Grace and Peace,
Matt...
Saturday, April 26, 2008
General Conference Commentary
I'm doing some daily blog commentary on General Conference. My latest post regarding the cell phone gift issue has generated some heat, apparently. Feel free to check it out on "The Truth As Best I Know It".
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Missional Methodist Meta-Questions
Part 1 of ?
Okay, now that the long series of 21 ponderings on the questions, vision pathways, and focus areas that may be likely to shape the future of the denominational structures of the UMC has come to a close, what's left to write about?
Well, a good bit, I think.
Along the way of thinking and talking with some of you during the 21-part series (and, by the way, since this is a blog, all 21 parts are still out there and you can comment on any of them anytime you like!), several other basic issues came up (and I invite you to raise others) that may call for some serious re-thinking and re-working as we re-emerge into a more missional Methodism in our own contexts in the days ahead.
Here are just a few...
Ordination-- what's it for, who needs it, and why-- in a missional Methodist context?
Membership-- where does it belong, really? And why?
Clergy Itineracy-- what WAS it for, what's become of it, and in what kinds of contexts does it still make sense (and not!)
Sacraments-- where do these belong, not belong, and how and why?
Organizational Capacity-- for both the missional/discipleship structures AND the congregational/denominational structures-- who is best at doing what and what does it take for each to do that?
Getting paid-- by whom, and for what?
Who has what "rights" in a missional context? And why does that matter (or not!)?
If local matters most, where do trans-local and global connect?
Do we really HAVE to build discipleship structures ALONGSIDE rather than primarily WITHIN the congregational format?
What about Sunday School?
What about the role of children in the life of a missional Christian community and their formation and deployment as missionaries?
Whither "confirmation?"
Who holds missional/discipleship groups accountable to one another? Congregations? A network among missional groups?
Do worship experiences in a missional group "count" for a given week/period of time, or does only congregation-based worship count, or both, or what?
Before I begin on any of these, though-- I'm interested in hearing what you might add to this list of missional Methodist meta-questions.
And in the meantime-- I'm in Fort Worth getting ready for assisting all the worship events we do at General Conference-- so do pray for us down here!
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Okay, now that the long series of 21 ponderings on the questions, vision pathways, and focus areas that may be likely to shape the future of the denominational structures of the UMC has come to a close, what's left to write about?
Well, a good bit, I think.
Along the way of thinking and talking with some of you during the 21-part series (and, by the way, since this is a blog, all 21 parts are still out there and you can comment on any of them anytime you like!), several other basic issues came up (and I invite you to raise others) that may call for some serious re-thinking and re-working as we re-emerge into a more missional Methodism in our own contexts in the days ahead.
Here are just a few...
Ordination-- what's it for, who needs it, and why-- in a missional Methodist context?
Membership-- where does it belong, really? And why?
Clergy Itineracy-- what WAS it for, what's become of it, and in what kinds of contexts does it still make sense (and not!)
Sacraments-- where do these belong, not belong, and how and why?
Organizational Capacity-- for both the missional/discipleship structures AND the congregational/denominational structures-- who is best at doing what and what does it take for each to do that?
Getting paid-- by whom, and for what?
Who has what "rights" in a missional context? And why does that matter (or not!)?
If local matters most, where do trans-local and global connect?
Do we really HAVE to build discipleship structures ALONGSIDE rather than primarily WITHIN the congregational format?
What about Sunday School?
What about the role of children in the life of a missional Christian community and their formation and deployment as missionaries?
Whither "confirmation?"
Who holds missional/discipleship groups accountable to one another? Congregations? A network among missional groups?
Do worship experiences in a missional group "count" for a given week/period of time, or does only congregation-based worship count, or both, or what?
Before I begin on any of these, though-- I'm interested in hearing what you might add to this list of missional Methodist meta-questions.
And in the meantime-- I'm in Fort Worth getting ready for assisting all the worship events we do at General Conference-- so do pray for us down here!
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Thursday, April 10, 2008
A UM Missional Future: Focus Area 4
Part 21 of 21...
Focus Area 4:
Stamping out killer diseases by improving health globally. Conditions of poverty cause illness and death. The lack of access to doctors, nurses, medications and appropriate facilities is deadly, especially among those who live in conditions of poverty. But the diseases of poverty are not inevitable. We believe the people of The United Methodist Church can play a significant role in educating others about diseases such as HIV/AIDS and malaria, and treating and preventing their devastating effects.
As with the previous focus area about engaging in ministry with the poor, it's hard to say much more than a hearty Amen!
The target sought for the reduction of malaria in partnership with others who are working on this is very ambitious-- a reduction of 66% in death from malaria in just a few years.
That's huge. Malaria remains one of the leading killers of people in the world. It doesn't need to be. It can be treated if caught in time, and it can be prevented from happening in the first place through simple measures such as nets around bedding (the Nothing but Nets campaign that the UMC has joined with many other global partners) or more permanent fixes like ensuring safe water supplies and good drainage that would reduce the number and reproduction rate of disease carrying mosquitos.
Donate Now! You can do it here, and even have the record linked to your UM congregation.
While I served as Director of Community Impact with United Way of Madison County in Anderson, IN (2002-2005), I also became a member of the local chapter of Rotary, International. In case you're not aware of it, Rotary took on a major health initiative itself-- to rid the world of polio.
And its 1.2 million members around the world have largely succeeded. Less than 2000 cases were reported worldwide in 2007. That's down from over 1000 new cases per day reported in 1988, when Rotary began their focused work. (Source).
Part of the genius of Rotary's plan was the fact that it already had chapters in many countries around the world where polio was still an issue. A significant portion of the dues and meal costs for each meeting, paid by every member, went to this cause. And its members had relationships with business and other leaders locally and internationally who were glad to help in a variety of ways-- supplying funds for vaccine, transportation to get it where it needed to go, people to supervise operations on the ground with the support of governments and local NGOs and health agencies.
Rotary is a network of small to large groups, all contributing not just at their group meetings, but by their additional networks of relationships, to see this mission-- eradicating polio-- to its conclusion. I have every reason to believe they'll get it done. And soon.
With all the talk going on in many quarters about how the UMC is dying, we may sometimes forget that we still have about 35,000 "branch offices" in the US, and thousands more in other countries. Through our larger networks in the World Methodist Federation, we're in many, many nations on the planet. Through our ecumenical networks-- which take in nearly all of Christianity, we have networks that include relationships with people in every nation on earth.
One of the things I really appreciate about this focus area is how it absolutely gets this. It does not say that the AGENCIES of the denomination will do this FOR United Methodists. It says "the people of the United Methodist Church" can educate and work with others to get this job done-- to educate others and treat and radically reduce the conditions that make malaria the killer it still, and unnecessarily, is. And it pledges us-- the people of the UMC-- to work on radically reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS and other such diseases as well.
If we really can pull off such focused work-- probably led though not solely brokered by our General Agencies-- this could be great good news to the poor. It would be, to use the words of the Great Thanksgiving from our Word and Table I, an example of the church being part of announcing "that the time had come when [God] would save [God's] people."
But let's just keep remembering how this works. It's the distributed chapters, the networks that the people that compose them can activate, PLUS whatever centralized leadership there may be.
Rotary has not by any means accomplished their incredible work to eliminate polio just themselves. They can take credit for deploying their chapters and the networks that members of their chapters have to get it done-- and they can credit their own leadership for keeping their own networks focused on attaining this goal. But they can't take credit for doing it all themselves. And they don't.
Right now, the basic units of UMC networks are congregations. Unlike Rotary chapters, most of our congregations do not have a sharp focus on what they want to accomplish. (No, I'm not going all "purpose-driven" here). Most of them DO donate the the work of the General Agencies and the Annual Conference, and many of them include a good number of folks who would no doubt love to be involved in a project as big and ambitious and transformational as this one. But as structures themselves, that culture of "let's really get this done" may not be in place in most of our congregations.
But it would be in place, for sure, in renewed Methodist missional groups alongside congregations. Early Methodism had within it a very sharp focus on being accountable to each other and to God to make sure that prisoners and the sick were visited and cared for, that social ills (such as the rapid rise of alcoholism with the advent of cheap gin in England in the early Industrial Age) were addressed, and that social evils (such as slavery and the slave trade) would be stopped. They didn't do these things alone, either. But they were able to deploy their networks of class meetings and societies alongside other organizations and organizers-- religious and "secular"-- to get it done.
But let us remember again that our calling is not only to bring this good news of elimination of such killer diseases. Just like we can (and often do) see "the poor" as "objects" for "us" to change, so also we may see the people who are being killed by such diseases as malaria as either victims or potential victims primarily. That's not an entirely bad perspective to bring-- that is part of the reality, and we have to take that seriously. But just ending malaria for folks who may have succumbed to it before we got involved must not be the end or even the goal of our involvement.
If it is, we're missing a significant part of the heartbeat of God's mission-- in the words of Ephesians, "to make one new humanity in place of the two."
The problem with malaria or HIV/AIDS from our angle as Christians isn't simply or only that it kills people. It's that by doing that, it both reveals and perpetuates the lack of community we experience in the world. It sustains a permanent underclass in the "under-continents." In Trinitarian terms, it commits Arianism-- ontologically subordinating one part of humanity in the two-thirds world to another, just as Arius proposed that Jesus/Son/Word was ontologically subordinate to the Father.
No, what we are invited into as those who hear, are baptized, and seek to follow the way of Jesus is not some project to fix everyone else who is deemed inferior in some way. It is rather to enter into the eternal Love of the Divine Life in the God we know as Three in One. It is to enter and be transformed by the Love that calls the universe into being, moves in all hearts and all things, and restores the world. It is to enter into the Divine Community of ceaseless giving and receiving of Love from Father to Son to Spirit and back again and round and round. It is to join the Primal Dance, the Eternal Perichoresis of Love.
Living and fed by that Community, we learn and see the possibilities for such community with all around us, and especially the poor and those who suffer. We see suffering not to turn away from it, neither to overlook it, nor simply to remove it, but to remember that this is our sister, this is our brother, and in love to do all love can do with her or him and pray for what is beyond our capacity. And we keep doing this with these sisters and brothers, even after what may have been our first act of love-- perhaps curing or preventing a disease, or offering safe water-- is complete. And they, in the Eternal Perichoresis of God's love, will continue to do the same with us.
Not "fix it, chalk up the brownie points, and move on to the next thing."
No-- love, love to the uttermost, perhaps in part by fixing such things as we can, deploying whatever networks and resources we ourselves may have or can encourage others to use-- but then more love, more giving and receiving of love.
Always, always, eternally, Love.
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Focus Area 4:
Stamping out killer diseases by improving health globally. Conditions of poverty cause illness and death. The lack of access to doctors, nurses, medications and appropriate facilities is deadly, especially among those who live in conditions of poverty. But the diseases of poverty are not inevitable. We believe the people of The United Methodist Church can play a significant role in educating others about diseases such as HIV/AIDS and malaria, and treating and preventing their devastating effects.
As with the previous focus area about engaging in ministry with the poor, it's hard to say much more than a hearty Amen!
The target sought for the reduction of malaria in partnership with others who are working on this is very ambitious-- a reduction of 66% in death from malaria in just a few years.
That's huge. Malaria remains one of the leading killers of people in the world. It doesn't need to be. It can be treated if caught in time, and it can be prevented from happening in the first place through simple measures such as nets around bedding (the Nothing but Nets campaign that the UMC has joined with many other global partners) or more permanent fixes like ensuring safe water supplies and good drainage that would reduce the number and reproduction rate of disease carrying mosquitos.
Donate Now! You can do it here, and even have the record linked to your UM congregation.
While I served as Director of Community Impact with United Way of Madison County in Anderson, IN (2002-2005), I also became a member of the local chapter of Rotary, International. In case you're not aware of it, Rotary took on a major health initiative itself-- to rid the world of polio.
And its 1.2 million members around the world have largely succeeded. Less than 2000 cases were reported worldwide in 2007. That's down from over 1000 new cases per day reported in 1988, when Rotary began their focused work. (Source).
Part of the genius of Rotary's plan was the fact that it already had chapters in many countries around the world where polio was still an issue. A significant portion of the dues and meal costs for each meeting, paid by every member, went to this cause. And its members had relationships with business and other leaders locally and internationally who were glad to help in a variety of ways-- supplying funds for vaccine, transportation to get it where it needed to go, people to supervise operations on the ground with the support of governments and local NGOs and health agencies.
Rotary is a network of small to large groups, all contributing not just at their group meetings, but by their additional networks of relationships, to see this mission-- eradicating polio-- to its conclusion. I have every reason to believe they'll get it done. And soon.
With all the talk going on in many quarters about how the UMC is dying, we may sometimes forget that we still have about 35,000 "branch offices" in the US, and thousands more in other countries. Through our larger networks in the World Methodist Federation, we're in many, many nations on the planet. Through our ecumenical networks-- which take in nearly all of Christianity, we have networks that include relationships with people in every nation on earth.
One of the things I really appreciate about this focus area is how it absolutely gets this. It does not say that the AGENCIES of the denomination will do this FOR United Methodists. It says "the people of the United Methodist Church" can educate and work with others to get this job done-- to educate others and treat and radically reduce the conditions that make malaria the killer it still, and unnecessarily, is. And it pledges us-- the people of the UMC-- to work on radically reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS and other such diseases as well.
If we really can pull off such focused work-- probably led though not solely brokered by our General Agencies-- this could be great good news to the poor. It would be, to use the words of the Great Thanksgiving from our Word and Table I, an example of the church being part of announcing "that the time had come when [God] would save [God's] people."
But let's just keep remembering how this works. It's the distributed chapters, the networks that the people that compose them can activate, PLUS whatever centralized leadership there may be.
Rotary has not by any means accomplished their incredible work to eliminate polio just themselves. They can take credit for deploying their chapters and the networks that members of their chapters have to get it done-- and they can credit their own leadership for keeping their own networks focused on attaining this goal. But they can't take credit for doing it all themselves. And they don't.
Right now, the basic units of UMC networks are congregations. Unlike Rotary chapters, most of our congregations do not have a sharp focus on what they want to accomplish. (No, I'm not going all "purpose-driven" here). Most of them DO donate the the work of the General Agencies and the Annual Conference, and many of them include a good number of folks who would no doubt love to be involved in a project as big and ambitious and transformational as this one. But as structures themselves, that culture of "let's really get this done" may not be in place in most of our congregations.
But it would be in place, for sure, in renewed Methodist missional groups alongside congregations. Early Methodism had within it a very sharp focus on being accountable to each other and to God to make sure that prisoners and the sick were visited and cared for, that social ills (such as the rapid rise of alcoholism with the advent of cheap gin in England in the early Industrial Age) were addressed, and that social evils (such as slavery and the slave trade) would be stopped. They didn't do these things alone, either. But they were able to deploy their networks of class meetings and societies alongside other organizations and organizers-- religious and "secular"-- to get it done.
But let us remember again that our calling is not only to bring this good news of elimination of such killer diseases. Just like we can (and often do) see "the poor" as "objects" for "us" to change, so also we may see the people who are being killed by such diseases as malaria as either victims or potential victims primarily. That's not an entirely bad perspective to bring-- that is part of the reality, and we have to take that seriously. But just ending malaria for folks who may have succumbed to it before we got involved must not be the end or even the goal of our involvement.
If it is, we're missing a significant part of the heartbeat of God's mission-- in the words of Ephesians, "to make one new humanity in place of the two."
The problem with malaria or HIV/AIDS from our angle as Christians isn't simply or only that it kills people. It's that by doing that, it both reveals and perpetuates the lack of community we experience in the world. It sustains a permanent underclass in the "under-continents." In Trinitarian terms, it commits Arianism-- ontologically subordinating one part of humanity in the two-thirds world to another, just as Arius proposed that Jesus/Son/Word was ontologically subordinate to the Father.
No, what we are invited into as those who hear, are baptized, and seek to follow the way of Jesus is not some project to fix everyone else who is deemed inferior in some way. It is rather to enter into the eternal Love of the Divine Life in the God we know as Three in One. It is to enter and be transformed by the Love that calls the universe into being, moves in all hearts and all things, and restores the world. It is to enter into the Divine Community of ceaseless giving and receiving of Love from Father to Son to Spirit and back again and round and round. It is to join the Primal Dance, the Eternal Perichoresis of Love.
Living and fed by that Community, we learn and see the possibilities for such community with all around us, and especially the poor and those who suffer. We see suffering not to turn away from it, neither to overlook it, nor simply to remove it, but to remember that this is our sister, this is our brother, and in love to do all love can do with her or him and pray for what is beyond our capacity. And we keep doing this with these sisters and brothers, even after what may have been our first act of love-- perhaps curing or preventing a disease, or offering safe water-- is complete. And they, in the Eternal Perichoresis of God's love, will continue to do the same with us.
Not "fix it, chalk up the brownie points, and move on to the next thing."
No-- love, love to the uttermost, perhaps in part by fixing such things as we can, deploying whatever networks and resources we ourselves may have or can encourage others to use-- but then more love, more giving and receiving of love.
Always, always, eternally, Love.
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
A UM Missional Future: Focus Area 3
Part 20 of 21...
Focus Area 3:
Engaging in ministry with the poor. As an expression of our discipleship, United Methodists seek to alleviate conditions that undermine quality of life and limit the opportunity to flourish as we believe God intends for all. As with John Wesley, we seek to change conditions that are unjust, alienating and disempowering. We engage in ministry with the poor, and in this, we especially want to reach out to and protect children.
There is perhaps little more to say to this focus area for General Agency investment and focused work than, Amen!
Well, maybe a little more.
There's more to engaging in ministry with the poor than addressing what's wrong. In the midst of all the things we do, of course we must address those things, too. But if the entire approach we take in ministry with the poor at any level-- from international efforts to end child labor and prostitution to much more street level efforts to make sure kids coming home from school have safe places to be and food to eat-- is only or even primarily about addressing what's wrong, and from "our" angle (that is, from the angle of those who understand themselves as being "not poor"), there may be a lot of God's mission we may be missing.
Don't get me wrong. We need to do all those things and more. We pledge ourselves in baptism to resist evil, injustice and oppression in every form they present themselves. This focus area can provide General Agency leadership to help all of us live that out in many ways. And that's all good.
But let's not forget that the same Jesus who leads all of us to battle oppression also said, as Luke's gospel records, "Blessed are you who are poor." He did not add there, as we have it recorded in Matthew, "in spirit." Nor did he add to those simple words something like "when the wealthy give them good things," or even "by and by." No. In Luke the words of Jesus are "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God."
Not later. Not by and by. Now. Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
If we want to see the kingdom of God, then, we need to look for it with and among the poor.
These were, after all, perhaps the bulk of the people to whom Jesus spoke these words. Luke 6 describes a large crowd scene, with lots of disciples all over the place, and many sick and demon-possessed people gathering in to be healed and delivered by Jesus.
There was no health insurance plan in Israel. If you were sick, physically or psychically, you probably couldn't work. If you couldn't work, you probably couldn't eat. And many, many people depended on working every day to get the "day's wage" to put the food on their table that night.
These were the poor. These were among those who suffer from what we today call "extreme poverty." Jesus turned to disciples, some of whom lived in such poverty, too, and said, "Blessed are you who are poor. Yours is the kingdom of God."
So it's not enough to look at the poor and the problems that face them (do you hear the objectification in all of this!). We are called to do that, too. We are anointed by the same Spirit who anointed Jesus to bring good news to the poor. So yes, we do that.
But we are invited to do much more. We are invited to connect directly and personally with the poor and see the face of God and the working of God's kingdom, already at work, even before "we" woke up to our calling to be among the poor and bring them good news.
I don't know about you, but my observation is that we who are not poor have done a pretty good job of insulating ourselves from ever encountering people who are poor very frequently. Often, when we want to do something "for the poor," we do that by creating institutions or programs or funding other people to do something for them. Doing that ensures we may not meet them. Maybe the person or persons we pay to handle what we want to do will meet them. But probably not us. Not personally.
And we've done a pretty good job, too, of convincing ourselves that "we're" okay and that "they're" not ultimately, because they are poor. But we have the power to fix that, to make them better, maybe even almost as good as us. Maybe even more than almost.
But listen to Jesus, again. Blessed are you who are poor. He's not talking about the poor. He's talking to people who are poor. This is an I-thou relationship.
Both those who were poor and those who were not were privileged to hear or overhear him say these words. To the poor, he said "Yours is the kingdom of God." To the rest, he said, in effect "Watch me-- and do likewise."
And he also said, just a few verses later, "Woe to you who are rich now. That's all the consolation you'll ever receive."
Note: This is I-thou, also! He's not blowing off "the rich" or talking about them. He addresses them with the same steady gaze. And so he says to the poor who observe him talking to the rich, "Watch me-- and do likewise."
Jesus invites us all, all who want to be his disciples, that is, to watch and listen to him, and to do and say as he has done. Jesus invites us to watch and listen to and with the poor, not just for signs affirming to us their poverty. The poor have something to give those of us who are not poor, something to show us, something to help us see. The poor have the kingdom of God happening in their midst.
I'm grateful for what appear in this focus area to be commitments to challenging and overturning systemic injustice embedded in institutions and the patterns of institutional relationships. We all need to and can play at that level.
I'm grateful for the commitments here to reach out to children and protect them-- perhaps a set of more local initiatives that congregations and community groups can engage.
But let's keep this just as personal as Jesus did, too. And let's keep this as intimately relational as John Wesley insisted the early Methodists keep it as they were living and holding each other accountable for Rule 2 in the class meetings-- by ourselves visiting the sick, prisoners, and poor people, and offering not just things or advice, but our gaze and God's blessing-- Christ in us. And in the exchange, perhaps, if we are willing, we may see and experience the kingdom of God with them.
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Focus Area 3:
Engaging in ministry with the poor. As an expression of our discipleship, United Methodists seek to alleviate conditions that undermine quality of life and limit the opportunity to flourish as we believe God intends for all. As with John Wesley, we seek to change conditions that are unjust, alienating and disempowering. We engage in ministry with the poor, and in this, we especially want to reach out to and protect children.
There is perhaps little more to say to this focus area for General Agency investment and focused work than, Amen!
Well, maybe a little more.
There's more to engaging in ministry with the poor than addressing what's wrong. In the midst of all the things we do, of course we must address those things, too. But if the entire approach we take in ministry with the poor at any level-- from international efforts to end child labor and prostitution to much more street level efforts to make sure kids coming home from school have safe places to be and food to eat-- is only or even primarily about addressing what's wrong, and from "our" angle (that is, from the angle of those who understand themselves as being "not poor"), there may be a lot of God's mission we may be missing.
Don't get me wrong. We need to do all those things and more. We pledge ourselves in baptism to resist evil, injustice and oppression in every form they present themselves. This focus area can provide General Agency leadership to help all of us live that out in many ways. And that's all good.
But let's not forget that the same Jesus who leads all of us to battle oppression also said, as Luke's gospel records, "Blessed are you who are poor." He did not add there, as we have it recorded in Matthew, "in spirit." Nor did he add to those simple words something like "when the wealthy give them good things," or even "by and by." No. In Luke the words of Jesus are "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God."
Not later. Not by and by. Now. Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
If we want to see the kingdom of God, then, we need to look for it with and among the poor.
These were, after all, perhaps the bulk of the people to whom Jesus spoke these words. Luke 6 describes a large crowd scene, with lots of disciples all over the place, and many sick and demon-possessed people gathering in to be healed and delivered by Jesus.
There was no health insurance plan in Israel. If you were sick, physically or psychically, you probably couldn't work. If you couldn't work, you probably couldn't eat. And many, many people depended on working every day to get the "day's wage" to put the food on their table that night.
These were the poor. These were among those who suffer from what we today call "extreme poverty." Jesus turned to disciples, some of whom lived in such poverty, too, and said, "Blessed are you who are poor. Yours is the kingdom of God."
So it's not enough to look at the poor and the problems that face them (do you hear the objectification in all of this!). We are called to do that, too. We are anointed by the same Spirit who anointed Jesus to bring good news to the poor. So yes, we do that.
But we are invited to do much more. We are invited to connect directly and personally with the poor and see the face of God and the working of God's kingdom, already at work, even before "we" woke up to our calling to be among the poor and bring them good news.
I don't know about you, but my observation is that we who are not poor have done a pretty good job of insulating ourselves from ever encountering people who are poor very frequently. Often, when we want to do something "for the poor," we do that by creating institutions or programs or funding other people to do something for them. Doing that ensures we may not meet them. Maybe the person or persons we pay to handle what we want to do will meet them. But probably not us. Not personally.
And we've done a pretty good job, too, of convincing ourselves that "we're" okay and that "they're" not ultimately, because they are poor. But we have the power to fix that, to make them better, maybe even almost as good as us. Maybe even more than almost.
But listen to Jesus, again. Blessed are you who are poor. He's not talking about the poor. He's talking to people who are poor. This is an I-thou relationship.
Both those who were poor and those who were not were privileged to hear or overhear him say these words. To the poor, he said "Yours is the kingdom of God." To the rest, he said, in effect "Watch me-- and do likewise."
And he also said, just a few verses later, "Woe to you who are rich now. That's all the consolation you'll ever receive."
Note: This is I-thou, also! He's not blowing off "the rich" or talking about them. He addresses them with the same steady gaze. And so he says to the poor who observe him talking to the rich, "Watch me-- and do likewise."
Jesus invites us all, all who want to be his disciples, that is, to watch and listen to him, and to do and say as he has done. Jesus invites us to watch and listen to and with the poor, not just for signs affirming to us their poverty. The poor have something to give those of us who are not poor, something to show us, something to help us see. The poor have the kingdom of God happening in their midst.
I'm grateful for what appear in this focus area to be commitments to challenging and overturning systemic injustice embedded in institutions and the patterns of institutional relationships. We all need to and can play at that level.
I'm grateful for the commitments here to reach out to children and protect them-- perhaps a set of more local initiatives that congregations and community groups can engage.
But let's keep this just as personal as Jesus did, too. And let's keep this as intimately relational as John Wesley insisted the early Methodists keep it as they were living and holding each other accountable for Rule 2 in the class meetings-- by ourselves visiting the sick, prisoners, and poor people, and offering not just things or advice, but our gaze and God's blessing-- Christ in us. And in the exchange, perhaps, if we are willing, we may see and experience the kingdom of God with them.
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
A UM Missional Future: Focus Area 1
Part 19 of 21...
Focus Area 1: Developing principled Christian leaders for the church and the world.
For more on focus areas in general, see the previous post on Focus Areas and Focus Area 2.
This focus area is further described by the Connectional Table as follows:
The church must recruit young people for ministry and provide them with the skills necessary to be effective in this new time of opportunity. That includes women and people of color the world over. Similarly, we must offer leadership training for lay people who are in ministry in countless ways.
This Focus Area is one place where the Connectional Table is seeking to respond to the challenge posed by Lovett Weems's research that has noted that United Methodists have the second lowest rate of ordained elders (or their equivalent) under the age of 35 of any mainline denomination in the US at 4.69% in 2005, which is a precipitous fall from 15.05% in 1985. (Only The Episcopal Church has a lower rate of younger ordained priests at 4.10% in 2006). This corresponds somewhat, too, to Weems's challenges in his Provocative Proposals, where he wondered aloud whether perhaps a major metric for the denomination to try to track and improve over the next decade might be professions of faith among people of color, asked if we were really serious about being a global church, and were thus ready to structure ourselves accordingly, and if we were willing to work at issues that both eliminate the endangered species status of younger clergy AND focus more on fostering good clergy leadership than continuing to allow poor leadership to go unchecked.
The issue in all of these questions and the whole first section of this focus area is clergy leadership.
That's not a bad thing to gain greater focus upon. Congregations do need trained and effective clergy leaders of all adult ages, not just older clergy.
The issue is not just recruitment, of course. It's also helping younger persons and other persons who have fewer financial means to get through the financial and other costs of the process leading to ordination, a process that has lengthened, increased in cost, and that has fewer places where it can occur since the Disciplinary changes in 1996 and the continuing reduction of seminaries approved by the University Senate. And more that that, finding appropriate appointments for these younger leaders to serve both as they are preparing and as they are beginning their full-time work as commissioned and ordained elders.
An appropriate appointment for a younger leader may not be as a solo pastor. And it is almost certainly not as the solo pastor of a several point charge of several small and struggling congregations of people of primarily older generations and a vastly different cultural background.
And, if part of the hope for these younger leaders is that they will be effective at helping to reach younger people, then an appropriate appointment might be to places where younger people actually live. Current demographics in the US would identify those places to be far more likely in or near large urban areas, and far less likely to be in small towns or rural areas.
Appointments are not issues that this focus area-- which represents the intentional work of the General Agencies of the UMC-- can fix directly. This is something for bishops and cabinets to work on, and to convince their Boards of Ordained Ministry (which are actually very independent from conference to conference) to follow suit in how they work to support rather than hinder the process of ordination for younger and less financially well-off candidates.
But I digress a bit...
Let me say first WHY this is important. It's because though congregations are not a sufficient form or venue for missional disciple-making, they are necessary. If we don't have strong leadership in the congregational format, that weakens the capacity of Methodist missional groups that may come alongside them to be maximally effective as well. Put in other words, the institution matters, too-- not just the movement. The movement without the institution has no center. The institution without the movement lacks vital piety. It's always both. That this area addresses the institution is no weakness, but rather a form of clarity about one place where such focus needs to be placed-- on the clergy leadership of local congregations.
It is likely to be the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry that will provide the lion's share of the general agency leadership and investment toward supporting this focus area. Others will no doubt assist where they can and should (GBGM, for example, in a number of settings outside the US). The decline in the number of younger ordained elders and the awareness of the deep giftedness and possible calling of all people in all places where United Methodists form congregations are solid reasons to pursue this focus area with diligence and generosity.
But not to the exclusion of the third sentence of it.
Similarly, we must offer leadership training for lay people who are in ministry in countless ways.
I do not read this as an afterthought, even if its rationale is less detailed than that given for a focus on ordained clergy leadership. Rather, I read it as the very heart of our task as missional Christians. Elders serve the work of the kingdom of God in the church in a few specific ways that primarily support the congregational format of Christianity. The rest of us do this missional work in literally countless ways.
I've seen the word "countless" used in such contexts as a sort of a throwaway compliment. "Yes, they do countless things," we say. What we sometimes means in saying that, though, is that we're not really sure what all they do, but whatever they're doing, we're glad they're doing it. At the same time, that means we're not all that invested in coming to understand what those "countless" things are. So we'll make sure we train them to do something-- maybe something we can create another program for or a position in the church (like committees and the like).
Yes, this statement could imply all of that. I'm choosing not to let it do so for me, and I'm hoping you will choose not to let it do so for yourself or others.
The reality, the simple reality, is that if we each take ALL of our own missional contexts seriously, and diligently find ways to act as growing missionaries in all of them-- and to do that we'll have to have the support of a small group that breathes communitas and is sold out to the way of Jesus, something most congregational formats won't be prepared to provide or support well--then, yes, those ministries could indeed become countless.
Let's do the math on this.
If, as Wayne Schwab contends, we all live constantly in perhaps 6 missional contexts, in ADDITION to a local congregation, and we are in a missional/accountable discipleship group of perhaps 6 people-- that's up to 36 contexts just there (unless, that is, we all live and work in exactly the same places all the time!). That's 36 contexts, not 36 ministries. Each of these contexts may offer opportunities for each individual to engage in a good number of ministries, every day, both through organic relationships and through intentional actions. Let's put that number at 3 just to be conservative. So six people now have the opportunity to engage in 108 ministries. Every day.
Now scale that up to a few million people who call themselves United Methodist. Let's call it six million for the sake of similar round numbers. Let's say we have 1 million little groups of 6, sold out to Jesus, living communitas themselves, while also connected to a congregation. 36 million contexts. 108 million ministry opportunities. Every day. Multiply that by the days in a year. That's 39,420,000,000-- yes, over 39 BILLION, with a B.
That's pretty close to what I'd legitimately call countless. And that's not counting more organized opportunities these people may pursue with each other or through other networks.
You think we're going to create any sort of monolithic, one size fits all national training program that can possibly "equip" people for 108 million ministry opportunities every day? Something that you can purchase and run as a program in your congregation?
I don't. For lots of reasons.
But I know God can equip all these people and all this ministry, and much, much more. Indeed, God has done so. The witness is that we're here, all these generations later. The witness is that the good news continues to spread and form people to be missionaries in every nation on this planet.
And I believe you can. I am convinced the network can. Or to use John Wesley's term-- I believe the connexion can-- when it's about connection and not so much about control. And I think general agencies working to live out this Focus Area can be a valuable part of it. Not as any sort of monolithic program, but rather as cheerleaders and partners and as creators or hosts of platforms or hubs for webs of relationships among missional groups and congregations and communities-- some with the label United Methodist and perhaps many more not bearing that name-- but serving as bona fide learning and teaching partners with us.
Yes, we need leadership training for all the baptized-- including some who will serve primarily within the missional context of the congregational format and other para-congregational formats such as agencies or as District Superintendents or conference staff.
But more than this we need training-- probably more from experienced people who live this way where we already live, or close enough by for us to meet and learn from-- in the ways of communitas, and in the disciplines of being missionaries, wherever we are, wherever the Spirit blows us.
But above all of that, we need not training, but conversion.
What we really all need, most of all, is to be sold out to Jesus-- and so to seek God's kingdom and justice, following him wherever he leads, going in his name wherever he has sent us.
Even so...
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Focus Area 1: Developing principled Christian leaders for the church and the world.
For more on focus areas in general, see the previous post on Focus Areas and Focus Area 2.
This focus area is further described by the Connectional Table as follows:
The church must recruit young people for ministry and provide them with the skills necessary to be effective in this new time of opportunity. That includes women and people of color the world over. Similarly, we must offer leadership training for lay people who are in ministry in countless ways.
This Focus Area is one place where the Connectional Table is seeking to respond to the challenge posed by Lovett Weems's research that has noted that United Methodists have the second lowest rate of ordained elders (or their equivalent) under the age of 35 of any mainline denomination in the US at 4.69% in 2005, which is a precipitous fall from 15.05% in 1985. (Only The Episcopal Church has a lower rate of younger ordained priests at 4.10% in 2006). This corresponds somewhat, too, to Weems's challenges in his Provocative Proposals, where he wondered aloud whether perhaps a major metric for the denomination to try to track and improve over the next decade might be professions of faith among people of color, asked if we were really serious about being a global church, and were thus ready to structure ourselves accordingly, and if we were willing to work at issues that both eliminate the endangered species status of younger clergy AND focus more on fostering good clergy leadership than continuing to allow poor leadership to go unchecked.
The issue in all of these questions and the whole first section of this focus area is clergy leadership.
That's not a bad thing to gain greater focus upon. Congregations do need trained and effective clergy leaders of all adult ages, not just older clergy.
The issue is not just recruitment, of course. It's also helping younger persons and other persons who have fewer financial means to get through the financial and other costs of the process leading to ordination, a process that has lengthened, increased in cost, and that has fewer places where it can occur since the Disciplinary changes in 1996 and the continuing reduction of seminaries approved by the University Senate. And more that that, finding appropriate appointments for these younger leaders to serve both as they are preparing and as they are beginning their full-time work as commissioned and ordained elders.
An appropriate appointment for a younger leader may not be as a solo pastor. And it is almost certainly not as the solo pastor of a several point charge of several small and struggling congregations of people of primarily older generations and a vastly different cultural background.
And, if part of the hope for these younger leaders is that they will be effective at helping to reach younger people, then an appropriate appointment might be to places where younger people actually live. Current demographics in the US would identify those places to be far more likely in or near large urban areas, and far less likely to be in small towns or rural areas.
Appointments are not issues that this focus area-- which represents the intentional work of the General Agencies of the UMC-- can fix directly. This is something for bishops and cabinets to work on, and to convince their Boards of Ordained Ministry (which are actually very independent from conference to conference) to follow suit in how they work to support rather than hinder the process of ordination for younger and less financially well-off candidates.
But I digress a bit...
Let me say first WHY this is important. It's because though congregations are not a sufficient form or venue for missional disciple-making, they are necessary. If we don't have strong leadership in the congregational format, that weakens the capacity of Methodist missional groups that may come alongside them to be maximally effective as well. Put in other words, the institution matters, too-- not just the movement. The movement without the institution has no center. The institution without the movement lacks vital piety. It's always both. That this area addresses the institution is no weakness, but rather a form of clarity about one place where such focus needs to be placed-- on the clergy leadership of local congregations.
It is likely to be the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry that will provide the lion's share of the general agency leadership and investment toward supporting this focus area. Others will no doubt assist where they can and should (GBGM, for example, in a number of settings outside the US). The decline in the number of younger ordained elders and the awareness of the deep giftedness and possible calling of all people in all places where United Methodists form congregations are solid reasons to pursue this focus area with diligence and generosity.
But not to the exclusion of the third sentence of it.
Similarly, we must offer leadership training for lay people who are in ministry in countless ways.
I do not read this as an afterthought, even if its rationale is less detailed than that given for a focus on ordained clergy leadership. Rather, I read it as the very heart of our task as missional Christians. Elders serve the work of the kingdom of God in the church in a few specific ways that primarily support the congregational format of Christianity. The rest of us do this missional work in literally countless ways.
I've seen the word "countless" used in such contexts as a sort of a throwaway compliment. "Yes, they do countless things," we say. What we sometimes means in saying that, though, is that we're not really sure what all they do, but whatever they're doing, we're glad they're doing it. At the same time, that means we're not all that invested in coming to understand what those "countless" things are. So we'll make sure we train them to do something-- maybe something we can create another program for or a position in the church (like committees and the like).
Yes, this statement could imply all of that. I'm choosing not to let it do so for me, and I'm hoping you will choose not to let it do so for yourself or others.
The reality, the simple reality, is that if we each take ALL of our own missional contexts seriously, and diligently find ways to act as growing missionaries in all of them-- and to do that we'll have to have the support of a small group that breathes communitas and is sold out to the way of Jesus, something most congregational formats won't be prepared to provide or support well--then, yes, those ministries could indeed become countless.
Let's do the math on this.
If, as Wayne Schwab contends, we all live constantly in perhaps 6 missional contexts, in ADDITION to a local congregation, and we are in a missional/accountable discipleship group of perhaps 6 people-- that's up to 36 contexts just there (unless, that is, we all live and work in exactly the same places all the time!). That's 36 contexts, not 36 ministries. Each of these contexts may offer opportunities for each individual to engage in a good number of ministries, every day, both through organic relationships and through intentional actions. Let's put that number at 3 just to be conservative. So six people now have the opportunity to engage in 108 ministries. Every day.
Now scale that up to a few million people who call themselves United Methodist. Let's call it six million for the sake of similar round numbers. Let's say we have 1 million little groups of 6, sold out to Jesus, living communitas themselves, while also connected to a congregation. 36 million contexts. 108 million ministry opportunities. Every day. Multiply that by the days in a year. That's 39,420,000,000-- yes, over 39 BILLION, with a B.
That's pretty close to what I'd legitimately call countless. And that's not counting more organized opportunities these people may pursue with each other or through other networks.
You think we're going to create any sort of monolithic, one size fits all national training program that can possibly "equip" people for 108 million ministry opportunities every day? Something that you can purchase and run as a program in your congregation?
I don't. For lots of reasons.
But I know God can equip all these people and all this ministry, and much, much more. Indeed, God has done so. The witness is that we're here, all these generations later. The witness is that the good news continues to spread and form people to be missionaries in every nation on this planet.
And I believe you can. I am convinced the network can. Or to use John Wesley's term-- I believe the connexion can-- when it's about connection and not so much about control. And I think general agencies working to live out this Focus Area can be a valuable part of it. Not as any sort of monolithic program, but rather as cheerleaders and partners and as creators or hosts of platforms or hubs for webs of relationships among missional groups and congregations and communities-- some with the label United Methodist and perhaps many more not bearing that name-- but serving as bona fide learning and teaching partners with us.
Yes, we need leadership training for all the baptized-- including some who will serve primarily within the missional context of the congregational format and other para-congregational formats such as agencies or as District Superintendents or conference staff.
But more than this we need training-- probably more from experienced people who live this way where we already live, or close enough by for us to meet and learn from-- in the ways of communitas, and in the disciplines of being missionaries, wherever we are, wherever the Spirit blows us.
But above all of that, we need not training, but conversion.
What we really all need, most of all, is to be sold out to Jesus-- and so to seek God's kingdom and justice, following him wherever he leads, going in his name wherever he has sent us.
Even so...
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
A UM Missional Future: Focus Areas and Focus Area 2
Part 18 of 21...
10 Provocative Questions
7 Vision Pathways
and now...
4 Focus Areas...
The latest language for these four focus areas, developed by the Connectional Table, is:
Developing principled Christian leaders for the church and the world
Creating new places for new people by starting congregations and renewing existing ones
Engaging in ministry with the poor
Stamping out killer diseases by improving health globally
Or, to put it in a bit of shorthand:
1) Leadership development
2) New church starts and revitalizations
3) Ministry with the poor
4) Global Health Initiative
But before we get to the conversation about these focus areas individually, first a word about what they are.
These four areas represent the four major priorities for work that the General Agencies of the UMC are committing themselves to do at least for the coming quadrennium. The budgets that will be presented to the upcoming General Conference will reflect how general agency work is being done in each of these four areas, primarily. (Certainly, work falling outside of these four is done and may continue to be done, as well). And the organizational life of each of the General Agencies is likely to be reformed to align more closely with these areas than it currently does. It may be less the budget, and more the re-alignments within agencies and partnerships to accomplish work in these areas across agencies, that will, institutionally, represent how these areas actually become means of focus for work they do.
But let me make this clear. The focus areas are instruments of change and organization for the general agency level of the United Methodist Church. The UMC is NOT its general agencies. The UMC has general agencies, but it is not the same as those agencies. Neither is the UMC its conferences-- which actually receive far more money, collectively, than the general agencies do. Neither is the UMC its congregations, which actually receive and distribute far more money than its conferences and general agencies combined.
I say that to say this. Often, local congregations take the view that they are at the least important part of the UM connection-- that they HAVE to have direction from annual conferences who in turn HAVE to have direction from General Conference and General Agencies to get anything done. This happens because we tend to equate power and importance with the size of budgets. The General Conference budget is far larger than that of any annual conference. And the annual conference budget is far larger (usually) than that of any congregation in it. Therefore, looked at that way, congregations tend to feel like they don't have much "pocketbook power." Individually they don't, relatively speaking. Collectively, they have by far the most power there is. That is, if the power equation relates to total dollars available.
And I say that to say this. As valuable as the work of the general agency level of any denomination may be, it pales in comparison with the importance of the distributed effect of congregations and missional groups at the local level across the US and the world-- wherever United Methodists happen to be.
In short, don't overestimate the power of centralized agencies. And don't underestimate the power of God happening in, around, and through the missional settings in which you as individual Christians, missional groups, and United Methodist congregations may find yourselves. Agencies developing more focused efforts to work together for big outcomes is a great thing-- but it's not the most important answer to a missional turnaround for the people called United Methodists.
That said, now that we are likely to have these four focus areas at the general agency level, and the four focus areas are likely to have a significant impact (though potentially not by any means the most significant impact) on how we engage mission at every level, the question for us at every other level-- especially congregations and missional groups-- is this: How can we leverage the vision and institutional power that will adhere around each of these areas to accomplish what God's mission is calling us to be and do locally-- where we concretely are, where we concretely are being called by Christ and driven by the Spirit to be, and where we are being sent in the name and power of the Triune God?
Or, in short-- what's in it for our missional future, where we are?
I'm taking these a bit out of order, starting with #2, since it's probably the more signficant new effort of its kind than #1.
Focus Area 2: New places for new people-- new church starts and revitalizations
I've already commented on both of these issues, which combine paths 1 and 2 of the Vision Pathways, here and here. There, I talked about them more or less in the abstract-- since the vision pathways themselves are intended as guideposts more than organizing principles that will be directly embodied in institutions. So here (and in subsequent posts in this series) I want to comment particularly on what will be or may be attempted institutionally by general agencies and how we might most helpfully relate to or use that toward missional ends locally.
New places for new people means a new, more intentional focus of money and resources to plant over 600 new congregations in the next decade, or less. This means there may be substantially more money available to Annual Conferences to start new churches. Annual Conferences may be more likely to be creating full-time staff positions to coordinate new church starts. It also means they may be designating more money in their budgets-- or asking more money from districts or other clusters of congregations-- to make the startup of new congregations financially possible. It also means that there may be a significantly ramped up focus on training and recruiting pastors to be planters for new congregations.
That could sound like a trickle-down to local congregations, or to you, to pay for other people to start new congregations.
Turn the hose around. And don't just trickle. Spray.
Give very generously to this work. But not just whatever little trickle may be asked of you. Do more. Do much more. And start doing it yourselves.
Consider this an invitation to take the larger concept of "new places for new people" seriously, and not think only inside the congregational box, and the usual permission systems that expect you to wait and see what you get to support doing what they tell you they want you to do. Start a missional community that is discipling folks and deploying them in mission. Keep it connected to a local congregation. And ask for the money you may need to expand this or keep it sustainable. Create the "ask" pool before dollars get "apportioned" out-- and prepare your case to do so, starting now.
But if enough of you start doing this sort of thing-- actually creating these spaces with and for new people, on your own-- not waiting around for someone at a "higher" level to tell you you are allowed to do it if you follow their way-- my strong hunch is that your collective voices will be hard to ignore when your flood of giving and asking comes.
Note-- I'm NOT talking about "arbitrarily" starting new congregations. That's actually a chargeable offense for clergy. Don't go there. Don't go anywhere close to there. I'm talking about missional groups that come alongside and stay connected with congregations-- existing ones and new ones that may be started in your conference. I'm talking about groups of vitalized Christians that are, by their activity and connection with the Spirit, also revitalizing (as a side effect) the congregations of which they may be a part. In short, I'm talking about early Methodism, revived where you are.
Do this. Get these groups going. Create new places for new people-- by coming alongside people in God's mission. Create a track record of missional effectiveness. Ask for the Focus Area I dollars as they become available. Lots of you do this. And lots of you ask.
The worst anyone can say is no.
If they do, don't stop giving. Give more. Outdo others in your generosity. Keep multiplying ministry with more and more people where you are. Offer ministry WITH-- not at. Join WITH God's mission, in all its forms, not limited to getting more numbers into the congregational format. Follow Jesus and actively teach others how to do the same.
Keep YOUR focus on mission and ministry where you are and where you are being sent by the Spirit as you follow Jesus, worship God in spirit and truth (with an existing or even a brand new congregation!) and live the Love that is and lives in the unity of the Holy and Undivided Trinity.
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
10 Provocative Questions
7 Vision Pathways
and now...
4 Focus Areas...
The latest language for these four focus areas, developed by the Connectional Table, is:
Developing principled Christian leaders for the church and the world
Creating new places for new people by starting congregations and renewing existing ones
Engaging in ministry with the poor
Stamping out killer diseases by improving health globally
Or, to put it in a bit of shorthand:
1) Leadership development
2) New church starts and revitalizations
3) Ministry with the poor
4) Global Health Initiative
But before we get to the conversation about these focus areas individually, first a word about what they are.
These four areas represent the four major priorities for work that the General Agencies of the UMC are committing themselves to do at least for the coming quadrennium. The budgets that will be presented to the upcoming General Conference will reflect how general agency work is being done in each of these four areas, primarily. (Certainly, work falling outside of these four is done and may continue to be done, as well). And the organizational life of each of the General Agencies is likely to be reformed to align more closely with these areas than it currently does. It may be less the budget, and more the re-alignments within agencies and partnerships to accomplish work in these areas across agencies, that will, institutionally, represent how these areas actually become means of focus for work they do.
But let me make this clear. The focus areas are instruments of change and organization for the general agency level of the United Methodist Church. The UMC is NOT its general agencies. The UMC has general agencies, but it is not the same as those agencies. Neither is the UMC its conferences-- which actually receive far more money, collectively, than the general agencies do. Neither is the UMC its congregations, which actually receive and distribute far more money than its conferences and general agencies combined.
I say that to say this. Often, local congregations take the view that they are at the least important part of the UM connection-- that they HAVE to have direction from annual conferences who in turn HAVE to have direction from General Conference and General Agencies to get anything done. This happens because we tend to equate power and importance with the size of budgets. The General Conference budget is far larger than that of any annual conference. And the annual conference budget is far larger (usually) than that of any congregation in it. Therefore, looked at that way, congregations tend to feel like they don't have much "pocketbook power." Individually they don't, relatively speaking. Collectively, they have by far the most power there is. That is, if the power equation relates to total dollars available.
And I say that to say this. As valuable as the work of the general agency level of any denomination may be, it pales in comparison with the importance of the distributed effect of congregations and missional groups at the local level across the US and the world-- wherever United Methodists happen to be.
In short, don't overestimate the power of centralized agencies. And don't underestimate the power of God happening in, around, and through the missional settings in which you as individual Christians, missional groups, and United Methodist congregations may find yourselves. Agencies developing more focused efforts to work together for big outcomes is a great thing-- but it's not the most important answer to a missional turnaround for the people called United Methodists.
That said, now that we are likely to have these four focus areas at the general agency level, and the four focus areas are likely to have a significant impact (though potentially not by any means the most significant impact) on how we engage mission at every level, the question for us at every other level-- especially congregations and missional groups-- is this: How can we leverage the vision and institutional power that will adhere around each of these areas to accomplish what God's mission is calling us to be and do locally-- where we concretely are, where we concretely are being called by Christ and driven by the Spirit to be, and where we are being sent in the name and power of the Triune God?
Or, in short-- what's in it for our missional future, where we are?
I'm taking these a bit out of order, starting with #2, since it's probably the more signficant new effort of its kind than #1.
Focus Area 2: New places for new people-- new church starts and revitalizations
I've already commented on both of these issues, which combine paths 1 and 2 of the Vision Pathways, here and here. There, I talked about them more or less in the abstract-- since the vision pathways themselves are intended as guideposts more than organizing principles that will be directly embodied in institutions. So here (and in subsequent posts in this series) I want to comment particularly on what will be or may be attempted institutionally by general agencies and how we might most helpfully relate to or use that toward missional ends locally.
New places for new people means a new, more intentional focus of money and resources to plant over 600 new congregations in the next decade, or less. This means there may be substantially more money available to Annual Conferences to start new churches. Annual Conferences may be more likely to be creating full-time staff positions to coordinate new church starts. It also means they may be designating more money in their budgets-- or asking more money from districts or other clusters of congregations-- to make the startup of new congregations financially possible. It also means that there may be a significantly ramped up focus on training and recruiting pastors to be planters for new congregations.
That could sound like a trickle-down to local congregations, or to you, to pay for other people to start new congregations.
Turn the hose around. And don't just trickle. Spray.
Give very generously to this work. But not just whatever little trickle may be asked of you. Do more. Do much more. And start doing it yourselves.
Consider this an invitation to take the larger concept of "new places for new people" seriously, and not think only inside the congregational box, and the usual permission systems that expect you to wait and see what you get to support doing what they tell you they want you to do. Start a missional community that is discipling folks and deploying them in mission. Keep it connected to a local congregation. And ask for the money you may need to expand this or keep it sustainable. Create the "ask" pool before dollars get "apportioned" out-- and prepare your case to do so, starting now.
But if enough of you start doing this sort of thing-- actually creating these spaces with and for new people, on your own-- not waiting around for someone at a "higher" level to tell you you are allowed to do it if you follow their way-- my strong hunch is that your collective voices will be hard to ignore when your flood of giving and asking comes.
Note-- I'm NOT talking about "arbitrarily" starting new congregations. That's actually a chargeable offense for clergy. Don't go there. Don't go anywhere close to there. I'm talking about missional groups that come alongside and stay connected with congregations-- existing ones and new ones that may be started in your conference. I'm talking about groups of vitalized Christians that are, by their activity and connection with the Spirit, also revitalizing (as a side effect) the congregations of which they may be a part. In short, I'm talking about early Methodism, revived where you are.
Do this. Get these groups going. Create new places for new people-- by coming alongside people in God's mission. Create a track record of missional effectiveness. Ask for the Focus Area I dollars as they become available. Lots of you do this. And lots of you ask.
The worst anyone can say is no.
If they do, don't stop giving. Give more. Outdo others in your generosity. Keep multiplying ministry with more and more people where you are. Offer ministry WITH-- not at. Join WITH God's mission, in all its forms, not limited to getting more numbers into the congregational format. Follow Jesus and actively teach others how to do the same.
Keep YOUR focus on mission and ministry where you are and where you are being sent by the Spirit as you follow Jesus, worship God in spirit and truth (with an existing or even a brand new congregation!) and live the Love that is and lives in the unity of the Holy and Undivided Trinity.
Peace in Christ,
Taylor Burton-Edwards
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)