tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post5787175205661181487..comments2024-03-21T03:45:48.679-05:00Comments on Enter the Rainbow: Thoughts on the Role of CriticismAndy B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05944614269873479581noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-36401998983546225202009-01-25T09:47:00.000-06:002009-01-25T09:47:00.000-06:00Maybe one of the “rights and privileges” granted t...<I>Maybe one of the “rights and privileges” granted thereunto the ordained in the UMC system is the privilege to offer criticism.</I><BR/><BR/>Maybe. But I'd say that any right to criticism is more likely based upon informal political power than any title of ordination. Criticize your bishop and you could be sent to a punishment church the next year.<BR/><BR/>Is that the term used in your conference? In Florida they're called "punishment churches".Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04854543617806427302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-4404611513672259462009-01-22T17:00:00.000-06:002009-01-22T17:00:00.000-06:00One of the main problems within the UMC, from my v...One of the main problems within the UMC, from my vantage point is the culture of mediocrity that seems to exist. I am certainly not talking about any one person or group but as a whole maintaining the status quo, not rocking the boat or taking too many risks is the norm. John Wesley would be appalled to see how the passionate flame of the beginnings of the movement has swindled to a mere flicker. The most passion is not for the cause of Christ or making disciples, it is for advancing agendas and dwelling on minutia while souls perish. Just my humble opinion...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-74911347016706024852009-01-20T19:45:00.000-06:002009-01-20T19:45:00.000-06:00I think respectful criticism from both insiders an...I think respectful criticism from both insiders and outsiders is valid. Still, there are things that my family can say to and about one another that I'd likely punch an outsider out for saying.<BR/><BR/>Ok, probably not, but you get my drift. <BR/>-MitchAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-41726853439151186722009-01-20T15:47:00.000-06:002009-01-20T15:47:00.000-06:00Two different pieces...First, is the UMC "working?...Two different pieces...<BR/><BR/>First, is the UMC "working?" If an organization is "working," then while dissidents should be respected, there is a presumption in favor of "if it isn't broke, don't fix it." However, I think virtually everyone agrees that there are problems with the UMC. Disagreement comes when we come to causes and solutions.<BR/><BR/>The second part is asking whether you are being part of a solution or being part of the problem. At the NEJ Conference, for example, we were berated by Rev. Isaacs from GCRR because we showed our racism by appointing a group to the general agencies that would be representative of what the general population would look like in ten quadrennia! That group was more diverse than the laity or the clergy are. In fact, it would probably be an example of reverse discrimination. Rev. Isaac's lecture did nothing to address our basic, glaring problem: we don't have as many UMs as we used to. If we don't work on that, we won't have to worry about the diversity of the NEJ in forty years because we will be extinct.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-44754253168616992352009-01-20T07:52:00.000-06:002009-01-20T07:52:00.000-06:00These are great ideas about criticism, and I speci...These are great ideas about criticism, and I specifically want to interact with the questions about insider versus outside criticism.<BR/><BR/>I think the most important aspect of criticism is honesty, which is sometimes brutal. I'm not suggesting that we should be cruel in our critical comments, but instead, that there are many times that we simply refuse to listen to the truth of our own weaknesses. In this regard, I think an "outsider" has the advantage. There is no investment on their part, they can say what they perceive to be the honest truth even if it is unsatisfactory (a fact I think we saw in operation last week).<BR/><BR/>But I think you are also right to say that the outsider's perspective may not be as accurate. They may not know the whole picture. So, the insider has that advantage. At the same time, though, I think critiques from insiders are more likely to be ignored. "A prophet is without honor in his hometown," kind of thing. Especially when the critic is younger, like myself. I know from experience that my ideas are likely to be brushed off as "young, idealistic, inexperienced and unrealistic." I tend to be encouraged that I will think differently when I grow older and realize the world is incapable of idealistic realization.<BR/><BR/>Ultimately, I think the most effective critic is the insider who is forced to leave. Both by their words and their silent protest, their critiques are unavoidable. Whether this person leaves by choice (such as Martin Luther), or by "default" or "accident" (such as John Wesley), the most notable critics are those who start as insiders, speak out, are ignored and have no choice but to leave to maintain faithfulness to their God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10217302.post-36189037820115795052009-01-19T13:04:00.000-06:002009-01-19T13:04:00.000-06:00A big "Aye" to your comments on inside criticism.....A big "Aye" to your comments on inside criticism... we need safe place to be able to critique, and to do so boldly, knowing that we are doing so out of love. Excellent words brother! (and that's my honest critique).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com