May 19, 2013 · 12:47 pm

God, Tragedy, Churches, Faith and Forgiveness

Granbury Tornado Damage, photo from NBCDFW website

Granbury Tornado Damage, photo from NBCDFW website

The Dallas Morning News had a front page article today about the role faith and churches are playing in the aftermath of the deadly tornadoes in Granbury.

The beginning of the article contains these statements:

In a place where so much has been lost, broken and scattered, many people in this tornado-touched town say they found something they didn’t know was missing.

“I guess you’d call it faith,” said Josiah Thompson, a 26-year-old who decided at the last minute to take his wife and two young children to Granbury Baptist Church on Wednesday night. Thirty minutes later, his rental home exploded in winds up to 200 mph.

“That proves right there that going to church can literally save your life,” said Thompson, . . . Thompson said his faith was renewed in friends and family, who have buried him in cash, clothes and food. And in God, who demonstrated quite clearly that everything important is out of our control.

Thompson, like so many others in this lake-straddling town an hour southwest of Fort Worth, said it’s impossible to live through the fury of an EF-4 tornado and not sense God’s protecting hand.

God’s Protecting Hand?

God’s protecting hand.  Oh yes.  But how about those who were killed?  Were they left out somehow of this miracle of protection?

That’s my first question here. And I’m not going to try to answer it except to say this: tragedies happen to the best of us and to the worst of us. If God is not present in all these tragedies, even those which lead to death, then God is a capricious monster and should not be worshipped. It is wonderful that the family mentioned in the article was spared. But I find it despairingly grievous to suggest that they are more special to God that those whose lives were lost.

Let’s just stop doing that.  Please.

The second question revolves around what is happening now: both local and distance churches are, as is normal, responding quickly and generously to those whose homes and lives have been ravaged by the tornadoes. Same thing is happening in West, Texas, after the fertilizer plant explosion there. These stories are written over and over again. In the face of tragedies and natural disasters, people almost instinctively turn to churches. And church people also instinctively turn to service.

Takers AND Givers or Takers OR Givers?

My question: Will those who are on the receiving end of what will be nearly unceasing acts of mercy and charity on the part of church-going folk themselves become part of a worshipping community? Or will they just expect that the church will show up at the next tragedy without their own participation?

Frankly, it is far easier to just stay on the receiving end of this type of charity than it is to become a vital part of a worshipping community, to train oneself for acts of charity, and to learn to pray, “Thy will be done” with faithfulness and hope in the face of hard and complex lives.

Several weeks ago, this spoof piece by Larknews made the rounds on Facebook, passed from clergy person to clergy person. Some, not knowing it was satire, commented, “Wish I could do that.” What was “that?” It was the act of aggressively telling people who are “takers” from church life to either get with the program and start becoming “givers” as well, or just get off the church membership lists.

I understand the temptation.

For the last several weeks, I have been on a combined vacation/study leave. Last year, when I was on Sabbatical leave, I spent every Sunday at a different church. These visits spawned my “Mystery Worship” series.

Week after week, I wandered into different churches and differing worship experiences. I chronicled what I experienced at each one. It was fun–and I also knew I’d never be back at any of those places. I would never establish the kinds of connections there that would offer real life and hope for me–and in which I could offer real life and hope in return.

I was going to do the same this year. And then, suddenly, I just could not. Utter exhaustion  accompanied me during this time away.

The intensity of the worship schedule starting in Advent and culminating at Easter, along with some significant issues at church that had to be courageously faced but which left me battered and bruised, combined with some intensely difficult personal issues had left me almost completely empty. The fact that I am still healthy physically leaves me shocked and grateful.

But the thought of walking into someplace full of strangers and seeking to be in a space where I could freely open myself to what I needed, the healing Presence of God, simply flattened me. That which I needed most I could not bring myself to do.

Although I have never minded solitude, thanks be to God, I am finding in my solitary time away greater and greater need for real community. A community that can indeed become vulnerable to God in faithful worship, vulnerable to one another in loving, accountable connections, and vulnerable to the world in sacrificial service. Just popping into a worship service cannot bring that needed connection.

Those who are on the receiving end of sacrificial service in Granbury, West, and countless other locations around the world see one portion of church life. They are essentially doing what I did on my Sabbatical: popping in and receiving.  Even so, they rightly must be “takers” for a while.

Those who seek to be givers must go much further and discover the practices the disciplines of the church. This is a lifelong process of forming spiritual connections and learning to be a part of a community.

The Nature of Real Connection

In all my years of loving and serving the church, this one main lesson stands out: we who are connected to one another by our churches are connected not because we are good, or nicer, or more generous than others. We are all exquisitely human, and full of failings. Many of our failings actually see deeper exposure by our very connection through the church.

Furthermore, we have high expectations of each other. Because of that, we fail one another not just mildly but spectacularly. That’s what makes the healthy church and spiritually-based connection so powerful. At its best, it is unbreakable because we learn what it really costs to forgive each other. Once we learn that, we are fully able to worship God, receive forgiveness, and live in grace.

I’ve blogged and thought a lot over the years about our need to be in connection with each other and especially about the situation within my beloved United Methodist Church. Our fights and disagreements with each other are threatening to tear us asunder.

Will We Forgive?

Will we forgive each other?

Will we forgive each other for seeing different versions of the truth even while affirming and humble owning our particular versions?

Will we engage in the disciplines necessary to have adequate connection so we can continue to respond to crises and tragedies?

Will we insist to others and know well ourselves that being only takers ultimately means the destruction of the soul?

Will we bow before the Almighty and Holy One and say, “Thy will be done, even if it means my own death?”

I don’t know.  I do know my concerns here add to my weariness. I do know I’m a bit frustrated with my own church community right now where too many stay on the membership rolls only in the role of taker, not giver. Too many who will not engage in the necessary disciplines to learn to know God;  too many who expect the pastor to keep them motivated rather than tapping their own motivation; too many who expect others to give generously and sacrificially but who will not even consider the power of the tithe for themselves; too many who see their own life’s challenges as needing everyone’s attention without awareness that everyone suffers.

Yet, each of these also needs forgiveness, support, and the opportunity to transform from being takers to being givers.  And I do as well. The process never ends.

Leave a Comment

Filed under accountability, charity, church, clergy, generosity

Tagged as , , ,

May 15, 2013 · 11:38 am

Japanese Sex Slaves and The Nature of Truth

Pregnant Comfort Woman Discovered After World War Two

Pregnant Comfort Woman Discovered After World War Two

Please read the quote below from the current mayor of Osaka, Japan, Toru Hashimoto.  He was speaking about the use of sex slaves provided for Japanese soldiers during World War Two.  Historians suggest that up to 200,000 Korean and Chinese women were forced into providing these services.

“To maintain discipline in the military, it must have been necessary at that time,” Hashimoto said. “For soldiers who risked their lives in circumstances where bullets are flying around like rain and wind, if you want them to get some rest, a comfort women system was necessary. That’s clear to anyone.”

OK, I’m hardly the only one objecting to such a statement. This story is all over the electronic news, although I stumbled on it accidentally in the print version of the Dallas Morning News today.

What I am is probably the most obscure commenter, and very likely the only one to use this as a way of entering discussion about the nature of truth.

Hashimoto, the author of this incredibly inflammatory quote, is being accused of whitewashing history. Here’s what I see: rather than simply whitewashing history, he is speaking what he needs to be true in order to continue to justify his current course of action and his belief system.

I don’t think we humans have an easy time of holding two very much contradictory opinions at the same time.  If one of our primary opinions is “I’m essentially a good person” then evidence of lack of goodness needs to be adjusted to fit the primary filter. So if Mayor Hashimoto wants to hold to the larger truth that the Japanese aggression leading to the second world war was justified and necessary, then results springing from that just war need to be explained in light of the larger truth. That’s what we humans do.

The Nature of Truth

OK, now, to the main point:  the nature of truth.

I happen to hold to the view that there is such a thing as absolute truth.

I also hold to the position that I, in my very finite, extraordinarily flawed humanness, am not capable of understanding more than a tiny portion of absolute truth. I really do believe that the Apostle Paul had this one right when he was warning the squabbling Corinthian church about the necessity of long-suffering, self-sacrificing supportive love for one another. He wrote after discussion the nature of that kind of love, “for now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known .”

Frankly, I see what I want to see, and I have huge capacities to ignore what I don’t want to see. My office, as do most institutional offices, has a ceiling well wired and littered with those long, awful, unflattering, fluorescent bulbs. I never, ever turn them on. Instead, I have carefully placed multiple table lamps and a floor lamp that provide soft, indirect lighting.

Why? Well, frankly, women of a certain age really don’t need to be in a place where harsh, overhead lighting predominates. It exposes things I really don’t want to see–both in me and in others.

“The Bible Clearly Teaches . . . “

When I hear someone say, “The Bible clearly teaches . . . ” with the understanding that if I disagree with the answer I am therefore tagged as “unbiblical” in my worldview, I have real problems.

You see, I’ve spent my life trying to sort out what “the Bible clearly teaches” and have discovered that there is no real agreement across the board on anything “the Bible clearly teaches.” Everyone looks at the Scriptures through our own version of truth, using our own blinders, and with our views distorted and challenged by the dimmed mirror.

When I hear someone say, “I KNOW this is true and biblical and if you don’t agree with me, I will refuse to stay in connection to you, ” I hear someone who is making a significant violation of what is pretty darn clear in the Holy Scriptures. Please understand, using my filters, I think our primary command is to love one another, to forgive one another and to stay in unity and connection with each other.

The wholesale, “I have correct doctrine and you don’t and therefore to h*** with you,” strikes me as profoundly unbiblical. Those are my lenses, that is my primary truth. But it is not the primary truth for many.

And this is what I see happening in The United Methodist Church, apparently primarily over the very complex question of full inclusion of those in the LGBTQ camps. Many responses strike me as profoundly unbiblical.

I see the camp that says, “I KNOW what is true and you don’t” telling those they disagree with that they need to take a hike. The camp that says, “I believe there are radically differing ways to look at this and I have come to radically different conclusions” generally says, “Let’s stay in connection and embrace the wideness of God’s mercy.”

But, of course, that is my truth, and again, it is filtered through  my lenses.

A Tight Rigid Line?

Most people I know want a tight, rigid line between truth and non-truth. They want a clear division. And some things are really clear. I’ve written a bit about the nature of evil here. But genuine disagreement is NOT evil. It is human. It drives creativity and dips into wells of passion that can bring about huge societal changes for the good.

Look at the history of racism and sexism, particularly through the eyes of those who want to stand firmly on biblical truth. Depending on one’s primary truth, and primary entrance point into the interpretational challenges of the Bible, people have for centuries landed on radically different sides of these debates.

Much of the Christian world still does not see women as fully human, or as those who should exercise any type of spiritual authority. Those in that camp will say that are profoundly biblical and anyone who disagrees with them have wandered away from revealed truth.

Let us go back to Mayor Hashimoto’s statement: very few readers of his comments will find them anything but utterly disgusting. But some people do agree with him. Some want that version of the truth:  it gives both comfort and justification for further actions that others will condemn.

Those who agree with him will or already have formed a group of like-minded people. They will reinforce each others views and decisions about such a controversial matter.  And their versions of the truth will be solidly cemented in their minds.

That’s what we do. Unless we happen to be those who are willing to say with humility, “God, Your will, not mine, be done.” That is the most challenging prayer of all to pray because it relinquishes control and leaves us open and vulnerable to the notion that we really might not have all truth and all knowledge at our fingertips.

Without humility, we are doomed to break apart. That is also the truth. And it is one we all need to heed.

1 Comment

Filed under Bible, certainty, evil

Tagged as , , , ,

May 14, 2013 · 10:31 am

More on The Nature of Evil

DementorSeveral weeks ago, in the aftermath of the bombing at the Boston Marathon, I wrote: “evil defies reason.” With the exposure now of kidnappings and years-long torture of three women in Cleveland, the time has come to further explore the nature of evil.

Again, evil defies reason. Reasonable people do not plant bombs that kill, maim and destroy. Reasonable people do not kidnap others and hold them and torture them for years on end. Reasonable people do not insist on sucking everyone around them into their own vortex of impenetrable darkness.

Reasonable people may make lots of foolish mistakes, even indeed bringing harm to others, but they do not do such things with hope-defying, life-destroying murderous intentions.

Evil people do exactly that.

It is the nature of evil to destroy innocence and to use fear and terror as primary weapons.

We often don’t know when we are going to come face to face with evil. There are no preparations adequate to protect from some of their plans—such as bombings. We can offer fairly effective protections from reasonable people when they make mistakes or engage in unwise activities, like mixing texting and driving or alcohol and loaded handguns. Such actions are not necessarily evil, despite the often destructive results.

But the craftiness of someone who has crossed over into evil often takes us by surprise.

Craftiness is such an important word here. The most evil are those who can make themselves look supremely good. The kidnapper in Cleveland offering rides, the religious practices that claim to own the only real path to redemption, the desire to consolidate power and special privilege by the justification that many will benefit—how often such ones are praised!

I’ve spent many pleasurable and also thought-provoking hours the last several weeks reading the Harry Potter novels by J.K. Rowling.  I remember when they first came out and the initial movie hit the screens.  Many well-meaning Christians called them “evil” and insisted they promoted witchcraft.  Warnings popped up telling parents that their children should not read those books or see the movies.

What I’ve found is a compelling set of stories about the ongoing confrontations between good and evil. In Rowling’s character, Lord Voldemort, we have an exquisitely drawn portrait of the Evil One and his craftiness.  But one set of beings that inhabit the Potter books seem to me to show most fully how that which is truly evil operates:  these are the “dementors.”

As one of Harry Potter’s instructors described them: “Dementors are among the foulest creatures that walk this earth. They infest the darkest, filthiest places, they glory in decay and despair, they drain peace, hope, and happiness out of the air around them.”

Soullessness, emptiness, filth, decay and despair, disguised by false promises:  these are the primary tools.

How shall we respond when face-to-face with such soul-sucking darkness?  The human tendency?  Fight bad with bad. ”Well they hurt me, so I’ll hurt them in return” has justified more violence, war and destruction in the world than any other factor.

But when evil threatens us, we’d be much better off to change our focus from “How can I fight back” to  ”Why am I so destroyable?” Because when we are destroyable, we have let our own inner evil win rather than calling for the good also within us to stand firm.

Remember: Dementors, and even Lord Voldemort, eventually do face defeat.  But they are defeated by good, not by greater evil.

We must discover the real nature and power of goodness in order to be both effectively protected and properly armed to engage evil with competence and hope. The craftiness of the Evil One has made that discovery process amazingly difficult.

I look forward to exploring these things with you over the next few weeks in both writing and preaching as I return to the pulpit on May 26.

1 Comment

Filed under death, evil, fear

Tagged as , , , , ,

May 13, 2013 · 1:07 pm

Heart-breaking Schism or Healthy Division?

day-lily-smI am choosing to participate in a synchblog by DreamUMC on the topic of Schism in the United Methodist Church.

Last fall, I wrote a post about the now-impossibility of actually reforming death-giving structure of the UMC.  My frustration emerged after the Judicial Council, doing exactly what they are supposed to do, put the final nail in the coffin by overturning all significant votes taken at the last General Conference.

Now, the big challenge, besides our structure, are the multiple theologies held by varying United Methodists. One of the UMC’s great strengths is its wide umbrella gathering many under its shelter.  That wide umbrella now threatens to self-destruct.

Give Up and Split Up?

So, the questions appears again and again:  should we just give up and split up?

My answer is both no and yes.  We must not give up.  To do so denies the transforming power of the Gospel that all of us seek to uphold.

To say to one another, “Our disagreements are so great that I no longer wish to be in connection with you,” says to the world (already prepared to condemn the church for its poor ability to create anything approaching heavenly harmony), “Yep, pretty well everything we say to you is a lie.”

If we need to split like this, we just need to give up.

The Healthy Division

But as a gardener as well as pastor, I also think there is a healthy division.  This is a division that brings lots of new life.

As are many gardens, my flower and vegetable beds are a mixture of annuals and perennials.

Annuals must be planted each year.  Ideally, and if we are not using hybrids, the plants produce well for a year, and then set some seeds so they can be resown and rebirthed the following year.  Life to death and back to life again, that beautiful cycle.

Part of church life consist of “annuals.”  There should be short-term efforts that produce fruit and then die and then have the seeds resown as necessary.

But the larger church functions more like perennial plants, which come back year after year without the necessity of resowing seed. Eventually they get so stuck together that only the act of dividing them gives them opportunity of new life.

Most gardeners I know take immense pleasure in dividing their perennials and giving them away.  The flower beds at the church I serve are almost entirely populated with donated perennials.  Those plants are a testament to the life-giving process of division and separation.

The image at the top of this post shows a daylily bloom just about ready to offer its beauty with flowers that live just one day.  That particular daylily plant is the third or even fourth division of the original daylily plant.  One plant has turned into at least 20 more.  All are related to each other.

The divisions may have been painful for the plants. There is some evidence that plants do feel pain.  Each plant to be divided had to be forcibly removed from its spot, pried apart and replanted some distance away.  There was loss in the process.  Some of the divisions didn’t carry enough roots to be able to rebuild themselves.  Most did, and continue to do so.

The ones I don’t divide eventually quit offering blooms.  The are just too tightly wound around each other to offer beauty any longer.

elephant-ears-sm

These elephant ears are now four years old.  I had planted seven bulbs originally.  At least sixty to seventy have now come up where the original seven first took root.

At some point, but not nearly as soon as the daylilies, they, too, will have to be divided. Otherwise they will end up killing each other because of inadequate space to grow and find light and water.

Lessons from the Garden

So what do lessons from the garden say to the church?

I think they teach us exactly what we need to know:  if we are going to stay alive for generations to come, and continue to be able to offer the beauty of grace, we must engage in healthy division practices WHILE staying connected by our DNA.

Right now, we appear to be functioning like a perennial that refuses to be dug up and broken apart.  Our roots are so intertwined and stuck together that they can no longer receive water or fertilizer.  The core had become hard, tight, and unable to bring forth blooms.  Slowly, but with great surety, the entire plant will die without separation.

This is the pattern of the early church.  They fought and argued and disagreed and separated and still stayed as one united by Jesus.

Doctrinal Purity/Missional Relevance

But how do we do this?  I so appreciate what Jeremy Smith has said here: Schism seeks to end the tension between doctrinal purity and missional relevance, but fails. There can be space in the UMC for both those who place doctrine above the human condition and those who place the human condition above doctrine.

We must not break into different denominations over these issues.  We must find a way to strengthen that umbrella so there is room for both to be covered by grace underneath it.

Certainly, there is not going to be unified thinking or universal agreement in our connection.  Thanks be to God for that.  A place with unified thinking and universal agreement is a place where terror and mind-control rule.  

Our rule is to be love.  That is how others will know we are Christians.  They will see us love WHILE we disagree and fight and argue and make some healthy divisions so we can continue to grow and bloom and give life.

Those on the side of missional relevance need those who value doctrinal purity.  Doctrine matters hugely.  We are to be distinctively Christian.  We are not an “anything goes” church.

Those who value doctrinal purity must learn to find their humility in the mystery of God and grace and recognize that doctrinal purity at its core leads to practices like the Inquisition.  When the need for purity is not balanced with deep humility and awareness that all human decisions about the nature of God are deeply limited and always flawed, that need brings death without hope of resurrection.

So, yes, we must divide. No, we must not split or let schism rule.

We need to stay United Methodists.  United in love, in the core of our Wesleyan understanding, and held together by the bonds of grace that remind us that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.  That proves God’s love for us.  In the name of Jesus Christ, we are forgiven.  Glory to God.  Amen.

4 Comments

Filed under church as garden, forgiveness, General Conference, schism

Tagged as , , ,

May 9, 2013 · 10:43 am

Missing Babies, Feral Males, “Smokin’ Hot Wives” and Female Appointments

Ultrasound of a female fetus

Ultrasound of a female fetus

A little background here before I weave together some threads of thought.

Sex Selective Abortions

First, look at issue of sex-selective abortions and female infanticide. These are major issues especially in India and China.  For multiple financial and cultural reasons, many families have a strong preference for male babies over female babies.  The growing availability and affordability of ultrasound technology makes it increasingly easy to abort unwanted female fetuses.  If an unwanted one makes it to birth, the child is often abandoned and left to die.

The result is a growing disparity between the number of males and females entering adolescence and early adulthood.  In plain English, there are not enough women to go around.  Here’s an article about the situation in 2001.  By using 2001 figures (it is worse now), we can see that the situation has now manifested itself in that shortage of marriage-age females.

Feral Males

Now, has anyone besides me noted the large number of news items recently about the growing incidences of mass rapes in India?  My quick analysis:  there are bands of feral males roaming the countryside full of anger about the shortage and taking out their anger on the women they cannot have.

Women are a civilizing force, even relatively powerless women, which is very much the case in India.  The decision to radically reduce the number of female infants is contributing to the destabilization of these societies.

We all know the teen-age brain is long on impulse and short on self-control.  This is especially the case in males whose brains do show somewhat different developmental patterns than females.  Risk-taking behavior without regard to consequences characterizes much youth culture, especially male-dominated youth culture.

I predict that things are going to get much, much worse in those societies that do not have sexual parity.  Even in the unlikely hope that incidence of sex-selective abortion stops immediately, it will be at least 30 years before all this sorts itself out.  Expect immense damage and continued destabilization there.

“Smokin’ Hot Wives”

Now, let’s talk about “Smokin’ Hot Wives” for a bit.  For the last several years, young, virile, charismatic male superstar pastors have made a big deal of their “smokin’ hot wives.”  It appears to be a way to let everyone knows how sexually potent these pastors are.  Here is a great post on the situation, written by someone who himself was guilty of that demeaning stances before recognizing how very, very destructive it is.

The  phrase objectifies women, placing all their worth only on their ability to be sexually attractive.  Personally, I call it “smokin’ hot pastor porn.”  It’s the first part of the book of Esther all over again.  The foolish King Xerxes insists his beautiful wife Vashti come out and dance for his drunken cronies.  When she rightfully refuses, he deposes her for her lack of submissiveness. He then systematically searches for as many young virgins as possible so he can routinely deflower them until he finds just the one who pleases him.

I do wonder what would happen if one of those “smokin’ hot” wives were to say to her pastor husband, “You are a fool and are an embarrassment to all around.”  Except they won’t because then they, like Vashti, will be labeled as “unsubmissive” and will face just punishment.  Trust me on this one.  I know that world.

Female Appointments

Now, let us talk about the apparently growing number of churches that are saying, “We don’t want a female pastor.”  I don’t know how strong this movement is, but understand that this is a problem at least in the North Texas Conference of The United Methodist Church.

These churches want men, preferably young, handsome and virile ones, to fill their pulpits.  These young men, especially when they’ve got their own “smokin’ hot wives” in tow, will solve the problem of depressed and declining churches.

They could very well be right.  Let’s face it:  pretty and sexy draws the crowds.  Always has, always will.  We live in a visual, consumer-driven society.  The call to well-formed characters, depth in spiritual understanding and practice, and complicated paths to discipleship that include following Jesus to the cross just do not fill worship spaces or offering plates.

Multiple sociological studies show that the young, the tall, the beautiful and handsome nearly always are hired earlier and with better pay packages than the dumpy, plump, and homely. I call this the Elephant Man syndrome: we have a very difficult time getting past the exterior.   Why? Probably because the young, tall and beautiful say, “Life is going on.  We will not die.  We will persevere.”

Here are the problems for female clergy:   First, when they are young and especially attractive, they very much get sexualized. Huge forces combine against taking them seriously as leaders. Second, these are their prime child bearing years.  Few female clergy are going to get away with what some high-powered women in industry get away with:  having babies and showing back up at work the next week without missing a step. Some of these high-powered ones even hire surrogates to bear their children for them.

Many older women, no longer facing the problems of being sexualized or needing to bear children while they can, have developed immense reservoirs of wisdom and the understanding of spiritual things.  But we have little value in a system that says, “only the young [and pretty/virile] may apply.  Frankly, older men do not face the same demeaning pressures.

This is our reality.  This becomes our cross to carry. And this becomes the church’s loss to bear.  So the church continues to move forward with surface spirituality that cracks when real life pressures hit.

Why can’t we do this in real partnership?  Male AND female?  Young AND old?  Beautiful AND plain?   Charismatic AND quiet? And, yes I will dare to mention this:  Heterosexual AND homosexual?  But all with formed characters, impeccable moral lives and unwavering love of God and neighbor?

Should we do this, we might indeed show the world that the church is a place where the kingdom of heaven is lived out.

But we don’t and we won’t.  And God’s heart breaks.

Addendum:  In Barry Weber’s comment below, he pointed me to a TED talk.  I thought it was so important that I have linked it here.

 

25 Comments

Filed under adolescence, character, clergy, cultural context, homosexuality, kingdom of heaven

Tagged as , , , , ,

May 2, 2013 · 3:21 pm

Straw Blankets, Ministry With The Poor

hay-blanket-peppers-smIt is cold here right now in North Texas.  Wind is blowing wildly, temperatures continue to drop and we are on target for record lows tonight.  Areas just slightly to the west and north are under a frost watch.  I suspect my own garden may get a bit of frostbite because it is on the north side, high up, with a large pasture behind it, so there is nothing to block the wind and cold.

I went out and piled straw around all the warm weather plants.  Am hopeful they won’t be damaged.  However, many gardeners and farmers may wake tomorrow to a fair amount of destruction.

As always, weather really does win. All who have reasonably well-insulated houses and functional heaters will stay comfortable. But for those who don’t . . .

These thoughts always lead me to the mandate that we are called to be in ministry with the poor.  I honor that, respect that and believe that it is nearly impossible for anyone who is reasonably protected to actually do that.

I’ve been doing a lot of reading and research this past year, trying to get a handle on what it means to be poverty-striken.  Now, there are lots of kinds of poverty:  spiritual, educational, financial, social, and cultural, just to name a few.  I think it is possible to have few monetary resources and not be poverty-striken, but those who manage that generally have rich inner resources and strong community support.  Most of the time, being impoverished in one area means the rest of the areas also suffer from the effects of poverty.

I understand that the vast majority of people in the US who end up in bankruptcy or in other terrible financial binds get there, not because of financial mismanagement or spending too much on luxuries, but because of the atrocious cost of even basic health care.  Emergencies and chronic illnesses, again much more common among those living in poverty to begin with, can send people into a never-ending spiral of greater debt, more ill-health, less ability to work, leading to greater debt, greater stress and even more ill-health.

And here is my conundrum:  how can we, particularly as United Methodists, confidently affirm that we seek to be in ministry with the poor when we have the straw blanket of fairly decent health insurance tucked all around us?

To be really, seriously, stuckly poor means no health insurance and extremely limited access to what few available means there are for medical care and the practice of habits that bring health rather than destroy health.

Last year, I had to undergo my first-ever surgery. A rapidly growing uterine tumor starting causing enough symptoms to set off alarm bells that even I would listen to.  Although I did have visions of someday being written up in a newspaper story (Headline:  ”Woman With Watermelon-sized  Tumor Steadfastly Denies That Anything is Wrong”), and after grieving that I would not be able to reach my stated goal of dying with all my lady-parts intact, I agreed to a hysterectomy.

Sure, I had co-pays.  Absolutely the hospital wanted their money up front.  It was a lot of money for me.  The insurance company paid their part (a pittance of the actual bill), and then it was over.   I was lucky. The tumor turned out to be benign, despite its rapid growth.  (One of the nurses in the hospital said, “I could not believe how much your uterus weighed!”  I tried to take that as a compliment.)  I recovered reasonably uneventfully, although I will say it is not a good idea to take an international flight just a couple of weeks after that kind of surgery.

But more to the point:  if I had not been able to wave my handy-dandy insurance card around, and whip out a high-limit credit card for my own part of this event, I would have faced these choices:  One, go ahead and let the tumor grow.  Two, have the surgery and be faced with years of paying off those bills.  And that was a relatively inexpensive procedure with no complications.

I am not rich, but I have straw blankets all around me.   I have a level of protection that cushions me to such a point that despite my real concern for those who do live in poverty, I can’t fully enter into their experience.

I do not know what it is like to live so close to the edge that a child sick for just a couple of days can have such an impact that my whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

If we are really going to do ministry with the poor, then we need to be in solidarity with the poor over these issues of health care.  I admit I do not know how to do this.  I don’t want to relinquish my own health insurance.  But I am reaching a point where I think it smacks of great hypocrisy to make that statement as a guiding principle and then live with the kinds of straw blankets around us that too many are routinely denied.

6 Comments

Filed under clergy, education, garden, health care, hypocrisy

Tagged as ,

April 24, 2013 · 9:17 pm

Called and Gifted? How about Called to Circuits?

A Circuit Rider

A Circuit Rider

The blogging world of United Methodist Clergy has exploded recently with the revelation that the Texas Annual Conference is floating a document that appears “ageist” in its suggestions as to who might or might not be encouraged to seek ordination there. I want to thank Jeremy at Hacking Christianity for this post which exposes the possible plans in the Texas Annual Conference for discouraging older people from entering the ordination process.

Now, there are lots of comments flying around. One, from someone who was part of creating the proposal, reminded us that we live in the real world and that, among other things, older clergy add to the health insurance burdens of all us the rest of us. This, of course, assumes that no younger clergy will find themselves in the midst of a horrific disease and will run up giant medical bills in response to it, a rather naive assumption.

But others are saying, and in my opinion more rightly, that just because someone senses a call to the ministry of the ordained doesn’t necessarily make them one of the chosen for this very complex and draining profession. Age, gender, able-bodiedness, race, etc. are not the issue.

Giftedness Must Match the Call

The issue is giftedness for the profession.

I wish that every person sitting on the various gatekeeper boards (SPRC’s, District Board of Ministries, Conference Board of Ordained Ministries), would take the time to read this compelling little novel called Cosmas or the Love of God.

Here’s a review:

Devout, sensitive, young Cosmas believes that he has a vocation to become a Trappist monk, but the reality of monastic life disappoints him deeply. Fellow monks are hard to live with. The life of the monastery seems worldly. He is disheartened by his own shortcomings and appalled by the weaknesses of others. If he can’t live the life, does that mean God isn’t calling him to it? What should he do? Many people—single, married, vowed, ordained—ask these same questions. Pierre de Calan explores them all in this exquisite tale of a man who learns that sanctity does not mean perfection.

Now, that statement in the review, “the reality of monastic life disappoints him deeply,” struck a nerve with me. The reality of the life of one in the ministry of the ordained surely has disappointed everyone to some degree.

Frankly, fellow clergy are hard to live with. The nature of the “career ladder” for pastoral moves, and a highly limited number of prime appointments makes us all competitors with one another more than colleagues in loving covenant.

“Worldly” is very much a word that describes The United Methodist Church. We are selling our souls down the river of numerical success. The “making of disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world” be damned. The process of discipleship simply gets in the way. It is too slow, too cumbersome, without glamour, and not at all remunerative. Seriously, no really effective discipler is going to make Time Magazine’s “25 Most Influential Christian Leaders” list.

We’ve Already Tried This

But none of that is the point. Here is the point:

The young, hotshot (male) clergy that the movin’ and shakin’ Conferences want and are actively promoting to prestigious pulpits look like clones of the very people who helped bring The UMC to the point where we are now: laboring under giant, smothering, expensive infrastructure that says, “More is better!” They are the ones who have proudly brought us to a situation where we are crushed under bureaucracy, burdened with an unworkable, impenetrable Book of Discipline, and dismayed by the fact that apparently only 15% of our churches can be labeled “vital.”

Now, time for a serious disclaimer: Every Christian generation does what seems right at the time in their call to serve the church and to love God and neighbor. Those men, and a few women, who came into clergy ranks 35-50 years ago were doing exactly what the conventional wisdom of the day said to do, and they did it with the best of intentions. Many have persevered through years of heartache, disappointment, and difficult appointments.

The Search for a Messiah

Nonetheless, we as a denomination are in a bad place. So we, in our very human state, start looking for a Messiah. But we don’t want a Messiah like Jesus, who died alone at the cross, pretty well disappointing everyone who wanted to restore “success” to the Jewish nation. No, we want a messiah like Moses who will lead us to the promised land, flowing with milk and honey, or in our case, full offering plates and stuffed worship centers.

Our current hopes as those who will be our Messiahs? Young, gifted, good-looking male pastors. There are solid reasons for this. Frankly, the ones I know that fit the description have simply an astounding level of talent and also come to their calls to the ministry of the ordained under powerful leading from the Spirit of God.

But here lies my great, huge concern: Too many of these young, gifted ones have not spent adequate time in the desert in order to competently deal with the huge pressure to succeed, i.e., save The United Methodist Church. How many of these will bring incalculable harm because their talents have not yet been joined by characters both tested and purified by fire? How many will end up like Walker Railey and Bailey Smith, just to name two of those whose talent levels were not matched with formed characters?

Moses was clearly called to leadership, to his own brand of messiahship, from birth. He was not gifted for the task until he lost everything and had to come face-to-face with his own soul in the wilderness.

Called to Circuit Ministry?

I want to make a suggestion here that I think might help: Let us consider returning to real circuit ministry. Our so-called “itinerancy” is simply a joke, a code for “some well-connected ones are going to make it big and will be powerful and famous but most of you are going to labor in near-poverty and great obscurity for your entire ministerial lives.”

It’s time to change this system.

I envision circuits this way: Churches are grouped geographically into a circuit with no more than one large membership church in any given circuit. Clergy teams are appointed to circuits, not individual charges. The teams consist of a mixture of young and energetic, middle-aged and experienced (especially those coming in as second-career pastors), racially mixed, older and full of wisdom, male and female, elders in full connection, provisional elders, local pastors and interns, some full-time, others part-time, gifted in multiple ways and with varying talents and theological viewpoints.

Clergy teams are charged with the spiritual health and well-being of their entire circuit, not individual charges. Together, they pray their way through the God-visions for the circuit. They rotate preaching, teaching, pastoral and administrative skills from charge to charge. They hold each other accountable in every area of their lives. They model for their charges the nature of kingdom of heaven living as they work out their conflicts and misunderstandings with each other. They know they are in this together and for one charge to benefit at the expense of another becomes anathema to them. Together, they seek the lost, the least, the last and the littlest, and never, ever poach one another’s “founds.”

A Common Pool for Compensation

Furthermore, all members of any given circuit share a common pool for their compensation, although it will vary among the team, factoring in experience, background and full or part-time status. The way clergy salaries are currently set should be a cause of public shame. To have it necessary for some clergy to have to enroll their children in Medicaid to get health insurance while other clergy are able to purchase lavish homes and enjoy country club memberships denies the very basis of Wesley’s understanding of itinerant ministry. At this point, the highest paid clergy may enjoy pay and benefit packages that could be as high as eight to ten times what the lowest paid clergy receive.

We are either in this together or we are not. Currently, I believe we are more “not” than “together.”

The challenge of the distribution of the compensation pool may be one of the toughest faced by each team, and certainly input from the superintendents will be mandatory.  If, however, we could do that and do it maintaining deep love and respect for each other in the circuit, then, and only then, do we evidence the spiritual maturity necessary to move into pastoral leadership.

Compensation is a very touchy and deeply personal issue.  The world tell us, “your compensation packages speaks volumes about your worth as a human being.”  But the church must say, “The love of God has already determined your worth as a human being.”  That’s what we call “grace.”

Could We Start a Conversation?

I know this is radical. I know the idea needs huge tweaks. It’s easy to start listing the issues with it.

But what if? What if we serve in life-giving connection with one another? What if we seek to honor the distinctiveness of the itinerancy by marrying it to the need for greater accountability because of our cultural context? What if we make the Discipline-mandated committee structure start working for us instead of against us, which is too often the case?  It would have to undergo giant change to make circuits work.

Could we at least start a discussion on it? Could we engage in a connected discussion where we explore whether the idea could be matured and shaped into something far healthier than we currently have?

Any and all comments are both hoped for and welcome.  I will also be happy to take emails privately.  I just want to know:  could we even talk about this?

4 Comments

Filed under calling, character, clergy, competition, discipleship, kingdom of heaven, wisdom

Tagged as , , ,