This was a Private Matter

What is public and what is private? As we hear our politicians debate Clinton’s actions, a national feeding frenzy continues where the media grows rich digging up any detail it can. They are making so much money because the nation is wallowing in the dirty details. But out of this a question is arising about what is private and what is public. What is someone’s personal choice and what dramatically affects public life? Increasingly we are finding that things that many Americans believe are private have incredible affects in the rest of our lives, "Pray to the God in secret, because your God who sees in secret will reward you." That which is hidden comes to light.

Sexual Harassment

If we are careful, then through all the hoopla about "Clinton’s legal right to private concentual relationships with other adults", and "how the relationship with Monica Lewinski isn’t really the issue – its about perjury and obstruction of justice" (or political slander, depending upon which side you are one), we will begin to see that relationships between bosses and anyone working for them may never be the same. Whether or not we understand the issues of unequal power, fear will force every company in America to ask questions about how we treat one another in a work environment.

When I was brought up in the United Methodist church, a Bishop, addressing the candidates ready to go off to seminary said, "be really active in your church and find there a young woman member of your parish (we were all men at that particular gathering) who really understands and loves the church to be your spouse." Many of my older colleagues wooed and married a member of their church. That is now, almost by definition, sexual harassment. We are in a time of change. Maybe not all for the better because some important things are lost in the change, but a mighty value is being uncovered in the questions.

We are becoming more aware that the off-color jokes we say while relaxing, the tales of "conquests" we relate in a work environment, the gossip in the bathrooms, and the gender related teasing, the images we portray on our walls, each have undermining the humanity of us all. The solutions will take generations to overcome.

How much will we lose and how much will we gain? No one knows. But we are changing as a nation and as a church as we face these conflicts.

Justice, Punishment, Forgiveness, Repentance, Accountability, Responsibility

Almost every week since last January, some news commentator has told us that Americans seem to be willing to forgive Clinton "if only they would see some hint that he understands what he has done and faces up to it." It is odd hearing newscasters talk about forgiveness and repentance. But odd too is the way these theological terms play themselves out in national politics. If someone spends all their time denying in a legal setting what they have done; and if someone has all his or her supporters deny it as well, is there repentance? Or does repentance lie outside the system of justice? Do we need to allow a certain amount of denial and lying in our politicians (can you believe that question?) so that they can preserve their civil rights and privacy.

How would we know if a politician who had done wrong had "done their work" or "worked their program" to use a little jargon? How could we trust that they had changed? How much do we trust the arenas of accountability we set up or, more likely, have never thought about for leadership.

In the United Methodist church ministry, taking on the issue of sexual misconduct, we realize that the greatest deterrent to sexual misconduct and the best tool for addressing the abuse in our midst is a community of colleagues who talk honestly with one another and know one another. They don’t exist. In that statement we go from talking about a small percentage of clergy who hurt others to a cancer in the midst of us all. So, across the conference we are setting up clergy clusters and learning slowly how to share trusts and guide one another in accountability. It will take a long time. What support group does a President have or do you have?

Questions about Our Legal System

When a congress that represents the constitution and makes our laws tromps all over due process what do we do? Have you ever heard so many people talking about law as in the last years of Simpson and Clinton. We are involved in a national debate about the foundations of law in our country.

Questions about Our Legal System

hen a congress that represents the constitution and makes our laws tromps all over due process what do we do? Have you ever heard so many people talking about law as in the last years of Simpson and Clinton. We are involved in a national debate about the foundations of law in our country.

The Place and Study of History

In both the holy union and the Clinton conflicts, people are learning about how their governing bodies work (I can’t remember talking to my colleagues about two other judicial council decisions in my entire ministry). These conflicts in the past year have been an opportunity to look at history and its importance. Some of this, of course, is just a matter of finding in history people who agree with a certain position. On a national scale, many are finding that we become more conversant in history and the process of political debate. Congress people have become more conversant in Adams and United Methodists are looking in history books to see how we dealt with the issue of slavery and women’s rights. Many discover that the history books give us proof texts for someone unable to change, but can also highlight complex the issues and affirm that it takes decades and even generations to work out some issues. And that is OK.

The Christian Right’s Anger

One reason that Clinton may seek a long trial is to show that the Christian Right is dug in, angry, and obsessive. A long trial may reduce the power of the Christian Fundamentalists.

The last congress has done almost nothing. They have resolved few issues facing the nation, they poorly relate with others, and they are very angry. They loudly talk about their consensus and their agenda, but they have done next to nothing, passed almost no legislation except for no less than 92 bills having to do with abortion and women’s choices.

I owe my love of the Bible to Christian Fundamentalists. In early college, belonging to an independent, literal-interpretation church brought my faith alive in a way that I cherish each and every day. I will honor that way till I die even though I disagree with it constantly now. But I am embarrassed by the political "Christian right". I am tired of having people with very limited ways of understanding the Bible not only strip meaning from my church language but also pretend to govern my country in the name of Christian values while reeking judgment and anger and sexual obsessivness at every turn. This year, while trying to skewer the President, two such leaders have been found out.

As a nation, we are looking very critically at those who call themselves Christian. Also within the church, others are confronting the Christian Right and questioning their motives. (Did you know that one of the three major New Testament passages mentioning homosexuality, is set within a larger context illustrating the evil of Christians taking other Christians to court. Hmmm.)

What is a Liberal Anyway?

When most of the democrats spend their time in an impeachment process defending the position of the President by saying that he wasn’t really lying about his actions in the white house, where is their agenda of women’s rights? Where is their agenda of supporting the poor in a struggle for equality? Where is their agenda of rights of minorities?

We are examining our "liberal" politicians and wondering where their values have gone. If the Christian Right is being shown to be angry, obsessive and judgmental, then the Caring Left is being shown to be irrelevant, absent, or simply confused.

How Important are Truth and Integrity

Anyone who pays attention to campaigns knows that our politicians lie to us all the time. Suddenly we are asking: how important is the integrity of our leaders. How much can they lie to us and in what contexts: to do political work, to preserve national security, or to maintain their own privacy. And how do all these relate to one another. How many times have you heard the question: What kind of example does this set for my child, "if it is OK for the president of the United States to lie, why not me?"

What is the Nature of Rituals

When we bless a relationship what are we doing? Many of my minister friends have been talking about weddings and other ways that we bless people, buildings, dogs and cats, land and relationships in our work in the ministry. We have been talking about funerals and memorial services, baptisms and who we do or do not serve in communion. What authorizes us to bless? What power does it import? By what authority do we act, or by what accountability do we not act? What criteria would determine who we don’t or do marry, baptize, serve communion, ask into leadership positions? What questions do we ask to determine that and what are the consequences of asking those questions?

What is the Importance of the Bible?

This is, of course, the critical issue in the conflict. Are we Biblically based Christians? If so, what does that mean?. There probably is not a single person alive who really lives according to the Bible literally. But there are those who profess that we should live as close to the laws, life pattern and calls set forth in the Bible as possible. Even here, the question arises: what is the interpretive devise used for the Bible. Often the Bible is followed with the presumption that the New Testament supersedes the Old. Any Old Testament law that is called into question by the New Testament, or often by inference in the New Testament can be let go. Another devise is that the system of sacrificial worship has been superseded by a worship of the heart and by Christ’s sacrifice. Dietary laws of the Old Testament are let go with Peter’s vision in Acts. Works and acts of atonement prescribed in the Old let go by Christ’s crucifixion in the New. But where do these edits end? The United Methodist church, indeed the whole Christian church for two thousand years has struggled with these issues of discernment, literalism, and boundaries. And so, one of the core questions that arises is how do people in our church who think different things, who use different interpretive devises to live Biblically, stay one community?

Individual and Corporate Conscience

A good friend of mine, who is also going to be co-officiating at the holy union, and I were talking about the nature of conscientious dissent the other day. We asked: what we choose when personal discernment clashes with the corporate discernment. At the same time, we spoke. He said "personal" and I said "corporate". Which is more important your own discernment, or the discernment of your church?

I believe that personal decisions will come and go and my opinion within the United Methodist church means historically next to nothing. However, my dissent keeps alive a discussion that will certainly outlive me. My dissent provides a bridge not only to the future, but to a life of diversity in the present discussion. To hold back my dissent when I feel my church is wrong is not only ill-advised for me, it is unhealthy for our denomination and for our church community. I believe firmly in consensus administration, but I do not think that necessarily means unity of opinion and oneness of spirit. Often the best things we do, we do in the midst of conflict.

What is the consequence of the United Methodist church banning identification with an organization or policy that stands against the discipline? Does this not limit our dialogue and limit voice within our church. At the elders conference this fall, someone suggested that we disband all caucuses because they were divisive in our Conference. And yet, there has not be a tool so affective giving minority members of the Conference voice. Do we disband caucuses for women or Koreans just because they are divisive. In my experience the divisiveness of the women’s caucus has come at points where they were developing true community absent in most other places on the Conference floor and when they were pointing out unjust treatment of women, that time has shown to be all too true. We silence that conflict at all of our peril.