Ok. So after that brief interlude, I'm finally ready to report on the rest of my time in Scotland (aka, I'm procrastinating).
My first evening in Edinburgh was quite uneventful. I wanted to watch the US lose to Ghana, so I skipped whatever events were taking place at the Conference that day and went down to the hotel bar to watch the match. I made friends with the cute Australian bartender--which is about all I can say about the productiveness of the afternoon. The US lost, obviously, and I had missed most of the first day of the conference...so what to do next. Well, I went out for a meal. Found a nice Italian place that reminded me of Rome, and while there, I met a couple from Arizona. They were a bit strange, but friendly. He was a big golf afficionado and had just played 36 holes at St. Andrew's (which means very little to me, but he was excited). Then I went and saw the Da Vinci Code. (Professional interest, you see.)
The next day, there wasn't much going on at Conference that I could attend, but I thought it best to put in an appearance and get registered, etc. So I arrived at the Conference Centre, which was a 30 minute bus ride outside of Edinburgh. I was running a bit late, but found some people that I recognized (which was exciting) from my District. At this point, only ministers (clergy) were in attendance. You see, at the British Methodist Conference, there is a separate session, specifically for clergy, which meets the few days before the rest of the Conference arrives. Similar to the clergy session at an Annual Conference, they hear an address from the President of Conference (no bishops!), and decide on matters of ordination and discipline. They also have the opportunity to discuss, in very general terms, some of the reports that were to come up in the representative session. (Yes, Methodists do reports here, too!)
Well anyway, I arrive, and about an hour later, they go into closed session, so I got kicked out. There was nothing that I could do or that really interested me for the next 5-6 hours, so I went back into Edinburgh to look around. Didn't do much of the touristy bit, as I was worried that I might not have enough time. So I walked around, bought a yard of the Hamilton plaid (plaids are also called tartan), and generally took it all in. At one point, I came across a military parade that were to honor veterans or some such thing, so that was exciting. The soldiers all wore plaid trousers and there were pipers in kilts and everything. I finally got some lunch and then headed back to the Conference Centre (30 more minutes on the bus) for the afternoon session and the Communion service that afternoon. I forget what they talked about that afternoon--missiology comes to mind. It obviously made a great impression.
In any case, the climax of the day was the Communion Service for the presbyters and deacons. (In general terms, a presbyter is the same as an elder and deacons are the same as deacons.) It was an interesting service in that I was liturgically offended on several occasions. I'm trying to get over it, but you know, some things are harder than others. First of all, I should tell you that this is the first time the Methodist Conference has been held in Scotland since the Methodist Union in 1932. So some people like to make a big deal out of things like that, and one of the things they did to commemorate the occasion, was to make up the Methodist Church tartan (plaid). At first, I thought I might buy some, just as a souvenir, but that didn't last past this Communion service. I walk into the auditorium and there, at the front, was the Communion table, draped in tartan! You see, Communion cloths should be white and only white. It's a symbol of Christ's victory over death. It has been white for a long time and will hopefully be white for a long time to come. I'm a little gratified to know that even some of the liturgically apathetic Methodists were a little upset by that. (Funnily enough, the printed rubric they used specifically said that at the end, the remaining elements should be covered by a
white cloth. They used tartan.) Then, when we received the elements, we actually had to leave the room. We walked out into the hall, received the elements, and then back into the auditorium. Very strange. To top it all off, (and this is the one that I'm trying to let go of first), there were two people with prominent roles in the service--the President and Vice-President. Remember, no bishops. In the British Methodist Church, every year, they elect a President (clergy) and a Vice-President (lay). They really don't have much power, but it's their chance to get on their soapbox for a year and say what they want to say. (Their words, not mine.) Anyway, so the President, who presided at Communion wore a black stole and the Vice-President who preached wore a white stole. I know, horror of horrors! You really shouldn't wear a black stole ever, let alone at Communion. (Remember victory, resurrection?) And then the lay person wore a white stole. Probably a 'preaching scarf' but who can tell the difference? In any case, small annoyances that should not have distracted me from the service, but I'm broken and fallen like everybody else.
This is getting long, and I still have two days left! Saturday didn't have anything for me in the morning, so I went to a colloqy--basically a panel discussion--about where God is working in the Church, etc. It wasn't much to speak of, but I was gratified to hear some of the speakers. They spoke good sense. The afternoon was the Opening of Conference. All the lay people had arrived (interestingly, in the US, there's an equal number of lay and clergy. In the UK, there's more lay than clergy represented at Conference.) and they have a big worship service where the 'mantle' is passed from one President to another, and from one Vice President to another. The Presidents pass John Wesley's field Bible. The Vice Presidents pass a hymnal. This is also our first opportunity to hear the new President speak. Here he lays out his theme and agenda for the coming year.
That night we had a
céilidh (pronounced kay' lee). Basically, it's Scottish square dancing. Only you don't really dance in squares as in circles or lines. In any case it was great fun and I was sore for days!
Sunday morning, I went to the Reception into Full Connection, where the ordinands are recieved into Conference membership and the Vice President addresses the Conference. Here, the ordinands make their promises/vows and are welcomed into the Church as leaders. It was fun for me because I knew four of the ordinands through my Probationers' group. Then, after three hours of free time (I took a touristy bus tour of Edinburgh), I got to go to an ordination service.
There were over 50 ordinands (which sounds like a lot until you realize it's for the whole denomination and not just a localized area) and so they couldn't have them all in one place. There were eight (8) ordination services all over Edinburgh. (Funnily enough, the ordinations took place at the same time England played Ecuador in the WC. As soon as the service ended, earphones and mobile phones came out so people could find out what was going on.) The service I went to wasn't necessarily spectacular. Being good Methodists, there wasn't much pomp and circumstance, which disappointed me a bit. The procession was a silent one when the worship leaders and ordinands came in. The sermon was probably a good one, but not that interesting, and so didn't hold my attention. But they were ordained and they all looked scared out of their wits afterwards. I had to laugh. They should be scared. I know I will be!
Afterwards, people from the district (East Anglia) met up in the city for dinner and we had a good evening of fellowship. Monday morning I returned to Norwich. There were lots of things left to discuss as the main part of the week was yet to come (see earlier post about being an idiot in my travel plans). They discussed lots of things from peacemaking to homosexuality, etc.
One of the best questions I heard asked came from a report about living with contradiction in the church. The report was commissioned in light of the disagreements about sexuality, but was drafted to cover all levels of disagreement within the church--which I found helpful. It aimed to answer how we as Christians disagree with each other. The highlight of the report came when the brought up two issues that Christians in the past have disagreed about--slavery and pacifism. The committee pointed out that with these two issues, one of them we can live with different opinions (pacifism) without it causing much divisiveness. The other, however (slavery), we can't, as we can see in history, it caused large divisions. So the question becomes, how do we decide which category any given issue falls into? How do we decide whether homosexuality is in the category of pacifism, where we can live with our differences, or the category of slavery, where we can't? What are the marks, the criteria that we look for?
I'll leave you with that thought. Thanks for reading this far!
