It is discouraging to be a United Methodist pastor right now. Not only are we suffering from the same trends affecting all of Mainline Protestantism related to a decline in participation, but we have the added anxiety of a the failed special general conference which promised to produce a way forward, but instead produced nothing but pain and frustration. So in a reality where the vast majority of our churches are declining in attendance, membership, and funding, there are more UM pastors doubting their call than ever before.
And who can blame us? We got into this because following Jesus introduced us to a way of living that is a gift we wanted to share with those who are enslaved to our anxious, selfish, hopeless culture. And when we look at our ministry and are unable to see God using us to find the lost, heal the sick, and feed the hungry... well, it's natural to ask if we are still called to serve in this way.
And some have argued that everything will get better when we just rip off the bandaid and split the church. And I think there is some truth to this sentiment. Part of the difficulty is a lack of identity. In a world where people are looking for reasons not to participate instead of reason to participate, the large tent approach has made it so everyone has a good reason not to be United Methodist. If you are progressive, the evangelicalism of UM doctrine is enough to push you away. If you are conservative, the Bishops refusing to defend the faith from public disobedience is enough to push you away. If you don't like conflict... well, you get the picture.
So I do think it will be beneficial when we tear the big tent at the seams, but its not going to be a magic bullet for the problems affecting our local churches. Nor is it a miracle drug for the depression that is gripping a large group of my colleagues.
Now, this would be the point where if I was smarter I would propose a solution. Or if I was really smart I would tell you that the solution is in my new book which will be released next month. No, I don't have a simple solution or even a complex one. And my sense is that it is going to get worse before it gets better.
So pray for your pastor. Chances are they feel like they are failing you and failing God.
If you are going to criticize them, make sure it is missional criticism. You have no idea the breath of fresh air it would be for your pastor to hear you go to them and say, "Pastor, I got a bone to pick with you. We need to make new disciples." Understand that the vast majority of what gets to us is petty. So to hear someone voice a problem that is related to the mission instead of one's preference is better than ten compliments.
Because we see the hurt and anger and anxiety and hopelessness of so many people around us, and in our bones we know that following Jesus radically transforms a person's life. And our hearts are breaking and for many of us, it feels like we are alone. Because it is rare to hear someone ask what Jesus or the church can do for their neighbor who just lost a child to a heroine overdose. It is rare to hear someone ask what Jesus or the church can do for the son who is angry and being shaped by supremacist voices. It is rare to hear someone ask what Jesus or the church can do for the sister who lives with the shame of abuse.
But this is why we are here. We are here to be the instrument by which God finds the lost, heals the sick, feeds the hungry, frees the captive, and reconciles the rebellious.
The world has changed. The way your pastor was trained is not very effective anymore. But, we are doing our best to be faithful in this new reality, and most of us feel like we are failing. Methodism as we have known it is dying.
And if it is to be saved, it will be by lay people whose hearts are broken for the brokenness of their community. Men and women who believe, in their bones, that the gift of God is not to be hoarded by those who reside within the church, but is rightly received when it is being given away. Children and Seniors who know the power of new life offered to those who trust in Jesus and are filled by the Holy Spirit.
We are missionaries of life in a land of death. May we not grow weary in our mission.
Wednesday, October 23, 2019
Monday, February 18, 2019
The Way Forward: Humility as an Intellectual Virtue
A week from now 864 delegates, hundreds of alternates, thousands of support staff, and tens of thousands of demonstrators will invade St. Louis for the Special General Conference. And there is just one item on the agenda, negotiating a deal that will make those on the left happy enough that they don't riot and those on the right happy enough that they don't secede from the denomination. And honestly, I don't think this will happen. I think we will probably see a riot or two and by March 1st the gears will be in motion for a formal church split.
And honestly, this doesn't scare me or bother me. The UMC has put the mission and the vision in the trunk for decades and our bloated bureaucracy exists for the preservation of the institution and nothing more. So, a split that results in two or more new connections picking up the pieces and being forced to articulate a vision for being the church is the best thing that could happen to the Methodist movement.
My hope for the Methodist expressions of the future is that we will have the humility to recognize that we live in a slice of time, with a particular zeigeist, privileging evidence in a particular way, and that we are finite, fallible, and cannot be trusted to rewrite the doctrinal confessions of the church.
It is tempting to take six semesters of theological education and the tools one gains during that time and believe that these tools are all we need to properly interpret the Bible and properly execute the Christian life. But we could not be more mistaken. The Great Tradition is a gift and one that we leave unwrapped at our own peril. It may be that as we study a particular section of the Bible, we begin to believe that the church universal has gotten it wrong; and our proper response is to go back and read Athanasius and Augustine and Aquinas and Luther and Wesley and Barth and Coakley to understand what is deficient from my study that is putting my understanding at odds with the giants of the tradition.
Richard Feldman and his posse at University of Rochester have been exploring belief justification, and they measure a person's capacity to know based on three criteria. The first is the quality of their evidence: Does a person have all the evidence that they could possibly have? The second is the sincerity of the inquirer: Does a person have competing commitments that will get in the way of evaluating the evidence fairly? And finally, the last measurement is intelligence: Does a person have the brain power to evaluate the evidence.
With this in mind, is possible that a single interpreter with their divinity degree might have better evidence, but it is unlikely. And it is possible that one is somehow more sincere than those who came before, but again, this is unlikely. And it is possible that this person is more intelligent, but I doubt it.
Intellectual virtue demands that when my belief is in conflict with the belief of someone who is informed, intelligent, and sincere that my level of confidence in said belief is diminished. Likewise, if informed, intelligent, and sincere people from around the globe and across time hold a belief that is different than mine, I should be far more concerned with understanding their arguments, recognizing the likelihood that I am wrong than in psychoanalyzing the saints that have come before in order to smear their sincerity.
The arrogance one must possess to say, "Huh, would you look at that. My 'indepedently concluded' belief differs from Augustine, Aquinas, Sarah Coakley, and my grandmother; I must be a genius!" is unfathomable.
The reality is that we all occupy an intellectually vulnerable place and into this intellectually vulnerable place comes the creeds and confessions that make up the great tradition. It is a gift to us, and one that we would be wise to embrace.
Now, it is important to point out that the Great Tradition doesn't deal with everything. When the church has talked about doctrine, it has dealt primarily with questions related to the "nature of" God and creation. Which means that it won't give us particular instruction for how to deal with every technological development and how these developments interact with humanity. However, it will give us a starting point and oftentimes guardrails.
So my hope is that whatever happens in the United Methodist Church, we all find ourselves more appreciative and responsive to the wisdom of the Saints who gather alongside us and the Saints who have come before. My hope is that we rediscover the humility to recognize that when we hold beliefs that are at odds with the doctrine of the church that it is us who are probably wrong.
And honestly, this doesn't scare me or bother me. The UMC has put the mission and the vision in the trunk for decades and our bloated bureaucracy exists for the preservation of the institution and nothing more. So, a split that results in two or more new connections picking up the pieces and being forced to articulate a vision for being the church is the best thing that could happen to the Methodist movement.
My hope for the Methodist expressions of the future is that we will have the humility to recognize that we live in a slice of time, with a particular zeigeist, privileging evidence in a particular way, and that we are finite, fallible, and cannot be trusted to rewrite the doctrinal confessions of the church.
It is tempting to take six semesters of theological education and the tools one gains during that time and believe that these tools are all we need to properly interpret the Bible and properly execute the Christian life. But we could not be more mistaken. The Great Tradition is a gift and one that we leave unwrapped at our own peril. It may be that as we study a particular section of the Bible, we begin to believe that the church universal has gotten it wrong; and our proper response is to go back and read Athanasius and Augustine and Aquinas and Luther and Wesley and Barth and Coakley to understand what is deficient from my study that is putting my understanding at odds with the giants of the tradition.
Richard Feldman and his posse at University of Rochester have been exploring belief justification, and they measure a person's capacity to know based on three criteria. The first is the quality of their evidence: Does a person have all the evidence that they could possibly have? The second is the sincerity of the inquirer: Does a person have competing commitments that will get in the way of evaluating the evidence fairly? And finally, the last measurement is intelligence: Does a person have the brain power to evaluate the evidence.
With this in mind, is possible that a single interpreter with their divinity degree might have better evidence, but it is unlikely. And it is possible that one is somehow more sincere than those who came before, but again, this is unlikely. And it is possible that this person is more intelligent, but I doubt it.
Intellectual virtue demands that when my belief is in conflict with the belief of someone who is informed, intelligent, and sincere that my level of confidence in said belief is diminished. Likewise, if informed, intelligent, and sincere people from around the globe and across time hold a belief that is different than mine, I should be far more concerned with understanding their arguments, recognizing the likelihood that I am wrong than in psychoanalyzing the saints that have come before in order to smear their sincerity.
The arrogance one must possess to say, "Huh, would you look at that. My 'indepedently concluded' belief differs from Augustine, Aquinas, Sarah Coakley, and my grandmother; I must be a genius!" is unfathomable.
The reality is that we all occupy an intellectually vulnerable place and into this intellectually vulnerable place comes the creeds and confessions that make up the great tradition. It is a gift to us, and one that we would be wise to embrace.
Now, it is important to point out that the Great Tradition doesn't deal with everything. When the church has talked about doctrine, it has dealt primarily with questions related to the "nature of" God and creation. Which means that it won't give us particular instruction for how to deal with every technological development and how these developments interact with humanity. However, it will give us a starting point and oftentimes guardrails.
So my hope is that whatever happens in the United Methodist Church, we all find ourselves more appreciative and responsive to the wisdom of the Saints who gather alongside us and the Saints who have come before. My hope is that we rediscover the humility to recognize that when we hold beliefs that are at odds with the doctrine of the church that it is us who are probably wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)