Here is the web page from the conference with a short video and FAQ from their perspective.

This dude trying to act like he is doing this for the benefit of the congregants/members is a big lol for me.

As they say, just follow the money




https://www.htcumc.org/hpumc

HPUMC will basically get its way. The UMC might get the real estate but they'll lose the donor base. With that reality, their only survival play in the long run will be to monetize the dirt. Wouldn't be surprised in the least if the HP congregation bought it back at a steep discount (what other buyer exists?).

Hate to infect the church with this sentiment but you have to follow the golden rule: he who has the gold makes the rules. And the HP congregation has a heck of a lot of gold.

MAROON said:

---

We faced this at First Pres. the first vote failed to get the 2/3 majority by 15 votes.

The opposition the day of the vote showed up with busses of seniors from nursing homes who had not set foot in the church in years but were still on the rolls. Had one lady ask me when we had built the new modern worship facility - uhhhh 10 years ago.

Church leadership actually failed IMO opinion by not scrubbing the membership rolls.

Resulted in two years of pain as the vast majority wanted to leave and were hamstrung but a vocal group of liberals.

---

That sounds like a familiar strategy.

A video message and FAQ's from HPUMC's pastor. His position is that the suit is without merit, their bylaws were updated in accordance with state laws, that their council-centric governance had been in place since a church vote in 1998, and that they were caught completely off-guard with the filing.

https://www.hpumc.org/news

Who owns the property, the local congregation or the mothership?

mothership. it's why the UMC is still around. this is the only card they have, but it's a big one.

TresPuertas said:

---

mothership. it's why the UMC is still around. this is the only card they have, but it's a big one.

---

When we disaffiliated, we were allowed to keep the property. We just had to assume the small outstanding debt and pay, I think, two years of apportionments to get out.

It was the same for our conference which was the Texas Conference, plus we charged with taking care of the pastor's pension plans. However, I understood that some bishops of other conferences did have some additional strings attached to make it a little more difficult and a number of those had law suits.

Martin Cash said:

---

TresPuertas said:

---

mothership. it's why the UMC is still around. this is the only card they have, but it's a big one.

---

When we disaffiliated, we were allowed to keep the property. We just had to assume the small outstanding debt and pay, I think, two years of apportionments to get out.

---

I think the UMC is letting this play out with some of the smaller more rural congregations. Probably easier to just cut them loose and avoid a fight. the property probably isn't worth the hassle

But the big ones won't be so lucky. And i'm guessing that HPUMC may be the wealthiest, or one of the wealthiest, in the world. This will get nasty, and i know these dudes high up in that church. They are very rich and very powerful and don't like to lose so any fight the UMC picks will be very very difficult.

Speaking of, I drove by a UMC this morning while their service was in progress

Not many cars there. All of them could have fit in the first row or two

But instead, the ones that were there were very spread out, with empty spaces between each vehicle

It looked very deliberate, so as to make it look like the parking lot was "fuller"

T dizl televizl said:

---

I'd have to sit down and think about it but there is also the SMU angle which makes it more complex.

If I remember correctly SMU was trying to back off their association with the UMC when all the "anti gay" stuff was happening as they were worried about it affecting enrollment.

I think technically the land that HPMC sits on is owned by SMU and they get to use it through a special deed which obviously would incentivize them to keep SMU happy (not that they wouldn't want to do that anyway) but would also prohibit the UMC from confiscating the land I think or make it more of a fight

---

Dont know about the land issue you mentioned, but SMU claimed to leave for the opposite reason - it was in 2019 when the UMC actually had a brief period of increased bans/restrictions on alphabet "pastors" and marriages, and SMU said it conflicted with their non-discrimination policies. I was getting my masters there when that went down. My feeling was that SMU had been looking for any reason to break that affiliation for the sake of consolidating their institutional control.

tk111 said:

---

T dizl televizl said:

---

I'd have to sit down and think about it but there is also the SMU angle which makes it more complex.

If I remember correctly SMU was trying to back off their association with the UMC when all the "anti gay" stuff was happening as they were worried about it affecting enrollment.

I think technically the land that HPMC sits on is owned by SMU and they get to use it through a special deed which obviously would incentivize them to keep SMU happy (not that they wouldn't want to do that anyway) but would also prohibit the UMC from confiscating the land I think or make it more of a fight

---

Dont know about the land issue you mentioned, but SMU claimed to leave for the opposite reason - it was in 2019 when the UMC actually had a brief period of increased bans/restrictions on alphabet "pastors" and marriages, and SMU said it conflicted with their non-discrimination policies. I was getting my masters there when that went down. My feeling was that SMU had been looking for any reason to break that affiliation for the sake of consolidating their institutional control.

---

Looks like you are correct - it was in 2019 when the UMC had reinforced a ban on LGBT pastors / weddings

Tex100 said:

---

Who owns the property, the local congregation or the mothership?

---

A church symbolizes a collective of believers rather than a marital union. If an individual leaves this community, they can no longer be regarded as a member of the shared faith, and consequently, they cannot possess the property of the community.

What you are describing is not Christianity. The NT clearly defines Christianity, and clearly defines the fruit that it exhibits.

Fighting and arguing over materials things is not one of those fruit.


The NT also clearly describes wolves in sheep clothing parading as something that they are not… this is more akin to that, than anything else.

HPUMC didn't want to be called homophobic bigots, wasn't directly being impacted by the divisive issues (yet), and naively thought that their demographics & location would forever insulate them. So they chose to not address the issues at hand.

But the progressive/communist cancer that has infected the UMC will never stop spreading. And now that the formal disaffiliation period has long since passed, HPUMC is stuck.

They could have taken the approach of St Andrew UMC in Plano, whose leadership, when disaffiliation talk was just starting up, that St Andrew was leaving without even taking a congregational vote. But HPUMC thought that they would be left alone and never impacted.

TheRatt87 said:

---

HPUMC didn't want to be called homophobic bigots, wasn't directly being impacted by the divisive issues (yet), and naively thought that their demographics & location would forever insulate them. So they chose to not address the issues at hand.

But the progressive/communist cancer that has infected the UMC will never stop spreading. And now that the formal disaffiliation period has long since passed, HPUMC is stuck.

They could have taken the approach of St Andrew UMC in Plano, whose leadership, when disaffiliation talk was just starting up, that St Andrew was leaving without even taking a congregational vote. But HPUMC thought that they would be left alone and never impacted.

---

I tend to agree with this and a version of what I posted in my OP.

Furthermore, which I originally failed to share, our pastor at our HPMC church addressed this issue back when it reared its head because our congregation was obviously pretty stressed by it. He essentially said [paraphrasing]: We are going to ignore it and continue doing what we do here.

The problem is what you said following the bold: you can't ignore communist / identity politics. It's a cancer and will spread unchecked.

I have never really viewed HPUMC as a conservative bulwark trying to not rock the boat. It is a moderate to progressive church, and publicly celebrates that fact. It is very linked with the nearby Perkins school of theology, which lead the charge for "inclusiveness" starting in the early 1990s and also has a heavy focus on social justice.

https://www.hpumc.org/adults/lgbtq

It certainly has wealthy donors with conservative views, but I can't imagine it would have the support to join the Global Methodist Church after disaffiliation.

I could see it going indy but, it would have to rebuild from scratch somewhere fairly far away. It is such a corporate money machine and I am sure something will be lawyered up and papered over in this instance.

Quote:

---

For our siblings in Christ who are lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transgender, and queer, we want our church to be a safe place for you to find joy, community, worship, and grow in your faith as part of the HPUMC family.
We believe diversity is a strength and ally of our church and, most importantly, inclusion and diversity are central in Christ's ministry.

At every opportunity, HPUMC seeks ways to be more mindful of inclusivity, knowing that learning more helps us uncover gaps that can be improved, moments for growth, and paths for impact and change. The voices and hearts within the LGBTQ community and allies, as valued members of HPUMC, are key to each of these areas.

---

Windy City Ag said:

---

I have never really viewed HPUMC as a conservative bulwark trying to not rock the boat. It is a moderate to progressive church, and publicly celebrates that fact. It is very linked with the nearby Perkins school of theology, which lead the charge for "inclusiveness" starting in the early 1990s and also has a heavy focus on social justice.

https://www.hpumc.org/adults/lgbtq

It certainly has wealthy donors with conservative views, but I can't imagine it would have the support to join the Global Methodist Church after disaffiliation.

I could see it going indy but, it would have to rebuild from scratch somewhere fairly far away. It is such a corporate money machine and I am sure something will be lawyered up and papered over in this instance.

Quote:

---

For our siblings in Christ who are lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transgender, and queer, we want our church to be a safe place for you to find joy, community, worship, and grow in your faith as part of the HPUMC family.
We believe diversity is a strength and ally of our church and, most importantly, inclusion and diversity are central in Christ's ministry.

At every opportunity, HPUMC seeks ways to be more mindful of inclusivity, knowing that learning more helps us uncover gaps that can be improved, moments for growth, and paths for impact and change. The voices and hearts within the LGBTQ community and allies, as valued members of HPUMC, are key to each of these areas.

---

---

Well, I never really did either and it's frankly almost impossible for them to be a conservative bulwark simply because of geography which is also back to my OP.

You aren't going to be or stay a conservative bulwark over time when you are based dead center in a top 10 huge blue city on the campus of a university. Damn near impossible.

I know the ELCA denomination of Lutherans also have major issues with this. About the time the crazy liberals started taking over, they had all their congregations change their church constitutions to basically state that all property belonged to the Synod not the individual church bodies themselves from what I understand.

When the denomination really started ramping up the alphabet soup/socialism agenda it was too late. I had a good friend that was an elder at a small hill country ELCA church that has been around since the mid 1800's. They desperately wanted out and wanted nothing to do with the national church leadership/synod but they would lose their 100+ year old building and property that the community was built around. They were devastated that they were backed into a corner. They thought they could just ignore the national body and continue on as they always had but in reality they knew they were indirectly supporting unbiblical policies that were totally against what they actually believed.

I'm glad that Missouri Synod Lutheran congregations own their properties. I don't see the Missouri Synod going off the rails but if it does, the Synod can't come in and take the property if the congregation chooses to disaffiliate.

Quote:

---

I tend to agree with this and a version of what I posted in my OP.

Furthermore, which I originally failed to share, our pastor at our HPMC church addressed this issue back when it reared its head because our congregation was obviously pretty stressed by it. He essentially said [paraphrasing]: We are going to ignore it and continue doing what we do here.

The problem is what you said following the bold: you can't ignore communist / identity politics. It's a cancer and will spread unchecked.

---

This is pretty interesting, and I feel like our Methodist church is in the same boat. I remembe the political issues back in 2019, but it never really affected the church and we are still a part of the UMC. Our previous pastor did have some left leaning sermons, but not about sexual preference. But that was enough to get him moved on. We have now had the same pastor for 10 years, which I hear is rare in the UMC. One of the things that keep me there is that the sermons are focused on our relationship with Christ, not politics.

TheRatt87 said:

---

HPUMC didn't want to be called homophobic bigots, wasn't directly being impacted by the divisive issues (yet), and naively thought that their demographics & location would forever insulate them. So they chose to not address the issues at hand.

But the progressive/communist cancer that has infected the UMC will never stop spreading. And now that the formal disaffiliation period has long since passed, HPUMC is stuck.

They could have taken the approach of St Andrew UMC in Plano, whose leadership, when disaffiliation talk was just starting up, that St Andrew was leaving without even taking a congregational vote. But HPUMC thought that they would be left alone and never impacted.

---

It should also be noted while most UMC congregations are losing members St Andrew's is THRIVING. I've been going there off and on for a few years and it's growing.

TrumpsBarber said:

---

I belong to a UMC church in East Texas. Prior to the vote on disaffiliation, the pastor and asst. paster visited the Sunday School classes to "inform" us of the circumstances with their biased nuanced view. To disaffiliate, a congregation had to vote 66% in favor. Only 11% voted to disaffiliate in our church, but 50% walked over to a nearby Methodist church and joined them. That church congregation in Highland Park likely wanted to avoid the same fate and I don't blame them.

---

I was a member of 2 different UMC churches at the time of the split and the way the 2 pastors handled the situation couldn't have been more opposite. One totally removed himself from the discussion and the other launched an attack on anyone who wanted to go with the Global Methodist and called them closed-minded and filled with hate. Unfortunately the later had a small congregation and they were absolutely terrified of losing their apportionment money as they operated heavily in the red. The larger congregation had the financial backing to go at it on their own and voted almost unanimously to disaffiliate. That church is thriving and growing and ended up keeping the pastor who, I can only assume, walked away from the UMC as well. The smaller church lost about 60% of their already small congregation. Luckily for my family, there is a Global Methodist Church within driving distance and we were able to find our new church.

Owlagdad said:

---

ts5641 said:

---

We left the UMC church in 2012 after having attended my whole life and raising our kids in the church. We had a new pastor come in who was extremely liberal. He posted a pic of him shaking biden's hand on his Facebook profile. A group of us did a little digging and the UMC changed the wording on their stance on abortion. They became more agnostic on it. Also the PAC of the UMC bishops was donating to Soteroe's campaign.
We found an SBC church that isn't afraid to speak truth in a loving way, but always truth ever since.

---

Had a Baptist preacher tell me that the reason SBC is so conservative is that it is made up of conservatives who left liberal denominations. I am one who made fun of Baptists growing up and now am one.
I can remember back in 60s Dad throwing down the Methodist newspaper because the Methodists were supporting commies in Africa. It's always like Rush used to say, "liberals just think that things will always turn out peachy and rosy if we always just love one another etc". They are not good students of human nature.

---

Baptists, particularly SBC churches, aren't any better in most cases than what has been described here -- political infighting galore. In other cases, there isn't infighting -- there is just acquiescence to bad, non-faith based leadership. We're struggling with that right now.

However, they have a structural advantage in the way they're set up: the SBC church is an independent entity. If they want to stray from the SBC message, fine. The SBC, or more likely the state association, may "remove" them, but for the most part, that just means they won't accept funds from the church to the SBC (and other) cooperative program or other funds that support ministries like missions. Unlike the local Presby church (I've represented one) and the UMC churches, the denomination has no say on the property or the leadership of the church.

The time I represented the local Presby church, they had a problem with their interim pastor, assigned (or at least, recommended by) the association (I can't recall what it was called). We contacted him directly, told him that while we were paying him under his agreement, he was to get lost immediately. The association came back to us and, in a voice like a mom who would (justifiably) tell someone, "no, you're not going to tell my kid what to do...," that it was them, not the church, and certainly not me, that was going to handle it. I all but told that person to f-off, but in a church-like manner.

Last I heard, that church is no longer part of the association. Its one thing to have poor leadership at the church level. But at least those folks are there, know the people they are supposedly leading, and hear the issues. Trying to manage a church or a group of churches from a big association is a prescription for disaster. I recommend people remove themselves from any denomination that has that structure.

There is a big difference between, "The Church" and "a church". Thankfully, my church doesn't muddle in politics.

I attended this church for several years and was impressed with him as a pastor. However, as the size of the church grew, so did his power (absolute power corrupts absolutely). Eventually, his liberal beliefs took precedence over the Bible and Christianity.

Well looks like the spiciness is about to begin. Just received an email with this link

https://www.hpumc.org/news

Church resolution formally denouncing the bishop and conferences control of the church

T dizl televizl said:

---

Well looks like the spiciness is about to begin.

---

It's a Hispanic church?


Ohhhh, "spicy-ness".

BigRobSA said:

---

T dizl televizl said:

---

Well looks like the spiciness is about to begin.

---

It's a Hispanic church?


Ohhhh, "spicy-ness".

---

This made me laugh harder than it should've. Thank you.

Shots fired!

Churches like HPUMC are like the spineless, naive GOP politicians. They think if they play nice that the progressive/liberal UMC leadership will act in good faith, despite the UMC showing over and over and over again that they never will.

Now that HPUMC has gone public with their disagreement, I expect the UMC's retribution campaign to ramp up.

In North Georgia, the disaffiliation movement really took off after the presiding bishop (a white woman with two/hyphenated last names - shocker!) took the unilateral action of reassigning the senior pastor of Mt. Bethel UMC (the largest, wealthiest church in the N GA conference) as political payback for Mt. Bethel being outspoken with the UMC failing to uphold the Book of Discipline. The issue was ultimately settled via legal action with Mt Bethel paying a significant ransom.

TheRatt87 said:

---

Churches like HPUMC are like the spineless, naive GOP politicians. They think if they play nice that the progressive/liberal UMC leadership will act in good faith, despite the UMC showing over and over and over again that they never will.

Now that HPUMC has gone public with their disagreement, I expect the UMC's retribution campaign to ramp up.

---

No, the reality is that HPUMC put language in their bylaws to prevent the conference from just coming in and making changes without approval of the Church, so not actually spineless and nave. That is what the conference and the bishop do not like and why they sued HPUMC.

Also, it was the conference, not HPUMC, that took this public. They have had a PR and legal firm working in the background for months during what I would describe as bad faith negotiations on the conference's part. That video in the thread was on a webpage they went live with the day the conference filed the lawsuit which was complete with an FAQ section. The conference is also the party that leaked it to the press.

Having said that, HPUMC was acting in accordance with all of the current requirements and tenets in the current Book of Discipline. You are correct that the progressive / liberal UMC will not act in good faith and working up a lawsuit and a PR campaign for months while allegedly "negotiating" is a prime example of underhanded leftist tactics.