United Methodists and Human Sexuality

1,540 Views | 16 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by UTExan
stbabs
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:25a, 10/9/18
AG
Any United Methodists out there?
Are you aware of the three possible plans for the road ahead in dealing with the topic? Supposed to be decided Feb 2019.

1. One Church Plan- Leaves handling of gay issues to individual churches but all remain in the ONE UMC

2. Connectional Conference- Three separate national conferences. Progressive, Traditional and Unity. All still Methodists but not connected at national level

3. Traditional- Remains as is with prohibition against gay marriage, same sex weddings in church, no openly gay ministers.

Thoughts?
Reply Quote
Martin Q. Blank
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:34a, 10/9/18
#1 is sustainable, but progressives won't go for it. #2 splits the church. #3 will never happen.
Reply Quote
swimmerbabe11
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:11a, 10/9/18
I've kinda read up on all the goings ons and I kinda thought the split was inevitable
Reply Quote
craigernaught
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:34a, 10/9/18
AG
I'm a former UMC minister.

1) The One Church Plan does not leave issues around sexuality to the local church. I wish it did that, but it doesn't. Instead, the One Church Plan leaves it to the Annual Conference.

The One Church Plan is opposed by both progressives and conservatives and is largely supported by institutionalists and moderates. It's the last attempt by the moderates and institutionalists, like the bishops, to keep the church together. Many conservative leaders have claimed that if the plan is adopted, they will leave the UMC causing lawsuits around the UMC trust clause which may force decisions in US courts on whether or not individual churches own real assets or if they are owned by the Annual Conference or a Diocese. The implications here could be huge. Either way, it will be nasty and expensive. The split would create 1 very conservative church, one very liberal one, and moderate churches, which are the vast majority, will have to choose sides in a split they don't want, or will have to make a 3rd church. It may also trigger a massive breakup with multiple different regional and ideological churches. I doubt most of those would be able to survive and would just join the more ideological churches or would just disappear.

Under the plan, progressive churches in Alabama would not be able to marry same sex members nor would they be able to have a gay ministers. Likewise, conservative churches in the northwest may not be allowed to forbid such unions or reject a gay ministers. And they would all have to live in a church that recognized gay marriage while also forbidding it and recognizing gay ministers while also forbidding it. As a result, neither conservative nor liberal leaders want this plan. This is a test to see if the bishops can rally the moderates who either don't like the extremes of either side or aren't currently engaged, to vote together. If they do, the One Church Plan will pass and the church may or may not split. If they reject it, who knows what happens.

2) The Connectional Plan won't happen. It has no real supporters.

3) The Traditonalist Plan is not a "remains as is" plan. It creates significantly more centralized power for the purpose of not allowing conferences to defy the Discipline's rejection of same sex weddings and "self-avowed practicing homosexuals" from being ordained. The problem we have now is that the General Conference relies on bishops to enforce its rules but the bishops have a lot of independence inside the Annual Conference.

If this plan is enacted the church will split. Except this time, the progressives who break away will be sued by the conservatives for their real assets. They'll just adopt their positions based on who leaves first.



The real question is if the conservative or progressive leaders can convince or force other churches to split with them. The bishops don't want to split. The ministers don't want to split because no one knows what happens to pensions and insurance and parsonages and gurantees appointments and such if we do. A small minority of people on either side are trying to break up the church. The moderates are so impotent that the minority will likely succeed.

The most likely options in order are:

1) No agreement. Nothing decided. Split highly likely
2) One Church Plan adopted. Split highly likely. How many break away is unknown.
3) Traditonalist Plan. Split inevitable.
4) We all become Catholics
5) Connectional plan.

The UMC, as currently constructed, is broken.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
UTExan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to stbabs • 2:25p, 10/9/18
stbabs said:
Any United Methodists out there?
Are you aware of the three possible plans for the road ahead in dealing with the topic? Supposed to be decided Feb 2019.

1. One Church Plan- Leaves handling of gay issues to individual churches but all remain in the ONE UMC

2. Connectional Conference- Three separate national conferences. Progressive, Traditional and Unity. All still Methodists but not connected at national level

3. Traditional- Remains as is with prohibition against gay marriage, same sex weddings in church, no openly gay ministers.

Thoughts?


Due to the bureaucracy and clergy, #1 will likely happen, but if laypeople has their way, 2 or 3.

Edit to say that the best result would be a new conservative, evangelical denomination with tie ins to Asbury, Perkins and United seminaries, but not to others. Let the liberals go to the UCC,

Further edit: Apropos of the thread on inerrancy, the problem many Methodists have with this issue and many others is not one of equality or homophobia. It goes to the larger issue of how we read and interpret the Bible. The battle has been brewing for decades and also involves the denomination's political stances. Only recently has the UMC walked away from the BDS crowd re Israel. I think most Methodists want a church that looks a lot more like John Wesley than Karl Marx.
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
AgLiving06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to craigernaught • 8:48p, 10/9/18
Great post.

Sadly, the UMC is not the only group to suffer through this kind of split, and they certainly won't be the last. All Christian groups are having to deal with the influence of social issues into the Church.

Every Christian group I've looked at is having to deal with the same questions and sadly, even within the more historical groups, a split is ideals is occurring.

I half wonder if this will lead to consolidation of the Conservative groups. I hope so.
Reply Quote
Athanasius
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to craigernaught • 9:33p, 10/9/18
AG
craigernaught said:
I'm a former UMC minister.

The most likely options in order are:

1) No agreement. Nothing decided. Split highly likely
2) One Church Plan adopted. Split highly likely. How many break away is unknown.
3) Traditonalist Plan. Split inevitable.
4) We all become Catholics
5) Connectional plan.

The UMC, as currently constructed, is broken.
That's my recommendation.
Reply Quote
UTExan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Athanasius • 10:22p, 10/9/18
Athanasius said:
craigernaught said:
I'm a former UMC minister.

The most likely options in order are:

1) No agreement. Nothing decided. Split highly likely
2) One Church Plan adopted. Split highly likely. How many break away is unknown.
3) Traditonalist Plan. Split inevitable.
4) We all become Catholics
5) Connectional plan.

The UMC, as currently constructed, is broken.
That's my recommendation.


See John Wesley's opinions on Catholicism.
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
Reply Quote
craigernaught
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to UTExan • 2:58a, 10/10/18
AG
From Catholic Spirit by John Wesley

Quote:
But although a difference in opinions or modes of worship may prevent an entire external union, yet need it prevent our union in affection? Though we cannot think alike, may we not love alike? May we not be of one heart, though we are not of one opinion? Without all doubt, we may. Herein all the children of God may unite, notwithstanding these smaller differences. These remaining as they are, they may forward one another in love and in good works.


https://www.umcmission.org/Find-Resources/John-Wesley-Sermons/Sermon-39-Catholic-Spirit

I've read Wesley's opinions on Catholicism. I hope my "we all become Catholics" is read in the good natured joking manner in which I intended.

Nevertheless, I hope Methodists consider Wesley's words here and the full text of Catholic Spirit . I think a split is likely inevitable, but I think we can do it without the malice and without the lawsuits which is the path we are currently set on. And, I think we can do it while retaining a connection with the other sides in love, charity, prayer, and even with some adminstrative connection through our common support of charities and evangelical support for overseas churches.

I don't think that will happen.
Reply Quote
1 edit
AgLiving06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Athanasius • 6:59a, 10/10/18
Athanasius said:
craigernaught said:
I'm a former UMC minister.

The most likely options in order are:

1) No agreement. Nothing decided. Split highly likely
2) One Church Plan adopted. Split highly likely. How many break away is unknown.
3) Traditonalist Plan. Split inevitable.
4) We all become Catholics
5) Connectional plan.

The UMC, as currently constructed, is broken.
That's my recommendation.

Because the self-titled Lavender Mafia isn't causing all kinds of issues within the Catholic Church right now...
Reply Quote
1
UTExan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to craigernaught • 8:24a, 10/10/18
I live in the "liberal" Western Jurisdiction. Go to any annual conference here and you will find the mud slinging and judgmentalism against evangelicals that posters of this board associate with the religious right.
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
Reply Quote
1
craigernaught
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to UTExan • 8:49a, 10/10/18
AG
I've seen that myself in the Baltimore Washington Conference and in my very progressive seminary. In seminary my girlfriend worked for the Bush administration while my friends were regularly condemning them and their evangelical allies. The admin deserved criticism, of course, but the personal nature was pretty extreme. I learned a lot then by living in the middle of both worlds.

But that isn't a problem unique to the left. The traditionalist leadership has often treated other people terribly. I'm close to a few people who have been the target of unfair, ridiculous attacks from the right. It was ugly.

Each side can play the blame measuring contest all they want. I have little interest in deciding who is the most in the wrong or trying to declare one side innocent. I had enough. I'll leave the partisanship to the partisans.
Reply Quote
2
UTExan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to craigernaught • 11:08a, 10/10/18
Quote:
But that isn't a problem unique to the left. The traditionalist leadership has often treated other people terribly. I'm close to a few people who have been the target of unfair, ridiculous attacks from the right. It was ugly.

Each side can play the blame measuring contest all they want. I have little interest in deciding who is the most in the wrong or trying to declare one side innocent. I had enough. I'll leave the partisanship to the partisans.
That is exactly why a split would be best. These clergy who demand a change in church policy know full well when they were ordained that they were bound to the Book of Discipline and regulations laid down for clergy. And they took their vows knowing they were in violation of those vows. Better to split now into orthodox and progressive denominations like the Presbyterians have done. That will draw down on the toxic exchanges and allow each group to pursue their ministry objectives.
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
Reply Quote
1
craigernaught
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:28p, 10/10/18
AG
I think a split is in our best interest, but I think the way we are going about it now is terrible. Right now, the game is about real assets and setting each side up for the eventual lawsuits.

I see little reason why we cannot retain a connection of some type to each other and split amicably, except that the leaders on each side don't want to do that. When the split happens, the vast majority of Methodist members will feel as if they had no say in the process and will feel cheated. And they will be right.
Reply Quote
3
John1248
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:41p, 10/10/18
AG
We have a great local church. Lots of good folks. Mostly conservative. I think most would hate to walk out. Like someone said above, property is technically owned by the conference. I suppose we could all walk out shutter the doors and offer to buy it back.

Bad deal any way you slice it. I hate it since I grew up, and am raising my kids in this church.
Reply Quote
UTExan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to craigernaught • 2:58p, 10/10/18
craigernaught said:
I think a split is in our best interest, but I think the way we are going about it now is terrible. Right now, the game is about real assets and setting each side up for the eventual lawsuits.

I see little reason why we cannot retain a connection of some type to each other and split amicably, except that the leaders on each side don't want to do that. When the split happens, the vast majority of Methodist members will feel as if they had no say in the process and will feel cheated. And they will be right.
We can retain a connection only by using the term "Methodist" and participating to retain one of the most efficient aid organizations out there: UMCOR. Discipleship? That's questionable. I knew of people on the Board of Discipleship who were torn by church politics, struggled to overcome them, but were hamstrung. Bishop Elaine Stanovsky actually elected to sever the BOD relationship with the UMC's most dynamic evangelical associate: Aldersgate Renewal Ministries, whose summer conferences were the largest Methodist family gatherings in the US. This occurred when she was given oversight of the BOD.

But beyond humanitarian relief and help, there just are not many similarities. One way to reform the UMC is to move to a congregational system of governance, effectively eliminating the bishop-driven bureaucracy and the other boards, such as the left-wing Church and Society Board, That would be a huge difference, but one could have a similar governance to the pentecostal Church of God, which has a General Overseer and area overseers (in effect, bishops) . As it is right now, the episcopal form of government may be counterproductive because of its cost and the ideological predispositions of the bishops, who are more interested in a corporate church than in resolving simmering, deeply held differences of opinion. And division is a natural Christian process: the Pentecostal Methodist Church of Chile has about 700,000 members while the original Methodist Church there has about 10,000. And this all grew from the Chilean revival of 1902-1909. Actually, 2/3 of Chilean Protestants are pentecostal/charismatic.
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
Reply Quote
AggieArchitect04
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:20p, 10/10/18
AG
Do we still get to have the potlucks?
Reply Quote
UTExan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:52p, 10/10/18
And then this:
Quote:
A theologically diverse group of United Methodists wants General Conference delegates to prioritize passing a "gracious and equitable" plan for churches exiting the denomination.
"While we pray for a unified way forward, the reality of our circumstance convinces us that any decision made at the 2019 special session will likely lead to congregations and pastors deciding they are no longer able to remain in The United Methodist Church," said an open letter put together by 16 clergy and lay members of the West Ohio Conference.

"We write to urge the 2019 Special Session to approve a gracious and equitable process for exit."
As of mid-afternoon on Sept. 20, another 271 United Methodists had signed the letter. Most signers come from across the United States, with one signer from Norway.
The bishops have called the special session of the denomination's top lawmaking assembly on Feb. 23-26, 2019, in St. Louis, with the aim of resolving the church's longtime debate over homosexuality. On the table are a number of different proposals for how the denomination should minister with LGBTQ people.
The letter urges that "a process for exit be adopted prior to the consideration of any proposed model or solution."
https://www.umnews.org/en/news/letter-urges-gc2019-to-prioritize-exit-plan
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
Reply Quote
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.