The following is a guest column from a United Methodist layperson that offers a helpful checklist to help all of us evaluate the varied plans for unity and schism in the church today.
=====
The battle has begun
by Greg Nelson
Yes, the battle has begun for the 2016 United Methodist General Conference. Not the battle over delegates or votes or the ability to demonstrate on the floor of the conference, but the battle over the key narratives. Perhaps in church politics the old saying Carpe Diem “seize the day” should be changed to “seize the narrative.”
In May of 2014 this process began when a group of conservative United Methodists proposed that the solution to disagreements over the acceptance of LGBT members and clergy was an “amicable split.” At that time, someone asked me why this was coming up so early. My reply was:
It is an attempt to seize the narrative.
Seizing the Narrative
In a story, the narrative sets the direction of events. Written and oral storytelling are used to carry knowledge forward, share common history, and train future generations in the ways of a community. This is why the stories of the Bible are so powerful for us as Christians. They illuminate our Christian Narrative – showing us where we have been, and guiding us in the path forward.
Now, as General Conference grows nearer, we are hearing more narratives being put forth by both official and unofficial church organizations. Just last week we heard that the Connectional Table of The United Methodist Church will put forward legislation supporting a “Third Way.” This has some similarities to a proposal by well known United Methodist Pastors Adam Hamilton and Mike Slaughter named “A Way Forward.” Another narrative is now going by the name “Jurisdictional Solution.” It proposes reorganizing the jurisdictions in the United States into two overlapping jurisdictions where, “One would be in keeping with the present language of The Book of Discipline, and the other would take the more progressive approach” (Note to anyone wanting to jump in the narrative battle: a catchy name and a good website are two of the requirements!).
Another common narrative, is the “unity” narrative. It lacks a specific website or public relations team, but lives in the background with statements like, “can’t we just get along”, “I’m okay with how things are now,” and “disciplinary obedience.” However we need to recognize that the unity narrative, while masquerading as the status quo, is a false narrative. It forces us to ignore biblical narratives of love, justice, compassion, and acceptance. As Dorothee Benz wrote in a Hacking Christianity guest post,
“The belief that one can design structurally neutral solutions that punt the substantive struggle over whether we will continue to discriminate to another level of the church is an illusion.”
This is by no means an exhaustive list of the narratives coming to the General Conference (See one attempt at a list here). In fact I’ve failed to mention the key one:
The theme of the conference is Therefore Go, based on Matthew 28:19-20:
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.
Developed by a committee, this narrative may call us either to ignore other battles, or to rise above them. There’s no chance the other battles will be ignored. And it remains to be seen if we will rise above them.
How to discern the narratives
The challenge of narrative is that they only tell the story you want to hear. Our challenge as part of the quasi-democratic body of The United Methodist Church is to try to read between the lines. There are impacts hidden in every proposal. And sadly to say, some proposals will come to the General Conference with the intent of adding to the confusion.
Here are some questions that you can use as you look over proposals and discuss them:
- Who benefits? As the saying goes, “follow the money.” Shifts in structure, particularly divisions, will change funding for seminaries, jurisdictions, and general agencies. Already some churches are withholding apportionment payments. Who “leaves” and who “stays” has a big impact on who gets the money.
- What is the impact on general agencies? We need to remember that forces outside The United Methodist Church, specifically the Institute on Religion and Democracy, have funded the battle on homosexuality in the church to distract us from being a strong voice for truth and justice in the world. When looking at any structural plan, consider if the justice and mission work–that the church is known for–can continue.
- Is it realistic? Ask yourself if such a plan will still function in 10 or 20 years? For instance, if all the “gay” churches went away, would the people in the “straight” churches stop having babies? Some of whom would be gay.
- And finally, does it show God’s love? God calls us to love one another, not to judge. As the church has battled over racial division, the ordination of women, reproductive rights, and other issues, eventually we have or will see God’s will in these areas.
There will be many more issues for us to ponder as the world continues to change. But we always want to move toward God, not away. And we want to pull others toward God, and not push them away.
Greg Nelson is Director of Communications for the Oregon-Idaho Conference. His first General Conference was in 1976, in Portland, Oregon at the age of 15. Since then he’s served as a General and Jurisdictional Delegate, and General Agency commission member. If you ask him about communications, you’ll invariable get a lecture about knowing your message and knowing your audience.
===
Thoughts?
It’s distressing that “Is it biblical?”, “Is it faithful to Church teaching?” and/or “Is it consistent with faithful Christian exegesis over our 2000 year history?” didn’t merit inclusion on the list. Those are certainly “in bounds” as considerations.
Good points Keith,
I’m sure we’ll see those narratives come up. I hope that when you read, “does it show God’s love” you will presume there is some biblical basis behind it.
The challenge for me is that unless I’m in relationship with someone enough to know their context, these seem like phrased intended to trick or trap me. We are not of one mind about how to read/interpret the bible. Not not, and not over 2000 years of history.
And we know that Church teaching has not always been correct. So while we can use it as a guide and one part of our quadrilateral narrative, we still need to apply reason. Case in point, the Jurisdictional solution looks a lot like the Central Jurisdiction of history. That’s not a history I think we should repeat.
And, you know, I’ve never figured out what “exegesis” means. So my eyes always glaze over when someone uses that word.
This morning it occurred to me that Keith’s comment is an excellent example of someone attempting to change the narrative of a conversation.
In public relations terms this is a “pivot.” It’s what someone does in an interview when they don’t want to address the question.
I appreciate Greg’s perspective on “the narrative” here. As a fellow communications person I can attest to the power of narrative in shaping the convesation and, ultimately, the vote.
I appreciate Greg Nelson’s line: “But we always want to move toward God, not away. And we want to pull others toward God, and not push them away.”
Though I do no know the path, I remain convinced there is a healing center toward which we all can journey, together, finding our way forward to truly being a church of “Open Hearts. Open Minds. Open Doors.” I remain convinced the Holy Spirit not only can guide us there, but I am even more convinced that the Holy Spirit desires to guide us there. May we be discerning, humble, and faithful.
Pray for the United Methodist Church that God will be honored and the church continue in ministry.
Speaking of narratives, that shot at the IRD was masterful. I’m not really a fan of theirs. However, when the only lens to think through impact on general agencies is a polemic against an outside group, I’d say that a narrative is already at work.
I don’t know if anyone else will find this helpful. I offer it only because I find it relevant. Paul advises Timothy in his second letter (NASB):
11 It is a trustworthy statement:
For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;
12 If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we deny Him, He also will deny us;
13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.
14 Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers.
I’m gonna identify my stake and position first off…. I am a transgender woman married to another transgender woman. After having been absent for church life since I was a teenager, I’ve joined a Methodist church. When I went to church as a child, it was in the American Baptist denomination. So, that’s the skin I have in this, and that’s where I’m coming from. That said: I don’t see why so many people object to allowing individual congregations to follow their own conscience on this matter. While I understand the appeal of having a book of discipline and of trying to be of one mind, I don’t think that’s how people work. People of good will can approach the same problem and come away with very divergent opinions, and it takes time to work out difficult issues. So the question becomes do we want to be a UNITED Methodist Church? Do we want to work through the trying times together, offering each other grace, and work to grow together, or do we want to walk away, wash our hands of each other? In essence, do we follow our Christian imperative to love our neighbors as ourselves, even when we are repelled by what they’re up to, or do we take our jacks, go home, and say good riddance? When we stay united, offer the other space, work through the issues with love and grace we play the long game, the hard game, the one that makes our hair turn gray prematurely. But, we also work toward healing and true reconciliation.
1 Corinthians 1:12-13
12What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?
Were we baptized in Christ, or baptized in the Book of Discipline? Well, I was baptized as a Baptist, so I know I wasn’t baptized in that book, but I suspect none of you were either.
So what do we do? While we of such different minds of this issue, we allow each other love and grace. I’m not sure how this works in terms of Methodist politics, I just know what it looks like in terms of Christian love.
-C
As someone who has studied narrative and ideology a lot in my communications background I appreciate this article for that reason.
However, I am afraid this issue may have little to do with narrative when it is all said and done. The difference between interpretations on Scripture over this issue is vast. This is not simply a womens ordination or racial issue of the past. This is a debate over the foundational understanding of sin and redemption. And that is not going to simply go away.
I’m not sure why an amicable parting of ways can not be the solution. Paul and Barnabas parted ways. I’m worried that if that is not the solution, that it will simply end up being an ugly divorce…