Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jeff Gill's avatar

Yep, still relevant, Dennis. For me, I was feeling that same stillness in 2016 -- so many venues were as you say going dark or shutting down -- then in 2017, the Ohio implosion pulled me into its vortex, and I first found this platform after doing a great deal of posting on Facebook in Notes. Once that was "taken away" I found Substack and reposted a fair amount of the "Decline and Fall of the Ohio Region" material here. Then asked . . . what now?

I did get the blessing of teaching at the 2019 Des Moines GA (and met you, albeit all too briefly!), and then began teaching our history & polity for the CMLT program housed at Phillips Seminary. Since that summer, I've gotten to teach a couple hundred commissioned & ordained clergy about who we are, and the question keeps coming up: "how do I stay in touch with the Disciples more generally?" Of course I commend to their attention Disciples News Service and their regional newsletters [https://disciples.org/dns/] but with the best will in the world, those seem awfully one-sided, a clattering of press releases and exhortations to support the wider institutions of our tradition, flung like handfuls of pebbles at our windows or tossed over the transom (now THERE'S a dated metaphor). None of them seem conversational.

To be fair, were "The Disciple" or "DisciplesWorld" conversations? Well, no, and yes they were. Schmucks like me could write a) letters or b) articles, and see them in print, and even responded to. They didn't represent the general office per se, but it felt like a point of contact and even dialogue -- let alone the column so many of us turned to first, seeing who went where, or who was leaving where.

Some regions have upped their game on both Clergy Alerts and open pulpits in email newsletters and such; Ohio certainly has, and tries to do a monthly Zoom clergy dialogue. In my area, the district clergy try to meet a few times a year, and Zoom a few. But it does feel as you say: conversation is over, and what we hear tends to be one-sided in import, if not in intention. Ironically, as we've become in sum, on average, much more progressive than Midwestern Disciples were twenty or thirty years ago, the communications feel much more like exhortations. Regional and general communications were not only by mail, but they were certainly more cautious in trying to find a sweet spot of coherence if not consensus; now we get plenty of email and social media inputs, but they're fairly directive or instructive.

I see Terri Hord Owens is inviting us to do a group study on a Ron Osborn book, of all things, which suggests a sort of search for a middle ground about "The Faith We Affirm." Of course, I couldn't see it on May 27, but hope to engage with the June 3 & 10 entries. It's got the potential to become a conversation - https://disciples.org/office-of-the-general-minister-and-president/the-faith-we-affirm-churchwide-study/

But your basic point stands: lacking a shared common well-thumbed resource, we don't have a voice or platform for Disciples dialogue. Even seminary events aren't attended by many other than retired clergy, not working ones (unless they're working on a D.Min.). Facebook closed groups have, in comments to certain posts, the most exchange of diverse views I've been able to find. But that's a hard way to establish community, though it exists there in those threads, of a sort.

Thank you for your re-posting! Blessings to you & yours.

Expand full comment

No posts