The UMC and the Issues 2012: The Environment

The opening paragraph of the section of the Social Principles of The United Methodist church entitled “The Natural World” reads...
“All creation is the Lord’s, and we are responsible for the ways in which we use and abuse it. Water, air, soil, minerals, energy resources, plants, animal life, and space are to be valued and conserved because they are God’s creation and not solely because they are useful to human beings. God has granted us stewardship of creation. We should meet these stewardship duties through acts of loving care and respect. Economic, political, social, and technological developments have increased our human numbers, and lengthened and enriched our lives. However, these developments have led to regional defoliation, dramatic extinction of species, massive human suffering, overpopulation, and misuse and overconsumption of natural and nonrenewable resources, particularly by industrialized societies. This continued course of action jeopardizes the natural heritage that God has entrusted to all generations. Therefore, let us recognize the responsibility of the church and its members to place a high priority on changes in economic, political, social, and technological lifestyles to support a more ecologically equitable and sustainable world leading to a higher quality of life for all of God’s creation.” (Discipline paragraph 160)
The positions that The United Methodist Church takes on environmental issues are based on our belief that all of Creation belongs to God and that God has made us, individually and collectively, stewards of Creation.  A steward is not an owner, a steward is a caretaker who is responsible to maintain and to use that which has been entrusted to them according to the wishes of the owner.
There are many specific things that the Church encourages including recycling, conservation of energy and water, avoiding the use of bottled water, reducing the use of fossil fuels and the reduction of “greenhouse gases,” responsible mining and drilling, and sustainable agriculture and organic foods. (Discipline paragraphs 161A, B, D, and G)
Oftentimes, I, like perhaps many of you, find myself overwhelmed by the enormity of the environmental problem and the radical change that a truly “green” lifestyle might involve.  Sometimes I feel guilty because I know that I waste fuel, water, and energy.  I know that I often throw away what can be recycled.  I cannot always find, or afford, organic food.  A hybrid just did not fit my family’s needs, or budget, the last time I bought a car.
Of course we do not all have to be environmental saints or live in ecological monasteries, but we do have to take our responsibility as stewards of God’s creation seriously.  We can all make small changes in the way we live and the choices we make every day.
 

The UMC and the Issues 2012: Health Care

The issue of health care is one of the hotest political issues of our time.  This is perhaps because while many issues may not affect all of us, health care is something we all need and it is an issue that can have dangerous and even deadly consequences.

The Social Principles of the United Methodist Church declare that health care is “a basic human right,” and, “We believe it is a governmental responsibility to provide all citizens with health care.”  (Discipline paragraph 162.III.V)

First, let me say that I believe that we in America enjoy a very high quality of health care as well as a very high quantity of health care.  The very best level of care, provided by well qualified and caring professionals in extremely comfortable and well equipped facilities, is available to most Americans, including we who live in rural areas.  In fact, I have begun to consider the possibility that it is precisely the high quality and quantity of health care we enjoy, and have come to expect and demand, that has caused the costs of health care to become so high.  

Am I suggesting that we somehow lower the quality and quantity of our health care to reduce costs?  That may be a good idea is some cases.  For instance, we could stop running to the doctor for every ache and pain demanding the newest drug we have just seen advertised on television.  Also, if a waiting room with a few less potted plants or without a fish tank means that I can save on my medical bills, I am all for that.  However, we all know that it would not be a good idea to take this line of thinking too far, we would not be willing to give up our high quality and high quantity of health care.  In fact, I think it is our fear of losing our high quality and high quantity health care that has made this such a heated debate.  

The problem has become how do we pay for the ever increasing costs of our high quality and high quantity health care?  Government programs like Medicare, Medicaid, Hawk-I, and others have helped many to afford health care.  However, programs like these are always limited in what they provide and in the number of people who qualify, and there are always those who fall through the cracks.  There are those who do not qualify for programs and still cannot afford health care and there are those for whom programs do not cover the health care they need.

For many years health care for most people has been paid for by health insurance provided by employers.  However, this system is beginning to break down as costs continue to increase.  Employers, especially small ones including churches, are finding it more difficult to provide health insurance.  This has limited the number of persons employers can hire and has contributed to unemployment.  Also, many people report being stuck in dead end jobs, afraid to change jobs or to start their own businesses, for fear of losing health benefits.

It is clear to me that the current system of health insurance through work is no longer sustainable.  Almost everyone I talk to, on both sides of the political spectrum, agrees that the system must fundamentally change.  The question is, “How?”

One answer I have heard is the elimination of the system of health insurance and a return to a consumer based direct payment model in which people pay for what they need and what they can afford and doctors and hospitals charge whatever the market will bear.  However, common sense will tell us that this would result in a catastrophic reduction in the quality and quantity of health care that is available to people, particularly poor people and those of us who live in rural areas.

The other answer I have heard is the implementation of a government run health care or health insurance system of some kind based on the Canadian or European models.  Valid concerns have been raised, given our government's tendency towards inefficiency, about the effect this will have on the quality and quantity of health care.  

However, as a pastor, based on my interpretation, I have to say that this is the position put forward by General Conference in the Social Principles.  Also, this is my personal position as well.  This appears to me to be the only hope we have to continue to maintain our high quality and high quantity of health care long term and compete economically with the rest of the world.

The UMC and the Issues: Homosexuality

It is with great fear and trembling that I approach the issue of Homosexuality because it is one of the most controversial issues in society and the Church today.
First, I need to outline the UMC’s current stand on the issue. “The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God’s grace is available to all. We will seek to live together in Christian community, welcoming, forgiving, and loving one another, just as Christ has loved and accepted us. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry with and for all persons.” (Discipline paragraph 161F)

The United Methodist Church supports “laws in civil society that define marriage as the union between one man and one woman.” (Discipline paragraph 161B) Also, the Discipline says, “Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches.” (Discipline paragraph 341.6) Also, “Self-avowed, practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in the United Methodist Church.” (Discipline paragraph 304.3) And, United Methodist funds cannot be used to promote the acceptance of homosexuality. (Discipline paragraph 806.9)

However, we should also remember that the Church has said that we should not, “reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends.” And, the United Methodist Church supports equal civil rights for all person regardless of sexual orientation. (Discipline paragraph 162J)

Since 1972, when the current language went into place, the Church has debated this issue. There are many in the Church who would like to see the current position reversed and have homosexuality fully accepted in the Church, including marriage and ordination. It seems to me that there have been at least three distinct voices in this issue: “yes,” “no,” and “wait.”

First, we’ll look at the “no.” These folks would point to several passages in the Bible, as well as to nature, and to traditional family structures, to say that we should maintain the current standard. These folks tend to view homosexuality as a perversion, a chosen lifestyle in rejection of God and traditional values.

Next, we will look at the “yes.” These folks would point to the fact that there are many wonderful people who are homosexual, some of whom, by all other appearances, are committed disciples of Jesus Christ. Also, there is much evidence to suggest that sexual orientation is part of who a person is, that the are “born that way,” and, therefore, it is unfair to ask them to change or to pretend to be someone they are not. It would seem fair then, to allow homosexuals to participate in the Church and have their sexuality accepted on the same basis as that of heterosexuals, within the confines of a committed monogamous relationship. 

Finally, we look at the “wait.” These are folks that might agree with the “yes,” but they are afraid of the damage that making a change at this time, when so many are against it, would do to the church. They agree that this is a place that we should, and will eventually, go but they want to wait until a larger consensus can be built.

For myself, I have to admit that I have found myself quite torn on this issue, as I suspect many of you have as well. I have found myself deeply impressed by the faith of homosexual Christians whom I have meet, and by their deep love for one another in their relationships. I have also become increasingly convinced that sexual orientation is something that is often deeply imprinted in our personality. However, I am also extremely reluctant to dismiss the guidance of Scripture. (Although we also do have a history of re-interpreting Scripture in the light of new situations and new understandings. After all, the Bible clearly teaches, or so we used to think, that slavery is permissible and that women are inferior to men.) And, I am also afraid of the effect a sudden change in direction, based on a narrow majority vote, would have on my beloved United Methodist Church.

Having said all of that, no matter what happens at General Conference in Tampa this year, I will remain a faithful United Methodist. Since I am often unsure of what to think, I will trust the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the Church. I invite you to join me in praying for the guidance of the Holy Spirit upon General Conference and up our whole Church.

Creation and Evolution

In our series on the issues of our day and the United Methodist position on them, we might as well begin at the beginning.  United Methodist proclaim, along with other Christians, in the words of the Apostles’ Creed, that, “We believe in God, the Father, Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.”  

The book of Genesis tells the story of God’s creation of the universe, the world, and everything it in.  The pinnacle of God’s creation is humanity, which is created in the image of God.  According to Genesis, God creates the universe in six days with each day bringing a new step in the creation process that leads ultimately to the creation of humanity.  

Meanwhile, the best science tells us that the universe and the world took shape over billions of years and that life developed gradually in a process called evolution.  Science, of course. makes no claim about the existence of God or God’s involvement in this process.

So what are we to believe?  Should we reject the Bible and the story of creation in favor of evolution, or should we reject the claims of science and cling blindly to the Bible and its traditional interpretation?   The answer is: neither.  The United Methodist Church states in our Social Principles# that, “We find that science’s description of cosmological, geological, and biological evolution and not in conflict with theology.”#  

But you may well ask, “How does that work?”  I am glad you asked.  There are four broad ways that people have responded to these questions.

1. Young Earth Creationism (YEC)# -  These are people who take the Bible literally and believe that the earth, and all life on it, was created as it appears today in six literal 24 hour days.  They believe that the earth is 6,000 years old, a date they arrive at by adding up all of the ages of people listed in Genesis. They dismiss all the mainstream scientific claims that are opposed to them as either mistaken or an attempt to undermine faith; and often conduct research and experimentation of their own to support their claims.  (There were times in history when Christians believed that the Bible clearly taught that the world was flat and that the Sun revolved around the earth.)  However, I do know many wonderful disciples of Jesus Christ who are YECs and I have deep respect for them.
2. Old Earth Creationism (OEC)# - These are people who believe that the universe is some 14.5 billion years old and began with the Big Bang and that the earth is some 4.5 billion years old as modern science states.  The key for OECs is that the Hebrew word yom, which is translated “day” in Genesis 1, can mean a literal 24 hour day or a longer, unspecified, period of time.  They point to the timelessness of God particularly in passages like 2 Peter 3:8, “With the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.”  They believer that days/periods of creation in Genesis is the story of God’s gradual creation over a long period time.  Some, called Progressive Creationists, do not believe in evolution.  They say that each species is a unique creation of God. Looking at the fossil record over time, this cold look like evolution.
3. Theistic Evolution (TE)# - TE is essentially another branch of OEC.  TEs believe that God is behind the evolution that science observes in nature.  They believe that God started the process of evolution, and that God, to a greater or lesser degree, guides that process.  Like YEC and OEC, TEs regard humanity, created in  God’s image, as the pinnacle of creation/evolution.  Many faithful Christians, including myself, are OECs and TEs.
4. Atheistic (Materialistic) Evolution (AE) - The name says it all.  These are folks that do not believe in God, and so, therefore, they believe that evolution, without the existence or involvement of God, explains the origins of the universe, the earth, and all life upon, including humans.

All of the first three groups believe that God created the universe, the earth, and all life upon it, including humanity; which is especially created in the image of God.  The only difference between each group is the question of how God created.  My point in outlining all of this is to demonstrate that there is some differences of belief among faithful Christians and that there is some wiggle room between hard science and a overly-literal interpretation of the Bible.
However, to come back to the point of this series of articles, the political, social, and religious issues of our day, (Notice how I used the word “day: to refer to something other than a 24 hour period!)  This issue of creation and evolution (and not versus, they do not necessarily have to compete) is usually played out in the debate over the scientific curriculum in our public schools; whether our schools should teach creation or evolution.  

As a pastor, I would prefer that the public school stick to teaching science according to the widely accepted standards of the scientific community; and leave the teaching of religious faith to me, and to qualified leaders of other faiths.  

As a parent, I want my children to be fully educated and ready to succeed in any field they choose, including science.  I expect that my children will learn science, and other subjects, at school; and will learn religious faith at home and church.

I believe that this is the spirit in which the United Methodist Church has developed its position on creation and evolution.

UMC and the "Issues" 2012: Introduction

The caucuses will soon be over and the politicians will leave Iowa, that is, at least, until they begin to return to campaign for the general election.  However, since this is a election year, and a General Conference year for us United Methodists, I thought I might use this year's newsletter articles to outline the position of the United Methodist Church on some of the issues of our day. (General Conference 2012 will be held April 24-May 4 in Tampa FL.)  This article will serve as an introduction to those articles.  This article will also set some ground rules for the others, so I encourage you to keep this copy to refer to in reading future articles.

1. The Social Principles Over the years the United Methodist Church has adopted Social Principles which outline the UMC's thinking and positions on social issues.  The Social Principles are adopted by General Conference and only General Conference can change them. (I would be happy to put you in touch with our Iowa delegates, if you have concerns.) The Social Principles are intended to provide official guidance to the work of the UMC around these issues and to provide guidance to help individual United Methodists to think through these issues.  No individual United Methodist, lay or clergy, is required to agree with the Principles.  In fact, United Methodists, including pastors, are free to disagree, even publicly, with the Principles, however, clergy, and others who teach, are required to present the Principles accurately, fairly, and completely as the official position of the UMC in addition to providing their own positions.  The social principles will form the basis of these articles.  I will also, occasionally, offer my own opinions, but I will be clear about what are my own positions and what are the official positions of the UMC.

2. Issues Only IRS code and federal election regulations forbid churches from officially endorsing or supporting any candidate or political party.  However, we are, of course, allowed to discus and take positions on issues.  Therefore these articles will discuss only the issues and will not discuss candidates, parties, or their positions or platforms.  I will do my best to be fair to all sides of each issue.

3. Not From the Pulpit While I do think that the Bible has much to say about our current political issues, I find that the pulpit is not the best place to get into such things.  I find it much better to deal with these issues, in newsletters, like I am now, in Bible studies, and in one-on-one and small group discussions.   

I do not exactly know yet what issues I will be doing or in what order, so stay tuned.  I look forward discussing these things with you and I welcome your, loving and respectful, feedback.
Pastor Brian.

People Praying

People Watching is a past time many of us engage in at the mall and while we are waiting in other public places, and since I spend a lot of time at the mall, (love you Heather) it something I do a lot.

The problem is, I have to confess, that people watching often turns into people judging. The loud group of teenagers, the homeless-looking middle aged man, the mother with a child throwing a temper tantrum, are all potential objects of my judgmentalism. Never mind that I was once a loud teen, that I was once homeless, that I have had my own children throw temper tantrums in public and I probably threw some of my own in my day. Yes, judgementalism is a persistent sin.

So, today I suddenly had an idea, "What if I prayed for the people as I watched them?" So I did. I began to pray silently for each person or group I saw.

• For the immigrant family 
• For the family with the special needs child. 
• For the man with the "Vietnam Veteran" hat. (It was Veterans' Day.) 
• For the mother with two small boys, one of whom is in a full blown meltdown. 

Often all I could really do is pray, "God bless them," as they passed by. As I engaged in this new hobby of "people praying," praying for people rather than just "watching" or worse still "judging" them, I found my heart more open and full of joy. Don't tell Heather, but I can't wait to go to the mall again.

Why I Don't Preach Tithing

1. Tithing is giving 10% of one's income to church and/or charity.  (Whether that means 10% of net or gross is still up for debate.)  
1. Tithing of agricultural products, not necessarily money, was required in the Old Testament. (eg Leviticus 27:30)  Later an exemption was made for farmers who lived at a distance from Jerusalem who could sell their tithe portion and then bring the money to Jerusalem and buy products to tithe. (Deuteronomy 14:24-26)
2. Some churches and pastors teach that a tithe of cash income is required for Christians, some calling it, "the minimum standard for Christian giving."  Some churches even require members to provide a copy of their income tax return so that they can prove that they are tithing.
3. In my experience the modern practice of tithing leads to pride on one hand and guilt on the other.  There are those who can give 10% and not even feel it, while there are many others who cannot give 10% without depriving themselves and their families.  Tithing has become a form of religious extortion which victimize the most faithful and spiritually and financially vulnerable.  Stories abound of lonely widows sending their life's savings to radio and TV preachers.  I think Jesus said something about religious leaders who extort money from widows in Mark 12:40 and Luke 20:47.
2. However, the New Testament does not teach tithing.  The New Testament only mentions tithing three times.  
1. Two of those comes from Jesus in the gospels, and both cast tithing and tithers in a negative light.  
1. The first comes from Matthew 23:23, and has a parallel in Luke 11:42, here Jesus is condemning the Pharisees, "You give a tithe of your spices--mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness."  
2. The second from Jesus comes from Luke 18:12, The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector.  Both go to the Temple to pray, the tax collectors begs for mercy, the Pharisee brags about his righteousness saying, among other things, "I give a tithe of all I get."  
2. The other mention of tithing in the New Testament comes from Hebrews 7, but in that chapter the author uses the tithe merely as an illustration in the allegory relating the priesthood of Melchizedek in Genesis to the High Priesthood of Christ.  
3. So we have three mentions of tithing in the New Testament, two refer to tithing and tithers negatively , and the other merely uses tithing as an illustration in an allegory.
4. My conclusion, then, is that, because of the very specific way in which the tithe is treated in the Old Testament, and because of the lack of a  positive requirement in the New Testament, tithing is part of the Jewish ceremonial law and is NOT a requirement for Christians.  
3. Having said that, I need to say that that tithing does offer us the principle of proportional giving; we should all give in proportion to our income.  Also, I need to say that tithing is a wonderful spiritual and stewardship discipline.  If you are able to tithe, and feel called to do so, you should.
4. But, if the New Testament, Christian, standard of giving is not tithing, then what is it?  The Apostle Paul gives us some guidance in 2 Corinthians 9:7 "Each of you must give as you have made up your mind, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver."  There are three principles for giving that are outlined in this passage.
1. First, the giving should be intentional.  We should pray about, and think about, and decide beforehand what we are going to give,  It should not be just whatever we happen to have at the time or whatever we feel like at the time.  Paul also reminds us in 1 Corinthians 16:2 that our giving should be proportional to our income (10% may work for some people)  The point is that we have to plan our giving and be intentional   Decide to give a certain amount every week or every month and follow through.
2. Second, our gift must be voluntary.  It cannot be a requirement.  It is not a fee.  It is not dues.  It is a gift.  To make tithing, or any other gift, a requirement means that is is not a gift anymore, and the giver will lose God's promised blessing.
3. Third, our gifts must be given given cheerfully.  Everybody likes receiving gifts, but nobody likes receiving gifts from a grumpy person with an attitude, and neither does God.  If you cannot give it willingly and cheerfully, keep it in your pocket!
5. As a Methodist and a Wesleyan, I practice Wesleyan stewardship which is outlined by John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Movement, in his sermon, "On the Use of Money."  
1. Wesley said that we are to earn all we can, save all we can, and give all we can.
1. First, we are to earn all we can though honest and hard work that is healthy and safe for our selves, our neighbors, and our environment.
2. Second, we are to save all that we can by being careful with our money and by avoiding unnecessary expense and luxury.
3. Third, we give all that we can, after we have met our needs and the needs of our families, short and long term, we give  the rest, all of it, away.
2. In Wesleyan stewardship we do not give God 10% and then do as we please with the other 90%.  No, in Wesleyan stewardship we do what God wants with 100% of the money that God has given us.  So, what does God want us to do with God's money?  I'm glad you asked.
1. Wesley taught that the the first thing God would have us do is to provide for our selves and our families and meet their needs.  The key word is needs.  Of course, that would include reasonable entertainment and recreation because these are needs.  
1. If we give away money without first meeting our own family's needs we cannot say that we have done God's will.  Remember when Jesus condemned the Pharisees for "giving a gift to God" rather than supporting their elderly parents in Mark 7:11.
2. Once we have met the needs of our selves and our families, we then give the rest of God's money to meet the needs of others and the church.
3. In Wesleyan stewardship every dollar belongs to God and every purchase and every financial decision is subject to the will of God.  We are invited to ask ourselves whether or not each and every purchase or decision we make is God's will, whether we can honestly say that this is something that is good and necessary for our selves and our family, or if this money can be given away or used for a more God-pleasing purpose.  In this way we give God 100%, not 10%.  To me this seems like a more difficult, more rewarding, and more God-pleasing method of stewardship.
6. In closing I would like to offer a modern parable that helps me understand Wesleyan stewardship.
1. When I was a kid my mom used to send me to the store.  I was sent with a list and money.  When I returned I had better have the items on the list, no more, no less, a receipt, and correct change.  (Once in awhile I would be allowed to get something for myself though; moms, and God, are good like that.)
2. In Wesleyan stewardship God gives us money to meet our needs, to do God's will, and, occasionally, to have a little fun.  Once we have met our needs we give God back God's change, and, trust me, God will look at the receipt.