things that are God’s.”  (Matthew 22:21). Speaking of image bearing items scripture teaches that humans are made in the image of God. Not just emperors but all humans. As bearers of the image of God the Judeo-Christian religion teaches the importance of care for all people.  Rich, poor, sick, in prison, widowed, orphaned, foreigner, sinner, tax collecter and the list goes on and on.  All of these people to be ‘given to God.’  All of these treasures to be recognized because they bear the image of God as ‘belonging to God’.

Covid-19 has shown the world that there is a value that is not measured on the spreadsheets and in the algorithms of stock markets.  The value of life.  Oil prices that drive war and conflict shrunk into negative territory because staying at home to save lives was more important than leaving home to spend money.  Billions of Denarius’ worth of life has been given to the world in terms of life and health and even the lowering of carbon emissions.  But these figures will all be measured as loss of productivity to global stock markets who are not able to factor in the mysterious value of humans created in the image of God.

The problem is that global currency values are derived from resource and productivity indexes rather than real life values.  Happiness, health, virtue and right relationships.  It seems that sometimes all of these things are contingent on devaluing currencies by ‘opting out’ of the secular trade and opting in to an economy that measures value in ways that somehow incorporate ‘life’ on the balance sheet.

When Jesus counsels the rich young man to sell all of his possessions and give the money to the poor he does not paint a picture of this young man entering into a life of poverty – instead he paints a picture of wealth beyond all measure:
Truly I tell you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the good news,f 30 who will not receive a hundredfold now in this age—houses, brothers and sisters, mothers and children, and fields. (Mark 10:29-30)

f Or gospel

Reflecting on the Possiblity of Communion Online - Law, Order, Communion and Vulnerability

[Work in Progress...]

You can read and comment here (via Google Docs)

The Law, Order and Vulnerability of Communion
(Shared Vulnerability in Covid-19)

The usual practices of the gathered church especially sung worship and the sharing of communion are highly conducive to the transmission of the Covid-19 virus.  This means that church gatherings are likely to be stopped for almost a year.  If no vaccine for Covid-19 is found it might mean that church gatherings will be halted for even longer.  Congregations are meeting online through various social networks like FaceBook, Instagram and WhatsApp or via video conferencing facilities like Zoom and Skype.  Augmented reality and social networking will soon combine to create virtual connection points that are as lifelike as possible.  Of interest right now is the question of at what point would the Methodist Church of Southern Africa be able to offer sacraments through these virtual means?  And would that be appropriate?

In this essay I briefly explore the possibility of making changes to the order of the church of the sake of sharing the sacrament in novel ways. First I briefly examine the development of the Eucharistic Feast as separate from the Love Feast on the basis of matters of Order rather than of Law. That this separation and dogmatization of the Lord’s Supper seems to be based on ‘order’ rather than ‘doctrine’ and this would indicate that if appropriate the church might be justified in making changes to its practice that would facilitate the ‘virtual’ sharing of communion. Second there is the question of whether it would be appropriate to do this.  There are many arguments to be made about the incarnational importance of physical presence and the experience of communion as a gathered group but I want to look at the way in which we are to hold law, order and communion in vulnerability in a way that truly honours the church’s role as body of Christ in the world.

One thing Wesley is known for is his bold willingness to invent new ways of doing things in conflict with the church of his day. Beside field preaching an interesting part of the development story of the Methodist denomination is Wesley’s consecration of Thomas Coke for the role of superintendent[1] of the Methodist Church in the Americas in 1783.  One of the reasons for this ordination was the cry that “thousands of children remained unbaptized” and some members of Methodist societies “had not partaken of the Lord’s Supper for many years” (Heitzenrater 1995, chap. 6).  The consecration of Coke and ordination of Methodist ministers that followed made it possible for sacraments to be administered in the growing American church.  But it also led to the formalization of divisions between the Methodist Church and the Anglican Church. 

In one sense it follows that the sacramental practices might be changed to facilitate reception of the sacrament in novel ways.  But, in the case of Wesley’s consecration of Coke and the subsequent establishment of an order of ministers in America it is important to note that sending a hand written order of service and preserved and consecrated elements from Wesley to a church in America was not considered as an option.  The church needed a Presbyter to preside at the table and to be physically and contemporaneously present[2]

The Early Methodist Church was innovative in establishing the church in America especially for fear of a sort of sacramental starvation for those without access to ordained ministers. The Methodist tradition understands the need to break from tradition from time to time. As interesting as this might be Albert Outler points out that Wesley’s distinctive use of tradition as an authority for theological discernment was not based on the tradition of the Church of England but rather on the tradition of the church of Antiquity (or the Early Church) [3].

A survey of the practice of the early church seems to show that that it was matters of order and not law or dogma that led to the Lord’s Supper being seen as a meal separate from the early love feast and strictly presided over by a presbyter or bishop.  Ignatius, a first century bishop in his letter to the Smyrneans insists:
“Let no one do anything involving the church without the bishop. Let that eucharist be considered valid that occurs under the bishop or the one to whom he entrusts it. 2. Let the congregation be wherever the bishop is; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there also is the universal church. It is not permitted either to baptize or to hold a love feast without the bishop. But whatever he approves is acceptable to God, so that everything you do should be secure and valid.”
– Letter of Ignatius to the Smyrnaens 8 (circa 100AD) (Ehrman 2003: 305)
Thus the bishop becomes in a sense a representative of Christ’s presence to the church but it is important to note that the bishop may ‘entrust’ the eucharist to someone else.  Beyond that Ignatius seems to indicate a certain amount of flexibility of practice in that the bishop may approve and innovate.  At this stage it seems The Didache, another important document with evidence for a formalised Eucharist does not seem to insist that the Eucharist is presided over by a presbyter / episkopos even though in Chapter 15 it gives instruction for the congregational[4] election of bishops and deacons (Ehrman 2003: 439-441). This might be because the order described by Ignatius is generally assumed or it might be the case that the congregation operates according to the synagogue structure of first century Judaism by which a leader would be appointed most probably on the basis of patronage and this leader would be the host of the supper when shared (Giles 1997: 219-26).  Banks (1993, 134) writes: “The epistles and New Testament do not seem to make distinctions about who presides at the Lord’s Supper. Nowhere in Paul’s letters, disputed or undisputed, is anyone identified as the presider or celebrant of this meal. Most probably this was undertaken by the host or hostess of the meeting in whose home the meal was being held.” It is clear that in the early church the tradition of a formal ‘Lord’s Supper’ developed gradually for the sake of order. The formalization of this order seems to have been for the sake of unity as described in Ignatius’ epistle to the Smyrneans.

In the Methodist Church of Southern Africa the minister’s role at the communion table is not a so much a matter of doctrine as it is a matter of order.  Doctrine pertains to the right glorification of God and right Theology.  Order has to do with the practice of the church that stems from that doctrine.  As the recently (and more appropriately) renamed Book of Order[5] declares:
“Because the Holy Communion is an act of the whole Church, the celebrant is a Minister whose call from God has been recognised by the church as a whole and who has been set apart by ordination to the ministry of Word and Sacrament.”(MCSA 2016, para. 1.26, emphasis mine)
Order[6] is discerned and determined through the church’s often cumbersome administrative processes.  It takes a long time to deliberate on a decision that has to do with the religious and spiritual lives of millions of Christians. And because this is a distinctively human process sometimes Order and Doctrine are so deeply intertwined that the one may be mistaken for the other. Sometimes order is abused and sometimes it is oppressive – order is expressed as dogma rather than spiritual (λογικὸν) wisdom. This may happen where the sacrament is wrongly used as a disciplinary instrument being withheld from those who have not paid their dues or whom the leaders of a certain society have found ‘unworthy.’ It is impossible to defend these practices with good Theology and so instead of rightly and transparently discerned or described in a way that brings illumination and liberation dogma is described in ways that result in obfuscation, oppression and heinous forms of spiritual manipulation and abuse.

Rather than dogma the Book of Order is an agreement between Methodists about how we ‘do’ church in a way that unites us. It is an agreement that is always open to amendment and debate. The processes and procedures that allow for the amendment and debate of this order are not always the most efficient and clear and they are certainly not incorruptible. It is easy to see how an institution’s decision making processes can evolve to preserve the institution rather than the mission of that institution. Wesley’s bold decisions with regard to the formation of the Methodist Church in America indicate his willingness to break with the tradition of the institution for the sake of sharing the gospel and edifying the church. Even Wesley’s bold decisions were not made without thorough going consultation. Among the first acts of the newly formed Methodist Church in America was to hold a conference to establish its order.

Liberating rules need the assent of the community that makes and keeps them.[7]  Church leadership needs to be ‘duly authorized’ in order to have due ‘authority.’  Authority can be such an oppressive word depending on where that authority is derived ‘authority’ in church should have only the best connotations finding its root in the servant leadership of Jesus.  In the example of the earliest church.  In the Methodist Church of Southern Africa ‘Authority’ theoretically comes from the people of the Methodist Church who in their Book of Order and Minutes of Conference outline a transparent decision-making process. This decision making process incorporates the church in all of its meetings, synods and Conference.[8]

It is this ‘Conference’ or ‘Fellowship’ that makes its own ‘rules’ and order.  As such it must hold its order in humility. An example of this kind of humility is found in the earliest church. In the letter to the Gentile Christians of Acts 15:23-29 the Jerusalem church under James, Peter and the apostles is able to use humble language: “…it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose on you…” (Acts 15:28).  This church has humbly discerned their solution which they feel is in harmony with the prompting of the Holy Spirit and the agreement of the congregation.  The word for seemed ‘δοκέω’ is described by Louw and Nida (1989, para. 31.29) as “to regard something as presumably true, but without particular certainty—‘to suppose, to presume, to assume, to imagine, to believe, to think.’”  The church of Acts establishes an order through consultation and “consent of the whole church” and they hold it in humility or perhaps vulnerability. This order is not held as a matter of dogma. This humble discernment is captured in beautifully in the words of James who says: “…the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere” (James 3:17).

Brené Brown writes of the power of vulnerability and stresses the importance of understanding the dynamics of vulnerability as true strength she writes:
When discussing vulnerability, it is helpful to look at the definition and etymology of the word vulnerable. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the word vulnerability is derived from the Latin word vulnerare, meaning “to wound.” The definition includes “capable of being wounded” and “open to attack or damage.” Merriam-Webster defines weakness as the inability to withstand attack or wounding.” (Brown 2015, 67)
Perhaps the earliest church that met in homes was so robust because in faith it was willing to become vulnerable. To meet together as a church was to become vulnerable to persecution but even in the midst of persecution they were able on matters of doctrine to admit that they didn’t know for sure – but “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us.” It was in vulnerability that Jesus established his supper, washing the disciple’s feet – dipping his bread in the same bowl as the one who would betray him. It was in vulnerability that his disciples saw him sweating and praying for the cup to be taken away. It is through his wounds and in some way – our participation in his wounds - that we are healed (1 Peter 2:24 / Isaiah 53:4-6).

In vulnerability the church at Corinth protected and promoted the letter from Paul that strongly rebuked them for their practice at the Lord’s Supper.  As if to prove the point of the importance of woundedness for the church which is the body of Christ this letter to the Corinthians becomes one of the chief scriptures that guide us in the practice of the Lord’s Supper:
20 When you come together, it is not really to eat the Lord’s supper. 21 For when the time comes to eat, each of you goes ahead with your own supper, and one goes hungry and another becomes drunk.” (1 Corinthians 11:20-21) 
Paul’s critique of this early church is its marked lack of shared vulnerability in its love feast / eucharist. To share a meal is to share in vulnerability. In this church some people go ahead and get drunk while others experience pangs of hunger.  Covid-19 in the 21st century points to a terrifying lack of shared vulnerability in the world and in the church.  In America the daily headlines point out that the most vulnerable to the Corona virus are ‘front line workers’ in meat packing plants, grocery stores and frail care centers. These people are vulnerable not just because of their daily exposure to the virus as they work but also because of the co-morbidities like diabetes and hypertension that are associated with poverty, stress and lack of access to health care.  In education children with access to technology and internet are able to continue with their schooling while those who are disadvantaged have to wait and see what the year will bring.  In South Africa deaths from Covid-19 will probably disproportionately effect the poor just as it has in America.

Perhaps the Covid-19 crisis is a stark reminder that without shared vulnerability the meal that we eat might not be The Lord’s Supper.

The church might not be able to share communion for a long time. Technological and practical implications could probably be easily overcome. In overcoming these barriers we need to make sure that we are not overcoming barriers to practical sharing of communion with some people.  But that we are making sure that we maintain vulnerability in sharing. Geographical circuits do not take away the problem of habitual social distancing in the church today. Even societies like the one I serve are onedivided by language, culture, and financial status. It is easy to make changes to order and even to ritual. In the case of The Lord’s Supper there may be a way to adapt our practice to suit the modern Covid-19 situation but whatever ways are developed it will not be the Lord’s supper unless somehow it is a true expression of shared vulnerability.


Banks, RJ. 1993. ‘Church Order and Government’. In Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, edited by GF Hawthorne, RP Martin, and DG Reid. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Brown, Brené. 2015. Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead. Reprint edition. Avery.
Ehrman, Bart D., trans. 2003. ‘Didache - The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles’. In The Apostolic Fathers, Vol. 1: I Clement, II Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Didache. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Freire, Paulo. 2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 30th Anniversary Edition. 30th Anniversary edition. New York: Continuum.
Giles, KN. 1997. ‘Church Order, Government’. In Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments, edited by RP Martin and PH Davids. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Heitzenrater, Richard. 1995. Wesley and the People Called Methodists. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
Louw, Johannes P, and Eugene A Nida. 1989. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains. 2nd ed. New York: United Bible Societies.
MCSA. 2016. The Methodist Book of Order: The Laws and Discipline of the Methodist Church of Southern Africa.
Methodist Church. 1999. Methodist Worship Book. Methodist Church of Great Britain.
Outler, Albert C. 1985. ‘The Wesleyan Quadrilateral in Wesley’. Wesleyan Theological Journal 20 (1): 158.

[1] Wesley ordained Coke as ‘superintendent’ drawing on the New Testament word ἐπισκόποις which is translated as overseer or bishop.
[2] In considering whether it would be acceptable to consecrate the elements via electronic broadcast it must also be considered whether it would be acceptable for this broadcast to be pre-recorded?  Or must it be a ‘live’ broadcast?
[3] Wesley’s quadrilateral as described by Outler (1985, 10) emphasizes ‘Christian Antiquity’ as the proper locus of tradition.
[4] In this case ‘congregational’ should not be understood to described modern individualized church governance (Giles 1997, 219–26).
[5] Which used to be called The Law and Discipline
[6] An example of this kind of Order that is not law or doctrine may be found in some of Paul’s instructions to the churches of the New Testament:
“…let each of you lead the life that the Lord has assigned, to which God called you. This is my rule in all the churches” (1 Corinthians 7:17)
Paul is writing about whether converts should continue in marriage to their unbelieving husbands or wives.  He doesn’t have a law for this but instead makes his own recommendation or instruction based on his argument in the preceding verses.  This is his ‘rule’.  The Greek word is διατάσσω which Louw and Nida (1989) interpret as “to order, to instruct, to tell, to command.”  It is a rule for which he does not claim some higher spiritual authority.  He presents this rule as a proposition to the Corinthian church and they are welcome to keep it or leave it.
[7]By imposing their word on others, they falsify that word and establish a contradiction between their methods and their objectives. If they are truly committed to liberation, their action and reflection cannot proceed without the action and reflection of others.” (Freire 2000, 126)

[8] Although participation of the congregation in decision making and even in the ordination of ministers is greatly stressed there are often interesting changes.  In the ordination service of the Methodist Church of Southern Africa (1975 Liturgy) the President (Bishop) asks the congregation:
“Do you believe that they are by God’s grace worthy to be ordained?
The people answer: They are worthy.”  
(Methodist Church 1975, G7)
At the 2019 ordination the liturgy was different:
The Presiding Bishop addresses the congregation:
“…By the grace of God we declare that they are worthy to be ordained.  Will you uphold them in their ministry?”  Does this use of a liturgy closer to the 1936 liturgy reflect a movement away from the acknowledgment of the wider church’s participation in the ordination of ministers and deacons?