Does Your Church Have Laryngitis?

Does Your Church Have Laryngitis?

Does your church have laryngitis? You’ll know by how you answer this question: What is your church speaking up about? Or, What is your church known for? If you answered: We are known for being friendly or we welcome anyone, then chances are what you’re really saying is “not much.” In that case, your church may have lost its voice. It may have laryngitis.

As people committed to the Kingdom of God, the Beloved Community, we are also called to make ethical decisions about right and wrong: what you will stand for, and what you won’t.

While laryngitis is mostly benign in humans, it’s usually indicative of a systemic problem in churches. I want to share with you what that problem is, three fears that drive the problem, and three ways to transform the fear so that we can speak with a clear, strong voice.

 

Losing Our Native Tongue 

The problem I see is that churches confuse ethics with politics. If it’s being discussed on the news or in Congress, then it must be politics. For many churches, that means the topic of conversation is now off-limits. But that kind of self-censure limits our ability to speak our native tongue: the language of ethics. Ethics encompasses values, principles, ideals, right and wrong, virtue and sin. Meanwhile, we have left ethics to the politicians. While we claim laryngitis.

I’m not saying that re-claiming our voice is easy. It’s not. Whether we’re talking about chronic poverty, immigration, human trafficking, gay and transgender people, economic injustice, gun violence, or human impacts on the precious planet we call home the ethical issues before us are tough, tough, tough.

Reclaiming its voice is the hardest thing a church will do. But it is also the most freeing.  Because it causes us to truly depend on the grace of God, to walk in the footsteps of the great Hebrew Prophets, and to emulate Jesus himself.

 

Fears

While Adam Hamilton has done an excellent job of “Confronting the Controversies,” I’d like to address 3 fears that often get in the way of churches dealing with ethical issues:

  1. The fear of alienating people through controversy, or causing division, which in turn could mean losing financial givers.
  2. The fear of delving into politics, especially if it puts us on the wrong side of where our people are, either red or blue.
  3. The fear of losing a focus on the love of Christ, or straying too far from the spiritual.

 

Fear of Alienating People through Controversy: Though the church needs money and tithes to operate, being clear on issues of ethics, is of extreme importance. As a church leader, our congregations listen to, and often, respect us and our views.  If we don’t possess the courage to name as sin the assaults on transgender and people of color, or the abuse of immigrants, mass shootings. Or if we are not able to stand up against laws that favor corporations at the detriment of the poor, then are we being true to Christ’s teachings? Are we being true to ourselves and our vocations? We can’t be ambiguous on issues that affect our fellow travelers on this planet, or the planet itself.  We must have the courage to risk speaking up.

Speaking Tip #1: It’s not easy to speak truth to power. And sometimes it’s not easy to speak truth to those we know and love, to our faithful congregations. But overcoming the fear of controversy is essential to creating a planet on which we can all live in peace. You may lose people. But you may end up gaining more than you lose. Either way, you’ve done what Jesus would do.

 

Fear of Politics:  I understand the fear of delving into politics. That’s shaky ground and sure to turn off some people. The trouble is, the public arena is where ethical issues are often debated and outcomes determined. I suggest bypassing political parties and personalities while exploring the underlying ethical issues being debated. When we deal with hot issues from an ethical or biblical standpoint, we put things on more neutral ground.

Speaking Tip #2: Dealing with ethics does not mean telling people how to vote or think. It does mean helping people explore the sources that can inform our thinking, especially scripture, experience, tradition, and reason.

 

Fear of Straying from Christ:  People want and need to be grounded in the love of Christ. Dealing with ethical issues actually aids this. I think of ethics as the love of neighbor in action. Why would we leave that to career politicians?

Speaking Tip #3: Frame ethical matters in terms of love. This brings issues back into our territory and allows us to speak with authority and confidence.

 

The Power of Speech

While Martin Luther King Jr’s example has guided several generations of dreamers, a new incarnation has taken center stage recently, Pope Francis. In his brief tenure, he has managed to speak up on key issues facing the world from re-establishing good relations with Cuba, to living wages, to climate change, to the humanity of the LGBTQ community. Is he dealing with the political? Or the ethical? I’d say its love of neighbor on a grand stage.

Speaking Tip #4: Not sure how to begin speaking up? In the style of the prophets, we can use our voices to ask: Who is hungry? Who is thirsty? Who is rich? Who is poor? Who is included? Who is excluded? Once those dynamics are identified, we can approach it from the perspective of Jesus and his ministry. WWJD?

 

Finally, be sure to immerse yourself in prayer and study. Let the still, small voice guide you in reclaiming your own voice from the malaise of laryngitis. Who knows…it just might change the world.

If you are having trouble as a Christian leader reclaiming your voice, I would love to help. I have coached many leaders, successfully reclaimed their voice and found new strength in speaking up to injustice in the world. Reach out if you need coaching or just to share your thoughts!

 

Adapted, updated and reprinted from original posted February 2015.

Copyright © 2023 rebekahsimonpeter.com.  All Rights Reserved.

Should Gender Matter in Christianity?

Should Gender Matter in Christianity?

Several years ago, it made the news when fundamentalist preacher John MacArthur told the very popular evangelical Bible teacher, Beth Moore, to “go home”, putting on clear display his thoughts on women in church leadership. He warned that “empowering women makes weak men” and “weak men make everybody vulnerable to danger.”  Today, John MacArthur’s church is back in the spotlight, with news of the very real and tragic consequences of this type of sexist and disempowering teaching.

Studies around the world show that empowering women is the key to developing economies, family well-being, better nutrition, and equal rights. So, why is there still confusion about the role of women in churches with some denominations still not recognizing female clergy and leaders?

Rather than derail Christianity, the full participation of women in all aspects of Creation is the fulfillment of the Christian impulse.  A look at Judaism reveals why.

Judaism is built on the power of distinctions.  The creation stories exemplify the distinctions between the first six days and the other days of the week; between the sun, moon and stars; between plants and animals; and between humans and God.  The evening prayer in Judaism plays on those themes by glorifying the distinctions between night and day, and between sleep and activity. Havdalah, the blessing that ends the Sabbath, lauds the differences between holy and secular, and between Sabbath and the rest of the days of the week.  Ancient Jewish prayers even prompt men to pray with thanksgiving that they were not made a woman, a gentile or a slave.  Distinctions matter in Judaism.

Christianity goes in a decidedly different direction.  Rather than playing on distinctions and dualities, Paul has a vision of integration. “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28) Indeed, women play a major role in the Gospels.

This theme of unity and integration is further celebrated in the New Testament. Consider the story of Pentecost.  When the Spirit comes, all hear a unifying message in their own language. This unity is celebrated as people share in a common life, a common purse, and a common purpose.  Finally, we see in Revelation 7:9-10 that all tribes, peoples and languages have a common trajectory—unity within the oneness of God. 

So what’s with the controversy about gender distinctions, including the rejection by so many mainline Christian churches of our LGBTQ and transgendered brothers and sisters?  Why are confident and powerful female leaders treated differently than their male counterparts?

I wonder if the focus on gender isn’t indicative of deeper problems in the church. Like decline in worship, influence, and imagination.  Todd Anderson, a former District Superintendent in the West Ohio Conference, told me, “The church is only in decline where the status quo is enforced.”  He should know.  Every District Superintendent past and present is painfully aware of how the status quo stifles new life.  That’s why Todd worked across state lines, district lines, and conference lines to create new, experimental ministries. And they worked.

Decline is not a Christian value. The status quo is not a Christian value.  Women preaching, turning things upside down, is. That’s what lets new life in.

Interestingly, even Judaism itself has moved toward integration.  While distinctions still matter, female clergy are beginning to be ordained in the orthodox world. 

Bottom line:  Equality, leadership ability, and inclusion in the church should not be limited by gender.

Respecting and appreciating the value of each and every human being transcends gender.

 

Copyright © 2023 rebekahsimonpeter.com.  All Rights Reserved.

The Speed of Change

The Speed of Change

As we know, change is inevitable. Technological change, while giving us access to an abundance of information and tools that a decade ago we wouldn’t have thought possible, is happening faster than ever. While this rapid rate of change can be exciting, in our churches and congregational settings it can feel overwhelming to navigate a constantly shifting landscape.

The younger members of our congregations have embraced technology since early childhood.  They grew up with iPads and phones. They read books on Kindles. They use laptops at school. They’re accustomed to navigating more change in a few months than many of us have encountered in our lifetimes! Is it any wonder that they can’t understand how we, as the church, are still debating whether it’s ok to sing songs out of “new” hymnals or to give gay and transgender people positions of leadership?

Quantum physics has shown us that observing changes the things being observed. Yet, we say that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forevermore. We tend to interpret this verse as something about the objective, unchanging nature of Jesus and, by extension, the church and morality. But our views of Jesus, the church, and morality will vary greatly depending on our circumstances, and our acceptance of change.

While that would seem to drive us farther apart, quantum physics is where science and spirituality converge. It has affirmed what we have known spiritually: Not only are all particles in the universe interconnected, but so are all humans—indeed, all of creation. More than that, since consciousness is the stuff of the universe, we are all deeply linked to the Source of All Life, our Creator, and the whole creation. And technology can facilitate and increase that spiritual connectedness!

Here’s the trouble. Church culture still functions as if we are living in Newtonian, maybe even biblical times. “If the King James Bible was good enough for Jesus, then it’s good enough for me!” But the world has moved on. Most young people consider themselves to be “spiritual.” But they have little to no experience with “organized religion” nor, often, do they want that experience.

The speed of change has taken on new relevance since the COVID-19 global pandemic. Suddenly, if churches were to continue to serve people, they found they had to quickly move online, including worship, giving, Bible study, pastoral care, and fellowship. With this quick shift, more people could participate in the church’s life. Even as social distancing kept people physically apart, the rapid spread of the virus and the intimacy of connecting almost anywhere online through video have emphasized our interrelatedness. I write about how to build on the changes the pandemic wrought in Forging a New Path: Moving the Church Forward in a Post-Pandemic World.

Back to in person worship means it’s even more important for the church to wake up, smell the coffee, and embrace change! As we look forward with hope and courage into the future, let us remember that we have a unique opportunity to create an even better world than what has come before. We can do this by acknowledging our interconnectedness with one another and with God, by learning to trust the wisdom of our young people, and by creating spiritual communities that are open to change.

Even if that change sometimes moves us outside of the constraints of “organized religion.” Especially when working within our communities.

All of this requires a willingness to let go. We must be willing to let go of our need for control and certainty and, instead, explore the unknown. We must open ourselves to the transformative power of love and grace.

It is time for us to step boldly into the future, trusting that God will be with us – especially if we are willing to embrace a new paradigm of the interconnectedness of all things and let go and adapt to the new normal. This is how we will create a new Christianity that is alive, vibrant, inspiring, and relevant for all ages.

If you want to learn more, check out my latest book Forging a New Path:Moving the Church Forward in a Post-Pandemic World. In it, you will learn practical steps to move the church forward into a new era of unity, understanding, and love.

 

Copyright © 2023 rebekahsimonpeter.com.  All Rights Reserved.

What My First Marriage Taught Me About Acceptance

What My First Marriage Taught Me About Acceptance

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.

Don't Compare Apples and Oranges

Don't Compare Apples and Oranges

Satan offered Jesus power over all the kingdoms of the world. Tempting indeed for a person who was here to proclaim the Kingdom. Yet what Jesus meant by “kingdom” and what Satan meant were two entirely different things.   Jesus had to have understood the difference. Otherwise, he would have succumbed to a soul-killing temptation.
Just as Jesus had to be clear about meaning, and to not project his understanding of Kingdom onto Satan’s, so we have to be clear about the meaning we ascribe to words. And to not project our personal definitions onto someone else’s words. Otherwise it’s like comparing apples and oranges and finding oranges wanting because they are lousy apples.
The Traditional Plan and the One Church Plan had different meanings for different General Conference constituents. From what I gather, many delegates who voted for the Traditional Plan were not voting against gays. Rather, they were voting for something else. Likewise, many delegates who voted for the One Church Plan weren’t voting against Biblical authority. Rather, they were voting for something else.
Some people are saying, “The United Methodist Church now rejects gays.” But IS that what happened at General Conference? That depends on who you ask.
I have to admit that as a One Church Plan proponent, I didn’t get why people would vote for the Traditional Plan since it seemed to allow space and grace for theological differences. So, I asked around amongst my friends and colleagues who supported the Traditional Plan. This is what I found:
One friend and colleague believes that the church moves forward only when it is countercultural. John Wesley challenged the culture of his time. Martin Luther challenged the culture of his time. Thus, my friend believes that we must challenge the culture of our time.
Another friend supports the Traditional Plan because she feels it supports a deep reverence for God and the Scriptures.
A third colleague believes that God alone wills human sexuality and that the will of God is delineated through the creation, and union, of Adam and Eve, which was male and female, and thus heterosexual.
When I polled One Church Plan proponents, here is what I found:
One friend supported the One Church Plan because her interpretation of the Bible prioritizes Jesus’ first and second commandments (to love God with our whole being, and our neighbor as ourselves) above any passages related to sexuality.
Another colleague supported it because of his understanding that our United Methodist baptismal covenant welcomes all people —regardless of sexual orientation—into the fullness of the life of Christ, and the fullness of the life of the church.
A third friend and colleague supported the One Church Plan because it would allow United Methodists the freedom to follow their conscience as they minister with the love of Christ in their various settings.
It is tempting to use either Traditional Plan or One Church Plan rationales as justifications to bolster your arguments for why supporters of the plan you didn’t support are wrong. I get it.   I’m quite capable of falling prey to the same temptation.
Here’s the thing, though. Making them wrong victimizes both you and them. Because it’s an “against” position. In the law of emotional triangles, what goes around comes around. Victimizing others because you feel victimized simply reinforces victimization. Jesus put it this way: Judge not lest you be judged. This is a spiritual temptation that will not get us where we want to go, assuming that where we want to go is Christ-like love.
A few caveats: First, to be sure, some folks did vote against gays and some folks did vote against Biblical authority. Second, regardless of why people voted the way they did, votes have unintended consequences which can do great harm. Third, I am not urging anyone to leave the denomination or to stay. That choice is between you and God. What I am doing is encouraging us to expand our powers of emotional intelligence as we traverse this Lenten journey.
Want to act instead of react? Step out of the emotional triangle and self-differentiate. Have the courage and clarity to say what you are for instead of simply reacting against what you oppose. In other words, lead with vision and not from reaction.
Self-differentiation is a key ingredient of emotional intelligence. Jesus shows us how it's done. Click To Tweet Notice that Jesus didn’t fight Satan in the desert, or even quarrel with him. Instead, Jesus simply articulated his own vision again and again. It’s what allowed him to emerge unscathed from his 40-day journey through the desert.
How will your 40-day journey go?

Demonizing the Other Side: The Last Temptations of the UMC


Jesus survived the temptations of the wilderness because of his spiritual grounding and his guidance by God. Another factor empowered him as well: his emotional intelligence. Jesus had his wits about him. He never could have survived otherwise.
The UMC faces its own set of temptations as we threaten to implode or explode over General Conference proceedings. We too need our wits about us.
The UMC faces its own set of temptations as we threaten to implode or explode over General Conference proceedings. We too need our wits about us. Click To Tweet
A hidden opportunity awaits us in this timeline. These 40+ days give us time to think instead of react and time to pray instead of stew. It gives us time to gather our wits about us. So that we can address the last temptations of the UMC in a calmer fashion.
This week I want to address the temptation of demonizing the other side.
Reactions to General Conference have included: THAT side is against love. THEY are against me. Clearly, THEY don’t want me, so I’m outta here. I am done with church, done with organized religion, done with people like THAT.
Or on the other side: THAT side is godless, THEY worship at the altar of human preference, THEY have abandoned the Bible, and the authority of Scripture. Clearly, God’s will was done through General Conference. God wants for things to be this way.
Demonizing the other side feels empowering, but it’s a temptation we can ill afford to entertain. The truth is many factors came into play at General Conference. Let’s see what we can tease out.
Factor 1: Our will, not God’s will. In the Bible, Jesus is explicit that humans must decide how to interpret the scripture. Not only that, Heaven will go along with what we decide. This principle is captured in Matthew 16:19 “I will give you the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven.  Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” So, when it comes to General Conference decisions, we’re not so much looking at God’s will but at the will of the delegates we elected. We must take responsibility for our theologies and votes, not ascribe them to God. In this case, the will of the General Conference was to pass the amended Traditional Plan. It received 438 yes votes (53 percent) and 384 no votes (47 percent).
Factor 2: The will of the body can change. Two thirds of US delegates were in favor of the One Church Plan. Even though the One Church Plan didn’t pass, a mere 54 votes separated the two sides. From a numbers perspective, that’s an astonishingly narrow margin for a global church. It says to me that The UMC has come a mighty long way in its ability to accept people where they are.
Factor 3: Cultural understandings vary. According to reports I’ve heard, two thirds to three quarters of the International delegates were in favor of the Traditional or Modified Traditional Plan. Why the insistence on a traditional view when the One Church Plan would have safeguarded people’s dignity of choice? The answers are as varied as the delegates. Some international delegates were under the impression that the One Church Plan would have required them to accept LGBTQ pastors. How and why did they get that idea? Were they intentionally misinformed? Others were told that they could not return home if they didn’t vote for the Traditional Plan.
Factor 4: Becoming a global church. In addition to the above, consider this. This year, the General Conference consisted of 58% US and 43% International delegates. That’s a real shift from previous years. Now put these two sets of figures together and you can see why things came out so tight. As Bonnie Ives Marden, head of the New England Delegation and author of Church Finances for Missional Leaders: Best Practices for Faithful Stewardship likes to say, “We are a global church without a global business plan.”
Factor 5: Context matters. Since discussions about full inclusion of LGBTQ folks in the UMC began, gay marriage has become legal in the US. The rights of LGBTQs to marry has gained wide acceptance in our country. In light of these developments, restricting church leadership of LGBTQ folks in the US feels harsher and less just than ever before to many people. Meanwhile, the mere fact of being homosexual is outlawed in some other countries, punishable by death. Both contexts are very hurtful for a wide swath of people.   But the US context heightens the sense of injustice and impatience with the Traditional Plan.
The bottom line is that many of us were hurt and deeply discouraged by the recent General Conference. At the same time, others of us felt calmed, satisfied, even justified. Untold numbers are somewhere in between. Because we are church people, it’s easy to theologize our differences. And to demonize those with whom we disagree. As in, “God is on OUR side, not THEIR side.”
Demonizing the other side is a temptation we must avoid. The truth is, we are a church in transition. Instead of reacting, we can gather our wits about us, think, pray and practice the Platinum Rule.