Yesterday, in an attempt to get some distance between me and
the traumatic event now forever etched in my brain as—General Conference 2012,
I decided to brave the Texas heat and work on my flowerbeds and ideas for the
lawn. Isisas Barrario, my faithful landscape and lawn man for over 8 years,
stood by me in the heat as we discussed what to do about the yard. Its
important to know that when Isisas and I first met, I was single, working
toward tenure, and could have cared less about my yard except I wanted it cut
and to look good—which meant he had the run of the yard. Now, married with a
bigger yard and in a nicer neighborhood, I have become more involved (gender
roles are very hard to break sometime but that’s another blog).
As we looked at the deck, I told him that I saw some nails
popping at that he should get the carpenter out and fix them and then get it
painted. He said, “My friend, the earth
around the deck has changed. The sun and rain have taken their toll. It is
warped and nailing it won’t fix the problem—the structure is bad. You must tear
it down if you want it to do any good.” A gardener had become a prophet
right before my eyes and ears.
While many things will be written about General Conference
2012 (and 80% will be written by me and Mike Sykuta of Mizzou) and its
inability to enact real change for the United Methodist Church, here is one
thing to take from our week and a ½ in Tampa: The World around us changed. The
heat of the culture wars and the rain of a changing demographic are having huge
impacts. We are warped and cosmetic changes won’t help—we must dare to tear
down to our foundations if we ever hope to be any good to the world. Don’t get
me wrong. There are dozens, if not hundreds of local churches, annual
conferences, and general agencies who are doing the work of Christ in wonderful
ways but that’s not the issue. That’s like saying all of my boards in my deck
aren’t bad and that many of them are working just fine. Why? Because the good
boards are attached to a bad structure in the end they can only do so much
good.
Real organizational change cannot happen until an
organization reconnects with its foundation—its central mission. This is a
lesson I learned from Herb Kelleher and Colleen Barrett, founders of Southwest
Airlines and two of my closest mentors (I didn’t even get married to my husband
without them meeting him first). Herb and Colleen often point out that the
problem with other airlines is that they believe that they are in the airline
business—so they focus on planes, fuel, etc. But at Southwest Airlines, they
are in the customer service business and they just happen to use fuel, planes,
etc. to ensure that they are serving their customers (which includes their
employees, customers, and lastly their stockholders) in an excellent way. Guess
what? It works and it has been working well for over 30 years.
The United Methodist Church has so much wonderful potential.
As many of my colleagues who study religious organizations point out, it is the
only one that has a true opportunity to succeed where other denominations have
failed. At its core the UMC has always affirmed education, religious and
secular inquiry, the ministry to the poor and those on the margins, and dared
to speak when others were silent. Our other chief attribute is that we are a
pragmatic people, a people known for our reasonability and rationality. But
anyone watching the show (and that’s what it was) on Friday, can tell you that
when you have UNITED METHODISTS standing on tables, shouting down the presiding
officer, and engaging in personal attacks on and off the floor of the plenary
session, we have more than walked away from reason, we have run from it.
Our structure is contained in the Book of Discipline.
Interesting word—contained. Because that is exactly what our BOD is doing to us
now—it is containing Methodism. When organizational change, or attempts at
organizational change can be ruled unconstitutional because they do not permit
a new structure to emerge—your organization has ruled evolution and change out
of order. Keep in mind that under the ruling of our Judicial Council any of the
three plans submitted would have failed this constitutional test.
The issue is that the General Conference has powers that it
cannot delegate to any one but the Bishops and even then in a limited role.
Simply put, only a full delegation from all of Methodism can enact
administrative change and no matter how well equipped another body or bodies
may be in executing that legislative and administrative role on their behalf, only
1000 people can make that decision.
Because our system of governance is based largely on the US
system of governance it encompasses both its laudable ideals and its TERRIBLE
inefficiencies. I think what is attractive philosophically about this system is
it tries to provide for everyone to ensure that whether you are from the
Southcentral, Southeastern, or Central Conferences, which has the most members,
or the Cal-Pac where we have the least, everybody has a voice in our
governance. But here is the problem: everybody has a voice.
Our system, just like the US allows for minority voices
(whether of philosophy, race, gender, sexual orientation) to take an active
role in the shaping of policy and legislation. This is a good thing. The
Majority is not always right, especially if it is made up of homogenous point
of view. But as Michel Foucault points out, the minority can exercise its own
tyranny over the will of the people just like the majority.
Anyone listening to the debate regarding restructuring last
week and this week watched an evolution take place. Former adversaries came
together and created a coalition that created legislation that was supported by
Central Conference delegates, UMC delegates of all colors, sexual orientations,
educations, age and genders. A small
minority decided that that because THEY didn’t get individually consulted that
they would use whatever means necessary to stop attempts at reorganization.
What really is irritating is that every time I heard, “All voices weren’t represented”
I realized it was code for Adam, Don, Betty, Forbes, Christine or Joe didn’t
talk to ME personally, so I am offended! Let’s be crystal clear about this: while 40%
of the delegates did not support PLAN UMC, all of them did not support the
action taken to take this to Judicial Council. Some were willing to see what
reorganization wrought and were willing to come back to the issue in 2016.
Again, winning the battle and losing the war became the
strategy of the day. The minority point was clear: if we don’t like what you do
or we don’t feel like you gave us enough deference, we will shut it down
regardless of whom it hurts. Funny--whether its Grover Norquist (a United
Methodist by the way) and the Tea Party or the MFSA, the rhetoric of
organizational hostage taking has the same effect—polarization, distrust, and
in the end slow agonizing organizational death.
One of my students in Organizational Communication could
look at this mess called GC2012 and diagnose the problem immediately—folks it
doesn’t take a PhD. An 18th Century structure cannot sustain a 21st
century global organization. We must be willing to let go of the non-essential
to get back to the first fruits and ideals of why we are a People called
Methodist. Asking 1000 people to make organizational decisions and
restructuring is not only dangerous it is impractical for long-term survival.
Being limited by a BOD that has increased in regulation but decreased in
effectiveness is an indication that we have become all sound (and petitions)
and very little fury or significance. While as a denomination, we will not
disappear over the next 4 years, I believe that the Fat Lady has taken off her
kaftan and is looking through sheet music and for an evening gown.
We must Rethink Church (which is a wonderful campaign if I
must say so myself). We are not in the agency business. We are not in the
conference business. We are in the soul saving and soul sustaining business.
Agencies, Boards, Conferences, Elders, Deacons, and Laity are just the resources
we use to do that God given business. Let’s create a governance structure and
reorganization that places this priority FIRST. Over the next weeks I will be
exploring how I think that can happen.
In the meantime, repeat with me: Hello, My Name is United Methodist
Church and I need to change.
Ref: "At its core the UMC has always affirmed education, religious and secular inquiry, the ministry to the poor and those on the margins, and dared to speak when others were silent."
ReplyDeleteWhile researching and studying the orphan as a prophetic voice, my eyes are opening to the term "community". Poor, widown, alien, orphan... are NOT marginalized. We are all community. Arrogance, capitalism, greed have created terminology of "margins". How poor, widow, alien and orphan are recognized as equal in community is also like which part of the body is most important? We are all one body. Let us consider thinking correctly about what Scripture teaches. Then, community or body, will function accordingly -- bettter -- "United" Methodists.
I must admit, I was one of the individuals that strongly opposed Plan UMC and the IoT legislation presented in the General Administration section of the General Conference. The reasons for this were two-fold.
ReplyDelete1) I don't believe changing our structures alone is going to re-vitalize the church or in anyway create vital congregations. This work must be undertaken by a new generation of denominational and congregational leaders who are committed to connection, discernment, and providing relevant voice to the ancient truths in which we share. Moreover, I throughly believe this work cannot be completed without our willingness to allow our structures (and even ourselves as we currently are) to die. What, after all, is the point of a resurrection revolution that employs old parts of who we were to create who we are becoming. If nothing else, the plans (all of them) didn't go far enough. I don't believe we can build a new self with broken bricks.
2) The politics behind the the Plans were questionable at best and violent at worst. When young people are called into meetings and told that if they don't "get on board" youth and young adult representation will disappear from denominational leadership structures, I find myself a little suspicious. Add to this the extreme errors both editorial and substantive in the Plan UMC legislation (I was first part of and then a monitor for a task force to address these issues), and I wonder if we rushed through what should have at least been a full and substantive debate DURING General Conference 2012
Those things said, I ultimately agree with you. We need a new structure. That new structure has to start in the ways we govern ourselves, including finding new ways of doing General Conference that are equitable and emphasize relationship over difference. It has to begin in the way we do connectionalism, intentionally emphasizing the covenantal relationships that bind us to one another, not the structures that we fund and support. Either way, I appreciate your words, and hope to be a co-dreamer with you toward who God might be calling the people called Methodist to be.
thank you, Dr Dixon Hall for your powerful and prophetic witness! i really look forward to reading more of your thoughts in the day and weeks to come.
ReplyDeleteDid you see the post on my FB page? Some of our folks think we need to have you over to pick your brain....I'm still lovin' the blogs...keep 'em coming...
ReplyDeleteBrilliant... Let's talk soon.
ReplyDeleteOn this, I AGREE!
ReplyDeleteDr. Dixon:
ReplyDeleteThank you for your posts. I find them thoughtful and provacative. I would note however, that the part of the structure being revised doesn't date from the 18th Century, but from 1968 or 1972. This was near the high-water mark of UMC membership and only a few commenters had noticed that we had already started declining as a percentage of the population at that time. We were also experiencing "culture wars" in the UMC that I believe are both similar and related to today's polarization.
That being said, I absolutely agree that change is needed. UMW is working on that and I believe that it is possible for the whole church. Erin Hawkins introduced me to Peter Block's work and I have found that to be provocative--I hope you'll comment on his ideas about community as well. I think we need the "hybridity" recomended in the Starfish and the Spider, rather than increased centralization of authority, but I recognize the need for allignment that pushes toward centralization as well.
May we in the UMW find better ways to work together, to build the right incentives into our processes and systems and to produce the fruits of loving God and loving neighbor that we long for!
Hi Dr. Dixon,
ReplyDeleteI serve on staff at Duke Divinity School and was a young clergy delegate at GC 2012, and I just wanted to write to thank you for your writing and your reflections: you beautifully capture the heart of what I have been thinking and feeling about the gathering. Your posts have offered the most perceptive insight that I have found anywhere, especially for those of us moderates who make up the Methodist Middle, and who leave this Conference profoundly dissatisfied with both the right and the left. I hope our paths cross some day, and please do keep writing!
Grace and Peace,
Rev. Jeremy Troxler