Graduating Words

As I look forward to Matt Bell’s graduation from Perkins School of Theology this weekend and Mallory's high school graduation next week, I am reminded of my own graduation ceremonies, and have begun to wonder about the efficacy of those commencement speakers, some of whom manage to stir up a great bit of controversy.

Just this week, Senator John Cornyn was dis-invited from speaking at the Texas Southern University graduation because of the fear of protests. That was a likely possibility given the reaction that Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos received when she addressed the graduates of Bethune-Cookman University. A large number of students booed and turned their backs as she spoke.

My own commencement ceremony at SMU was memorable for a controversial, but apolitical reason, too. Perkins grads have to attend two different commencements. The first one is the proper SMU ceremony, which takes place in Moody Coliseum at 9 am in the morning. The second one recognizes only seminary grads, and takes place in the sanctuary at Highland Park United Methodist Church at 2 pm.

The event at Moody Coliseum was an utter disaster. The celebrated graduation speaker, whose name I have forgotten, spoke so long that the restless grads finally broke into spontaneous applause to force him off the stage! Unfortunately, I don’t remember a thing he said, except that I wished he was finished saying it.

My high school commencement speaker was Dallas Cowboys assistant coach Gene Stallings, which I remember being sort of exciting at the time. Again, I don’t remember a thing he said; it does not strike me as being particularly motivating or inspiring. Incidentally, Coach Stallings was about to embark on his own “graduation” of sorts. The year after he spoke to my Allen High School class of 1985, he took over his first and only head coaching job with the St. Louis Cardinals. In four seasons, he never managed a winning season. So much for inspiring pep talks!

I have never been asked to be a commencement speaker myself, but I have preached one baccalaureate sermon. In my first year as the pastor of Valley View United Methodist Church, I was invited by the pastor of the local Baptist Church to preach, since a good number of the graduating seniors were members of my church.

I actually do remember that sermon quite well. I used the story of Jacob wrestling the angel, and told the students that they would likely encounter a great deal of “wrestling” with God in college, but to keep hanging on, like Jacob did.

I also have a vivid memory of the Baptist preacher showing some discomfort. He must not have been happy with the end of the sermon, because he came up afterward and added an extended — and impromptu — altar call! I guess he wanted to make sure the Methodist kids were all saved before they went off to college and wrestled with God …

I’ve sat through enough commencements now to realize that they’re a lot like weddings — nobody cares about what is said during the ceremony; the only thing that matters is the status of the participants at the end of the ceremony.

But of course, I have my own graduating high school senior this year. And so I have been pondering what I might say if I were asked to address her group of peers, or any other group about to “commence” a new phase of life.

It might go something like this:

“May God give you the grace never to sell yourself short;
grace to risk something big for something good;
grace to remember that the world is now too dangerous for anything but truth
and too small for anything but love.
So may God take your mind and think through it;
may God take your voice and sing through it;
and may God take your heart and set it on fire!”

The Seven Most Common Words in Church

Preachers like to joke that the most common seven words in the church are, “We haven’t done it that way before.” 

You may chuckle at that line; I think I may have even used it in a sermon.

But I think there’s a new “most common seven words” in the church. They are: “How do we reach the young folks?”

I hear it all the time in conference gatherings, and in clergy circles, and even in various meetings at Kessler Park UMC. And with good reason. A few years ago, the average age of the United Methodist member in the pews was 57 years old, and that trend has been in an upward swing for years.

It should be obvious that an aging membership will eventually do what most aging things do — die. 

That’s why so many people in the church are worried. We rightly are concerned that the witness of Methodism in particular, and the gospel of Jesus Christ in general, would be diluted by closing churches and diminished denominations. We rightly want to share the saving and transforming power of Jesus with our children and their children. Jesus has made a difference in our lives, and so we want future generations to have the same experience.

So we ask, “How do we reach the young folks?”

I have a few opinions on this matter.

First of all, we need to stop asking this question. It’s awfully patronizing. I’ve never met a young person who wanted to be “reached” by a church. That terminology is a little creepy. Can you imagine walking into a church and being told, “Aha, we’ve been looking to find people like you …”?

Furthermore, nobody wants to be called “young folks,” or “young people,” or “millennials,” or “snowflakes,” or “whipper-snappers.” They would prefer to be known as what they are — your neighbors. 

Besides, think about how this question sounds to the other people who sit in your pews. How does this sound to those who don’t consider themselves “young folks”? What about the visitors who are on the other side of maturity, but are still looking for a church home? Are we not as eager to welcome them?

Second, the question itself indicates a lack of confidence in our message and mission. The problem, as framed by this question, appears to be that our age-old message has become a little old-fashioned and needs to be dressed up, modernized, and made more “appealing,” “attractive,” or “entertaining.” This approach treats the gospel as a religious “good” that we must package and market to the masses, like a consumer product. It frames the Methodist faith as a kind of “lifestyle choice” that one can choose amidst a long list of competing churches. It makes us want to improve our labels and spruce up the packaging — “Come see our fantastic children’s ministry!” or “We’ve got world-renowned music!”

In other words, when we ask, “How do we reach the young folks?” what we are actually saying is that we are afraid that the gospel of Jesus Christ is really not enough. We are saying that we are not sure that God is really doing something powerful among us and in us. We are basically admitting that we’re not sure that the Holy Spirit is at work in our church anymore. 

I believe that what young folks, and old folks, and everyone in-between, really want from church is an experience with God. That’s what I want. Isn’t that what you want?

And I want to be part of a church community that believes that every time we gather for worship, or work alongside the poor in a mission project, or sit around a table for fellowship, that Jesus shows up, and something powerful happens.

In the end, the only thing that will make our church attractive to anyone is the presence of church members who are fully alive in Christ, who have seen God at work in their world, and are in the process of being shaped and transformed by God. The reason why anyone will ultimately be drawn to KPUMC is because they see God in you and me.

Let’s stop asking, “How can we reach the young folks?” Please.

Instead, ask yourself, “What is God doing in me?”

The Church on Trial

Bishop Karen Oliveto after being elected in July 2016.

As I write these words, the Judicial Council of the United Methodist Church has just begun hearing arguments in its April docket. One of those cases dominates the denomination’s attention and interest.

It’s the question of whether Karen Oliveto’s election as bishop last year in the Western Jurisdictional Conference is lawful under present church rule. Oliveto is a “self-avowed, practicing homosexual” and is married to a same-sex spouse. This is forbidden by current United Methodist Church law, which is contained in the Book of Discipline (BOD).

The case was forwarded to the Judicial Council by the South Central Jurisdiction shortly after Bishop Oliveto’s election last year. Of course, the actual legal ruling has to do with matters of authority, jurisdiction, and precise terminology.

But in reality, this case mirrors the present impasse within the church, with implications that go far beyond the case of one particular bishop. If the election is upheld, then a great many people will argue that our laws have no force and that each jurisdiction will be independent. That is indeed, part of the Western Jurisdiction’s argument; they believe that church law gives authority to determine the credentials and qualifications of pastors and bishops solely to annual (regional) conferences and jurisdictions. Already, I have seen a conservative UM pastor complain on Twitter that, “We are basically in the position where each jurisdiction will become its own denomination if JC does not intervene here.”

If the election is rendered null and void, however, this will send a clear(er) message that LGBTQ folks are not to be considered candidates for ordination, much less the episcopacy. It will enshrine the BOD’s current language that “homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.” And it will make it even tougher for future change.

As if anticipating the anxiety that this case is dredging up, the Council of Bishops yesterday announced that there will be a special session of General Conference called for February 23-26, 2019 in St. Louis, Missouri, to hear the findings and recommendations of the Commission on a Way Forward, which was created upon the decision of the 2016 General Conference in Portland, Oregon.

If all this simply confuses you, with its Methodist terminology, acronyms, and legalese, then let me simplify matters for you:

The United Methodist Church is headed for a decision point — finally. That decision point will NOT be reached this week. Regardless of what happens to Bishop Karen Oliveto, the real date to circle in red is the special session beginning on February 23, 2019. The decision on Bishop Oliveto will make half of the church around the world angry, and half will be satisfied, but it won’t really matter. The special session will be the event at which we decide whether we’re going to stay together, or get a big fat messy divorce.

I am aware that some observers believe there are three factions at play — conservatives, liberals, and moderates who just want everyone to get along. But I believe there is a much simpler division. Despite all the talk about orthodoxy, authority of Scripture, and denominational heritage, it all comes down to whether or not one believes that homosexuality is a “sinful practice.”

To date, there have been more Methodists who believe that, yes, homosexuality is a “sinful practice,” than those who don’t. That’s a sad commentary on the contemporary United Methodist Church, but it is the reality.

To date, the United Methodist Church has, in practice, opted for a “big tent” approach, meaning that it has been willing to overlook the fact that gays and lesbians already serve as clergy and lay leaders. But that is changing — from both ends of the spectrum.

Conservatives believe that the purity of the church is at stake; if homosexuality is a sinful choice and lifestyle, then it simply can’t be “accepted” by the church at large, and certainly not in church leadership. In this thinking, the immorality of homosexuality threatens the overall witness of the church.

Progressives are, quite frankly, tired of waiting for church doctrine to change. We don’t believe that homosexuality is a choice, nor is it a “practice.” We believe that a great injustice has been done to gay people, which has caused lasting damage. We know that our denomination’s teachings have contributed to self-harming behaviors, including addiction and suicide. In our understanding, the discrimination and shame foisted upon LGBTQ persons threatens the overall witness of the church.

I don’t think these two viewpoints can coexist in the same denomination. Either homosexuals are living in sin and need to change, or they are living out the fullness of their God-given being and are to be affirmed and encouraged to live out their vocations. It’s one or the other.

This is one of those times when the church is called to make an either/or decision. I think of Joshua, who stood in front of the people of Israel as they were about to cross over into the Promised Land. He challenged them: “Choose this day whom you will serve … but as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord” (Joshua 24:15).

Long before we voted to become a “Reconciling Congregation,” Kessler Park UMC made its decision. We decided to serve the Lord by standing firmly on the side of LGBTQ persons, because they “are” us. We refuse to go backward on the path of justice, and we extend our arms to those who have been excluded by the church from living their full personhood.

The rest of the United Methodist Church must also choose ...