Be the change by Jason Valendy is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Theology as Fixer, Breaks the Church
Shelly Rambo writes the following in her book Spirit and Trauma: A Theology of Remaining and Resurrecting Wounds: Living in the Afterlife of Trauma:
The experience of trauma dismantles notions of theology as a fixer, a provider of solutions. A move to “fix” things may interfere rather than assist in the process of healing. Theologians who have learned from trauma theology emphasis the importance of accompaniment, truth telling and wound tending. Acts of witness and testimony acknowledge the reality of traumatic experiences that can never be fully brought to the surface of consciousness. This posture is not focused confidently on conveying theological or moral certainty. Instead, its confidence is in the healing power of giving witness to suffering.
I find this to be a helpful description of the tension within the in the UMC right now. The tension is not over one person or issue. The tension is rooted out of a collective trauma that the denomination has had and has inflicted. The different plans moving us forward, the different caucus groups and advocates, if they are anything, are different approaches to trauma.
Some believe that we can get past this trauma with a proper doctrine. Some believe if we remove certain teaching. Some give the subtle impression, that their plan or their position can “fix” the trouble we are in. In all these efforts to “fix” the problem we often discover, as Rambo says, that we interfere rather than aid healing. There is a feeling that if we could just “get past this current hurt” that we would come out on the other side with blue skies and smooth waters. That this one matter is albatross around our denominational neck and when freed from it we could “make disciples”.
So we try to fix it with theology, plans and positions. We send delegates to vote in the hopes that there will be a solution found in Minneapolis this May.
There was theology that was generated to “fix” the problem of slavery. Others created to "fix” the problem of female ordination. Still other theology to “fix” how we treat Native Americans, our international sisters and brothers, and even the ecological crisis. The truth is that the longer we approach “theology as a fixer” the longer we delay in healing these traumatic wounds.
I wonder if the UMC will discover in Minneapolis not a theology to “fix” us but a theology that take seriously wound tending, presence, truth telling, forgiveness and mercy? Frankly, these are not “fixes” but, again echoing Rambo, postures. These are not the ways we will solve our antagonisms, but rather are vessels to hold them.
Theology that “fixes” (Ironically) breaks the Church. Theology that tends to wounds, heals.
The UMC Deal-broker - Kenneth Feinberg
The UMC is recently atwitter about a proposed protocol of the future of the denomination. This post is not about the specifics of the protocol but in the one person who was able to broker such a deal between a diaspora of UMC theological ideas.
Kenneth Feinburg is a facilitator to a number of difficult and painful experiences. He got his start as a mediator in this capacity by happenstance by working to help Vietnam veterans gain compensation from a government that was resistant to payout. He also had a large role in the compensation for victims of 9/11, the Pulse night club shooting as well as many others.
I was turned on to him and his work through a podcast called Startup. If you are interested to hear more about this fascinating man please give a listen:
We All Have Bought A $120,000 Banana
If art is anything, it is provocative. For anyone who has ever looked at a bit of art and thought, “My kindergartner can paint that! Why don’t you give her $120,000 for her play-doe sculpture?” you are not alone.
Recently humanity lost our collective mind over a banana duct taped to a wall that sold for $120,000. There are many memes to thought pieces on this bit of art. Some believe it to be brilliant. Some find it crazy, others find it immoral and still others wonder what sort of world do we have when people cannot pay for their medical bills while others buy a $120,000 banana.
It is an easy target to throw stones at. It sounds insane that anyone would buy this much less anyone else call it art. We wonder what rich person could possibly have such a cold hart to waste money in this way. We wonder why the wealthy are putting more money to art than towards social services, charity or the common good. We see this bit of art as a proxy for all that is wrong with the millionaires and billionaires of the world. Then, when we hear the buyer of this banana ate the banana we just melt into madness!
Beyond how you feel about this specific banana and duct tape, the purchase, or the people involved I want to remind us that we all have bought a $120,000 banana.
We all have spent money on fleeting things (fast fashion?). We all have justified our expenses on things over using our money for the common good (don’t we all need three winter coats?). We all have bought into consumerism and purchased things just because everyone is a twitter about them (fidget spinners anyone?) We all have bought things that others disprove of (you have seen the National Inquire, right?). We all feel justified in our decisions and condemn others’ (I am improving the value of my home with these updates, you are wasting your money on buying a boat.).
We may not have signed a check for the same dollar amount, but we all have bought our version of the $120,000 banana.
No matter how we feel about this banana it reveals to us that we are no better or worse than the one “wasting their money” on a banana. We all feel justified with our own actions. We all feel like others are the problem.
I am thankful that we know the name of the couple who bought the banana. At least they are not hiding behind anonymity and are willing to publicly face the very questions we all should be asking ourselves every day.