Barry Dundas

Can We Talk

Many months ago, a friend got me started on Facebook and ever since I have found that it is a dangerous addiction. I can easily increase my level of procrastination by spending hours checking on my friends. It has also become a valuable tool to re-connect with individuals who were once important in my life. Through many moves and life experiences I had lost contact. One of those friends is Kevin Kennedy. Kevin and I attended Hutchinson High School and Community College together. We became friends because of a mutual passion for our faith and call to ministry. Even as seniors in high school, we were both aware that God was calling us to be pastors. We did not however grow up in the same church. In fact our church backgrounds and history could not have been more different. I am a cradle Methodist. Not only were my parents United Methodist, so were my grandparents. I don’t know how far we can trace our United Methodist roots, but it doesn’t matter. We rarely missed church on Sunday. Kevin did not grow up in the church, but came to faith as a youth in a fundamentalist Baptist congregation. Where I cannot remember a time when I was not a Christian, he understands at his core what it means to make an intentional decision to follow Christ. We knew even in high school that our theology was different, but probably could not have articulated those differences very well. Besides, it didn’t matter. We were friends who choose to love each other as Christian brothers even when we did not agree.

It has been over twenty years since we lost touch, but just recently re-connected on Facebook. We both continued on our paths toward ministry. Kevin serves on staff at Riverside Baptist Church in Hutchinson and I am the Senior Pastor at Trinity United Methodist in Salina. He describes his congregation as old fashioned KJV Bible Thumpers and Trinity is about as liberal United Methodist as you find in Kansas. What we have discovered is that our differences from our youth remain but we are now able to articulate our beliefs to one another. We have been having great discussions through Facebook. The beauty of our discussions is that they are not debates but honest dialogues as we try to understand each other and how we live out our faith. Neither questions the other s commitment to Christ but we do have clear disagreements. Out of these discussions I suggested to Kevin that we take them public on my blog. We will pick topics and each write an article or a response from our own theological tradition. You are than invited into the conversation. We only ask that you do so respectfully. We understand that faith is always personal but we also believe it is possible to disagree without questioning ones integrity or motivations. We pray that this exercise will be both educational and thought provoking.

Pagitt Article

I found a fascinating article by Doug Pagitt and the response of the Republican National Convention to the nomination of Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate. He has some great questions for the religious right and their stance on women in leadership versus their support of the Republican ticket. He attended the RNC and interviewed many delegates on the floor. Here is a portion of the article.

The most surprising response for me was to the role of a woman as vice-president and as it related to the worldview of religious conservatives. I asked questions about how people who hold that women should not be in spiritual leadership over men (a view called "complementarian") would respond to having a woman vice-president and potentially president). If you are not familiar with the line of thinking, it goes something like this:

Men and women are created in a relational order. Men are under God and women are under men. This is not to say that women are lesser than men, but just as tools are designed for specific purposes so is gender a guide to relational order. The Bible is used to support this view specifically passages like Genesis 2:7, 21-24; 1 Timothy 2:12-15; 1 Corinthians 11:8-9; Genesis 2; 1 Corinthians 11:8-10; Romans 5:12-19.

This is not a totally fringe view. It is supported by the Southern Baptist Convention, the Presbyterian Church in America, and many independent churches. It is perhaps the most common perspective among the evangelical religious right.

There is an additional line of thinking that this vice-presidential nomination raises. It comes from reading Hebrews 13:17 and 1 Peter 2:13-14 in the same way as the above passages are read: "Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account." "Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right."

Many religious conservatives have used these verses to make the argument that God places our leaders over us, and to obey them is to obey God. For that leader to be a woman would mean that men would have a woman over them as a leader. This is a problem.

Many who hold to the complementarian view would say there is a difference between church leadership and governmental leadership. But this poses a problem for those who want to suggest that the president is God's appointed leader.

I raised some form of this question with the delegates I interviewed. I asked, "Do you think it will be a problem for religious conservatives who hold that women should not have authority over men and who do not allow a woman to be a pastor of a church or teach a Sunday school class with men in it? Will they have a problem with a woman vice-president?"

To a person the response was Yes, I am sure they will. But they will just need to get over it.

I was fascinated to think that this nomination could actually weaken the complementary view or the view of the president being God's chosen leader because of the commitment to support the pro-life ticket. It will be quite a dilemma for some religious conservatives who will have to choose between commitments. And there is no doubt that the support for Governor Palin rests squarely on her pro-life stance.

Jurisdiction Day Four

It was a short night. After the election of Jim Dorff around 10:20 pm, we had a thirty minute recess, a couple more pieces of business and then the Episcopacy Committee met to discuss the Bishop’s assignments for the next four years. Everyone expected Bishop Jones to return to Kansas, but we all stayed for the formal announcement. It was almost 1:30 in the morning before the committee returned. Let’s just say we all were getting a little punchy by that time of the evening. What made the night short was a seven o’clock breakfast the next morning with the Kansas Area to celebrate the re-appointment of Mary Lou and Bishop Scott Jones to Kansas.

During breakfast a number of speeches were made expressing gratitude for a variety of things. One of the most poignant was made by Mark Conard as he noted the changes he has seen in the last twelve years in the Kansas delegation. Twelve years ago, an effort was made to unite our two conferences that was ultimately approved by the East but rejected by the West. It is probably an understatement to say that added a little tension between the two conferences. As Mark noted, not only could we not talk, it was difficult to share the same space. What made it worse was that the Kansas West Conference was split with an internal struggle over the same issue. We were not of one mind. It appears that over the last twelve years healing has occurred. There is a saying that says time heals all wounds, but I think that only tells half the story. Healing has come through the faithful leadership of God’s people in our two conferences and for that I am very grateful.

I attended the Bishop’s consecration service with three cups of coffee flowing through my system. After only four hours of sleep I didn’t want to embarrass myself by falling asleep in front of all those Bishops. One of the highlights was a youth choir made of students in the conference. They had close to 200 singers and did a great job. Speaking of music, once again the service was very traditional which was appropriate to the occasion and the setting. However the amount of music seemed excessive. I can’t believe I am writing this because of my history with contemporary worship. One of the biggest complaints from traditional worshipper about newer forms of worship is that there is too much music. I guess when it is not your music, there is limit to what you can take in worship. For me, five anthems and four hymns were about two songs past my limit. Even when the anthems were excellent and the hymns were familiar, it stopped being worship for me. I wonder if I would have felt the same if there was a live rock band and the anthems were all Rich Mullin songs. I already know the answer.

Ultimately the service brought an end to the conference as we completed the work we set out to do. Now it is time to catch up on some sleep.

Jurisdiction Day Three Addition

At around 10:20 pm on the 23rd ballot, we elected our final Bishop, James Dorff. It was a long and emotional day for both Jim and Cheryl and in the end I think it was a relief to both to have a decision made. Both were very gracious. The Kansas Area delegations showed amazing support all day for Cheryl. Before each ballot she was surrounded by prayer and often song. Is there anything more meaningful than to have friends and colleagues surround you with prayers of support and care.

I don't believe there was anyone supporting Cheryl who had a problem with Jim Dorff. He is qualified for the position. I think the disappointment was that once again all of the Bishops elected were men from Texas. I don't not have the data in front of me, but I believe that for the last three quadrenniums we have elected only males from Texas to the episcopacy. Are college of Bishops in the jurisdiction are beginning to look very similar. With the retirement of Joel Martinez we no longer have a Hispanic Bishop in an area where Hispanics are the fastest growing population. We also have only two female Bishops and have not elected a woman in the past twelve years.  We can do better.

It is now after 11:00 in the evening and we are trying to wrap up final business.

Jurisdiction Day Three

Friday began still needing to elect two Bishops with four candidates receiving significant votes, Mike Lowry, Cheryl Bell, Rodney Steele and Jim Dorff. Lowry was the closest to being elected and before the morning was over that happened. Just as the day before, I was surprised again that it was such a Holy Moment. I don't know Mike Lowry well or have any opinion about his qualifications for the episcopacy, but the announcement that the church had affirmed and elected him as Bishop was very emotional. After a standing ovation for Mike and his wife, the Conference again sang the Doxology with no instruments and in beautiful harmony. The experience is a wonderful metaphor for the church. We may not always get along or agree. We often fight like cats and dogs on certain issues, but at the end of the day, there is nothing more beautiful than the people of God joining together to sing their faith. The theme for Jurisdictional Conference is "Hope of the World," and it is in these Holy Moments that I have found my hope renewed.

The morning also included a retirement service for Bishop Benjamin Chamness and Bishop Joel Martinez. I did not have high expectations for worship, but it was surprisingly meaningful. The service was pretty ordinary, but the opportunity to celebrate the lives and service of these two men was moving. It gave us an opportunity to see a very human side of our Bishops and to say well done good and faithful servants.

After Mike Lowry was elected, Cheryl Bell and Rodney Steele were running neck and neck for the final slot, but the next few ballots changed the entire dynamics of the race. Jim Dorff started receiving more votes and eventually became the front runner.  Roberto Gomez dropped out followed by Rodney Steele. For the rest of the afternoon, Cheryl and Jim were locked in a stalemate with Jim leading by around 40 votes but still 20+ votes short of being elected. Instead of changing votes some conferences began lifting other candidates with their votes. Following the dinner break it has only become more of a mess with four new candidates. It is going to be a long evening.

Jurisdiction Day Two

The morning began with words of welcome, call to order and the first episcopal ballot. The exciting news for the Kansas Area is that Rev. Cheryl Bell had the third highest number of votes. Since we are electing three Bishops, she is in the running.  However in subsequent voting, she has dropped a spot is on the bubble. The question all of us were wondering is if she was a legitimate candidate outside of Kansas. The answer is an obvious yes. On the third ballot, Rev. Earl Bledsoe from the Texas Conference was elected. This was not unexpected, but it was a surprisingly holy moment when it happened. His wife was was sitting just in front of me and to be helped to her feet she was so overcome with emotion. As the standing ovation ended, the conference began to sing the Doxology. It was one of those moments where the Holy Spirit broke into the politics of the church.

Following the first vote we heard a State of the Church address and a Laity address. While neither was overly inspiring, I have to be honest that the Laity address was an embarrassment. It began with a "dumb blond" joke (seriously, you read that correctly) and was followed by an address that was so memorable that I could not tell you what was said. One theme that stood out in both addresses was that things are not going well in the UMC so we need to change and do better. Unfortunately that has been a constant message for 40 years. I get tired of hearing the same thing over and over. Maybe it is time to change how we talk about the church. Instead of lamenting how often we fall short, why not celebrate all the things we do right. There are churches that are thriving, lives being changed, ministries that are effective. We can do better.

The other issue of the day was the Bush Library and Institute at SMU. A motion was made to accept the library but to reject the Institute. Many speeches were made for and against, some very entertaining. However after the debate threw is hours behind schedule, the Jurisdiction voted to do nothing and the Bush Library and Institute can breathe easy.

In the evening we returned for more reports and ballots. There was a motion supported by a number of women's groups (and others) to remember that we need to be aware of our call to Holy Conferencing. The tasteless "blond" joke was mentioned as well as some poor behavior by delegates and one Conference who was already negotiating for their new Bishop. Rumor has it that they were making it clear that they did not want a female Bishop. I can not confirm or deny, but they were called out even if not by name. There are more ballots left this evening that I will report on if a new Bishop is elected.

Jurisdiction Day One

The South Central Jurisdictional Conference is being held at the Hilton Anatole in Dallas, Texas. The first thing I realized is that this is the nothing included hotel. Everything is pay as you go including your internet connection (about $11.00 per day). It is not an experience of radical hospitality by the facility but rather a reminder of the mindset that you only get what you pay for. What an opportunity the church has in this world to offer an alternative message of grace and hospitality to a world that expects to only get what you believe you have earned. I did find some free wi-fi in the conference room so I don't have to pay for it in my hotel room.

The conference began with worship on Wednesday night at First United Methodist Church in downtown Dallas. It is a beautiful traditional sanctuary with great decorative woodwork, wonderful stained glass and a powerful organ in the center of the chancel area. First church has an identity around the phrase "I am." The pastor welcomed the conference by explaining the phrase, "Here at First United Methodist we say I am inclusive, I am relevant, I am traditional." What a great way to claim their identity. The architecture of the room was so traditional that it would be difficult to modernize. There was no place to put screens, the organ dominated the center of the chancel. Any other set up would seem out of place in the room. First church claimed their identity as traditional, but traditional does not mean irrelevant or exclusive. At least in their vision through the "I am" slogans they want the world to know that they are inclusive and relevant.

I appreciate what First Church Dallas is trying to do (even if my experience is limited to one evening), but let me say that I also felt a little out of place in the opening worship. It was traditional worship done well with many elements, liturgical dancers, organ and brass, a combined choir, Holy Communion with the Great Thanksgiving and Bishop Alfred L. Norris preaching. In that sacred space, there was no other way to do worship well, but I had trouble connecting (I need to be clear that this says more about me than those who created and led worship). Maybe I am used to the pace that Gayle and Jane McMillen play the hymns at Trinity, but all the music felt slow and deliberate. The flow of the service often appeared pieced together. Anytime something more contemporary was introduced in worship, it just seemed out of place. There were powerful moments, the liturgical dance was meaningful, the service of remembrance for our Bishops who had died was powerful as their croziers were brought forward, and communion is always a sacred moment, but I realized how disconnected I have become to high church worship.

Thursday morning begins the balloting process for our new Bishops. It will be interesting to see the results of the first ballot. It may become clear quickly who are the top candidates to the three openings or it may show that nothing is clear. We are also scheduled to discuss the George W. Bush Presidential Library at SMU. Southern Methodist University (a Jurisdictional University) has entered into agreement to lease space for the Bush library and “think tank” (insert your own joke here). Some in the jurisdiction are questioning the wisdom and the process of this decision. My guess is that the jurisdiction will not act because contracts have already been signed. Even though the process was followed with questionable integrity, backing out at this point could bring legal complications that the Jurisdiction will be unwilling to tackle. I am expecting some passionate speeches but little or no action.

South Central Jurisdictional Conference

The South Central Jurisdictional Conference of the United Methodist Church meets July 16-19 in Dallas, Texas and I am attending as an alternate delegate from my Conference. I joked when I was elected that I was Mr. Irrelevant (a title given to the last player selected in the NFL draft) because I was the last alternate. After a year of meetings preparing for General and Jurisdictional Conference, I realize that I am not as irrelevant as I suspected. The alternates should have plenty of time on floor (sometimes called inside the bar but don't take that too seriously, we are United Methodists) which means I will be voting on our next Bishops. When I stop and think about it, that is an awesome task. I understand that the process can be a bit political, but so far it has been nothing like our national elections. Each endorsed candidate submitted written paperwork answering a series of questions and then were interviewed by each delegation. It was a bit surreal to sit in a small circle and ask direct questions to these folks who could someday be my Bishop. In the process it became clear to me who I would vote for (and a few I would have trouble voting for) so it will be interesting if the other conferences agree.  There are only three openings and nine endorsed candidates. This is where the politics may start to show their ugly little heads. Will we vote for the best candidates regardless of conference orientation or will party (oops, I mean conference) loyalty be more of a factor?  That is a question to be addressed by a future post.

Good Scriptures Going Bad

The past month my energy has been focused on one of the most challenging sermon series I have preached. Sometimes what seems like a good idea months in advance becomes incredibly stressful when it is time to live it out. The idea started when I came across a book by Bishop Spong called "The Sins of Scripture." If the purpose of a title is to get you to open the book, then it worked. The book became the catalyst for my January sermon series, "When Good Scriptures Go Bad: Facing the Texts We Use to Destroy, Control, and Distort God's World." Honestly, I am not inclined to stick my neck out on issues that I know will stir controversy. I would rather play it safe so that people will like me. This series has not allowed me to play it safe. I am fortunate to serve a church not only allows me to proclaim where I stand but is not afraid to stand with me. To see or hear the sermons you can find them on our church website at http://www.triumc.org/current_sermon_series.html. Each week an MP3 recording is posted after worship and streaming video by 10 PM.

True Riches

A few weeks ago I preached a sermon with the title "True Riches"  It was based on the parable of the dishonest manager found in Luke 16:1-13.  I had to come up with the title early and by the time Sunday came around it was not about true riches at all.  Honestly, I think the parable doesn't have much to say about true riches, but Luke did.  He has Jesus make the statement near the end of the passage, "If then you have not been faithful with the dishonest wealth, who will entrust to you the true riches?"  I don't know if it was my research on this parable or the fact that we are in a season that is often centered on greed instead of "true riches," but I have been pondering our definition of wealth.  I read something interesting the other day by Elaine Bernard, director of the Trade Union Program at Harvard.  She writes:

One of the things I find very interesting in our current debates is this concept of who creates wealth. Wealth is only created when it's owned privately. What would you call clean water, fresh air, a safe environment? Are they not a form of wealth? And why does it only become wealth when some entity puts a fence around it and declares it private property? Well, you know, that's not wealth creation, that's wealth usurpation.

We often define our worth by what we claim as private property, how big is my house, how new is my car, how current are my clothes (my answers, not big, not new and never current).  A common question this time of year is what do you want for Christmas.  We then recite a list of things that are probably more wants than needs.  We need more things if we are going to believe that we are individuals of great wealth.  What would happen if we redefined wealth as that which is best for the world instead of what is best for me?  What if instead of asking for things we said what I want for Christmas is to make a difference, to stop contributing to global warming or to do something that leads to greater understanding in the world instead of more conflict?  What if we really believed that true riches are not something that we could ever buy or own, but only something we can give away?