Nurturing Community, Encouraging Family

As I've shared in previous blogs, I retired from the fire service in June of 2001 after serving for several years in paid, paid-on-call, and volunteer capacities. It gave me the opportunity to meet many wonderful and devoted folks, and yesterday I attended the funeral of one of these folks, a man named Joe Drewry. Joe lost his life after a brief struggle with cancer. He was 72.

His son Tony asked me if I could participate in the funeral by presiding over the Last Alarm-Bell Ceremony - a part of the liturgy of a firefighter funeral in which we honor the life of the deceased and honor his last call to Eternal Life. I couldn't say no. The good news was that my Class A uniform that I retired in still fit. The bad news was the occasion in which to wear it.

I knew Joe by reputation before I ever met him personally. He was the father of a college classmate, and I was not disappointed when I met him in person. He lived up to what I had heard about him, and more. I've seen men who loved their community, but never one quite like Joe.

Joe was a twin, and he and his brother Jerry began their lives with a rough start; their mother died a day after giving them birth from delivery complications. Their father raised them on his own. More tragedy in his life: he buried his wife 24 years ago, and buried his older son Burt last year. All of those things could have created a very angry and bitter man.

That wasn't Joe. He was one of the most affable men I ever knew.

Joe was a Boy Scout leader. He taught hunter safety classes to children and youth. And he served the Greenfield Fire Department for 52 years, in capacities ranging from firefighter to training officer to deputy chief. He went on a fire call as late as 2009. He also wrote several grants for their fire department, one of them allowing their town to achieve a Class Four insurance rating. That is quite a feat for most municipalities, but an incredible feat for an all-volunteer department in a town of 2000 folks.

At graveside, when he was paged over the department radio and we heard the silence of him not responding, I began to weep. Not just because he wasn't answering, but because I know fewer and fewer people answer such a call to service anymore. Not just to volunteer firefighting, but to service to their communities. After the radio dispatcher gave a period of silence after calling his unit number, she responded that Deputy Chief Joe Lane Drewry was released from answering any more alarms. Her last words were overcome with emotion. It seemed to me not just the end of Joe's life and service, but a death knell to all the Joe Drewrys in the world: those who love their community and give back more than they were given. Those who loved children besides their own to pass on legacy and experience and love. Those who believe it takes sacrifice and investment for their communities to thrive and grow.

The body of Christ, the Church, is far from just an institution - it is a family. The Greek word is oikos, which means household, but even that definition doesn't do the word justice. "Family-like community" might be more accurate. It describes what the family of God should be like. It is part of God's design. It allows us to be disciples and to make disciples. We practice being the Kingdom of God so we can proclaim the Kingdom to all.

Communities are living entities, and like living entities they require nurture and care. Joe, and people like him, are the lifeblood of communities. It is so very similar to the way Christ modeled community life and sacrifice to us. It doesn't have to be drudgery - I cannot recall Joe doing much in his life that he hated. It was certainly hard work, but Joe was in the middle doing it.

I am reminded of a quote from Dietrich Bonhoeffer's book Life Together:

The...service that one should perform for another in a Christian community is that of active helpfulness... Nobody is too good for the meanest (i.e., most menial) service. One who worries about the loss of time that such petty, outward acts of helpfulness entail is usually taking the importance of his own career too solemnly. We must be ready to allow ourselves to be interrupted by God... [I]t is part of the discipline of humility that we must not spare our hand where it can perform a service and that we do not assume that our schedule is our own to manage, but allow it to be arranged by God. - from Life Together, reprinted 1954, p. 99

An investment in our community is an investment in the family of God. It is an extension of our discipleship. And it is a practice of our love for brother and sister. I hope folks like Joe aren't the exception, and that they become the rule. We are created to live in community, and not as individuals.

Such is the family of God. So give. Nurture. Encourage.

Pax,
Sky+

"Nurture and Cultivate Spiritual Disciplines and Patterns of Holiness"

"Nurture and cultivate spiritual disciplines and patterns of holiness..." That's not from The Rule of St. Benedict. Nor is it from an objective of a spiritual growth retreat. It is ¶304.1 (b) of the Book of Discipline, the United Methodist's canon law, under the heading "Qualifications for Ordination."

In midst of the numerical decline of much of Protestantism, it seems that we are putting a great deal of emphasis on hospitality, worship, church programming, and communications - and we should be, because those are certainly areas that need shoring up. But when you talk to pastors about spirituality, spiritual direction, spiritual disciplines, etc., you often get a stare in return. I've even heard some say, "That's just too personal." I even heard this one once: "It's all about Jesus, preaching the Word, and getting into the Bible. That spirituality stuff is too Catholic." The smart ass in me considered quoting Scripture to this learned colleague about Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, but I resisted. So I simply asked him, "If it's all about Jesus (and it is!), but we can't teach people to pray and be Christologically grouded and formed, who will?" His response was classic: "Well, people should get that at home."

The problem is, I heard that EXACT same thing said when I served on an advisory committee at the seminary I graduated from - by a colleague who should have known better. I had voiced my concern that while we were giving a good theological and historical education, we were doing very little, if any, spiritual formation. To which I was told, "That's not the job of the seminary. Pastors get that on their own." I was much younger at the time and so I kept my young mouth shut. Now I wish I had opened it a little.

But do seminaries engage their students in a conversation about the gravity of choices that they will face or prepare them to make those choices? Does the larger shape of theological education draw their attention to the formative character of the questions asked and answered by its professors? Does the shape of their preparation help them to grasp the difference between a vocation that demands a certain kind of performance from them and the vocation into which they have been called, which requires them to be the kind of people who are possessed by that "basic sense" of what is being asked of them? Are their professors prepared to shape souls as well as intellects? When they graduate, do students have the sense that they have already embarked on that vocation?

As a product of, and participant in, theological education for over three decades, I am inclined to think that the answer to these and other questions is, more often than not, "no." - Frederick W. Schmidt, "What Is Being Asked of You? Canonical Theism and Theological Education", from Canonical Theism, 2008, pp. 273-4.

Schmidt goes on to say that the blame can be place into three areas:

• The quest for credibility from the larger academic community - which preferred historical discussions over faith and spiritual experience.
• The adoption of the university model for graduate education - which drove professors to be more specialized in a few disciplines and led to religious vocational amnesia
• The issues of praxis which diverted the theological task away from spiritual formation towards the importance of leadership, administrative prowness, psychological therapist, and social prophecy

In short, we're teaching pastors a lot about church administration, biblical form criticism, systematic theology (the Barth & Tillich show), social psychology (the Freud and Jung show), and philosophy of religion (the Schleiermacher and Schopenhauer show). I learned these things - and they are certainly important things.

But what about lectio divina? Patristics (the Early Church Fathers)? Prayer offices? Spiritual disciplines? Spiritual discernment? Incarnational theology? Pneumatology (study of the Holy Spirit)? Sacramental theology? Discipleship and disciple-ing? Sanctification? I was very blessed by Don Saliers and Ted Hackett, mentors of mine, to develop an interest and passion for these things. But it was self-directed - it was not a mandatory part of the seminary curriculum for United Methodists (or any other Protestants), and to my knowledge it still is not. That leads me to believe we need to quit calling them "seminaries" and start calling them "schools of theology." Good information, but no anchor or undergirding of where these things fit in a life lived with Christ.

If we clergy cannot locate ourselves in our Christian quest and pilgrimage, we certainly cannot lead our churches to see where they are located in the Kingdom of God. We cannot lead with any sense of spiritual or theological authority (only that which is granted by the Book of Discipline!). We cannot tell the Christian story from a standpoint of faith - just from the standpoint as recorded by history.

Schmidt says, most importantly, those who teach present and future clergy must "remember that it is not enough to learn what it is that clergy do. They need to be in touch with what it is that clergy are meant to become. Their own relationship with God, their growth in faith, and the practice of spiritual disciplines are keys to that becoming and to the knowing that accompanies it. In turn, those same experiences are indispensable to the seminarians' own ability to make disciples of others." (p. 285)

If we pastors are mandated to "nurture and cultivate spiritual disciplines and patters of holiness" for our congregations (and we are), then we had better learn them ourselves. According to the Book of Discipline, it's not just "Catholic" - it's Methodist, too. I'm convinced it's Christian to the core.

Sounds like we better get on this. Soon.

Pax,
Sky+

Standard: Does It Make Disciples?

I recently read an operational assessment of the United Methodist Church - a very critical look at our denomination and its effectiveness. In reviewing some of my former blogs, a lot of what I was perceiving (and fearing) was confirmed by the assessment. Rather that gloat, I would hope we would prayerfully consider the changes we need to make to be faithful to God and His Kingdom as United Methodists.

One main observation is that there is too much "distance" between the local church, the Annual Conference, and the General Church. That is probably not a real shocker to most folks in the local church, but I suspect annual conferences and the General Church find this at best hard to believe and at worst are in denial that this is the perception. However, General Agencies and Annual Conference agencies often find themselves competing against each other (ever listen to or read Annual Conference reports?). Plus, some General Church work often alienates or sends mixed signals to local and even Annual Conference work (remember the infamous UMW study on Israel and Palestine?). This serves to confuse folks, and sometimes leaving the person in the pew to wonder, "Is anyone leading us? Is there any rhyme and reason to our denomination?" One particularly negative impression from some interviewed for the assessment even remarked, "[The agencies] 'dictate rather than serve.'" That's not good.

Another observation was one I made a few years ago, that jurisdictions are a "middle entity" that need to be discontinued. This was also mentioned in the assessment: "Our finding is that the costs (in distance and in dollars) may not be justified by the 'benefit' that is delivered by the Jurisdictional Conference structures." Basically, jurisdictions elect bishops; other than that, anything else is redundant to what General Church and Annual Conference structures do. Why not elect them at General Conference, as was the case for many years? Added to the fact that the costs are not worth the benefit, Jurisdictional conferences were birthed mainly from racism. Why keep that vestige around? I don't buy the argument that it's a matter of tradition or heritage: that seems akin to the "Heritage not Hate" stickers I occasionally see on bumpers with the Rebel Flag.

As far as effective leadership, the assessment gives the UMC a bleak future: we have no clarity of mission or responsibility (who does what?), we have lots of distrust of both the leaders and institutional church, and we cannot define competency. One interviewee was quoted to say that the Church "has a systemic allergy to authority." We probably got that honestly, starting with the earliest Methodist preachers who sometimes referred to John Wesley as "Pope John."

I think the obvious question is, "Do we want to make disciples?" And if we do, we have to throw out some of the old standby arguments we used to hold dear and challenge them, like, "Numbers don't have anything to do with ministry." As a friend of mine said, if I have three children and take them to the park, and only come back with two, my wife probably won't settle for me saying, "But honey, just think how much better we can raise these two children as opposed to three!!" And, as Jason Byassee reminds us, numbers aren't bean-counting; numbers DO matter and their upward trend is a sign of church health.

John Wesley certainly wasn't a perfect human being; his marriage was a tragedy and he could be downright boorish at times. But the Method of Methodism was genius, and proven. It involves trust in Christ, vulnerability in spirit, and willingness to be obedient and faithful.

We will have to own up to our mistakes (and I use the collective "our" because we CLAIM to be one in Christ and to be in a Connection). We will have to realize that our pensions might run out. We will have to realize that guaranteed pastoral appointments and salaries, General Church Agencies, and other entities are not realistically sustainable with current membership decline and rising costs. We will have to objectively diagnose ourselves and embrace the reality that we are dying - and do something about it rather than give into the insanity of continuing to do the same thing and expecting things to change.

Don't get me wrong - there ARE good things happening. There ARE faithful folks making disciples. And there are churches in the UMC who are growing. But they seem to be the exception rather than the rule, and we often intellectually dismiss them! "Well, that's not Methodist what they're doing!" Unfortunately, some of these same objections could have been lodged at Wesley himself. What we call "Methodist" is often more about our likes and dislikes, rather than the Method of making disciples.

For clergy, the temptation is to coast and retire. For laity, the temptation is to go through the motions and emulate (but not build upon) what our parents and grandparents did.

Lead us not into temptation, O Lord...

Pax,
Sky+

Chasing Sunsets

Yesterday, I met a fellow biker for supper, and we went on a short ride. It was towards the end of the evening, and we were heading west. It was one of the most beautiful sunsets I have seen, and it reminded me of something I wrote a few years ago for a Lenten devotional booklet.

Don't forget to smell the flowers, and watch the sunsets.

Pax,
Sky+

Time for What Is Important

It was God who made the great lights, whose love endures forever;
the sun to rule in the day, whose love endures forever;
the moon and stars in the night, whose love endures forever. – Ps. 136:7-9

Perhaps you’ve heard someone complain, “I have so little time.” Such a complaint is self-incriminating: we all have the same twenty-four hours a day. Our days are as long (or short) as our neighbors’ days. They are as long as the days Jesus experienced.

I’ve discovered the allure of riding a motorcycle; I don’t think it’s a rebellious spirit or flirting with danger – to be safe, you have to constantly scan the road ahead and ride on constant guard, thus leaving your mind little time to dwell in worries, minutia, or self-absorption. It’s an opportunity to slow down and clear my mind of “clutteredness.”

I chase sunsets (at legal speeds). The north star that is constant and sure leads me home at night. Within my quieted mind, I find myself being reminded to thank God for daily blessings that I usually overlook because “I don’t have time to notice.”

What I have been taught is that if I am disciplined enough to observe it, I can find daily blessings in anything I do. Driving down the road, watching the crops grow and mature. Singing silly but joyful songs with our children or grandchildren. Washing clothes and realizing the cleansing and life-giving gift of water. Changing the oil on a vehicle and marveling at God’s gift of intellect that created the engine. Stopping to look at the people around us at work and realizing that they’re fellow brothers/sisters in Christ.

Our busy schedules can allow us to forget the blessings around us. But allowing ourselves to be transformed by God can strengthen us to defeat the enemy of time, and find it instead to be our ally. And perhaps, on occasion, we can take time out to marvel at a sunrise, chase a sunset, and smile back at the moon. All gifts from God.

Sky McCracken
Lent, 2005

Guaranteed Pastoral Appointments - A Luxury We Can Afford Anymore? Revisited.

The Commission to Study Ministry will be recommending to the General Conference in 2012 to do away with guaranteed pastoral appointments. I wrote about this last year in this blog.

One statement confirms what I always thought - the clergy shortage was a myth. Yes, a lot of clergy are retiring, but the general membership of the church is declining as well. We desperately need leadership borne out of passion, not entitlement.

My only caution is that we not see this as a "fix all." One commission member noted: "Guaranteeing clergy jobs produces 'a culture of mediocrity. It allows people to coast rather than to continue to strive and to grow,' said Seattle Area Bishop Grant Hagiya, a commission member. 'What we need is the flexibility to maximize our leadership to those who are going to make a difference.'"

Maybe. But Southern Baptists are losing members too, and they certainly can't blame guaranteed appointments for their demise. Leadership, an understanding of discipleship, and a willingness to be spiritual guides and models seem to be needed now more than ever.

John Meunier, a fellow blogger and bi-vocational local pastor, writes a very good blog about this and what doing away with guaranteed jobs in the UMC might mean. An exerpt:

I think radical changes in the rules for ministry must go hand-in-hand with a renewal of a shared sense of our Wesleyan roots. It is from our shared identity as a people called Methodist that we need to define what we mean by effective ministry and the nature of the mission of the church.

Such a move also places much more importance on the role and quality of conference leadership. Do we select bishops and district superintendents to be the leaders with an clear eye for ministerial effectiveness and the skills and gifts to nurture and support mission-oriented churches and clergy?

Will our church structure and rules need significant rewriting to free clergy to do what they would be expected to do?

Does the denomination need to take on itself more of the expense of the educating of new pastors?

I look forward to the conversation.

So do I. Of course... does it have a chance of passing?

Pax,
Sky+

Being Authentic II - Time Well Spent

Given my last blog, it was with a strange twist of Providence that my brother called last week and said he was coming in on Sunday, that he wanted us to get together with my father on Monday and play a round of golf. I almost said no... and then realized that my father is 80 years old and that opportunities for us to get together for golf are probably numbered. So I told my brother, "Great idea."

The world knows the three of us as a retired college professor (Dad), an active college professor and researcher (my brother), and a minister (me). Two Dr's and a Rev. (I am the dummy of the family with only a masters degree). But to us, it was a father and his two boys playing golf. (The pic is one I snapped of Dad on an approach to a hole on Monday)

We decided playing nine holes was safest. All of us hit safely on the opening drive. No birdies for any of us, but there were some respectable pars. I ended up being 7 over - better than bogey golf (an 8 on the last hole didn't help my score, and McCrackens count all strokes). I was happy enough with my play given how long it had been since I swung a club that I should probably retire. I was also so doggone sore that it took me 15 minutes of slow-exercising arthritic joints in bed before I could get out of it the next morning.

It was well worth it.

We had a wonderful time with Dad. Good-natured ribbing and teasing. A few great shots by all of us. My brother and I noticed that Dad's swing is different. He certainly doesn't hit the ball very far. However - all his balls stayed in the fairway. Most of them were on line. I think the beauty of playing golf as long as he has is to know what your authentic swing is. It doesn't matter how impressive it looks; what matters is, it works. And it does.

Again, authenticity requires that we practice it. I think it probably requires some maturity as well. I don't think we have to be 80 years old to attain either - but it's nice to have some living models around nonetheless who have been doing it a while.

The late Bobby Jones once said this about "Old man par.":

"No man will ever have golf under his thumb. No round will ever be so good it could not have been better. Perhaps that is why golf is the greatest of games. You are not playing a human adversary; you are playing a game. You are playing Old Man Par.

"Old Man Par is a patient soul, who never shoots a birdie and never incurs a buzzard. And if you travel the long route with him, you must be patient, too."

That's probably a good approach to authentic self, too. As I said in the last blog, I'll say again: Doctors practice medicine, lawyers practice law. Christians should certainly practice Christianity.

Pax,
Sky+

Being Authentic

It's one of my favorite scenes from any movie. In "The Legend of Bagger Vance," Rannulph Junuh's caddy, Bagger, talks about the "Authentic Swing" - meaning golf swing:

Inside each and every one of us is one true authentic swing... Somethin' we was born with... Somethin' that's ours and ours alone... Somethin' that can't be taught to ya or learned... Somethin' that got to be remembered... Over time the world can, rob us of that swing... It get buried inside us under all our wouldas and couldas and shouldas... Some folk even forget what their swing was like... 

Junuh came back from the war with a Medal of Honor - and a broken man. Bagger wasn't just trying to help Rannulph's golf game, he was trying to get him to see how he was still useful. The preacher in me would say that God wasn't finished with him yet, he just had to grasp his unrealized potential.

I used to play golf. It didn't come naturally to me, and I realized one day if I wanted to be decent at it, I needed to intentionally practice it. So I did - I had a pro watch my swing, and he gave me very simple practice exercises to do everyday. I quit playing golf with friends for a while and just practiced: practiced irons, practiced driving, practiced pitching. Repetition. Practice doesn't make perfect, but it gets us one step closer to perfection.

I once got my handicap down to 11. To do that, I had to practice at least every other day. I would get up very early in the morning, go to the golf course, and play 9 holes (no one ever beat me to the course). Sometimes, I would drop 3-4 balls and hit from the same spot to hone my consistency. I sought to find a rhythm and discipline before I addressed the ball, and to duplicate it each time I played a shot. And it worked. It certainly wasn't perfect, and I wasn't going to turn in my ordination credentials to get my tour card, but I could play a round of golf with fairly good golfers and not embarrass myself too much.

It lasted about 3 years.

I moved and began going to the golf course more to be with church members than to play golf. It became a social time. And it certainly wasn't bad for ministry - had a lot of contact time with folks, invited a few folks to church (or back to church), and was able to talk with a few folks about tough struggles in their life. I wouldn't take anything for those times - they were rich and they were blessings to me. The only liability was to my golf game. I lost my "authentic swing." No sense of timing or rhythm. And as my arthritis got worse, I realized that my grip, my swing, and my whole approach to the game would have to be totally redefined. So I quit playing. The last time I played was at my 25th high school class reunion, and I barely finished the round.

Contrary to what some might believe, golf isn't life - but it can teach us a lot. For Christians to be authentic, to obtain or recover that "perfect swing," we have to know what fits FOR US. I certainly don't want to go down the road of individualism, because the American church already has too much "me and Jesus" in it and not near enough "us and Jesus." To be authentic means to be bathed in prayer and the Spirit. And to be bathed in prayer and the Spirit means, quite frankly, to shut up all of our requests and wants and to listen to God.

There is certainly a lot of brokenness in our lives: dreams unrealized. Riches lost. Poor choices. Accidents. Failures of health. It is easy to blame God, it is easy to blame the Devil. There is also a lot of healing in our lives: dreams answered. Being blessed with home and food. Being spared from physical harm. Walking away from a CCU or car accident. At those times, it is easy to thank God and say we beat the Devil.

An authentic life has us encountering both. Moses parted the sea but died on the mountain - in view of the Promised Land yet never setting foot on it. Elijah is brought into heaven, but not before God challenged him for retreating instead of fighting. Peter finally gets it right, but ends up dying (either crucified upside down or beheaded - both sound bad to me).

My hunch is that for these men, their authenticity depended on them being able to overcome their desires or their worries. To know God's voice and to realize our gifts and our limitations takes prayer - a conversation with God that is ongoing and constant. It swaps arrogance for humility. It exchanges wants for servanthood. It replaces our desire with God's passion. And all of these things take practice. Repetitious exercise. Practice leads us towards perfection.

The monastics have taught us how to do this through lectio divina. They suggest not just reading scripture - but PRAYING scripture. Daily. To ruminate on it. To ask God to change us through it. To focus on His presence and His voice. By such practices as this we learn what our true gifts are and what our place is as a disciple. We quit playing the games of who others want us to be and who we want to be, and instead find out who and what God created us to be. We find our authentic swing.

I don't think any of us are "naturals" when it comes to being authentic Christians. It takes work. It takes honesty. It takes courage. And it takes prayer - conversation with God - to find out what God truly created us to be. It's not that we don't have gifts or purpose - God created us with that already in us. We just have to discover what they are.

Let's find our one, true, authentic self. The only way to find it is to practice. Doctors practice medicine, lawyers practice law. Christians should certainly practice Christianity.

Pax,
Sky+

A Bad Law in the Midst of Absent Leadership - Is the Church Far Behind?

Fellow blogger Allen Bevere in a recent blog wrote about a Peggy Noonan Wall Street Journal editorial regarding Arizona's recent legislation on immigration (May 1st edition, "Opinions - The Big Alienation: Uncontrolled borders and Washington's lack of self-control", WSJ). The whole editorial is worth reading - it is very good. I don't agree with all of it, but it is well-written and engaging.

Peggy Noonan is a refreshing voice. She was a speechwriter for Ronald Reagan and George Bush the elder, but very critical of George W. Bush and Sarah Palin. She is Catholic in faith, and I have always found her writing to be both objective and thought-provoking.

I agree with Allen in his words and comments about the new Arizona law regarding immigration; it is a bad law. As a high school sports official, I know that the best way to get rid of a bad rule is to enforce it, and I suspect if the Arizona law is enforced it will be out the door fairly quickly. It's already being amended for some obvious flaws.

But the point Allen makes in his blog is a good one: because of a lack of leadership (gumption?) among our Congress in Washington for over two administrations, immigration has become more problematic for border states. Neither party wants to touch the issue because it will mean losing votes. As in most things, when there is abdication in leadership and/or responsibility, someone or something will usually take charge. In the case of immigration, Arizona is taking charge. Nature abhors a vacuum.

I will reproduce the same quote Allen gave in his blog from Peggy Noonan's editorial:

None of this happened overnight. It is, most recently, the result of two wars that were supposed to be cakewalks, Katrina, the crash, and the phenomenon of a federal government that seemed less and less competent attempting to do more and more by passing bigger and bigger laws.

Add to this states on the verge of bankruptcy, the looming debt crisis of the federal government, and the likelihood of ever-rising taxes. Shake it all together, and you have the makings of the big alienation. Alienation is often followed by full-blown antagonism, and antagonism by breakage.

...Arizona is moving forward because the government in Washington has completely abdicated its responsibility. For 10 years—at least—through two administrations, Washington deliberately did nothing to ease the crisis on the borders because politicians calculated that an air of mounting crisis would spur mounting support for what Washington thought was appropriate reform—i.e., reform that would help the Democratic and Republican parties.

But while the Democrats worry about the prospects of the Democrats and the Republicans about the well-being of the Republicans, who worries about America?

Now, fellow United Methodists, imagine if the words are changed a little bit.

None of this happened overnight. It is, most recently, the result of two or more factions that are supposedly all United Methodist and Christian, fights over homosexuality, the economy, and the phenomenon of a church beaureacracy that seemed less and less competent attempting to do more and more by passing bigger budgets, a bigger Book of Discipline, and a larger Book of Resolutions.

Add to this churches on the verge of closing, the looming bankruptcies of annual conferences, and the likelihood of ever-rising apportionments. Shake it all together, and you have the makings of the big alienation. Alienation is often followed by full-blown antagonism, and antagonism by breakage.

...some United Methodist Churches are moving forward because the church leadership has completely abdicated its responsibility. For nearly 50 years—at least—through several Council of Bishops and General Conferences, we deliberately did nothing to address the crisis in the Church because church politicians calculated that an air of mounting crisis would spur mounting support for what they thought was appropriate reform—i.e., reform that would help the liberal or conservative factions.

But while MFSA and General Boards worry about the prospects of the MFSA and General Boards, and the Confessing Movement and IRD worry about the well-being of the Confessing Movement and IRD, who worries about the United Methodist Church?

Farfetched? Or are we just mirroring our government? Isn't it a bit unsettling that the UMC is set up just like our government? We have an executive branch (Council of Bishops), a judicial branch (Judicial Council), and a legislative branch (General Conference). And, if we were honest, we have lobbyists too [insert church faction/group here]. Did this happen by accident?

There might be a good reason to separate church and state. Why would we want to be like the state?

Our prayer should be that leadership arise to the occasion - and if it's from the grassroots up instead of the top down, so be it. Jesus started the Church with 12. He fed a mountainside of people with a few loaves of bread and a couple of fish. There are still 8 million United Methodists hanging around - I wonder what God can do with us?

You don't have to be a bishop - or even ordained - to lead. We were all ordained at our baptism to make disciples - and we can change the world.

Pax,
Sky+

Is It About the Kingdom, or the Institution?

Bishop Will Willimon posted Ten Theses About The Future of Ministry on his blogsite this morning. They are a gutsy and rare prophetic voice from one of our bishops (Bishop Tim Whitaker also comes to mind as one of those voices). I'll comment on a few of these as a 45 year old pastor in between the generations that the Bishop speaks about.

• The pastoral ministry in mainline Protestantism will continue to experience numerical decline as well as be pushed to the margins of this culture. The mainline is old-line that is becoming sidelined.

Hard to argue with. The numbers and diminishing resources back this up.

• The pastoral ministry in mainline Protestantism will need to lead the church in redefining itself in the light of the spiritual needs and aspirations of people under 35 or else will continue to decline because it has limited itself to the spiritual affairs of one generation.

Yes again. We pastors have failed to culture leadership and legacy among the "one generation" to leave the church better than they found it. We haven't passed the mantle - it's been held on to for far too long.

• The pastoral ministry in mainline Protestantism will need to find a theological way through the intellectual death of theological liberalism (“Progressive Christianity”) and the cultural compromises of traditional evangelicalism (the IRD and evangelical Protestantism’s alliance with the political right).

The gutsiest statement yet. Theological liberalism was a theology found wanting - and sometimes, seemed to delight in the shock value of turning Christian doctrines at the heart of Christianity into a cafeteria Christianity. The IRD and ilk like them would have us be in bed with the correct politics... which resembles spiritual prostitution in being "of" the world rather than "in" the world. I would say that progressive Christianity has done the same thing where American politics are concerned.

• The pastoral ministry must be supple, adaptable, and willing to experiment on the basis of biblically supported leadership styles.

Another true and hard statement. Cut-and-paste ministry doesn't work. Leadership is blessed but hard work. It isn't all about preaching good sermons anymore (although it's not a bad start). How are we making disciples? What is our plan to do so? How do we BOTH (1) grow disciples in maturity, and (2) increase the flock?

• The mission of the church will take precedence over internal maintenance, real estate, fellowship, therapy, pastoral care and other factors that have driven the church in recent decades and have contributed to our decline.

The Great Commission was this: "Go, make disciples, baptizing and teaching them in my name." The Book of Discipline gets bigger and bigger (and more largely ignored and irrelevent), the number of Judicial Council decisions increases as does the docket, and yet the church membership continues to decline. As much of a baseball fan that I am, it simply isn't true that "if you build it, they will come." We must be willing to make disciples, and to do that, we must be willing to build relationships. We have done what the medical community has done - become specialists while forgetting our general health and wholeness.

• Methodists will either become engaged in the mysterious, relentless growth of the Kingdom of God or they will continue to decline. Growth is our most needed focus.

One does not have to be an actuarial expert to know that the denomination will financially and administratively collapse within 12 years. God isn't dead, but it is possible that we are realizing Wesley's worst fear (and I know, we all know the quote... but are we listening?):

I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case unless they hold fast both the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out. - J. Wesley

As a Lutheran friend once told me, "Methodists have lost their method."

• The pastoral ministry will recover the oddness and the excitement of salvation in Jesus Christ.

Seems like I remember being taught that Christians are to be counter-cultural. "Oddness" is probably a good word. Why would anyone in society who is cynical and distrustful of secular institutions want to be part of a Church that simply resembles another institution with a cross slapped up on the side of the building?

• The pastoral ministry will either find a way to attract and empower a new generation of pastor’s critique and reconstruct pastoral ministry or we will pass away with this generation.

Again, numbers don't lie.

This OUGHT to be a ripe opportunity for the UMC: We are connected. We have a framework for the deployment of ministry and a catechetical process for making Christians and disciples. In theory, we have a framework and discipline to deploy pastors and match gifts to churches. But in practice, we are failing. Miserably. Our connection is serving little purpose and laity have finally woken up and asked, "Is our apportionment money being used to increase the Kingdom or support a dying structure? Are we getting our money's worth?"

The itinerancy and appointment process has become a pastoral tenure system that is self-serving to clergy but not really helping the Church much. As far as catechesis... a lot of folks don't even know what that word means. Or words like catechism. Discipleship. Or disciple. I mean, have you asked anyone lately to define what a disciple is? It took a group in my church several weeks to arrive at a definition - not because they aren't good or faithful people, but they simply inherited a faith tradition that didn't hand that understanding down to them! We failed to teach and equip - hence, the present problem.

Nothing is beyond redemption, and if we are indeed a faithful people, then we are a hope-filled people. I am one with such hope. After a lot of prayer (more listening, less talking), I am convinced that some very faithful, hopeful, and risk-taking folks are going to have to rise to the challenge and call to extreme leadership. We need bishops not elected out of entitlement or pedigree, but out of spiritual and prophetic depth. We need risk takers. We need superintendents who lead pastors spiritually and boldly, not folks who got there because of a salary sheet or gender, or because it was "their turn." We need folks who can with muster and gumption do some hard work: some churches need to close. Some pastors need to be encouraged to leave pastoral ministry because they are ineffective at it. We need folks to take thou authority. We have to quit playing slot machine with pastoral appointments. And in the case of bishops and superintendents, we need some folks who are willing to do these things with the knowledge they might not get a guaranteed paycheck... since our system is presently collapsing to the point where conferences and episcopal funds won't be financed in a few years. That will call for creativeness and a willingness to think beyond present institutional practices.

I know I paint a bleak scene - but it is hard not to be concerned given the present realities. Lyle Schaller wrote a few years ago that to avoid financial and institutional collapse, we should have taken action at the 2008 General Conference on many of these things. Perhaps he is right.

God can redeem anything - but just like grace, we must be willing to receive it instead of push it away. Is God giving us the signs that we need to change? I don't see how we could interpret them any other way.

Instead of a dead sect, I sure would like the UMC to take the lead. We certainly have all the ingredients.

Pax,
Sky+

Putting On Christ - And Wearing Him Always

As Christians, we are always to wear the face of Christ wherever we go. It sounds good on Sunday mornings and whenever we gather as the Church. I know myself that it is very easy to be the example of Christ when I am wearing a clerical collar and suit.

But from Sunday at noon until the following Sunday at 8 AM - are we still wearing Christ? In this day and age, we are more and more transparent than ever. Our political stances and our Facebook comments are certainly public for all to see. While everyone is entitled to a political opinion and opinions in general, we have to very careful that our political stances and opinions don’t turn others off from the Gospel or our church.

When it comes to politics, I am at best a cynic. That doesn’t mean I can’t tolerate the opinions of others, though. At the end of the day, or at the end of any conversation, I think when there are disagreements among Christians, they have to end it with the words, “We will agree to disagree.” No moral judgments, no denigration. Just a difference of opinion.

Ronald Reagan once said, “Politics is the second oldest profession, but I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.” It is a humorous quote, but with an element of truth. If we sell out ourselves to political opinions first and the Gospel second, we have told the world where our treasure lies. And the world, especially those who are nominally Christian or new to the faith, is watching us like a child. Do we really want them to think we are a Republican or Democrat first, and a Christian second? That Kentucky basketball is more important than living the Christian faith? That we spend more time playing Farmville or Mafia Wars than we do reading scripture or articles about theology, discipleship, or mission (the Web is full of these things, by the way)? Or that we place more stock in Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann than we do Jesus Christ?

Don’t get me wrong: politics are important. And no one loves basketball more than I do. I have a Facebook page too. But none of those things are ever important enough to take the place of who Christ is… or to turn others away from Him.

Let’s be careful.
Sky+

In Hac Lacrimarum Valle

It is a very sad day. With Kentucky and Tennessee's losses this weekend, there is no SEC team in the Final Four. Worse, a Big East team and an ACC team are in it. It is almost more than I can bear.

So I will do something that I have never done, (or, for that matter, something that no one else has ever done, either), and root for a Horizon League team to win it all.

Go Butler.

Why Have the Church? Just Be a Democrat. Or a Republican.

Brothers and Sisters:

The Lord be with you.

One of the liabilities of being so involved in government, as one of our General Boards so often is, is that we actually get “credit” for what we do (in this case, a resolution made at an earlier General Conference). I speak as a political cynic, having found both of our American political parties wanting.

I want to draw attention to a quote Stan Hauerwas gave several years ago:

"...[A] theological politics understands the church as an alternative polis or civitas, which is constituted by the new reality of the kingdom of God as seen in the life and destiny of Jesus. In contrast to political theology, which makes the political struggle for emancipation the horizon in which the church's theology and practice is interpreted, a theological politics makes the church's story the 'counter story' that interprets the world's politics.... [m]aking the church the primary locus of politics [which] not only changes the political horizon, but also requires a different understanding of the nature of politics."-- Stanley Hauerwas

In my opinion, anyone who thinks Democrats are the only ones who are interested in big government doesn’t read very much – Republicans are just as interested in gaining/regaining power and running things. Today’s politics are reduced to issues, and using power and coercion to enforce the convictions of the Left or the Right. And while I am certainly cynical about politics, I am not advocating we withdraw from the world – indeed, we Christians are supposed to be IN the world, just not OF it. The politics we advocate are the politics of Christ, which will set us apart from the world.

We have only ourselves to blame for the press attention we have gotten from Speaker Pelosi. At least for this week, the United Methodist Church is not known as a Church that makes disciples, but rather known for helping pass a Health Reform Care bill through the House that is split down party lines. I’d say the same thing about abortion: I would like to see abortion become a thing of the past – not because Republicans passed a bill to make abortion illegal, but because the Church influenced society so much that (a) no one would feel so shamed by an out-of-wedlock pregnancy to have an abortion, and (b) no mother would feel alone since the church would step up and minister to her and her child’s needs.

A friend of mine reminded me that during the Bush Administration, Left wing critics made the following observation of Republican Christians: "If the Republican plank has become your Gospel, why do you still need the church?" He noted that this observation fits just as well with this possible observation given this week's happenings: "If the Democratic plank has become your Gospel, why do you still need the church?"

We have been used as a denomination this week by politicians, and it has given in to more of the American preoccupation of being on the correct side instead of being on the Lord’s side. As one of my blogging buddies Allen Bevere said today, to embrace the status quo politics of either party is to become ecclesial sectarians.

I think neither Jesus nor John Wesley would approve. Regardless of what the Book of Resolutions or the Council of Bishops tells us.

Pax,
Sky+

Are We Thinking Ahead? Who's Job Is It?

In the past few weeks, our bishop and cabinet sent out a letter: "Making the System Work." You can find a copy of the letter here.

The letter has rubbed some clergy the wrong way. Some see it as a threat. Others see it as void of anything pastoral. I see it as a retelling of what is already in the Book of Discipline. The problem is, we really haven't followed the spirit or the letter of the Discipline when it comes to the itinerancy. We are "selectively itinerant" these days, in my opinion, because we have been allowed to be. From the letter:

1. The mission of the local church comes first. As ministers, we are called to serve, not to be served. Our primary effort will be to place the best qualified minister, according to the needs of the church. Churches involved in mission and ministry for Jesus Christ and supportive of the connection will be given first consideration.
2. The appointment process deserves our honesty, a view for the good of the whole connection. Ministers are members of the Annual Conference and open to appointment in any part of the Conference.

We all know that while this is the theory, it has not been the practice. Some clergy have been truly itinerant, serving in varying appointments (and often across state lines, as our conference includes Western Tennessee and the Purchase Area of Kentucky). Some have requested that they not be appointed outside of a metropolitan area or across a state line. Some have citied educational needs for children, vocational needs for spouses, and consideration for those with aging parents - the list of variables is long and convoluted, and not without merit or concern.

But to complicate matters, we started selling off parsonages a few years ago. When this issue was raised a few years ago, someone found a realtor who spoke on the floor of the annual conference and said that one could "break even" on buying a house and selling it within 6 years (the length of a district superintendent tenure). I suppose that would be possible in a FEW places in the U.S... but nowhere close to where I live! As a result, we have added another variable to the itinerancy: the buying and selling of a house. Of course this is not a new phenomenon to most professions, but in our annual conference, clergy often move at the drop of a hat, and even in a "good" conference year pastoral appointments are rarely close to "done" until a month before a move happens. Four weeks is a very short window to (1) list a house for sale, (2) pack to move, (3) say farewell to a congregation, (4) move into a house that (5) hopefully you've bought (and been able to sell the other one), and (6) begin work at your new church/parish.

I think all of these more recent "convolutions" for the itinerancy makes it very difficult for our bishop and cabinet to try and "Make the System Work," because our ideas and practices about the itinerancy have strayed so far away from the ideal. When bishops and cabinets send us such statements, they sound harsh because we've been casual about being truly itinerant. But all of us who were ordained elders agreed to be appointed "without reservation." If we weren't comfortable with that, we had the option of being a local pastor, appointed year to year, but without a guaranteed appointment.

If we look at all of this from the standpoint of our laity, however, we begin to see another side. They can very easily and accurately say, "We have been faithful to what we've been asked to do." They have provided parsonages (or housing allowances), paid salaries, pensions, and insurance. They want the best pastor for their church, because that is what the church promises to provide for them. It is very hard to defend against the claim of some of our laity that our leadership has failed them. We have. And that's a corporate "we" - that's the nature of the covenant and the Connection.


Problem? The same institution that says: "The mission of the local church comes first. As ministers, we are called to serve, not to be served," also allowed parsonages to be sold off and allowed clergy to be selectively itinerant. Can we blame this bishop and cabinet? Not fully. But we clergy ultimately do have to take responsibility for our failure of leadership. That's the nature of the Order of Elder - we are in COVENANT with each other to serve the church.

Are we thinking ahead? One thing I learned from my mentor Don Saliers many years ago was this: The Holy Spirit rarely rejects good planning. In these difficult times, I think the Spirit demands it. It's our job to lead our congregations - and to serve, not to be served. That requires a lot of prayer, planning, and sacrifice, all with a Gospel bent.

Pax,
Sky+