Coming Clean

The great novelist Flannery O’Connor, known for surprise endings and plot twists that can turn a reader upside down, wrote these matter-of-fact words, “You shall know and do the truth . . . and the truth will make you odd.” We may feel odd in today’s world when we live truthfully. Ethics as defined by the dictionary is “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation.” I’m glad the definition started with the word, “discipline.” Doing the right thing, believing the truth and living truthfully, takes extraordinary discipline.

For example, 20,000 middle-and high-schoolers were surveyed by the Josephson Institute of Ethics--a non-profit organization in Marina del Rey, California, devoted to character education. Ninety-two percent of the teenagers admitted having lied to their parents in the previous year, and 73 percent characterized themselves as “serial liars,” meaning they told lies weekly. Despite these admissions, 91 percent of all respondents said they were “satisfied with my own ethics and character.” That’s a scary thing--when we knowingly misrepresent the truth and we are “satisfied with my own ethics and character.” Living truthfully may make you odd in today’s world.

Lenten season dares us to “fess up” to our shortcomings and that takes truth telling. Most of us would rather talk about what’s wrong with everybody else but ourselves. We have the Cleopatra Syndrome, so called because she was the Queen of DENIAL. Jesus came to expose the denying lies of those who felt smug in their self-righteousness and to bring relief to those who felt imprisoned by their unrighteousness. He told it like it was about both groups. He wanted both groups to come clean, tell the truth and experience the freedom that can only come from having no secrets from God.

With the woman at the well Jesus dodged her non-answers and went straight to the jugular about her many marriages and live-in lover. It was her honesty that finally opened her eyes to both Jesus and her own salvation. But she had to tell the truth to get there! Honesty is the best policy, especially honesty with God! He already knows what we’re thinking anyway, so why don’t we turn those ugly worrisome thoughts into prayers?

Only God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. Only God has the power to do all things, be all places, and know all things. Let’s give God his due. If God already knows everything about us, plus loves us, then aren’t we neglecting the best opportunity for real help when the going gets rough? Next time you find yourself in a predicament and are already planning your exit strategy with not-so-truthful ease, turn to God instead. Jesus is more than ready and able to help you. All He asks is for us to be honest. Sounds like a good Lenten discipline to me.

Ash Wednesday

As I ponder today as Ash Wednesday, I’m wondering how I will observe this Lenten Season. It may be easier this year than most to give up things for Lent. In these economic times it is an easy choice to give up tangible things, but what about the intangible attitudes and wrong thinking? As a District Superintendent it is easy to get out of the cyclic nature of the church year and yield to the Conference Year: Charge Conferences, Conference Meetings, Appointment-making, etc. I need today as a reminder to stay in touch with the Church Year and that God’s grace and spiritual nourishment are the only food for my soul. All the Conference stuff is secondary to my being in God’s will as an individual child of God. I need Lent!

Lenten season is a time set aside forty days before Easter, not counting Sundays, when we take an introspective look at our lives. The forty days are reminiscent of Jesus’ forty days of temptation in the wilderness at the beginning of his ministry. The word “Lent” comes from an older root word, “lencten.” Our word “lengthen” has this as its source. Just as the days are lengthening with the approaching spring, we should also lengthen the time spent on spiritual disciplines like worship, Sunday School, prayer, Bible Study, and service to others. We should do everything possible to keep our minds out of trouble and on God.

Someone asked quite pointedly, “Why is it that opportunity knocks only once, yet temptation bangs on the door constantly?” Have you ever noticed that the whisper of temptation can be heard farther than the loudest call to morality? Have you ever noticed that when we decide to do something wrong the means are so readily available? It is also a lot easier to point out the sins of others than our own.

An older priest and a novitiate were walking through the meadow when they came to a swollen creek. Beside the creek was a beautiful young maiden. The older priest offered to carry her on his back across the creek. The younger novice looked on with jealousy and desire. Miles later, long after they had left the maiden behind, the younger priest could not contain himself any longer. He asked the older priest why he had helped the young maiden. Didn’t he understand that what he had done looked improper at the very least? Hadn’t the older priest warned the younger man not to put himself in such situations? The older priest replied, “I left the maiden behind at the river bank, why are you carrying her now?”

What am I carrying that I don’t need to. Lent reminds me that Jesus is my All in All. Amen.

Moon Over Mitchell

Following a moon across the sky on Mt. Mitchell will make you move your head, crane your neck, and wonder at its path. This is going to be a “tough” moving year for pastors, or so people say. We usually have about one third of our clergy moving. This year it’s more like 10%. Moving or not, I feel for all the people who have had to move because of their jobs, age, or downsizing. Moving can be such a stressor. Counting my family of origin through all the parsonages we’ve lived in, I have called 13 different places “home.”

Some of this attitude is very selfish, I admit. I’m not as young as I used to be. The idea of heaving boxes is about as attractive as wanting to catch the flu. I wonder if Abram and Sarai felt some of this age-reluctance when, in their seventies, they were asked by God to leave their home in Ur and travel to an unknown destination?

Maybe their ages weren’t computed the way that ours are. After all, they both lived well into their 100’s. Perhaps they enjoyed good health because of the Middle Eastern diet. For instance, Mussa Zoabi of Israel claims to be the oldest person alive. He says he’s 160 years old. His name won’t go down in the record books because he is older than most record-keeping systems and his age can’t be verified. The interesting thing, however, is that Mussa Zoabi can tell you exactly why he’s lived so long. He says it’s his diet. Every day he drinks either a cup of melted butter or olive oil.

Diets are the rage, aren’t they? It seems that everyone has some special diet that will do this or that for you. Maybe Abram and Sarai had a special diet. Remember, when they got to the Promised Land, Abram had to pass his seventy-something wife off as his sister because she was so good looking that he was afraid someone would kill him to get her. Wow! Abram and Sarai must have had good genes and a super diet.

Sixty percent of women in North America say that they’re on a diet. Imagine that! We all want to be modern day Sarai’s and Abraham’s. A woman at Weight Watchers once told this story. She said that a new client had begun her diet. She came in to be weighed after the first stressful week. She stepped on the scales and had only lost a couple of pounds! The dieter wasn’t too happy, and complained. This is what she said: “My friend comes here to Weight Watchers, and she told me she lost ten pounds. She said I’d lose ten pounds in the first week, too!”

Well, the leader at Weight Watchers was a little disturbed. She knew that you don’t lose weight over night. So she asked the dieter, a little indignantly: “Who told you that? Is she a doctor?” The woman shook her head. The leader asked, “Is she a nurse?” “No,” said the woman. “Well,” continued the leader, “Is she a nutritionist, or another Weight Watcher’s leader?” Negative again! “Well, who is she?” asked the leader. “I think,” said the newcomer, “I think she’s a liar!”

Most of us know the truth and the lies about dieting. But what’s the truth about Abram and Sarai? How did they get the courage and gumption at their age to leave Ur of the Chaldees and strike out for Canaan? What made them so different from us and can we have a little bit of what they had? I think the answer was Faith! This year we need a lot of it to deal with the economy, itinerancy, and all of the everything-else’s that work on our spirits and bodies. Hang in there and follow the path.

Good News!

Sunday, Sunday - For the last month or so, I've been preaching in Columbia District churches which always gives me great hope for our future as a denomination. We have some great ministries! Today is a little different in terms of what happend today. I'm not preaching anywhere, but I have already been to a New Member's Class at one of our churches and stopped by the office to get ready for my next two stops: one with a SPRC in a conflicted church, and another with a prospective Senior Pastor and Prospective Associate.

We had Cabinet Meetings for 3 long days last week and it looks like we are going to have very few moves this year. With the economy there seems to be an incentive for people to try to work together without making a pastoral change. I have high hope that this will encourage people to actually work through their issues without a "critical mass" causing an explosion. As a Cabinet we will have the opportunity to give each appointment more attention and effort. Rather than the economy causing bad news, this is an opportunity to get it done right whether a clergyperson moves or not.

Tomorrow is Monday, Monday and I start meeting with clergy 3 hours each doing whatever they want to do. This is a breath of fresh air to my spirit and I hope to their's as well. This is going to be a good year in the United Methodist Church! May it be, Lord; May it be!

Valentine's Day, Ready or Not?!

St. Valentine’s Day is this coming Saturday. I hope all the love-birds out there are ready for the big event. St. Valentine has been purported to be the patron saint of lovers for centuries. Pope Gelasius in 496 A.D. set aside February 14 to honor St. Valentine. However, the history behind the actual person and his actions is cloudy at best. Some say he was a priest who secretly married couples during the reign of Roman emperor Claudius II. Claudius had outlawed marriage so that he could conscript more single men for his army. Supposedly after Valentine’s arrest he sent notes to Christians that were signed, “From your Valentine.” There are stories of his officiating at his jailer’s daughter’s wedding, too. According to tradition Valentine was beheaded by the emperor on February 14, 269.

What makes all this so interesting is that February 14 is the same day that had been dedicated to Roman love lotteries for over 800 years. Love lotteries were a Roman matchmaking scheme whereby eligible singles in towns and villages drew names of the opposite sex so that they could be paired for a specified time period. These love lotteries were held on the day before February 15, which is, of course, the 14th, the day dedicated to the Roman god Lupercus, so that couples could be matched. I guess they didn’t need eHarmony.com.

Needless to say 800 years of a coupling custom was hard to undo even when the empire became mostly Christian. After all, love is what makes the world go round. Therefore, whether there was ever a guy named Valentine who sent love notes or not is immaterial to the greater worship of love. So, conveniently, Valentine, or the story of Valentine, was canonized and made a saint so that Christians could usurp yet another pagan holiday and turn it into something good.

Ironically, the suspicious origins of Valentine’s Day caused the Roman Catholic Church to drop it as an official Feast Day in 1969. In reversal of the church’s co-opting of a Roman mating ritual, our contemporary pop culture got back the original intent of February 14 – a day with an emphasis on Lupercalian tokens of love. The irony is that what was pagan-turned Christian has now been co-opted by the candy makers and greeting card companies, plus a host of other suppliers. So we’re not sure if it’s love that makes the world go round or money.

Valentine’s customs through the so-called Christian centuries have been celebrated in a variety of ways. In the Middle Ages, for instance, young men and women drew names from a bowl to see who their Valentines would be. They wore these names on their sleeves for a week. It’s where we get our notion about people “wearing their hearts on their sleeve,” meaning that it’s easy for other people to know how they’re feeling.

Here’s how I feel about Valentine’s Day, saint or not. I’m all for showering our true loves and loved ones with expressions of affection. It never hurts to let people know that they are appreciated, valued, and loved. As a matter of fact, it’s time for the church to take Valentine’s Day back from the pagans. When it comes to love we don’t need to prop up some semi-historical figure like Valentine when we can do better. There’s no better example of love than Jesus. Let’s love people like Jesus, and chocolates will be in order year-round!

Gender Justice and Regional Conferences

This is another piece I've been working on about the constitutional amendments and gender justice:

This year there will be a flurry of proposed amendments to the United Methodist constitution that will be voted on by lay and clergy members of annual conferences across the connection. Since many of these amendments affect the structure and polity of the worldwide denomination, one must be aware of how our current structure and proposed amendments impact issues of gender justice for women. In our deliberations it should be recognized that there is a history of gender justice issues against women in general and particularly full clergy rights for women in the central conferences. Judicial Council Decisions 155 and 172 (http://www.umc.org/, "Our Church" tab - Judicial Council) are examples of this controversy from decades ago that precipitated the desire for autonomy from some of our former central conferences. However, this is not just a sad saga from our not-so-distant-past. There are current situations both overseas and in the United States that threaten gender justice for women. Therefore, these amendments are not new issues, but call us to sharpen our understanding of United Methodist ecclesiology and its specific ramifications for women.

This has personal importance. My daughter is an Elder in the South Carolina Annual Conference. It would be an anathema if she were not welcome to serve as a clergyperson in any of our annual conferences whether in central conferences or jurisdictions. In addition, we declare (¶ 215.4, 2008 Book of Discipline) that any baptized or professing member of any local UM congregation is a member of the “global United Methodist connection …” By our common baptism we are all, male and female, called to be servant leaders. This means that there must be no discrimination or gender bias across the connection.

“Connection” is the operative word in deliberating these amendments from an ecclesiological and justice perspective. In my second quadrennium as a member of the denomination’s Connectional Table, in my role as a District Superintendent, and as an Adjunct Professor for “United Methodist Discipline and Polity” at Candler School of Theology, it is keenly apparent to me that we are and must be a connectional church. Each of these venues adds to my perspective on connectionalism. At the Connectional Table the effort is made to holistically bring resources and mission together for the entire United Methodist Church. Then there is the fact that District Superintendents are one of the most visible signs of the connection between the greater Church and the local Church. From a local perspective in SC, 4 out of 12 District Superintendents are female while the AC percentage of female clergy is near 20%. Unfortunately, as a District Superintendent, there are those churches that are still reluctant to have a woman as their pastor. In polity class one sees the Wesleyan distinctive of sanctification shaping our way of being and doing church. After all, our book of polity is not called a Book of Suggested Rules, but a Book of Discipline. The theological underpinning of our book of polity’s title and the reason we care about social issues is wrapped up in our historic understanding of sanctification: God makes disciples of Christ for the transformation of the world.

Connectionalism is the primary vehicle for this distinctive theological emphasis in the United Methodist Church. It is our connectionalism that promotes a unity of purpose across the denomination. With these worldwide structure amendments we are voting on connectionalism and how that supports our theology. Key in this discussion is whether or not sanctification looks the same in every context. There are things that are universally good, and things that are contextual. The problem is in deciding the difference. This is where one encounters potential difficulties in our current ecclesiology and that which is proposed. These present and proposed difficulties directly impact gender justice issues. At issue is the little-known but factual diversity of adaptations of the United Methodist Book of Discipline. ¶ 543.7 states that “A central conference shall have power to make such changes and adaptations of the Book of Discipline as the special conditions and the mission of the church in the area require, especially concerning the organization and administration of the work on local church, district, and annual conference levels, provided that no action shall be taken that is contrary to the Constitution and the General Rules of the United Methodist church., and provided that the spirit of connectional relationship is kept between the local and the general church.”

If these particular amendments pass, not only will central conferences be able to adapt the BOD, but so will the United States regional conference or conferences (Cf. Judicial Decision 1100, Fall 2008). This fragmentation and diocesan ecclesiology will divide our denomination and reverse Wesley’s adage, “The world is my parish.” This fragmentation leaves great room for latitude and could cause divergent opinions to run amok. It is usually the marginalized who suffer the most in a hands-off approach to local autonomy. Left to do as each area of the church pleases breaks our connection and the checks and balances necessary to protect those who need it most. To ensure connectionalism and gender equity perhaps we need to clarify with absolute certainty the non-negotiables of our entire denomination. With sensitivity toward cultural relevance, ¶ 543.7 needs to be tightened up.

It does not even cover the Social Principles, and, because of that, they differ across the connection. These adaptations are accepted because they are not in violation of the constitution or the General Rules. However, some adaptations of the Social Principles may violate the “spirit of connectional relationship” mentioned in ¶ 543.7. Te Social Principles are not church law but they do impinge on church law in deciding the character of those who serve on the Church Council (¶ 244.3) and the use of United Methodist property (¶ 2532.3). Now to be sure, there are no Social principles that have been discovered or Special Advices, an additional set of rules/guidelines that many central conferences have, that overtly discriminate against women. However, the numbers tell a provocative story. They beg one to ask what is the state of our connection if these amendments are approved and regional adaptations are allowed.

What happens to regional attitudes toward women? For instance, there are no female clergy in one European annual conference. The number of female clergy in two African annual conferences is miniscule, 7 out of 438 or .015%, and 7 out 134 or .05% respectively. The total female percentage reported by the thirteen conferences for which we have up-to-date records is 11.6%. This includes conferences in Europe, Africa, and the Philippines. There is nothing that is written in those Central Conference or Annual Conference’s Social Principles that officially denies women’s ordination or clergy privileges. However, the fact remains that a number of annual conferences outside of the United States have very few clergywomen. The U.S., if it were a separate Regional Conference, has statistics that are telling in terms of gender justice, too. There are 44,842 clergy in the U.S. UMC, and 10,378 are female, or 23.1%. The percentage of female laypersons is 57.6%. Of U.S. Bishops, 28% are female, and, of U.S. District Superintendents, the percentage that is female is 26.8%. The issue of gender discrimination is certainly a question to ponder as we vote to change our constitution and ponder our historic connectional identity as United Methodists. Perhaps the better path is to allow the Worldwide UMC Study Committee to complete its work for the 2012 General Conference before we constitutionally codify a system that perpetuates the possibility of gender discrimination.

United Methodist Consitutional Amendments & Polity

This will be a long post but an important one. I've been working on this for some time, and starting writing about our church polity years ago. I had a piece published in the UM Quarterly Review and The Circuit Rider about the subject. I want all UM's who will voting at this summer's Annual Conferences to be aware of the gravity of their votes to change the UM constitution.

A Rationale to Oppose Proposed Constitutional Changes

The United Methodist Church has a distinctive connectional polity that promotes a unity of purpose throughout the denomination. Connectionalism is our vehicle for ministry. In these proposed changes to the constitution we are voting on connectionalism and how that supports our shared ministry. While we are a worldwide denomination, we must carefully protect those things that make us uniquely United Methodist. We believe that these amendments fundamentally harm our classic connectional polity.

Proposed Constitutional Amendment # IV, Par. 10 BOD –
Current ¶ 10 reads: There shall be central conferences for the church outside the United States of America and, if necessary, provisional central conferences, all with such powers, duties, and privileges as are hereinafter set forth.

If the amendment is passed and so declared by the Council of Bishops, ¶ 10 would read: There shall be regional conferences and, if necessary, provisional regional conferences, all with such powers, duties and privileges as are hereinafter set forth. (The change in name from “central” to “regional” takes effect January 1, 2013 at which time this parenthetical procedural note will be removed from the Constitution.)

Rationale to Oppose:
This amendment completely changes our structure by creating regional conferences across the entire church. This strikes at the heart of United Methodism. By mandating separate regional conferences, each with the ability to adapt the Book of Discipline as it so chooses (cf. Par. 31.5), this amendment would divide the denomination and cause the demise of one of our most hallowed hallmarks: Connectionalism. This amendment and the others hereinafter identified are the opposite of Wesley’s adage, “The world is my parish.” Separate regional parishes around the world would have very disparate agendas and priorities. We would look like the Anglican Communion that finds itself at odds among its various branches – compartmentalized and competitive. The US Episcopal Church is subject now to the missionary efforts of those from overseas that have a different understanding of theology and culture. This is where we are heading with Regional Conferences in the UMC.

Some of this separation has already taken place because conferences outside of the US can adapt the Book of Discipline (¶ 543.7). There is ambiguity about the purpose and scope of this ability to adapt the Book of Discipline. Some would say that the Book of Discipline limits such adaptations to organization and administration, while others suggest that the changes may be all encompassing. To allow the United States to have the same power would split the church. A better option would be to carefully limit the ways in which overseas conferences can adapt The Book of Discipline. For instance, there is at least one central conference outside the United States that does not have any female clergy, and another that either adapts or takes the opposite view of the Book of Discipline on contentious Social Principles. One central conference already states in their “version” of the Social Principles that “we are not of one mind on the practice of homosexuality,” and does not declare it to be incompatible with Christian teaching. Regardless of one’s personal perspective, one must note the confusion this places in the minds of those who call themselves United Methodist. Rather than expand the number of ways that we can disagree and divide, we should defeat this amendment and study ways to secure what we hold in common.

Proposed Constitutional Amendment # X, Par. 28 BOD –
Current Section V heading reads: Section V. Central Conferences and ¶ 28 reads: There shall be central conferences for the work of the church outside the United States of America with such duties, powers, and privileges as are hereinafter set forth. The number and boundaries of the central conferences shall be determined by the Uniting Conference. Subsequently the General Conference shall have authority to change the number and boundaries of central conferences. The central conferences shall have the duties, powers, and privileges hereinafter set forth.

If the amendment is passed and so declared by the Council of Bishops, the heading of Section V and ¶ 28 would read: Section V. Regional Conferences and ¶ 28. Article I. would read: There may be regional conferences for the work of the Church with such duties, powers, and privileges as are hereinafter set forth. The General Conference shall have authority to change the number and boundaries of regional conferences. The regional conferences shall have the duties, powers, and privileges hereinafter set forth. (The change in name from “central” to “regional” takes effect January 1, 2013 at which time this parenthetical procedural note will be removed from the Constitution.)

Rationale to Oppose:
This Amendment presupposes that there may be Regional Conferences as the worldwide structure of the denomination. This actually fractures our denomination more than uniting it, and allows further fracturing by a 50% plus one vote of General Conference rather than a 2/3 vote of the entire denomination. It is also an expensive restructuring. It adds a Regional Conference structure in the United States on top of Jurisdictions that are all then amenable to a General Conference. This creates a costly extra layer of bureaucracy. In this time of financial uncertainty and struggle, the expense is not justified.

Further, this particular amendment is also ambiguous as it states that there “may be” Regional Conferences. There is a lack of clarity caused by saying in other amendments that there “shall be” Regional Conferences and then saying here that there “may be” such. The discrepancy leaves the denomination open to ways of organizing that may create harmful, unanticipated consequences that could threaten United Methodism’s core interpretation of connectionalism.

Proposed Constitutional Amendment # XIII, Par. 31 BOD –
Current ¶ 31 reads: The central conferences shall have the following powers and duties and such others as may be conferred by the General Conference:
1. To promote the evangelistic, educational, missionary, social-concern, and benevolent interests and institutions of the Church within their own boundaries.
2. To elect the bishops for the respective central conferences in number as may be determined from time to time, upon a basis fixed by the General conference, and to cooperate in carrying out such plans for the support of their bishops as may be determined by the General Conference.
3. To establish and constitute such central conference boards as may be required and to elect their administrative officers.

4. To determine the boundaries of the annual conferences within their respective areas.
5. To make such rules and regulations for the administration of the work within their boundaries including such changes and adaptations of the General Discipline as the conditions in the respective areas may require, subject to the powers that have been or shall be vested in the General Conference.

6. To appoint a judicial court to determine legal questions arising on the rules, regulations, and such revised, adapted, or new sections of the central conference Discipline enacted by the central conference.

7. To appoint a committee on appeals to hear and determine the appeal of a traveling preacher of that central conference from the decision of a committee on trial.

If the amendment is passed and so declared by the Council of Bishops, ¶ 31 would read: The regional conferences shall have the following powers and duties and such others as may be conferred by the General Conference:
1. To promote the evangelistic, educational, missionary, social-concern, and benevolent interests and institutions of the Church within their own boundaries.
2. In those regional conferences where there are no jurisdictional conferences, to elect the bishops for the respective regional conferences in number as may be determined from time to time, upon a basis fixed by the General Conference, and to cooperate in carrying out such plans for the support of their bishops as may be determined by the General Conference. In those regional conferences where there are jurisdictional conferences, bishops shall be elected by the respective jurisdictional conferences.
3. To establish and constitute such regional conference boards as may be required and to elect their administrative officers.
4. To determine the boundaries of the annual conferences within their respective areas.
5. To make such rules and regulations for the administration of the work within their boundaries including such changes and adaptations of the General Discipline as the conditions in the respective areas may require, subject to the powers that have been or shall be vested in the General Conference.
6. To appoint a judicial court to determine legal questions arising on the rules, regulations, and such revised, adapted, or new sections of the regional conference Discipline enacted by the regional conference.
7. To appoint a committee on appeals to hear and determine the appeal of a traveling preacher of that regional conference from the decision of a committee on trial. (The change in name from “central” to “regional” takes effect January 1, 2013 at which time this parenthetical procedural note will be removed from the Constitution.)

Rationale to Oppose:
This amendment clearly reflects a lack of clarity about our connectional structure. It blurs the powers of Jurisdictions and Regional Conferences. For instance, ¶ 31.4 says that regional conferences can determine boundaries of annual conferences whereas ¶ 27.4 and Judicial Decision 447 reserves that right for Jurisdictional Conferences. This is a contradiction that reveals the need for further study on these structural changes before we amend the constitution.
To further illustrate the particular problems of this amendment, the notion of each Regional Conference (¶ 31.6) having its own Judicial Court to adjudicate its particular adaptations of the General Discipline is simply unacceptable. It undermines both the church-wide Judicial Council and our unity. Different Judicial Councils with different agendas will fracture us. This amendment clearly threatens how we practice being United Methodist; creating confusion and Disciplinary contradictions.

Proposed Constitutional Amendment # XXIII, Par. 38 BOD –
Current ¶ 38 reads: The work of the Church outside the United States of America may be formed into central conferences, the number and boundaries of which shall be determined by the Uniting Conference, the General Conference having authority subsequently to make changes in the number and boundaries.

If the amendment is passed and so declared by the Council of Bishops, ¶ 38 would read: The work of the Church may be formed into regional conferences, the number and boundaries of which shall be determined by the General Conference. (The change in name from “central” to “regional” takes effect January 1, 2013 at which time this parenthetical procedural note will be removed from the Constitution.)

Rationale to Oppose:
Judicial Decision 1100 (Fall 2008) has stated that the proposed amendments would create a US Regional Conference or Conferences. To have more than one regional conference in the United States, let alone in the rest of our Connection, causes the UMC to function more like the Anglican Communion and its relationship to the US Episcopal Church. The specter of schism looms large if this amendment passes.

We could spend millions discerning property ownership rather than making disciples of Christ. There would be potential for United Methodists from one Regional Conference to send clergy into another region to start congregations that are allied with its own particular theology. We would have a United Methodist turf war, and end up trying to evangelize each other rather than the unchurched; sending missionaries to our “misguided” counterparts maybe only a few states away rather than reaching out to our hurting world.

Proposed Constitutional Amendment # XXVI, Par. 48 BOD –
Current ¶ 48 reads: The bishops of each jurisdictional and central conference shall constitute a College of Bishops, and such College of Bishops shall arrange the plan of episcopal supervision of the annual conference, missionary conferences, and missions within their respective territories.

If the amendment is passed and so declared by the Council of Bishops, ¶ 48 would read: The bishops of each jurisdictional and regional conference shall constitute a College of Bishops. In regional conferences where there are jurisdictional conferences, the jurisdictional colleges shall arrange the plan of episcopal supervision of the annual conferences, missionary conferences and missions within their jurisdictions. In regional conferences where there are no jurisdictional conferences, the regional conference College of Bishops shall arrange the plan of episcopal supervision of the annual conferences, missionary conferences, and missions within their respective territories. (The change in name from “central” to “regional” takes effect January 1, 2013 at which time this parenthetical procedural note will be removed from the Constitution.)

Rationale to Oppose:
This amendment should be defeated because it presupposes and endorses that there must be Regional Conferences. The passage of this amendment and any others that do more than change the name “central” to “regional” are unsupportable if one holds that our connectional unity is vitally important.

This amendment also reveals the continuing inequity between the church in the US and overseas, allowing for jurisdictional conferences in the US and only regional conferences overseas. This contributes to a US-centric paternalism that is adverse to the unity of the church.

Conclusion: It is important to defeat these amendments and allow the Worldwide Nature of The UMC Study Committee to make its recommendations to the 2012 General Conference. Then, if so inclined, and connectional polity is protected, we can change the constitution. Defeat Amendments IV, X, XIII, XXIII, and XXVI.

Domed and Doomed Christians

As much as I’m an underdog-fan as a Gamecock, I was glad the Pittsburgh Steelers beat the Arizona Cardinals in the Super Bowl. I like the Steelers because I like the city of Pittsburgh. I’ve spent time there upon several occasions. It’s a pretty city with the Monongahela and the Allegheny rivers meeting to form the Ohio. The tunnels through Mt. Washington are daunting and majestic. The ride up the city’s famous Incline is worth the view overlooking historic Fort Pitt. The PP&G (Pittsburg Plate & Glass) building is an east coast version of the Crystal Cathedral.
The steel mills are mostly closed in this Rust-Belt city, but the Steeler attitude is still present. For the nearly two weeks I was there five years ago, I witnessed the what-you-see-is-what-you-get grit of the people. For instance, practically every day I ate at the Steel City Diner. It wasn’t a fancy restaurant, not even close. It was exactly what the name said it was, a diner. The food was hearty, hot, and hit the spot. The folks working there were personable and caring. The whole city exuded a raw edgy work ethic that was both no-nonsense and refreshing. There was no “putting on airs,” as the old adage goes.
It’s interesting that the Pittsburgh Steelers play at Heinz Field, named, of course, for the famous condiment company that is one of the backbones of the Pittsburgh community. Heinz Field is completely au naturel in both grass and sunlight. The Cardinals play in a facility with a retractable roof. I think there’s something to be said for football teams willing to duke it out in the brutal cold of winter. I think it helps them win, too.
Here’s why. The conditioning of a Super Bowl team requires rain, wind, mud, heat, cold, snow, and sleet. No team will be ready for the challenges of the playoffs, much less the Super Bowl, who hasn’t been through the elements. For my two-cent’s worth, the hardship of the elements builds character and character is what wins Super Bowls. Every team has talent. Therefore, hunger, desire, and character are huge. That says to me, from my experience of their hometown, why the Steelers were able to pull the big win off.
But what has this got to do with Christianity and faith? Christianity that resides in a sheltered environment is domed and doomed. To be Christian is to be in the world, open to all of its elements. Christianity didn’t begin in the protected enclave of a hot-house but in the open-air arenas and coliseums of Roman martyrdom. When pagans saw how Christians fared under the sword, how we weathered the persecutions, and how we died for Christ; they knew there was something “real” about Jesus, and they wanted to learn more.
We don’t play on artificial turf. We live in the real world, and the real world needs us! The earth needs us! I saw a bumper sticker the other day as I was driving down the street: “It’s time to Mother Earth.” At first, slow of mind, I didn’t get it. Then, wham! Yes, it is time for us to nurture this planet. We take and take, and hardly ever give back. Spaceship Earth is in dire need of our protection and stewardship.

Genuine Christianity is involved in an open-air transparent defense of creation and all its creatures. Artificial Christians and sheltered ones need not apply for discipleship. God wants us to make a difference. Can we? If we keep playing on real turf in the real world both history and statistics are on our side in the Super Bowl of life.