When the Political is Theological: Reflections in a Post-UMC Special General Conference Climate by Angela D. Sims
For 11 years and 11 months, I journeyed with a people who mostly identify as United Methodist. As a self-identified Womanist whose sense of witness is informed by exposure to congregations affiliated with the Progressive National Baptist Association, the National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc., and the Church of God in Christ, I found myself on the afternoon of February 26th wondering how best I might journey with people in a post–UMC Special General Conference climate that leaves many with more questions than answers.
During several semesters leading up to this global church conference that convened in St. Louis, Missouri, I encouraged students in a required Introduction to Christian Ethics course at Saint Paul School of Theology to consider their response to a moral issue that had the potential to evoke a level of discord in their local congregations. I realize now that no amount of teaching, interrogating texts (particularly applicable sections of The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church and Social Principles of the United Methodist Church), constructing evidence- based positions, and engaging in guided conversations could prepare me sufficiently for this faith tradition’s decision. As I streamed the proceedings in my campus office, I cussed out loud; wept for colleagues, friends, students, and the many who, in that moment, did not recognize the church that was central to their own understanding of self and faithfulness; and I realized that a decision that, at its core, calls into question not only the full inclusion of LGBTQIA persons in the life and ministry of the United Methodist Church had also offered a glimpse of the manner in which systems can implode when one fails to recognize the interconnectedness of the political and the theological.
As I observe from the sidelines, I am neither amazed nor shocked that central to this denomination’s interpretation and application of polity is not only what it means to be fully human BUT who decides to whom this distinction is granted. The many social categorizations with which we identify can sometimes distort our ability to assess a situation accurately. When this occurs, I tend to view some responses as reactionary, leaving persons to explore ways to enlarge conversations, as each grapples with a new reality that really isn’t new at all. I describe these proposed actions, at least from a perspective of one who understands herself as an outsider looking in, as synonymous with an attempt to “put new wine in old wine skins”. When this becomes a normative option, by default, I find myself wondering what preservation of a political entity (a denomination) might reveal about witness and allegiance.
From my vantage point, many conversations and actions in response to a pending January 2020 implementation of even more stringent “policing” of bodies can be categorized, irrespective of a person’s theological stance, into one of three categories: power, property, privilege. Approximately three months on this side of the Special General Conference, issues of formal and informal influence, issues that may not necessarily yield a preferred outcome, factor significantly when considering the costs associated with disaffiliation. With minimum knowledge of the intricacy of a connectional system whose conferences and agencies are funded in part by congregational apportionments, it will be important to note a) the financial implications to churches in the global south that support the Traditionalist Plan, b) the ability of U.S. conferences to sustain themselves as local congregations withhold all or a percentage of their apportionment, c) the implications of disaffiliation at UMC institutions of higher education, d) rhetorical constructions of otherness, and, e) the manner in which a U.S. church truly understands itself as a global church.
At the same time, advocacy and activism highlight ways in which movements of reform emerge from within, as a counter- or even previously unimagined response. There are signs of this movement, as reports from various annual conferences recognize the call of LGBTQIA persons through the sacred rite of ordination. This just act is a powerful reminder of a manner in which allies can use authority, power, and privilege on behalf of church and world. At this theological-political juncture, listening to and responding to the movement of God’s presence and spirit take precedence over adherence to the denomination’s code of conduct. Since culture is not a universal concept, I remain disturbed by what appears to be a tendency to place almost sole responsibility on delegates from Africa for February’s outcome. When money and votes do not align, is schism the most viable option? While some lobby for a compatibilist approach, this response seems to suggest that one too few white people seek a solution that will allow them to continue to dine with family and friends during high holidays without having to address opposing theological-political views. Does not an invitation to the Lord’s table require each person to engage in a process of self-examination and to turn from death-dealing practices that are often baptized in our silences?
Perhaps, for such a time as this, we are all called into a deep self-analysis as we live into an ongoing process of communal and personal reformation. In this moment, having concluded my sojourn at Saint Paul School of Theology on May 31st, could it be that the Divine wants me (to borrow from Dr. Eboni Marshall-Turman’s work-in-progress) to engage in a deep interrogation of the imago Dei and to acknowledge the ways in which superficial understandings and applications of this theological construct have not been helpful in actualizing equity and equality, but may indeed inform a deeper understanding of theological-political connections? During this Easter season, many continue to proclaim good news about an empty tomb, even as people grieve deeply the loss of what was and what may never again be realized. As we approach Pentecost, there are signs that the Spirit continues to fall afresh as voices rise from unexpected and familiar places to challenge systems of injustice, and as they imagine simultaneously fresh expressions of community. From these acts of reformation and resistance, might the UMC adopt a polity that does not mirror the US’s form of government? If so, what will this signal about a collective theological stance on what it means to be fully human and thus fully welcomed?
Angela D. Sims is president-elect of Colgate Rochester Crozer Divinity School in Rochester, NY. Her research examines connections between faith, race, and violence with specific attention to historical and contemporary ethical implications of lynching and a culture of lynching in the United States. An ordained Baptist clergywoman, Sims is the author of Lynched: The Power of Memory in a Culture of Terror, Baylor University Press, 2016.