by Rebekah Simon-Peter | Nov 2, 2021
At a time when polarization seems to be at an all-time high, most churches are not able to bridge the gap. Instead, they are caught up in divisiveness, too. This polarization limits the church’s ability to lead or to distinguish itself as a spiritual institution. That’s why I want to share six steps to getting your church past polarization.
These six steps are important to take. In some ways, churches now resemble the US House of Representatives more than the house of prayer that Jesus envisioned. It’s not that your church shouldn’t wrestle with important issues. By all means, it should.
But when the voice of the church is framed more by politics than ethics, or by who it stands against instead of the love of God that embraces all, this is bad news for your church and the community you serve.
The Lure of Polarization
We know we are supposed to love God, love others, and love ourselves. We know we are supposed to turn the other cheek and do good to those who hate us. Yet we find that hard to do with fellow church folk, let alone the people “out there.”
Unconditional love is hard to muster when news headlines play on fear, outrage, and worst-case scenarios. Or when social media feeds reinforce your perspective on the world. It takes true effort to get past these views of the world and believe that something else is even possible.
When churches try to speak to issues like the pandemic, immigration, or even school shootings from a political perspective, they get caught in either/or choices popularized by right- and left-wing media. This creates a lose-lose situation with no room for nuanced disagreement. Either/or choices are destined to polarize, and to pit people against each other.
I’d like to offer an alternative for getting your church past polarization. It comes from prioritizing ethics over politics.
Prioritize Ethics Over Politics
I suggest this 6-step process for ethical thinking. It’s not perfect or complete, but it will give you a starting point. United Methodists will recognize elements of the process as it engages the Wesleyan quadrilateral, the four sources by which we live out their faith.
Step 1 When it comes to thinking ethically, the first and most important step is to get the facts. That means looking beyond Facebook memes and polarizing talking heads. It means digging deeper to find out what’s really going on. “Some moral issues create controversies simply because we do not bother to check the facts,” observe the authors of Thinking Ethically.
Step 2. Turn to the scriptures. Discover the biblical stories or principles that might apply. This means thinking deeply and widely about meta messages of the Bible. Resist the temptation to pluck one or two scriptures out of context that seem to fit the situation. Many of the ethical dilemmas we face today were never mentioned in scripture. Similarly, the scriptures themselves were written over centuries in response to situations that are far from our post-modern context.
Step 3 Look to other commentaries or sources of your faith. United Methodist will want to consult the Book of Discipline, the Social Principles, and the Book of Resolutions to see how other informed persons of faith have approached these issues.
Step 4 Look at the history of the issue. How has it been dealt with in the past? What has worked? What hasn’t? As thinking persons of faith, we engage our faculties of reason.
Step 5 Engage in prayer. A word of caution here. I wouldn’t necessarily ask for specific answers to your specific questions; this prayer may lead to confusing our own solutions with God’s divine guidance. Rather, I suggest praying for guidance and wisdom as you discern together.
Step 6 Engage in respectful, patient discussion about the resources at hand. To do so, first decide on ground rules and boundaries, so that your discussions don’t become polarized or violent. At this point, don’t try to come to final solutions or absolute positions. Rather, keep an open mind. Keep prayer present even in the discussion. Over time, discuss possible ethics-based approaches to addressing the problem at hand.
Don’t worry if you don’t all come to the same conclusion. You probably won’t. That’s okay. Here’s what you will have done: you will have thought faithfully and ethically about the issues at hand. This ethics-based process creates trust, loosens polarization, and increases your skill at diving deep as a community of faith. It might even get you loving one another, differences and all.
In Creating a Culture of Renewal®, we empower church leaders to bring out the best in those who frustrate them the most. Not an easy task. But it is doable.
Copyright © 2021 rebekahsimonpeter.com, All Rights Reserved.
by Rebekah Simon-Peter | May 24, 2021
What My First Marriage Taught Me About Acceptance
Even though we weren’t married long, my first marriage taught me about acceptance. Doug, my first husband, was a smart, funny, kind person; a man of deep faith, and a lawyer by training. He had a heart of gold. He served as a guardian ad litem in the court system for children in precarious situations.
But Doug had a persistent, hidden pain. He couldn’t reconcile his inner spirit—his gender identity—with the body he was born into and the gender he was assigned. He wrestled with it from the time he was a small child and carried this pain into adulthood. Many years later, after our brief marriage dissolved, Doug finally transitioned into the life of a female and became known as Danyel.
While this decision came with a deep sense of relief, there was also a great price to pay. While Doug was beloved, Danyel was disowned by a sister. Other friends couldn’t hang in there either. But even through all her personal changes, Danyel, who has since passed away, continued the professional work of advocating for the dignity and safety of children.
Challenging Topics for Leaders
I don’t pretend to understand what it feels like to wrestle in this way. Or even why some people experience gender dysphoria. However having personally witnessed a slice of the searing journey Doug took to become Danyel, and the peace that at last came with it, I have nothing but respect for the courage of trans people.
Over the years I have come to know a handful of other men and women with similar stories. Each of them, interestingly, has been a professional person with deep convictions about their calling in life. While I don’t know Rev. Megan Rohrer, the newly elected bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, it sounds like she shares a similar journey to the folks I have known. She is the first openly trans person to be elected Bishop of a mainline denomination.
As a leader, you may be asked to comment on the connection between Bishop Rohrer, the Bible, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America. While her election doesn’t directly impact the United Methodist denomination, it does give you a chance to reflect theologically and personally on what it means to be made in the image and likeness of God, to be a beloved child of God, and to experience grace.
I don’t know what you will say, or even how you feel about this. But I would like to offer some questions for you to consider how to frame challenging topics.
How to Frame Challenging Topics
1) How to disagree without demonizing?
How can you talk about experiences like this that fall outside the norm, the expected, in such a way that you do not demean, demonize, or dehumanize people? Neither the people in favor of it, nor the people against it, nor the people who don’t understand it, or don’t care? Truth is, most people have their own inner conflicts. Hearing how you address this topic will help them consider their own unspoken concerns that may fall outside the norm or the expected.
2) How to dialogue rather than jump to judgement?
How can you draw people into dialogue or inquiry rather than making snap judgements? Adding to the culture wars ethos so prevalent today doesn’t help us come together. SO many things are immediately set up as a “for or against” proposition. Taking a reasoned thoughtful approach helps people think rather than react. Also, you may have people wrestling with gender dysphoria in your congregation. Choose your words carefully.
3) How to think theologically?
How can you use the tool of the Wesleyan quadrilateral to help people think theologically? It’s okay for people to arrive at different decisions. Teaching people how to think theologically is more powerful than telling them what to think. The quadrilateral also allows for people to flex and change their mind, rather than harden into a set position.
In the end, I’m grateful for what my first marriage taught me about acceptance. I have found that telling my own story—without making others wrong—and then listening—really listening—to their story, is a powerful way to approach sensitive subjects. It allows people to be heard, and to discover something new from each other. Best of all, this approach helps us to experience the grace of God and each other’s inherent humanity in such a way that we each get to express our true selves. That’s a gift we can give each other in the midst of challenging times.
by Rebekah Simon-Peter | Feb 13, 2020
As United Methodists face General Conference 2020 and the potential of forming new church bodies, it feels as though the denomination is at a significant crossroad. It’s as if we are doing something we have never done before. If only that were true. Let’s talk about the history of Methodist Schism.
The truth is, Methodist history is fraught with conflict. Two centuries of it. It’s part of our DNA. It’s who we are. Splitting and reforming are woven into our very being. Historically, there are more divided Methodists than there are United Methodists.
I recently led a session on Productive Conflict with Bishop Jimmy Nunn of Oklahoma. In preparation for our time together, he pulled together two centuries worth of Methodist tussles—theological and organizational—that have resulted in splits. Splits in the 1800s produced the following new denominations: African Methodist Episcopal, the Methodist Protestant, the Primitive Methodist, the Methodist Episcopal Church North and Methodist Episcopal Church South, Free Methodist, Salvation Army, Christian Methodist Episcopal, and Nazarene.
Splits in the 1900s produced these movements:
- Pentecostal Holiness
- Social Gospel
- Methodist Church
- Southern Methodist Church
- Evangelical Methodist
- Association of Independent Methodist Churches
- United Methodist Church
- Autonomous Methodist Churches
- The Autonomy of Methodists in South and Central America
It turns out schism is nothing new. It’s in our blood. It’s right there in the history books.
Hidden History of Methodist Schism
Twenty years ago, I mapped my family genogram. I was startled to realize that I wasn’t the only person in my family to have changed their name. Decades earlier, my Italian Catholic grandfather had changed his surname from Scozzafava to Scott. On the other side of my family, my Orthodox Jewish uncle had changed his first name from Harold to Hillel. My cousin Todd became Adlai. All of a sudden, my unique and significant history wasn’t so unique or meaningful. It was almost predictable, in my DNA, a part of my hidden history.
Similarly, the people called Methodist have been doing schism for a very long time. Perhaps what is different this time is that we haven’t split YET over this issue. In the past, splits took place every 20 years on average.
It’s not like the previous issues were less significant. As Bishop Nunn reminded us: “Methodist schisms fall into three distinct categories: theology, inclusion, and polity. Our present conflicts have roots in all three areas.”
“This realization should lead us to ask these three questions,” Bishop Nunn believes. “What do we believe, and how do we live out our beliefs? Who is fully included in the life and ministry of the church? What is the balance between connection and autonomy?”
Today’s Methodists
As we well know, today’s United Methodists respond differently to these questions. Our varied responses give rise to another dynamic that is at play. Historically, when a reform movement happened, it was followed by a restorationist movement. And vice versa. Often these counter-splits happened the very next year.
Our current issues have all the makings of a historical split. It’s a good drama. We have restorationists and reformers. We have the urge and precedent for splitting.
I wonder if we are freer when we split. After all, specific energy comes with a divorce—a sudden burst of freedom of independence. However, this new energy must not be sustainable because we continue to divide.
Perhaps it’s time to split once again. Maybe the genetic/cultural temptation is too strong to withstand, and the call of the times too strong to ignore. On the other hand, perhaps we’ll decide to do something different and find a way to work together—reformers and restorationists under one big tent. If so, we would finally have the opportunity to live out John Wesley’s aspirational thought, “Though we may not all think alike, can we not love alike?”
by Rebekah Simon-Peter | Jun 12, 2017
Will the United Methodist Church split or not over differing interpretations of human sexuality and biblical hermeneutics? That was the topic of informal conversation at a recent denominational retreat I co-led in New England.
“If The Way Forward doesn’t come back with something everyone can live with, we’ll split,” offered one pastor knowingly. “We’ve already split,” asserted another, “it’s just not official.” A contemplative silence ensued. “What if it’s not schism?” asked one savvy lay person. The group leaned in, curious. “What if it’s self-differentiation?” she continued. It got me thinking. Not all splits are schism.
Schism implies irreparable differences and anxious or angry reaction. Self-differentiation has a whole other feel to it. Yes, it’s a way of distinguishing oneself from the rest of the group. But it implies health, self-knowledge, and courage. Unity is the opposite of schism, but not of self-differentiation. Students of family systems know that anxious enmeshment is its opposite.
Jesus was self-differentiated. He didn’t go along just to go along. He stated his beliefs, his values, and his world-view. Even when it wasn’t popular. He offered his teaching—both when it coincided with current Jewish teaching, and when it veered away from it. He didn’t back down from either.
He was a non-anxious presence who allowed others to claim their own truth and life- experience. He was clear about his purpose, but he didn’t insist that others follow suit. For instance, he never decided for others whether they were “true Jews,” or faithful followers of his. By his estimation, even the Pharisees would enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus didn’t ostracize Judas, or cut him off from the others. Nor did he split his followers from mainline Judaism. That happened way after his death.
Could we learn to do the same?
Could we allow people to pursue truth as they see it? Could we calmly and lovingly self-differentiate, even as we maintain our bonds of connection? In other words, is there room for an intentional big-tent United Methodism?
Yes, I think so. Local churches do it all the time.
When you walk through the doors of First UMC, Anytown US, no one stops you to find out your theology or sociology. There’s no litmus test for biblical interpretation, or understandings of human sexuality. We don’t sort people at the door. We don’t sort people at the Lord’s Table, or at the Baptismal font. When we are baptized, it’s not into a set of doctrines. It’s into the Body of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit.
When a person joins the UMC, they covenant to faithfully participate in the ministries of the church by their prayers, their presence, their gifts, their service and their witness. That’s it. The rest is open to interpretation.
The way our current system is set up, a simple majority prevails when it comes to setting up the rules we live by in the Book of Discipline. The whole idea is get people to agree with you so that your “side” can “win.” But we all know that that’s a losing battle. Winners create losers.
We’re not made to agree on everything. We’re made to be one in Christ—in all of our glorious differences. That’s the miracle and magic of it all. We can be Jew and Greek, male and female, servant and free. And be one in Christ Jesus.
A self-differentiated United Methodist Church would be unlike our current gridlock Methodism. It would require an intentional openness about our differences. And an intentional acceptance of them.
We would need to make space for a wide spectrum of understandings of sound biblical interpretation and healthy human sexuality. Likewise, we would need to make space for a spacious variety of Christologies, and understandings of the Holy Spirit. And we would have to be okay with them openly co-existing.
It would mean giving up being right. Or making others wrong. And it would mean more Christlikeness than we currently manifest as a body.
It can happen. Confirmation came around a New Mexican table laden with carne adovada and green chile stew a few weeks ago. I sat with a group of beloved colleagues I met through Creating a Culture of Renewal; we were talking theology. In our small group of 3-4, we had at least one tongues-speaking Charismatic, one fervent evangelical, and one liberal-evangelical-passionate-progressive (me).
It took a while for us each to be clear about our theological differences. But as we did, we discovered something very interesting. We had many things in common—beyond our love and respect for each other. We had shared goals in ministry. Shared compassion. Not to mention shared fears of being marginalized in our current system.
God had called each of us to ministry in a unique way. Yet, no one person’s call undid anyone else’s. They were all valid; they all came from God.
What if we treated each other the same way? No insistence of sameness. Just insistence on authenticity. The truth is, the UMC is inherently diverse. We just don’t really ‘fess up to it—in a non-anxious, self-differentiated way.
I wonder what might happen if we could openly own our values and worldviews and theologies? We might not need to split. Or schism.
by Rebekah Simon-Peter | Jul 19, 2016
Last week, Karen Oliveto, the first openly gay bishop of the United Methodist Church was
elected. Much like at her baptism, she was consecrated with the laying on of hands and sacred words of declaration. She has even been appointed to her place of service for the next four years. This is a historic moment indeed. Some will say historically tragic. Others, historically grand.
How did we go from decades of “homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching” and the inability of “self-avowed, practicing homosexuals” to being ordained with Karen Oliveto being elected Bishop?
How did we go from all matters of sexuality being referred to the Council of Bishops at General Conference to this historic election just a few short weeks later?
While this decision is dramatic, it is certainly not without precedent.
Consider the number of annual conferences that have voted in favor of non-conformity with the Book of Discipline, and now refuse to take on church trials related to LGBTQ folks. (The acronym stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning.) Eight annual conferences voted in favor of full inclusion of gay clergy.
It’s no secret that the church is often slow to change. Measured and cautious, we approach change with a deliberate pace. We’ve taken some flak for it. Missed some opportunities. Not acted while the iron is hot.
The pace has suddenly picked up when it comes to LGBTQ inclusion. At least it may seem fast to many of us. But consider the gay people, who were baptized at birth in the church, and later called by God to be in ministry. They’ve responded. But we have not thrown our arms wide open. Even so, gay people have been answering the call to ministry and serving UM churches for decades. What’s happened is that we’ve finally hit church at the speed of life, to borrow a phrase from a colleague.
The world is changing and it’s not waiting for committee votes or episcopal commissions or legislative changes. Same thing in the church.
Over the years, various conferences have voted for greater inclusion of gays and lesbians from the Great Plains to Arkansas, and New Jersey to Germany. Resolutions have been passed, legislation has been voted on. But the Book of Discipline has remained unchanged on these matters of human sexuality.
That is, until the Western Jurisdiction and the North Central Jurisdiction nominated three openly gay candidates for bishop between them, and one was elected.
Certainly, there will be upset and judicial rulings. Some people will decide to leave the church. Others will decide to come back to church. There may be a split, a schism, an exodus. People on all sides will have
opinions.
One thing will not change: the need to love each other in the midst of fear and anxiety.
In the United Methodist Church, this election has been a long time coming. Especially if you are gay, called to ministry, and anxious to live out that faithful calling. Although I’m straight I am anxious to receive the giftings of these clergy, and welcome Bishop Karen Oliveto to the Rocky Mountain Conference. Turns out she’ll be my Bishop.
(more…)
