This translation is not completely accurate as it was automatically generated by a computer.
Powered by
A UMNS Report
By Barbara Dunlap-Berg*
12:00 P.M. ET March 14, 2012
The Miles family (from left): The Rev. Rebekah Miles, Jo Ann Miles, the
Rev. John Miles Sr., Deborah Miles and the Rev. John Miles Jr. Photo
courtesy of Rebekah Miles.
View in Photo Gallery
Two General Conference delegates from the Arkansas Annual (regional)
Conference — the Rev. John P. Miles Jr. and the Rev. Rebekah “Beka”
Miles — are siblings with sometimes widely divergent views.
But they and other delegates are being encouraged to use holy
conferencing, or holy conversation, to set “a tone for respectful
dialogue and relationship building.” The goal, explained
Minnesota Area Bishop Sally Dyck during the pre-General Conference news
briefing, is to have dialogue instead of debate and to find consensus
around important matters rather than have “winners” and “losers.”
United Methodist News Service asked John, pastor of First United
Methodist Church, Jonesboro, Ark., and Beka, associate professor of
ethics and practical theology at Perkins School of Theology, Southern
Methodist University, Dallas, to share their thoughts about holy
conversation and the role it might play at General Conference.
Your father, John Miles, was a several-times General
Conference delegate. What did you learn about holy
conferencing/conversation from him? Growing up, did you debate/discuss
United Methodist issues around the dinner table? How did that influence
you?
John: Dad has always been a very passionate person. He
is deeply identified with The United Methodist Church. I learned
that beliefs matter. I learned that principles were worth
defending. I am not sure how holy our conferencing was, but Dad
never demonized other people, even though he was often arguing with
others. Both at annual conference and at General Conference, there
were obvious allies and opponents. Dad always considered his opponents
his brothers and sisters. I also learned from him that church
politics were secondary to local ministry. Both Mom and Dad were
our tutors in United Methodist politics.
Beka: Our mother founded and led the women’s leadership team
in our jurisdiction, which was pivotal in the election of several
bishops, including Janice Riggle Huie and Ann Sherer-Simpson. We
learned from our parents that this is a highly political process, that
compromise is central and that compromise doesn’t happen by itself. You
have to work for it. You have to be willing to talk to people, to
listen, and to give and take. We were encouraged to debate issues
around the dinner table and to disagree with each other. A lively
disagreement was as important to a good family dinner as the food
itself.
Looking toward the 2012 General Conference and the many
issues to be discussed, how is holy conferencing/conversation
important? How would you define “holy conferencing/conversation?”
“Holy conferencing is holding fast to what you believe is true while listening to other people’s truths.”
–John Miles, first-time delegate.
John: I think most of us are deeply concerned about the
polarization within our nation’s culture and politics. We as the
church should try to give a better witness in our own
struggles. Holy conferencing is not the surrender of basic beliefs
for the sake of comity. Holy conferencing is holding fast to what
you believe is true while listening to other people’s truths. It
means not demonizing others. It means attempting to try to
understand why others think differently about issues.
Beka: Honestly, true holy conferencing is difficult, perhaps
impossible, to achieve on any large scale at General Conference. I
have a more modest hope, which you can call holy conferencing if you
want: that we will be civil, generous and try not to make complete
jackasses of ourselves, and that when we do make jackasses of
ourselves, we will apologize and then try to amend our ways.
John is a first-time delegate, though he has attended three
General Conferences, including one as an alternate. This is Beka’s
third time as a delegate. What is it like to serve on the same
delegation as your sibling whose votes, quite likely in some instances,
will be opposite yours?
John: It is an honor to serve on the delegation. When
my sister was elected as the second clergy delegate, I was very proud
of her. She is a wonderful person. I do not always agree with
her, but she is the kind of delegate and clergy person we desperately
need at General Conference. She is willing to think outside the
box while being deeply committed to basic Christian theology and
ethical behavior. I am not naïve enough to think things will always
go the way I want them to go. At General Conference, you are always
guaranteed to lose some of the votes. You do the best you can and
accept the outcome and go back to your home and be grateful for your
local church.
Beka: I love serving with my brother. What I want to see in
delegates — whatever their political leaning on any particular issue —
is a capacity to listen to others with whom they disagree, a
willingness to compromise and a pragmatic spirit that seeks to work out
agreements between the various parties. My brother has that in spades,
as do many other people of diverse opinions. Not only do I love
serving with my brother at General Conference, I am even going to room
with him! OK, I have to admit I am a little uneasy about that one! But
there is no question that our love for each other can weather any
disagreements and any living arrangements, including spending 10 days
in the same hotel room!
Do you expect to debate issues with each other before and/or during General Conference? If so, please elaborate.
John: Beka and I share a passion for The United Methodist
Church and the holy catholic church. It is a tie that binds
us. We love talking about theological and ethical issues
confronting our church. I think, sometimes, we enjoy debating our
differences more than our similarities. In our family, it is a
prized hobby.
Beka: That’s exactly right. We love arguing about the
issues. It’s the favorite sport in our family, but as with any sport or
game, there are rules. We know that we can’t be mean and nasty to each
other. We know we have to take the other seriously. We know our love
for each other and shared commitments to God trump any argument. That’s
true for arguments with my brother, John, and with all our brothers
and sisters in Christ.
Which issues, in your opinion, will call for the greatest
amount of holy conferencing/conversation, and how will you encourage
that?
John: The issue of homosexuality, of course, has polarized
the mainline churches for decades now. With the continued growth
of our more conservative regions in the United States and around the
world, I think there will be a bit less tension around that
issue. I also think the work of the Connectional Table will be a
flash point. Surely, no one at the conference believes the status
quo is acceptable. I have some hope we can rethink our structures
and our way of doing ministry together.
Beka: We should approach every issue with the minimalist
expectations I described above: being civil, listening generously to
the other and trying not to be a jackass. We like to think we are
divided by left and right, but the truth is that the ideologues on the
left and right are extremely difficult to tell apart; they are cut from
the same cloth.
Do you agree with the Rev. Mike Slaughter, lead pastor of
Ginghamsburg United Methodist Church, Tipp City, Ohio, who said, “We do
more political conferencing than holy conferencing?” Why or why not?
John: It would be naïve to think that holy conferencing will
be the guiding principle of something like General
Conference. Most of the delegates were elected through an openly
political process, and we are often political enthusiasts
ourselves. If we can be gracious in our political differences,
that is realistically about as close to holy conferencing as we can get
in something as political as General Conference. Actually, I have
found the people who decry church politics the most are the ones in
charge.
Beka: “Politics” is not a dirty word. We have a highly
democratic, political polity. The founders of American Methodism set
things up that way. An open political system is a gift. We just have to
be willing to engage in the process with civility, generosity and a
willingness to see and monitor our own faults. If the promotion of holy
conferencing encourages us to be civil to each other, that’s
wonderful. If it slows things down and gives less time to the actual
political process, it will give significant advantage to the packages of
legislation proposed by boards, agencies, commissions and bishops. In
other words, depending on how it is done, even the call for holy
conferencing itself can be a political act with political advantages
for particular players in our legislative process.
Each cycle, as I prepare for General Conference and as I engage in
the process at General Conference, I call to mind a quotation from the
economist John Kenneth Galbraith found in a letter he wrote to John F.
Kennedy as he began his presidency. “Politics is not the art of the
possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the
unpalatable.”
For more information, visit the General Conference 2012 website.
*Dunlap-Berg is internal content editor for United Methodist Communications, Nashville, Tenn.
News media contact: Barbara Dunlap-Berg, Nashville, Tenn., (615) 742-5470 or newsdesk@umcom.org.
About UMC.org
RSS Feed
Press Center
Contact Us