Why Are So Many Churches Conservative?  I often wonder why it is that so many churches lean conservative, not only in their handling of finances but also politically.  The word "conservative" never appears in scripture.  Indeed the word "liberal" appears many times and usually in relation to giving.

I have a couple of thoughts about this.  First, so often we have mistakenly defined being faithful with not doing sinful activities.  Sometimes Christians become so afraid of doing something wrong, they neglect to do something right.  Luther's phrase, "Sin boldly" reminds us that sometimes we must trust in God's grace and take the risk of doing something when doing nothing might be the great sin.

Second, Christians in trying to be nice try their best to keep everyone happy.  Being afraid to upset someone makes us indecisive.  A better way is to ask, what is pleasing to God and act on that.  You can't please everyone so why try?

Third, those of us who lean more toward the progressive have let ourselves be bullied.  We see the popularity of the conservative voices and we are afraid to speak out even if we are more in line with the way of Christ.  We have remained silent and timid for fear of backlash.  The result is that only conservative voices get heard.  Those who speak loudest bully the larger church into following their way -- even if it is not the way of Christ.  We must no longer be silent in our pulpits for if we don't speak for Christ who will?

For too long we have tried to please and placate, but we have not been faithful to scripture's call to seek justice, love mercy and walk humbly with our God.

Will Power Grabs Harm The United Methodist Church?  This month the General Conference of The United Methodist Church will be meeting.  They will be considering a proposal by our Bishops and some Mega-Church Pastors to restructure much of our Denomination.  Many of our Denominations boards will be eliminated and power concentrated in a small 10 person committee dominated by our Bishops and larger churches.  Likewise, while the system of appointing pastors by a Bishop will remain, they are proposing to eliminate the guaranteed appointment of Pastors.

These changes I believe would have two tragic and perhaps unforeseen effects.  First, by eliminating the guaranteed appointment yet retaining the Bishop's power to appoint clergy, the Bishops will have the sole power to determine which pastors serve churches and which pastors will be removed from the ministry.  It is said that this will eliminate incompetence, yet procedures already exist to remove incompetent pastors and Bishops seldom use this power.

Why is this dangerous?  Sometimes as a matter of conscious Pastors speak in opposition to established policies and procedures.  Sometimes we are called to question the intentions of those in authority.  With this new power Bishops can use the threat of removal to get those who question to "tow the line."  The result will be less diversity of opinion in our clergy and more pressure to conform.  If the appointment system is outdated, how about letting the Pastors apply to churches when their is an opening and remove the middle management of the Bishops and District Superintends.   This would at least make for a less arbitrary and vindictive process.  We should be suspicious of all grabs for power that can inhibit freedom of thought.

Likewise the power grab of eliminating many of our Boards and Agencies can likewise inhibit free thought and expression.  Yes, bureaucracies can at times be unwieldy.  I am sure there are cost savings that can be made by efficiency.  However, we are not only a nation-wide, but a world wide church.  It is important that the concerns of the diversity of cultures, backgrounds, ethnic groups and theological perspectives be respected.  A small group dominated by Bishops will most likely not be representative.

I'm suspicious of all power grabs.  This seems to be another one which is not only being pushed by our Episcopal Leaders, but also by some Mega-church pastors who have been flexing their muscle to get their opinion out there, but also to influence the election of delegates.  Such radical change should not be made suddenly without adequate prayer and study throughout the entire church.  If we trade efficiency for tyranny, we might regret it in the long run

In my 27 years of full-time service in our Denomination, I've seen a lot of changes.  But many of them have been to favor and encourage larger congregations to grow larger and to cripple smaller ministries which may be just as vital in their own settings.  In the past items like Pastor's health insurance was shared among all the churches on their ability to pay by means of the apportionment system.  Now as each church is billed for their Pastor's health insurance a larger burden is placed on smaller and poorer ministries.  Likewise, we are not allowed to seek more affordable insurance outside the church's structure (for example buying into a spouses program).  Cost was transferred from larger churches to smaller churches.  Thus many smaller ministries went to part time service.  This only contributed to the further decline of small churches.

Another change was the elimination of membership size from the apportionment formula.  Most of the costs of maintaining a congregation are fixed costs for building utilities etc.  When membership is not included in the calculation the apportionments go down for large congregations, up for small congregations -- another injustice.

What has been the result of this reward for "growth".  It's actually been an increase in our decline.  Small churches may seem inefficient but they are often filled with a vitality of service and devotion.  Some of them are in rural communities that can't support larger endeavors.  Others are in difficult urban situations struggling to find new meaning and purpose and to reach out with limited resources.  We complain that our small membership churches are loosing more members.  I contend it's not because they haven't been faithful, but because the system as become stacked against them.

This year we saw the "Occupy Wall Street" movement remind us that while 1% may be benefiting from changes in tax policy, the 99% were suffering a great injustice.  In the United Methodist Church, I feel like I'm part of the 99% who seeks to serve faithfully and well a difficult situation, but our system is changing to benefit the 1% who already have much and want to hold on to what they have rather than share to become a blessing to others.

I pray that our General Conference delegates won't be mislead by a movement to trade efficiency for freedom.  I also pray they won't forget about the small churches.  Not every church can be a mega church and not everyone wants to attend one.  If we eliminated all our churches under 100 in attendance would our people really flock to the United Methodist Mega Churches -- or would they find a smaller congregation of another faith?  I am fearful that this drive for efficiency might just leave our Denomination with a few mega churches, many less members and a bitterness from which we will never recover.  If the Christian model of success was a mega-church then Jesus was a failure.  He had 12 disciples and all but one abandoned him when he was on the cross.  Yet that small fearful group changed the world.  Restructuring may be necessary, but grasps for power are always dangerous.  I pray our General Conference can find a better way.

Will Their Be a UMC Schism over Homosexuality?

On the Upcoming General Conference of The United Methodist Church:  A good friend just sent me an article by Thomas Oden of Drew University Theological School about the upcoming General Conference of the United Methodist Church.  He strongly indicates his fear that should our denomination’s policies regarding homosexuality change there will be schism in our Church.  I find it amazing how many people think this one particular issue seldom mentioned in scripture is central to their faith.

Jesus never spoke one word about homosexuality, yet he clearly condemns divorce.  We welcome divorced people into our church family, ordain divorced folks and seemingly have little problem with it.  Why then are we so afraid of homosexuality.

Jesus never spoke one word about homosexuality, yet he clearly calls the wealthy to share of their abundance to care for the poor.  I hear no one in all church calling us to give what we have to the poor, only a call to support on overblown bureaucracy.

Jesus never spoke a word about homosexuality, but calls us to love our enemy.  Yet we are so quick to condemn homosexuality and so slow to call for peace.

I think the issue is this – remember how Jesus said we should take the log out of our own eye before we remove the speck in another’s eye.  The log in our own eye is the blindness to see beyond this one minor issue and unite behind the larger issues that could truly unite us.

Poverty is rising, the world is at war, and hurting people need to know the grace and love that can only come from a vital and growing friendship with God.  Let’s move beyond triviality and focus on the big picture.  Let’s unite around Christ’s call to serve the least, the last and the lost as if they were Christ himself.  Let’s put aside petty bickering and learn to truly love each other as God loves us.  When we get beneath it, I suspect all the rancor over homosexuality isn’t about morality as much as it is about grasping for power.  All such grasping leads to spiritual death -- let us listen for the spirit's voice and not the rages of competing parties in the church.

Prayer and Riding a Harley:  Motorcycle riding is very conducive to a great time of prayer.  The wind in your face, the scent of spring in the air and the constant noise of the engine block out the normal distractions and you can be alone in your thoughts.

I wonder how much distraction we find in the world.  The constant noise of media pulls our thoughts in one direction or another.  The constant pressure to do more with less.  All of these keep us from being able to be still and know that God is present.

It's ironic that a Harley is considered noisy and distracting.  However, the white nose leaves a silence in the mind through which God can speak encouraging me to examine my life, my ministry and my calling.  No matter where it is, I think everyone needs to find  a place where you can be deaf to the world around you so God's still small voice can speak to your heart.

Can the Year of the Bible Break the 10 Commandments?

This year the Pennsylvania State Legislature passed a resolution declaring 2012 as the "Year of the Bible."  At first it seems harmless enough, however it has become controversial.  Billboard sponsored by Atheist groups touting the verse "Slaves obey your masters" have popped up and they have made the national news.

I think the year of the Bible can be a great thing, especially if it was promoted by group like the American Bible Society or similar religious group.  But i do not believe that promoting the Bible is the place of government.  It seems this simple piece of legislation wasn't meant to honor the scriptures but to try to trap political opponents in voting against something that could be used in a later election.  I'm tired of politicians trying to claim God or Holy Scripture as their own.

In the 1980's President Reagan did a television add he shared how he relied on scripture for guidance.  Any of us, even politicians should be able to share their faith and beliefs as individuals.  It's different when it becomes an act of law.

The ten commandments remind us not to take the Lord's name in vane.  That's exactly what we do when we try to use God or Jesus' name, or the scriptures as a political weapon.  Let's leave legislation to the government and religion to churches synagogues and other religious communities and honor the Lord by not using Him as a tool to attack political opponents.  Otherwise we take the Lord's name in vane.