UMNS Photo by John C. Goodwin
A Red-Letter Speech
Tony Campolo, author and professor of sociology at Eastern University, addresses the Church and Society Banquet on May 1. By turns humorous and critical, Campolo drew shouts and applause as he urged people to become "red-letter Christians" who passionate follow Jesus' teachings.
Dan Dick has joined the General Board of Church and Society in the United Methodist Church. His first board meeting inspired a post defending the GBCS and expressing dismay over some of its critics.
The comments thread contains the predictable but illustrative display of UM political division with left and right defending or criticizing the board in ways that are probably familiar to most Christians who have had much engagement with church and politics.
If you are not familiar with GBCS, it is the board that articulates and advocates social positions of the church. It is often criticized for its positions by theological and political conservatives who see in many of its declarations and public statements as too liberal. Its defenders, like Dan in his post, see the work of the board as the living out of Old Testament and Gospel mandates to defend the poor, promote peace, and resist injustice.
One interesting comment on Dan’s post comes from Tom Lambrecht, a conservative United Methodist pastor. He proposed an alternative method of operation for the GBCS:
Where GBCS could serve us well is to foster discussion of alternative means to a common goal. Instead, BCS tends to adopt one particular philosophical approach to solving social problems, namely, a big-government, semi-coercive approach. That is why many people equate the UMC’s social positions with the Democratic Party platform.
GBCS should recognize that there is more than one way to skin a cat. Exploring alternative solutions, rather than emphasizing only one course of action, would gain GBCS credibility with people in the pew.
My first thought when I read that was that it would be a good idea to do this.
My second thought was that this sounds very much like the spirit of the failed Adam Hamilton and Mike Slaughter amendment on sexuality at General Conference 2012. I do not know Lambrecht’s position on that amendment, but I suspect he opposed it.
For my part, I am vexed at times by the positions the GBCS takes that go beyond what I can see in official UM teaching, but I do admire much of what the board advocates in many areas. In the end, my biggest complaint about the board is that it appears to me to be largely impotent. I’m not sure if it can point to any actual impact it has had other than going along and shouting “us, too” or “please, no” as some piece of policy or legislation was adopted.
I respect Dan Dick for calling things as he sees them. I will look forward to hearing his impression of the actual work and accomplishments of the board in the years ahead.