On
Being a Prophetic Voice
An address and teaching moment presented to
the 204th Annual Meeting of the Massachusetts Conference
of the United Church of Christ
June 6, 2003 at Mt. Holyoke
College, South Hadley, MA
By Nancy S. Taylor, Minister and President
INTRODUCTION
I have been asked to speak to you about how I understand our
various roles in being prophetic voices. Certainly, each setting
of the church - Local Church, Association, Conference, and
National - is called on from time to time to speak and act
prophetically out of our deepest Christian convictions.
But let us be forewarned: prophetic action and prophetic speech
are, by their nature, dangerous enterprises for they carry
us into disputed territory. And yet, disputed territory is,
or should be, familiar terrain to us in the United Church of
Christ. As Harry Rudin (1) has
famously remarked: if an organization carries the word 'united' in
its title, that is a fairly clear indication that it is not!
(The United Nations also comes to mind.)
ANNUAL MEETING RESOLUTIONS
Let me begin with last year's "Resolution Concerning
our Government's Response to the Attacks of 9/11/01".
It was a controversial resolution, attracting heated debate
both in the hearing and on the floor of plenary. In the end,
it was affirmatively passed by 70% of the delegates. Of course,
that also meant that 30% of the delegates voted against it.
A sticking point, for some people, was found in one of the "therefores" of
the resolution. In this "therefore" the Minister
and President was directed to release a copy of the resolution "to
the President of the United States, our Congressional delegation,
the national offices of the UCC, and major Massachusetts news
media."
In other words, I was instructed to serve as the mouthpiece of
the 203rd Annual Meeting. My personal feelings,
perspective or judgment was, in this case, irrelevant. I was
not speaking for myself. I simply did what the delegates had
every right to instruct. I communicated the majority view.
There is, however, an important qualification to note here.
Neither last year's delegates, nor I, nor the resolution, were
able to speak for the churches. What Annual Meeting
did through the resolution was to speak to the churches
and to the other audiences the resolution identified.
A fundamental principle of United Church of Christ polity
is well known: the inviolate autonomy of the local church.
Article 18 of the Constitution of the United Church of Christ
ensures that autonomy by stating clearly that neither the General
Synod, nor any Conference or Association "now, or at any
future time, [has] the power to abridge or impair the
autonomy of the Local Church." (2)
However, while the local church possesses this autonomy, each
setting of the church is related, connected, and responsible
to each other setting. In biblical and ecclesiastical language,
we are in covenant one with another.
Perhaps the two articles preceding and following Article 18
are less well known, but they speak to this relatedness, and
are equally important to the United Church of Christ: to our
ability live together, to witness and minister together as
the body of Christ.
Article 17 expresses the mutual responsibility each setting
of the church has to the other settings. Although we serve
in and represent different settings of the church, we each
have responsibility to the well-being of each of the other
settings, and to the ultimate purpose of all of our settings:
dedication to Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church.
Article 19 continues this theme, speaking directly to the
responsibility of the local church to listen to - not to heed,
not to obey, but to listen to - the voice of the wider church. and
thus, it speaks directly to the controversy over last year's
resolution. It says: "Actions by, or decisions or advice
emanating from, the General Synod, a Conference or Association,
should be held in the highest regard by every Local Church."
Therefore, on the one hand, each setting of our church can
speak to, but not for, the local church. But
on the other hand, the local church is obliged to listen and
take seriously - to hold in the highest regard - decisions
or advice emanating from another setting.
RECEIVING RESOLUTIONS
Last year's "Resolution Concerning our Government's Response
to the Attacks of 9/11/01" was based, theologically and
biblically, on statements from Paul's Letter to the Romans: "Repay
no one evil for evil" (12.17) and "Do not be overcome
by evil but overcome evil with good." (12.20) It is my
conviction that these sentences of Paul's are of extraordinary
importance to us. Christians can disagree with them. We can
disagree with their meaning and application. But I contend
that Christians do have a responsibility to wrestle with this
kind of theological admonition, because: 1) it reflects core
New Testament teaching, and 2) its author bears a kind of authoritative
weight no Christian can easily dismiss.
The local church that wrote and sponsored the resolution was
inviting all of us to wrestle together, pray together, study
together, seek the mind of Christ together and consult the
scriptures together about matters of the highest importance
to Christians: matters concerning good and evil, war and peace,
life and death, neighbors and enemies. They placed that invitation
in the context of Paul's admonition and asked, in effect, How
do Paul's words inform our Christian response to evil, including
the evil of 9/11?
To take seriously such resolutions - to hold them in the highest
regard - even if we disagree with them, is to live up to our
covenant with one another as a Conference of churches. The
important thing is that we all listen to each other, consider
and wrestle with issues, and then make our decisions based
on thoughtful, informed and prayerful consideration.
PROPHETIC VOICE OF MINISTER AND PRESIDENT
I want to turn now to a separate, but equally important facet
of the question that has been raised. What about the role of
the Minister and President?
A year ago I reported that much of my first year in this position
had been informed by the events and aftermath of 9/11. That
event meant that almost immediately there was a need for me
to speak a pastoral word to clergy and churches through emails
and print messages. At last year's meeting I heard you tell
me that this was widely appreciated. I have tried to continue
that ministry in periodic messages on a wide variety of topics.
But clergy and churches are called not only to pastoral, but
also to prophetic, ministry. Jesus was a decidedly prophetic
figure who placed his own ministry in the context of, and in
continuity with, the prophets of Israel. We ourselves, as the
Church are, in the words of St. Paul, "built upon the
foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself
being the cornerstone." (Ephesians 2.20)
Reporters have sometimes approached me for statements. In
other cases, I have taken the initiative to prepare and release
statements to the press or to write to elected officials advocating
a particular position or perspective. I have in the last 22
months (the time I have served in this position) from time
to time spoken publicly on matters of Christian concern: the
sexual abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church, mandating
reporting of child abuse, the war against terror, the war against
Iraq, inter-religious issues, state budget priorities, and
homelessness, among others.
In regard to my public voice, the question has been raised:
What right do I have to voice my convictions if those convictions
do not represent the churches? Or, to put it more succinctly, "Who
am I to speak for you?"
The answer is quite simple: I cannot and do not speak for
you or for the 430 churches and 850 clergy of the Massachusetts
Conference. But, just because I cannot speak for you, that
does not mean I cannot speak!
To support this, I offer into evidence, exhibit marked #1a,
my Position Description. It defines the Nature and Scope of
the Job thus: "The Minister and President is the spiritual
leader, pastor and teacher, and chief executive officer of
the Conference. This leader connects the Conference with the
local churches and with the national setting of the UCC, is
the prophetic voice of the Conference for social justice,
and is the chief ecumenical officer for the Conference." (emphasis
added)
And, as exhibit #1b, I offer into evidence one of the ten
principle activities of the Minister and President as listed
in my Position Description: "Represent the Conference
in the public media, giving witness on issues of Christian
concern."
You have called me to speak prophetically and to speak publicly.
It is my job.
Admittedly, this is a tricky business because issues of Christian
concern invariably carry us into that disputed territory. Just
because the territory is disputed, however, does not mean we
should not enter it. Indeed, we should and must, for these
are often the territories that matter the most.
Recent events have provided a useful example. In the past
week we have overheard the four Roman Catholic bishops in Massachusetts
informing their priests and parishioners of Catholic doctrine
and asking them to lobby their legislators on behalf of that
teaching. This was fine, of course; they had every right to
do so. What I objected to, and what I responded to, were several
matters:
- I disagreed with them and wanted to ensure that another
religious voice, with a decidedly different perspective,
was heard.
- I also wanted to invite the clergy and churches of this
Conference to consider these questions - questions about
the nature of marriage, human sexuality, the definition of
family, equality and civil rights - in the light of United
Church of Christ history and traditions.
- But finally, and this was, in fact, the over-riding reason
I responded as I did: I personally know many gays and lesbians
who are in monogamous, committed, life-relationships. Some
of these do not have children, while others are tender and
responsible parents. The bishops, on the other hand, made
unfounded and derogatory pronouncements about these families,
actually accusing them of wreaking "irreparable harm" on
the institution of marriage. The bishops produced no evidence
for these cruel assertions. My response was, in my view,
not prophetic in the first instance, but pastoral . a word
of pastoral care and concern for a group of people who had
been unfairly characterized and blamed.
I wrote to laity and clergy, informing them of my concerns
and position, and then asking: What do you think? How does
this inform and challenge your perspective in this crucial
on-going debate? And, I acknowledged in my letter to you, in
my letter to legislators, and in response to media inquiries
that I do not represent our churches and that you represent
a wide range of views.
In the words of ecclesiastical historian, Robert S. Paul, "In
the best insights of both the classic Reformed and Congregational
traditions, the final expression of the church of Jesus Christ
is not independence, but interdependence." (3)
It is that interdependence to which our prophetic voices - yours
and mine - call us. It is precisely this interdependence that
calls us into the hard and difficult places: the disputed places,
the places of pain and longing, of heartache and injustice.
It is here, in these disputed terrains, that God invites us,
just as God invited Jesus into Samaria, into arguments with
the Pharisees, and into fellowship with lepers, women, the
poor and outcasts.
FOOTNOTES:
(1) Freedom with Order:
the Doctrine of the Church in the United Church of Christ,
by Robert S. Paul, United Church Press, Cleveland, 1987 p.
ix)
(2) The Constitution and
By-Laws of the United Church of Christ, 2001 edition
(3) Freedom with Order: the
Doctrine of the Church in the United Church of Christ, by
Robert S. Paul, United Church Press, Cleveland, 1987
BOOKS/ARTICLES CONSULTED:
Freedom with Order: The Doctrine of the Church in the United
Church of Christ, by Robert S. Paul (United Church Press,
1978)
The Shaping of the United Church of Christ: An Essay on
the History of American Christianity, by Louis H. Gunnemann
(United Church Press, 1977)
Theology and Identity: Traditions, Movements, and Polity
in the United Church of Christ, ed. Daniel L. Johnson
and Charles Hambrick-Stowe (United Church Press, 1990)
"Three United Church of Christ Ecclesiologies" by Clyde
J. Steckel (July 28, 2003)
"Autonomy in A Covenant Polity" by Donald D. Freeman
(1998, 5th edition)
|
