I absolutely think that her presence is providing a greater impetus for United Methodists and supporters to advocate for change at the 2019 Special General Conference. The Judicial Council's complex ruling, which sent mixed signals to folks on both sides, about Bishop Karen Oliveto's case, which nevertheless says she "remains in good standing", shows just how divided the UMC is right now and how both sides are preparing for 2019.
My own denomination (PCUSA) went through this a while ago. I'm sympathetic with this position. I often felt we should just have it out and split.The UMC keeps trying to kick the can down the road instead of being decisive. At some point, that simply isn't going to work anymore. I still have much affection for my former UMC, but I wish they would be decisive and let the chips fall where they may. I think it's past time to get on with it.
... Forcing the issue to the point of split will leave both individuals and churches having to make a choice that they really don't want to make.
Also, the balance among Christians is shifting rapidly. Congregations might currently end up in a conservative version of a denomination when 10 years from now they'll be uncomfortable there...
There's no question that people are leaving because of this issue. But suppose we face the issue and force a choice. What do churches with mixed congregations do? How about families where members disagree? There are many people who can coexist with those they disagree with. The PCUSA, and other mainline churches, have definitely lost both congregations and members over this. But still, we didn't split down the middle. There are many people who continue to be in fellowship with those with whom they disagree. I think that's the better approach, and in fact I think it's good for Christians to show the communion can exist in spite of disagreement.As to your point about putting off deciding possibly avoid schism, I wonder how many people are already leaving from each side because of the wounds and acrimony over this issue?
In principle property is in trust for the denomination. But much of the practical responsibility is at the Annual Conference level. So if whole jurisdictions or conferences separate things get complex. Courts in different states also vary on how these things are enforced.My understanding is that whatever side prevails at Annual Conference keeps the building and whatever side that dissents will be looking for new space. In the UMC, the national church owns the building unlike some other denominations. At least that is how it was when I was in the UMC.
Why not have an atheist pastor? Be all-inclusive, tolerant and non-judgmental.
This is just silly. Conservative churches are more successful by all the usual worldly measures. Is it so hard to believe that many Christians actually think Jesus wants us to accept gays?Money, property, public opinion, hurt feelings... these are the things I see raised in this discussion (I was raised in the UMC) far more often than a thoughtful and prayerful look at what scripture says.