WE'VE ALL GOT SKIN IN THE GAME

This book is written for everyone within The United Methodist Church: members, clergy, district superintendents, bishops, and denominational, seminary, and agency staff—even people who are in sister mainline denominations—because we've all got some skin in the game. Having skin in the game means being invested, having something to lose. To have some skin in the game means that your own future depends upon the outcome. That pretty much describes all of us who are part of the mainline church in North America in a time of great and deep change. Some of us committed ourselves to be participants or members in a local church because we sought change and health in our lives, families, and communities. Some of us answered more formal calls to ordained ministry because of how our own lives were challenged and changed in ways we also hope for others. Some of us prepared for or were elected to specialized positions that we intended would help the church and therefore the people of the church. We've all got skin in the game.

When faced with great and deep change, we are all suddenly part of the same story. As a member or participant, I can no longer think only of my own personal questions and hopes. I am part of a larger community. As a clergyperson, I can no longer wait for my district superintendent or bishop to make things right, or at least better and more secure for me. As a bishop or denominational leader, I cannot wait for polity to be changed, for local church clergy and leaders to step up to new missional risk. The change in the mission field has already happened and is all around us in a postmodern world which is now global, deeply diverse, and rife with competing beliefs and value systems. As part of the same story, the same bigger picture, we all need to be in the conversation to address overall change and the need for a missional future within our established denominations and established congregations, despite the constraints of current rules and past practices that have until now allowed us to neglect responsibility for new ways.

One of the first responses to baffling constraint, complex change, and dwindling resources is for us to shrink back into the part of the system where we have most control. Members and local church clergy find it increasingly tempting to become isolated, weakening the connection with the denomination, waiting for district superintendents and bishops or the general church to get it right for them. Bishops and conference staff find it tempting to shrink back into institutional problem solving and creating programs for local church development so that the local church can get it right and get more people involved. Meanwhile, national and global assemblies such as the upcoming 2012 General Conference take on a life of their own, shrinking back into political strategizing to elect the right delegates (for instance, those who will forward a particular agenda) and focusing on legislation with the hope that more rules will make it right.

A good deal of my consulting work over the past years has been with a fair number of our American bishops. I am struck by the regularity with which other leaders in congregations, conferences, and interest groups conclude their meetings with bishops by telling them that, as bishops, they should just "bish." In other words, bishops should just lead. It is a standard reaction in any organization or institution that when folks get uncomfortable or dissatisfied they go to the leader and demand leadership. Just lead. Just "bish." Make this thing better.

We all quite naturally want the leader to do what is necessary to remove the discomfort and the insecurity so we can go about doing what we know. But this is the same system that has built a full range of constraints that limit and restrict the ability of a bishop to actually lead. We can no longer point to any one group of leaders and instruct them to change things on behalf of all and then either dismiss, or even enjoy, the ways in which it is impossible for them to do so.

Instead, we need conversation and conversational places across all levels of the denominational church where we can all talk about our shared situation. We all need to understand more and to talk more with one another about what is happening at the various levels of the local church, the annual conference, and the denominational church. We especially need to sit with one another across all of the parts of our denomination to discern and discuss what is happening in the mission field. As a leader, no one can any longer focus on his or her own part of the system, waiting and hoping that some "other" will address the larger issues. We are all in it together. We all have skin in the game.

Not the least of our challenges connected to moving into a fruitful future will be learning to break our own rules. I will say a good bit about rule breaking. Many of us like to think of ourselves as rule breakers, as creative people with spirits of independence. Others see ourselves as rule followers, knowing that stability and order lie in conformity. We watch over the shoulders of others and want to enforce compliance. The reality is that a revitalized future will require us to break our own rules. However, we will need to learn to do so purposefully and appropriately so that we do not dismiss the mission of our denomination or put parts of our community and connection unduly against one another. We need to learn how to honor the inheritance of our highly structured denomination and yet set ourselves free from the constraints of being so highly structured.

This book is about The United Methodist Church wanting to be a movement once again. If we are once again, as in the original spiritual movement that birthed The United Methodist denomination, to "spread scriptural holiness over the land," then we all need to be in this together. In fact, the essence of a movement is to commit to work toward a change that we all address together. If we are to be a movement we will need to claim a common spiritual task and connection that supersedes our differences. We've all got skin in the game, but that's not the same as all being committed to the mission of the movement. When it comes to the movement, there is still the question of who is in and who is out.

A Beginning Based in Scripture

If we are to talk about reclaiming ourselves as a movement it is appropriate to begin the conversation by grounding our considerations in Scripture. Movements need to be clear about who is in the movement and who is not. Movements need to be clear about their purpose and their wanted outcome. A helpful place to start is with the Gospel of Mark.

As a book, Mark appeals to me because of the pared-down logic with which the writer presents the story of Jesus. Not the richest in narrative detail, Mark is much more to the point. It is clear that Mark presents an argument about Jesus to the reader, an argument meant to lead to conclusions. I understand that experience is not always logical and linear....