Thursday, May 30, 2019

Observations: Resisters and Insisters


Image result for socialist posters
In our culture today we see a lot of people talking of reformation, rebellion, and resistance to perceived slights and injustices.  They carry signs, wear bold banners or shirts or hats to proclaim their cause.  That led me to thinking about how we view these reformers in the midst when they do not reflect a common view. They are momentum filled, dream fueled and vision motivated. Language plays a huge part in any cultural or social struggle. Propaganda and strong rhetoric have been used since Romans gossiped that the early Christians were cannibals eating the flesh of their God!  The words used take on great weight. Words are redefined to reflect new or different views.

A truth is that 'reformers" are a;ways seen as active, moving, momentum filled, vision driven and dream enabled.
"Conservatives", "Traditionalists" or as I call them the "Insisters" are seem as static, nonmotive, 'sticks in the mud' and their 'standing firm' seen as mere inaction.

"Making a Stand" was once seen as rock solid resistance to the inroads of evil, sin, corruption and all things negative. When we can do nothing else - we stand firm.  Today this action tends to be viewed as a lost cause huddle at the Alamo, a last ditch statement of doom and failure by a lonely few.

The marching horde, smiling, flags waving, marching upward with the rays of a smiling son filling the sky were favored symbols in decades of popular Marxist, Socialist and Communist posters and illustrations. They saw the value of reformers being seen as future focused, active, positive, mobile and engaged.

Controlling the image, the dialogue, reinterpreting terms and rules and symbols are all tools of corporate and institutional climate change.

In the culture struggles of changing times make sure that all terms used have an agreed upon single meaning, make sure that both the ones wishing change and those who do not wish that change are favored with equal and balanced rhetoric. Who is the resister and who is the insister can shift on a dime. It encourages caution, temperance, tolerance and kindness.

Today's Resister could be tomorrow's Insister.

All reasons that when Christians disagree they should follow different rules than the culture - they should be more charitable, more loving and tolerant. If differences develop creating deeply held theological canyons of disagreement they should celebrate their common ground even as they move apart.

In the end - God will sort us all out - his criteria is in the Bible. Did we accept the work of Christ? Did we love? Did we work on behalf of God to witness of God through words, deeds, and actions? Did we place God first and ourselves last? Did we depend on political maneuvers or did we depend on God? 

THE LAST CONFERENCE


The 2019 Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church of Oklahoma opened and I was on hand in an observing mood. It was –in many ways- a year of transition and a time of sadness tinged with the relief of laying down one task to gain energy to take up the next one. So in that mood I interviewed, watched, and listened with a more objective attitude and weighed things against a backdrop of past events, current struggles and future possibilities.

What I missed.
I recall the nervous first conferences where clergy and spouses met and mingled in “Hospitality Rooms”.  Here were the people we could ‘let our hair down’ with and kicked back to laugh and share news of events and happenings around the conference in a relatively ‘safe’ environment. Safe in the sense of being able to complain, let off steam and not feel you were going to get a quelling look from a supervisor (called a District Superintendent) or later be called on the carpet for ‘anti-company’ attitudes. These were the rooms where people who understood your struggles with less than stellar church people, hardships from less than perfect housing, poor jobs, too much to do, or the struggles of children labeled with the expectations of being a ‘preacher’s kid’.

For me, I recall visiting with older and more experienced spouses (mostly women then) who shared the struggles of their day. I heard of parsonages that had to pack up every year as their spouse when to conference, and waited for the appointments to be announced. If they moved, they were ready. If they stayed, then did a hurried spring cleaning and unpacked.  I heard of Bishops who demanded all women wear hose to conference, along with a hat and gloves. I heard with laughter and shock tales of the first women who  - younger or coming from other conferences – dared to wear the new pantsuits sans hats and gloves! I heard the warmth of kinship and comrades in arms as we all struggled to be this odd, shifting and ever complex thing called a ‘church spouse.’  How much was too much? How much was too little? Most all how to retain a sense of self and individualism in a world that often expected church spouses to be instant leaders, helpers or role models?  We worked through those issues with a helping a watery punch and cookies made by women across each district and sent to the Hospitality room. 

Even then, though, the times were changing. New ideas, attitudes, and behaviors were being seen as more spouses – and church women in general – were forced to work to make ends meet or selected to work to utilize their education or training. This was, it should be noted, only a major issue to female spouses. The then rare male spouses had no expectations that they would remain at home. In that sense their struggles to adjust were a little easier.

I miss that Hospitality Room and the deep sense of ‘connection’ it represented and provided.
Of course, conference still offered opportunity to ‘connect.’ Now it is in hallways, in passing and between sessions. Ships – people who might have been friends had they been given the opportunity to meet and mingle - passing in the midst of real or perceived busyness.

When I first attended conferences my husband was going through the steps on the way to Full Elder. Along the way, name badges were different colors with elders one color, deacons another, and local pastors yet another. Laity had their own specific hue as well. While this made approving voting elements easier it also led to behavior some of watched with secret delight. We noted a peculiar species emerged and some of us coined these people “Badgers.” This was based on their tendency to not look at your face when greeting you but at your badge. If you were not the ‘right kind of badge’ the greetings were brisk and quick while another badge wearer collected effusive greetings right and left.  I recall one year of this and some of us – lower rung badge wearers – wore ours upside down and made jokes about being in solidarity in our state of “nonbeing.”  

I was reminded of this as I stood in the “Problem Resolutions” line because being directed to the “laity” check in while my husband headed toward the “clergy” check in site (in another building) I discovered they did not have my name or badge. I was once more a ‘nonbeing.” Worse, I recalled a book I had once read about ‘Ministerial Problems and Procedures’ that – gasp! – included the pastor’s spouse but failed to categorize if the spouse was to be considered a problem or a procedure! 
“Clergy spouse? They probably put your badge in his packet.” Non-being alert and possible rant ahead; cute the violins. After years of being in feminist UMW circle’s, reading and hearing women proclaiming in the church the need for individual rights and status, here I was being a category: clergy spouse. 

Not a lay person (although I had been a Lay Servant for six years).Not a clergy. I was that neither fish nor fowl – the spouse.  So, although properly registered to attend annual conference I was ‘odd human out’.  A mere appendage in the equation. Segregated by a marital connection to a member of the clergy but not recognized as part of either the laity population or the clergy. As a person whose professional life (yes, the one outside the church) had focused on areas of customer service and relations, assessment and missional strategy, I had a lot to think on as I finally climbed into the bleachers to sit. 

Although, I can understand the logistics of managing legal voting – there is something to be said for the all one color name badges.

What I Liked


The theme of ‘living hope’ from 1 Peter 1:3 was appropriate. Bishop Nunn called us ‘Broken – but hopeful believers.’  He concluded his remarks by stating firmly and simply; “We need Jesus!” He likened recent struggles and divisions to the rival groups in the Corinthian church of Paul’s day. Some might say, he told the people of the conference, I am of the Traditional Plan. While another may cry, I am of the One Church Plan. And on and on… Like the church at Corinth, ‘has Christ been divided?’  He urged us to not lose sight of the essence of the Gospel (“Accept Jesus Christ and Him crucified”).
He also reminded us that prayer has power. The power to lives, hearts, and build churches, educate, to speak and share, and minister. 

The visit to the conference marked a last. A closure. A moving from one relationship with the conference to another as my spouse retired. Despite the wonderful and very apparent number of young adults in place for this conference – the generational shift is beginning – the youthful do not have a monopoly on hope. I treasure the things of the past – my history degree and research proves that – but I also look forward to the future and the things to come. I am hopeful of the future – regardless of what happens – because I know that God is still the master of the universe. With God in control there is always hope. Now to sit back and see what surprises God has in store for his people