Is it accurate to recognize the UMC is pretty liberal these days?

[circuitrider]

I think we see Methodists prominently in the media because this is the issue we are fighting over right now. Everyone knows what the SBC thinks. And on the other side everyone knows what the UCC thinks. But United Methodists are in a huge struggle of which the end is not yet in sight or the conclusion of what will come.

I have no doubt in my mind that eventually our children will decide for the denomination (if they are still Methodists) to change the language of the Discipline if we don't. The Millenials and the generation that is following them believe, in the growing majority, that we should grant LGBTQ folks equal status.

That is part of what is sad about the fight. Our generation is going to fight and no matter what decision we make we will be overruled in a generation. So we are spending huge amounts of energy, emotion, and struggle for something that is, frankly, a forgone conclusion.

I don't believe in gambling (UMC Social Principles) but if I where a betting man that I would bet that by the time I reach madatory retirement at age 72 (22 years away) that the UMC (or its successor) will allow same sex marriages to be performed by its clergy.

Fight all you want, but the change will happen and its out of our hands in the long run.

 

[BryanW92]

I don't believe in gambling (UMC Social Principles)

Perhaps those Millennials will fix that bit of shortsightedness too. From what I see in the line at 7-11, they like to play the lottery. We should just ask them about everything we do and change our rules to suit their desires right now, while they're still young and smarter than the people who already grew up and became self-sufficient adults. You know, the people who understand rewards and consequences and have learned that many things that were very appealing at age 22 are just stupid at age 42.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I think we see Methodists prominently in the media because this is the issue we are fighting over right now. Everyone knows what the SBC thinks. And on the other side everyone knows what the UCC thinks. But United Methodists are in a huge struggle of which the end is not yet in sight or the conclusion of what will come.

I have no doubt in my mind that eventually our children will decide for the denomination (if they are still Methodists) to change the language of the Discipline if we don't. The Millenials and the generation that is following them believe, in the growing majority, that we should grant LGBTQ folks equal status.

That is part of what is sad about the fight. Our generation is going to fight and no matter what decision we make we will be overruled in a generation. So we are spending huge amounts of energy, emotion, and struggle for something that is, frankly, a forgone conclusion.

I don't believe in gambling (UMC Social Principles) but if I where a betting man that I would bet that by the time I reach madatory retirement at age 72 (22 years away) that the UMC (or its successor) will allow same sex marriages to be performed by its clergy.

Fight all you want, but the change will happen and its out of our hands in the long run.

i guess the 'fight' could be sad, or not sad, depending on persuasion < .... ? if and as you and i and others overcome by the blood of the lamb and the word of our testimony of jesus,
there will always be a fight (with others in the flesh)
until jesus returns.
the union with Yhwh and unity in jesus is unique to the faithful ones abiding in Him, trusting and relying on Him, no matter what building they happen to be in at the moment, eh?
yes,
the differences are painful to see and to bear (as many are hurt and lost and dissuaded perhaps from further seeking Christ Jesus) ,
but the truth always wins out in the end (jesus has already overcome the world, as he said).

 

[Krillin]

I have noticed a lot of liberalism within the Methodist church in my state. I went to annual conference one year and felt like I was at a feminist rally....meh.

But the congregation I am a part of is very conservative. I feel right at home.

 

[circuitrider]

You have a problem with women Krillin?

 

[Krillin]

You have a problem with women Krillin?

Did I say that?

 

[circuitrider]

Did I say that?

It sure sounded like you did. Maybe you could elaborate on your "feminism" comment.

Usually comments like that indicate a disapproval of women's equality or leadership or both.

 

[Krillin]

It sure sounded like you did. Maybe you could elaborate on your "feminism" comment.

Usually comments like that indicate a disapproval of women's equality or leadership or both.

What I experienced were women crying inequality simply because most pulpits in the church are filled with men (why is that a bad thing?). But disagreeing with feminism in any context does not mean that someone has an issue with women.

Now I think you should elaborate on what you mean by equality. I believe that God had different purposes in mind when creating men and women. I believe he made when to be more dominant, and women to be more submissive. However, I also believe that this does not make woman lesser than man.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

Perhaps those Millennials will fix that bit of shortsightedness too. From what I see in the line at 7-11, they like to play the lottery. We should just ask them about everything we do and change our rules to suit their desires right now, while they're still young and smarter than the people who already grew up and became self-sufficient adults. You know, the people who understand rewards and consequences and have learned that many things that were very appealing at age 22 are just stupid at age 42.

Them dumb kids

I saw a guy the other day, must've been 50, oogling a woman in the checkout line and making some unsavory comments to his cohort. Good thing us millennial's came along; since by your logic (we can judge an entire generation based on interactions in the checkout line), we've had enough of creepy old men oogling young women.

Of course that's silly; but just to throw it out there. We've been over this before; and I know I'm just some dumb kid. But we do get a little tired of hearing how liberal and stupid we are; even if we're more conservative! Statistically speaking, Christian millennial's are no theologically or politically different than their older counterparts. It's the non-Christian millennial's who tend to be more liberal, as all younger generations tend to be more liberal, then once their version of liberalism sets in, they become the conservatives and reject the next generations changes and pretend like they were the last great hardworking generation, and the next generation is lazy, stupid and entitled. It's been going on since at least aristotle, because he actually wrote on the phenomenon. Aristotle has penned-to-paper some of the things people claimed came new with millenial's, like a belief that we deserve nothing less than high-paid high ranking positions.

 

[circuitrider]

What I experienced were women crying inequality simply because most pulpits in the church are filled with men (why is that a bad thing?). But disagreeing with feminism in any context does not mean that someone has an issue with women.

Now I think you should elaborate on what you mean by equality. I believe that God had different purposes in mind when creating men and women. I believe he made when to be more dominant, and women to be more submissive. However, I also believe that this does not make woman lesser than man.

We are in different places on this Krillin. I think it is a bad thing that the percentage of women clergy isn't somewhere near the percentage of women attending church. As an example, I'm in the UMC. We are around 25% women clergy over all and about 40% in Iowa where I serve. But I believe our number of women in the pew is well over 50% of the church so, since the clergy are called out of the laity I think the percentages should be similar.

As to pastoral leadership, some of the best pastors I've known over my almost 25 years of pastoral ministry have been women pastors.

As to equality, I believe men and women are completely equal in church leadership, marriage, and in general. I don't believe women are created to be more submissive. I believe that is an idea created by men who like women to do what they tell them to do.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

We are in different places on this Krillin. I think it is a bad thing that the percentage of women clergy isn't somewhere near the percentage of women attending church. As an example, I'm in the UMC. We are around 25% women clergy over all and about 40% in Iowa where I serve. But I believe our number of women in the pew is well over 50% of the church so, since the clergy are called out of the laity I think the percentages should be similar.

As to pastoral leadership, some of the best pastors I've known over my almost 25 years of pastoral ministry have been women pastors.

As to equality, I believe men and women are completely equal in church leadership, marriage, and in general. I don't believe women are created to be more submissive. I believe that is an idea created by men who like women to do what they tell them to do.

I'm with you on that.

Some women like living a 'traditional role'. Some of the older women in my church have so much joy in being homemakers. Other women I know would be miserable without their career and accomplishments. God didn't make women all that different from men (except for the obvious differences); but he did make those TWO women very different. And that's what it's all about, God creates and calls us all unique.

I'd like to think the percentages of male and female clergy shouldn't matter; so long as all who receive God's call have a venue to answer it. But I know there's a good likelihood that women called by God did not answer that call because of societal pressure, or even having been taught that it's immoral for them to hold the position of Clergy.

My Grandmother is a UM Elder. And I absolutely love what she told me one day. She said in her last year at Seminary a woman put her arms around her and she said "We need more of you", "What do you mean?" she said "We need more women Pastors". And my Grandma told me that was the very first time she ever considered that she might be a "Woman Pastor". In fact she was kind of offended at this female colleague. Couldn't she just be a Pastor; why did she have to be a "Woman Pastor"? And that's an attitude I wish more of the world had.

 

[circuitrider]

If the percentage of women clergy was closer to that of the women in the pew she'd not have to feel like she had to emphasize "woman pastor." But as long as women are a minority in leadership that is how it will be viewed.

I've known of a number of women over the years who either felt they couldn't answer their call or ended up having to change churches or denominations to do so.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

Fair enough!

You know the thing about women being designed as more submissive bares a pretty strong criticisms. If that's so; how do you explain non-western cultures? There are Asian religions where Women are dominantly the Clergy-equivalent (it's viewed as a more feminine position in some cultures; and in some women are the more 'holy' sex). There were and have been in history societies where women were the dominant sex and men the submissive. There were empresses, priestesses, queens ruling alone, etc. and have been for thousands of years. It's only Western society that has such a consistently slanted male dominance. (Not that other societies haven't been male dominated; but not with such consistency).

So did God only design western women to be submissive? I don't think so. I think it's a nurture, not nature, thing that causes many women to have more submissive attitudes.

 

[Krillin]

We are in different places on this Krillin.

And I genuinely hope no hard feelings arise on either side as a result.

Also, I'd like to apologize. Not for saying what I did, but for the reason I said it. Last night I thought about this discussion and realized there was some pride in my tone. I'm sorry.

I'm still not seeing where the idea of a submissive/supportive role always being lesser than a leading/active role comes from. What are your reasons for making this connection, if I may ask?

God, the Son, submitted to God, the Father. But Jesus still counted equality with God, the Father. The members of the Trinity each have different roles - yet they are all together one.

 

[Joykins]

I'm still not seeing where the idea of a submissive/supportive role always being lesser than a leading/active role comes from. What are your reasons for making this connection, if I may ask?

It isn't lesser. It's more being able to dowhat you've been called to do, as opposed to what people who don't know you think you should do just because you've been born with an innie or an outie.

 

[Maid Marie]

If the percentage of women clergy was closer to that of the women in the pew she'd not have to feel like she had to emphasize "woman pastor." But as long as women are a minority in leadership that is how it will be viewed.

I've known of a number of women over the years who either felt they couldn't answer their call or ended up having to change churches or denominations to do so.

Last month I went to a Pastor's conference in Boston. As I stood in line in the restroom [big SIGH], the woman from Nazarene HQs said "Isn't it great! We have enough female clergy that we have a LINE FOR THE BATHROOM!" I told her I'd cheer after I was done waiting . But it was a nice perspective that she shed for me. And she did let me go ahead of her in the line.

 

[Maid Marie]

And I genuinely hope no hard feelings arise on either side as a result.

Also, I'd like to apologize. Not for saying what I did, but for the reason I said it. Last night I thought about this discussion and realized there was some pride in my tone. I'm sorry.

I'm still not seeing where the idea of a submissive/supportive role always being lesser than a leading/active role comes from. What are your reasons for making this connection, if I may ask?

God, the Son, submitted to God, the Father. But Jesus still counted equality with God, the Father. The members of the Trinity each have different roles - yet they are all together one.

Well, to be honest, as a Nazarene Pastor, seeing your earlier comments in the Wesleyan forum [which is supposed to be a safe place for me] bothers me. Those in the Wesleyan theological family support women in ministry [ex. UMC, CotN, TWC, Salvation Army, FM] so I should not have to deal with this.

It may not seem important to you about the struggles that some of the clergy discussed at your conference, but one day as you try to do what God has called you to do and encounter resistance from those around you, maybe you'll have more empathy.

 

[Krillin]

Well, to be honest, as a Nazarene Pastor, seeing your earlier comments in the Wesleyan forum [which is supposed to be a safe place for me] bothers me. Those in the Wesleyan theological family support women in ministry [ex. UMC, CotN, TWC, Salvation Army, FM] so I should not have to deal with this.

It may not seem important to you about the struggles that some of the clergy discussed at your conference, but one day as you try to do what God has called you to do and encounter resistance from those around you, maybe you'll have more empathy.

Are you saying you shouldn't have to deal with my attitude, or my view itself?

 

[circuitrider]

And I genuinely hope no hard feelings arise on either side as a result.

Also, I'd like to apologize. Not for saying what I did, but for the reason I said it. Last night I thought about this discussion and realized there was some pride in my tone. I'm sorry.

I'm still not seeing where the idea of a submissive/supportive role always being lesser than a leading/active role comes from. What are your reasons for making this connection, if I may ask?

God, the Son, submitted to God, the Father. But Jesus still counted equality with God, the Father. The members of the Trinity each have different roles - yet they are all together one.

If you believe that God is both three and one submitting to one's self isn't the same as submitting to an external authority.

If women always, by nature, have to submit to a man that by nature they are lesser. But even if you don't agree with me there, there isn't New Testament warrent for the idea of women as submitting to men all thet time unless you very selectively read the text.

 

[Krillin]

If you believe that God is both three and one submitting to one's self isn't the same as submitting to an external authority.

If women always, by nature, have to submit to a man that by nature they are lesser. But even if you don't agree with me there, there isn't New Testament warrent for the idea of women as submitting to men all thet time unless you very selectively read the text.

I guess by using the trinity as an example I was more or less having marriage in mind. Because in marriage a man and a woman, in a sense, can become one together in Christ.

I don't believe all men have authority over all women all the time. Depending on what your definition of submissive is - yes I suppose it could mean inequality. But not by what I believe the biblical definition of submission to be. Still, I believe women were made with a more supportive role in mind.

In a group of lions it is the female that does the hunting while the male defends the group from other male lions. The male is head of the group, and the bigger risk taker, but surely no one can deny that both roles are equally important.

I never meant for this to become a discussion in and of itself, if I am honest.