Of Liminal Times and 'Losers'

by

Living in a liminal moment – the time between “what was” and “what is to come” – afflicts us with “significant ambiguity,” as my colleague Patrick Scriven writes so expressively in his latest Pacific Northwest Conference newsletter. At best, during liminal times we can perceive only small glimpses or quick flashes of what might be.

Such a flash came to me this week as I was gathering updates on The United Methodist Church’s conflict over the inclusion of LGBTQ people. Our progressive readers likely will gasp at my inspiration: a quote from Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, which styles itself as an orthodox Christian think tank while being perceived by others as an ultra-right consortium bent on destroying U.S. mainline Protestantism.

According to an article on the OneNewsNow website, Mr. Tooley predicts that United Methodist “radicals” “will lose” if the denomination splits. However, he doesn’t precisely define what he means by “losing,” although he alludes to a membership decline if the denomination divides into three parts as he and some others forecast.

Not surprisingly, I think Mr. Tooley’s interpretation is off the mark, not because of his arithmetic, but because of his implied definition of what constitutes “church.”

The numerical decline in United Methodism – along with other mainline Protestant denominations – didn’t begin with the 1968 merger when the Methodist Church joined with the Evangelical United Brethren Church. According to a magazine article by the late Episcopal Church Bishop James A. Pike, the membership decline among American Protestants began in 1960, the year that the U.S. birth rate surpassed the rate of new church memberships. Combined with the U.S. death rate, the bishop predicted that churches would experience a slow membership decline that would accelerate in future.

Bishop Pike’s math was correct, and it was exacerbated by the impact of social forces that even the prescient bishop couldn’t have foreseen in 1960. Among these were the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, followed by the tremendous social upheavals of 1968, the year that the UMC was born: the assassinations of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy; the violence of the Democratic Convention in Chicago; increasing protest of the war in Vietnam; unrest on the nation’s campuses; and a loss of faith in government following the Watergate scandal, among others.

Added to these mathematical and social forces came another reality: the fall of Christendom, that is, the severing of religion’s power over the state. The presidential candidacy of John F. Kennedy, a Roman Catholic who publicly declared that if elected he would follow American law not papal dictates, marked the precipitating event. Catholics were still suspect as governmental leaders in 1960, and Kennedy’s disavowal of papal influence paved the way for decreased religious influence in politics until the Moral Majority era began 20 years later with the election of President Ronald Reagan.

This historical background illustrates the social context of Mr. Tooley and his fellow “orthodox” and/or “traditionalist” Christians. From their writings, remarks and actions, it’s clear that their desire to resurrect Christendom, ­ i.e., for religion to hold sway over all human social, political and economic spheres, ­underlies their push for “scriptural authority.”

To rule in such a manner requires armies of adherents – hence the idea that those who cannot claim high numbers of members will “lose” the conflict now engulfing The United Methodist Church. If we make use of "scriptural authority," however, we can see that Jesus clearly has other ideas about what makes up his church, which theologian Howard Thurman described as “the beloved community.”

Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5 and 6, for instance, turns conventional human wisdom on its head. Unlike those who promote armed conflict, Jesus counsels peacemaking. In the face of Roman oppression, Jesus counsels humble strength and dignity that shames the oppressors. In the face of an economy of scarcity, Jesus counsels giving away all one’s possessions in the confidence that God will provide.

When it comes to the question of authority, Jesus makes his own authority clear in John 18: 31-19.1 (NRSV*):

“Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here.’”

Two verses later, Jesus again replies to Pontius Pilate:

“Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.’”

What is this “truth” to which Jesus alluded? Methodism’s founder John Wesley summarized gospel truth in three words: God is love. Therefore, the church that proclaims and practices love and its companion justice, which is love made public, demonstrates the truth proclaimed and practiced by Jesus, the Christ. 

 Faith in God’s love and justice does not build a “Christendom” where authority is exercised from the top down by an elect few. Faith in God’s love and justice as Jesus taught builds a community where all are welcomed and affirmed, where authority is shared collectively, and where grace upon grace extends to all. Of this gospel truth we can be assured, even in significantly ambiguous times such as ours today. God's mathematics are as infinite as God's love and not bound by official membership rolls. In Jesus’ kingdom, receiving, believing and practicing the truth of God’s love constitutes “winning.”

Cynthia B. Astle serves as Editor of United Methodist Insight, which she founded in 2011.

*New Revised Standard Version of The Holy Bible, Copyright 1989, 1996 by the Christian Education Committee of the National Council of the Churches of Christ, USA. All rights reserved. Used by permission.