April 30 - The "Set-Aside Bishop"

I mention my discussion with a European bishop in a post below (“Incompetent Pastors”). I met him the afternoon of April 23 and was very impressed with him. He shared what it was like to be a bishop in his Central Conference, how very different the Church was in each of the countries to which he has been assigned. He displayed the same kind of warmth, attentiveness, and curiosity I experienced with the bishop from an autonomous evangelical Methodist denomination in Asia. Let me say it again. It is people like them that give me hope for the Church.

I brought up the idea of setting aside a bishop as sought in The Call to Action.

He said he thought it was a necessary role because there were so many things that needed more attention than just what could be provided by the secretary of the Council of Bishops and the ecumenical relations role held by a retired bishop.

I asked, “Don’t you think such a position sets up the possibility of a future holder of that office assuming the role of Pope for United Methodists?”

His reply was immediate and urgent: “The other bishops would not stand for that!”

We may never know. The General Conference voted down the idea this time.

Let me give you four words about the implications of a set-aside bishop.

The first word is “elaboration.” Sociologically speaking, institutions tend to elaborate, get more complex, as long as they have resources. It appears that the Council of Bishops which takes very seriously Wesley’s saying about the world being his parish, envisions their body as the primary bearer of that mission.

Bishops travel the world for a wide variety of what appear to be valid reasons, visiting mission stations, establishing relations with autonomous churches with a Wesleyan background, connecting with Central Conference annual conferences for mission and resourcing special projects, etc.

Bishops have chosen themes and projects for the denomination to emphasize and resource.

Bishops have developed four focuses to direct our denomination’s ministries.

The Council of Bishops is a hotbed of great ideas needing expression and financing. The more they meet, the more they generate all these programs that will serve the world and the denomination. That’s a lot of talent and insight to put in one room and not find more things to do than can be done.

That’s elaboration.

“Insularity” is the second word. When such a body gathers frequently, its members develop strong and lasting relationships. Those relationships become more important simply because they are with important people. The effect becomes circular and mutually gratifying, leading to the development of a self-conscious elite or in-group.

That in-group very quickly becomes subject to Group Think, the frame of mind in which there is no need to listen to others from outside the group because the group has such wonderful perception and experience and insight. They are too bright to be wrong. They do not really need anyone else’s input.

Insularity means that little attention needs to be given to others outside the group because there is less relational energy available for the group’s members to share with others. They really only need each other.

That’s insularity.

The third word is “power.” Such a potent group, sitting with such wonderful ideas and sense of world mission among such excellent people, needs to express those things. To do it, they need authority to move resources, people, and finances around to fulfill those things. Unless those are already at their disposal, they need to bring to bear any power they have as a body to do the politics needed to give them what they seek.

By inserting themselves into the legislative and judicial processes as far as they are allowed to go, they can add to their administrative authority and take control of what they need.

That’s power.

The fourth word is “coordination.” Since each bishop is spread pretty thin with Council of Bishops efforts and programs as well as their own jurisdictional (regional) and annual conference responsibilities, no one can really coordinate all the efforts needed to obtain their goals. A set-aside bishop is a necessity.

A single person who can organize the various talents and skills of the Council of Bishops’ members would be extremely valuable to help the body function in its desired manner.

That’s coordination.

The General Conference closed that door. But with so much energy, the Council of Bishops will try to find another way to achieve their calling. With all those godly people involved, it must be a calling from God.

Didn’t Reinhold Neibuhr write a book about that phenomenon, MORAL MAN, IMMORAL SOCIETY?

No Large Southern Church Left Behind

Rev. Jeremy Smith wrote an article for “United Methodist Insight” under this title. You can read it for yourself at:
http://um-insight.net/blogs/jeremy-smith/no-large-southern-church-left-behind/page-3.html

Having served in the Wisconsin Conference, having lived in the New Orleans area and now in Florida, and having associates from all over the country, I came to the conclusion some years ago that the southern jurisdictions were excellent at politics and the other three were oriented around program. You can see it in the sophistication of respective jurisdictional structures and property holdings.

While it seemed that theology was close to splitting the United Methodist Church at General Conferences since 1984, it hasn’t happened. I believe it is because those who want to control the denomination don’t want to lose the properties (think NYC and Washington DC) and the name recognition.

As Rev. Smith points out, the Call to Action in combination with the hegemony of large southern churches may set up a situation where the power-oriented folks could do what the Southern Baptist Church did, drive out women and those who were more liberal, and take control of the property of the denomination. And to get that power, they are politicizing the burgeoning African church to join their voting block.

What these southern leaders fail to recognize is that among the African leaders there may be an even higher level of sophistication about power. It is no small matter that many conservative Episcopalian congregations give their allegiance to an African bishop.

So imagine if Call to Action passes General Conference and the bishops get their “set aside” bishop only to have an especially astute African get that new post.

Rev. Smith has done us a great service by analyzing the leadership of the drive to pass Call to Action. He did it without mentioning a word about theology. I think the energy of evangelicals is being manipulated as a diversion.

Now if only someone could “follow the money” so that we would know who has been funding this effort.

JCM 1159

http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1279&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1100&EN=1189

A question from South Carolina Conference about the authority of the General Conference Secretary to determine the number of delegates to be allowed to each annual conference under the Discipline was not answered because the Council took no jurisdiction.

Their rationale is identical in wording to several other such decisions in the recent past. I expect we’ll see it in the future again . . . and again . . . and again.
The Council provided a rationale to the requesting conference.

I happen to agree with the dissenting opinion because a decision would affect the numbers in all of the conferences with respect to the coming elections in conferences around the world as they choose delegates to General Conference.

Here there are two issues.

One, there has been a competition among the southern conferences over getting more votes at General and Jurisdictional Conferences because each vote means that much more power to elect bishops. Political power is the ambition in the southern conferences, compared to the programmatic ambitions of the northern and western conferences. So the question raised in South Carolina is a critical part of their view of church life.

Two, resolving the issue of dealing with the huge number of United Methodists in Cote d’Ivoire was put off in JCD 1128. Though not mentioned here at all, that elephant in the room haunts the church in the United States, especially those conferences in the Southeast and South Central jurisdictions. The southern church has a greater ability to understand and use power than the other three jurisdictions. The Africans may be more skilled at it and that could become a problem.

Watch for these two dynamics to return again and again to the Judicial Council over the next eight years.

PRIORITIES FOR GENERAL CONFERENCE

NEWSCOPE has been publishing a series on the ten priorities which several leading UM folks suggest for General Conference. I think I’ll take a stab at it. My main concerns tend to be attitudinal but I believe good legislation can sometimes lead to better attitudes!

1. We need to be Wesleyan and seek to “go on to perfection in love” as a denomination, not just as individuals. The Plan of Organization and Rules of Order once included a commitment to perfection. The truth of the matter is that, like individuals, our systems also need to go on to perfection in love so that things like patience, respect, understanding, mercy, kindness, etc. can be better manifest to all. The church should show the love of God and neighbor in all its life and activities. That includes how General Conference operates!

2. Bishops and Cabinets must have as their highest priority the success of the pastors and churches to whom they assign them. When those leaders are so busy doing other things and presume that the pastors should be able to handle everything on their own, Cabinets are violating the covenant of the clergy in order to seek their justification in having power, in doing program, or in having the best salary package. When the Cabinet matches a church and pastor, they must take responsibility to do all they can help them both be effective. Nothing else is close to as important.

3. We must be clear that the United Methodist Church holds two conflicting sets of church laws and two sets of Biblical support on the issue of homosexuality. Thus, both sides are right and there can be no peace, only conflict. If we cannot find a concensus, then we must either agree to disagree or continue competing against each other. . . .”Open hearts?”

4. The complaint management system called Fair Process is being disregarded in favor of allowing Cabinets to fire pastors at will. Cabinets sometimes forget that we operate under the Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

5. When Bishops and superintendents get out of line and disregard church law when it suits them, no one has successfully brought them to accountability under the current complaint procedures. Being accountable only to themselves has not worked.

6. We must recognize that the greater danger to our unity is not disagreement over theology or Bible interpretation but is really the gathering of all authority at whatever cost into the hands of the leadership of the denomination. The more concentrated the power, the more easily it is corrupted.

7. Finally (my gift to you is not trying for ten!), we must do as John Wesley, Jesus, and Paul did, look at the fruits more than at the beliefs of one another. Are those fruits feeding the hungry and clothing the naked, . . .? Are those fruits patience, kindness, forgiveness, . . .? In every local church I have ever served are Christians who live like this all the time and they never allow anyone to call them saints. When the denomination isn’t hard at work doing these things, we are letting down the strength of our church, those saints.