In the effort to make my voice one of the many, I sent the following to the delegation of the Oklahoma Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church.
To the Oklahoma General Conference Delegation,
I know you have received many viewpoints encouraging you to see fit to vote some way or another. My only desire is that you will vote the direction your heart leads you. Show integrity to what God has called you to live out. Be gracious in service to all in a spirit of love. Hope for the kingdom of God’s reign to be the ultimate end of any decision that will be made.
I would contribute my voice to the decision about the plans that have been submitted only as a way to encourage you to see what many have seen as the least viable plan as a potential way forward for the future of United Methodists. The Connectional Conference Plan has been criticized as being too vague, requiring too much voting (in terms of the number of Constitutional amendments), and a stop gap measure “kicking the can further down the road” and not dealing with the situation right now.
I feel the Connectional Conference Plan may be the most viable to deal with the future right now. We are in a dynamic shift in the realm of theology. This is not about LGBTQIA inclusion. That is only the latest symptom of the underlying fault shift that is occurring. We are witnessing the latest tremors of the ongoing shifts regarding authority within the Church. This is not a denominational-centric issue. This has been shaking denominations ever since the Reformation. In that single event were laid the foundations for placing authority in a variety of places. Instead of the Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church and the seat of the Pope, authority was wrested and distributed to Scripture, community, individual preachers, and self. We, as post-Reformation believers, have been trying to argue about where the final seat of authority lies. Yet we overlook that authority looks totally different to people in different trunks of the faith tree.
We are all growing from the same roots. Like the redwood, we grow tall because our roots are intertwined, offering strength and stability to each trunk. Each trunk represents the faith traditions. Many have described them as branches. When we step back and look at the source of authority, they appear more like separate trees. The time we are in right now is not a denominational-centric division of a new branch. We are looking at a Reformation type event of a new tree outgrowth from the root system.
The Traditional pattern of the United Methodist Church, and those with a Reformation slanted Scriptural authority position within it, are seeing the current discussion of homosexuality as violating the authority of Scriptural truth. The pattern of emerging United Methodist Churches who place the authority of the church in the equal acceptance of all is rooted in the Scriptural defense of the love of God above all other qualities. This shift isn’t about watering down the understanding of God’s great love so that it disregards personal responsibility. It lifts transformation of systems as its mission and purpose. This appears to be a new trunk that has outgrown the roots that it was nurtured by in its founding. John Wesley helped birth those qualities as much as he helped birth the qualities of personal holiness and the new birth into a sanctified person.
This shift is being felt in all denominations. If we look at the emergence of this trunk of faith development as an opportunity to see a future faith system growing into fruitfulness, then making room within the United Methodist Church, via the Connectional Conference plan, allows us to our denomination to two or three faith trunks (much like John Wesley did by tying to the Anglican and free church experiences to build the Methodist movement). This gives us all three trunks to fasten to: the trunk of ecclesiastical authority (like our Anglican tradition), the Scriptural authority (of our Reformed relations), and the new love based authority.
This also allows us to be more adequately prepared to be a globally unified denomination. We are not deaf to the cries of our African and Philippine conferences. We know that they are not only bound by Discipline, but also face government, cultural, and tribal barriers to the total inclusion of LGBTQIA. We also look to the European nations, who have become more tolerant of alternate lifestyles in some locations. In order to better represent a church for the world, the three Conferences could be implemented around the world to meet the contextual needs of wherever the United Methodist Church could continue to grow into.
The Connectional Conference Plan also gives us the opportunity to take the dialog of what connectionalism means and what it can look like to a new level. We are not just a church that has the same emblem that we share or a common heritage. In the Connectional Conference Plan, we can begin to live into a new reality of a people with differences of theology while united in mission. We all want to reach the world in order to transform it through making disciples for Jesus Christ. We look at that differently in each theological authority trunk. If we cannot agree on the means, we certainly agree on the ends. We are all looking for the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth as it is in heaven. By having all three theological trunks in our denomination, we have three different ways of achieving that end.
Logistically, yes, this would be a nightmare. Only in the short-term, though. If we have the courage to ask ourselves to do something new, imagine a General Conference office that isn’t divided into three. Imagine, instead, three conferences contributing to the one General Conference office. We are facing the harsh reality that the pensions of clergy could be in some way impacted. In the move to three Conferences, it would only require a transfer. This will also allow for wider connection to other areas. It will allow for us to redesign districts and annual conferences in order to better represent the population. This will take prayer filled time and discussions. It will take some adaptation to change. It is also bringing something new out of what could possibly be fractured beyond repairing.
Finally, as Oklahomans, we are already living with this reality. It doesn’t impact us as deeply as the potential change to the Connectional Conference Plan would, but we can see the roots of it working to some degree here. We live every day, and every annual conference year, with the presence of two connectional conferences in Oklahoma. The Oklahoma Annual Conference is the sister to the Oklahoma Indian Missionary Conference. We share a bishop. We share some agency resources. We share the same territorial lines, to some degree. There is a lot of room for improvement and communication. I, personally, would love to see more open hand holding between OKAC and OIMC clergy, laity, and congregations. I would love to see us working hand in hand to transform our communities that we share. I would love to see us doing more to share resources. The reality is, though, we have already shown as Oklahomans that people of discernable differences can share ecclesiastical space with one another.
I hope you will consider this. It isn’t that I feel I am right and there are so many others who are wrong. I just feel that with a little more hard work, some great imagination, and a stick-to-it attitude, we can work to make the United Methodist Church a denomination for tomorrow’s world today.
Thank you
Todd Bergman
Mooreland United Methodist Church
To the Oklahoma General Conference Delegation,
I know you have received many viewpoints encouraging you to see fit to vote some way or another. My only desire is that you will vote the direction your heart leads you. Show integrity to what God has called you to live out. Be gracious in service to all in a spirit of love. Hope for the kingdom of God’s reign to be the ultimate end of any decision that will be made.
I would contribute my voice to the decision about the plans that have been submitted only as a way to encourage you to see what many have seen as the least viable plan as a potential way forward for the future of United Methodists. The Connectional Conference Plan has been criticized as being too vague, requiring too much voting (in terms of the number of Constitutional amendments), and a stop gap measure “kicking the can further down the road” and not dealing with the situation right now.
I feel the Connectional Conference Plan may be the most viable to deal with the future right now. We are in a dynamic shift in the realm of theology. This is not about LGBTQIA inclusion. That is only the latest symptom of the underlying fault shift that is occurring. We are witnessing the latest tremors of the ongoing shifts regarding authority within the Church. This is not a denominational-centric issue. This has been shaking denominations ever since the Reformation. In that single event were laid the foundations for placing authority in a variety of places. Instead of the Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church and the seat of the Pope, authority was wrested and distributed to Scripture, community, individual preachers, and self. We, as post-Reformation believers, have been trying to argue about where the final seat of authority lies. Yet we overlook that authority looks totally different to people in different trunks of the faith tree.
We are all growing from the same roots. Like the redwood, we grow tall because our roots are intertwined, offering strength and stability to each trunk. Each trunk represents the faith traditions. Many have described them as branches. When we step back and look at the source of authority, they appear more like separate trees. The time we are in right now is not a denominational-centric division of a new branch. We are looking at a Reformation type event of a new tree outgrowth from the root system.
The Traditional pattern of the United Methodist Church, and those with a Reformation slanted Scriptural authority position within it, are seeing the current discussion of homosexuality as violating the authority of Scriptural truth. The pattern of emerging United Methodist Churches who place the authority of the church in the equal acceptance of all is rooted in the Scriptural defense of the love of God above all other qualities. This shift isn’t about watering down the understanding of God’s great love so that it disregards personal responsibility. It lifts transformation of systems as its mission and purpose. This appears to be a new trunk that has outgrown the roots that it was nurtured by in its founding. John Wesley helped birth those qualities as much as he helped birth the qualities of personal holiness and the new birth into a sanctified person.
This shift is being felt in all denominations. If we look at the emergence of this trunk of faith development as an opportunity to see a future faith system growing into fruitfulness, then making room within the United Methodist Church, via the Connectional Conference plan, allows us to our denomination to two or three faith trunks (much like John Wesley did by tying to the Anglican and free church experiences to build the Methodist movement). This gives us all three trunks to fasten to: the trunk of ecclesiastical authority (like our Anglican tradition), the Scriptural authority (of our Reformed relations), and the new love based authority.
This also allows us to be more adequately prepared to be a globally unified denomination. We are not deaf to the cries of our African and Philippine conferences. We know that they are not only bound by Discipline, but also face government, cultural, and tribal barriers to the total inclusion of LGBTQIA. We also look to the European nations, who have become more tolerant of alternate lifestyles in some locations. In order to better represent a church for the world, the three Conferences could be implemented around the world to meet the contextual needs of wherever the United Methodist Church could continue to grow into.
The Connectional Conference Plan also gives us the opportunity to take the dialog of what connectionalism means and what it can look like to a new level. We are not just a church that has the same emblem that we share or a common heritage. In the Connectional Conference Plan, we can begin to live into a new reality of a people with differences of theology while united in mission. We all want to reach the world in order to transform it through making disciples for Jesus Christ. We look at that differently in each theological authority trunk. If we cannot agree on the means, we certainly agree on the ends. We are all looking for the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth as it is in heaven. By having all three theological trunks in our denomination, we have three different ways of achieving that end.
Logistically, yes, this would be a nightmare. Only in the short-term, though. If we have the courage to ask ourselves to do something new, imagine a General Conference office that isn’t divided into three. Imagine, instead, three conferences contributing to the one General Conference office. We are facing the harsh reality that the pensions of clergy could be in some way impacted. In the move to three Conferences, it would only require a transfer. This will also allow for wider connection to other areas. It will allow for us to redesign districts and annual conferences in order to better represent the population. This will take prayer filled time and discussions. It will take some adaptation to change. It is also bringing something new out of what could possibly be fractured beyond repairing.
Finally, as Oklahomans, we are already living with this reality. It doesn’t impact us as deeply as the potential change to the Connectional Conference Plan would, but we can see the roots of it working to some degree here. We live every day, and every annual conference year, with the presence of two connectional conferences in Oklahoma. The Oklahoma Annual Conference is the sister to the Oklahoma Indian Missionary Conference. We share a bishop. We share some agency resources. We share the same territorial lines, to some degree. There is a lot of room for improvement and communication. I, personally, would love to see more open hand holding between OKAC and OIMC clergy, laity, and congregations. I would love to see us working hand in hand to transform our communities that we share. I would love to see us doing more to share resources. The reality is, though, we have already shown as Oklahomans that people of discernable differences can share ecclesiastical space with one another.
I hope you will consider this. It isn’t that I feel I am right and there are so many others who are wrong. I just feel that with a little more hard work, some great imagination, and a stick-to-it attitude, we can work to make the United Methodist Church a denomination for tomorrow’s world today.
Thank you
Todd Bergman
Mooreland United Methodist Church
Comments