Call all FREE METHODISTS, I have a question for YOU.

[GraceSeeker]

Those on CF for very long are quite aware of the debates going on within the UMC over any number of social issues. Right now we are about to tear ourselves apart regarding a couple of issues related to the practice of homosexuality and the church. I was just reading an article by a bishop of the Free Methodist Church on the topic of divesity, which within the UMC would be sure to include a discussion of homosexuality given our present climate, and I saw nothing of the conflicts that are tearing our UMC denomination apart.

I'm curious where the Free Methodist Church is regarding the issues of the church and homosexuality, both officially and in terms of what convesations are taking place in the larger body that may not be officially endorsed?

And I'm also curious if there are issues that the Free Methodist Church finds as internally divisive to it as homosexuality has been for the UMC?

 

[RomansFiveEight]

I'll second the 'question'!

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Why did God instruct to wipe out every man, woman and child in some of the towns they entered in ?
(this is so very pertinent and required to understand why God never allowed liars, adulterers, murderers or perverts to live in the midst of His people.)

 

[GraceSeeker]

Jeff, last I knew you were NOT a Free Methodist. Nor does your comment help in the slightest in answering my question. Please, don't sidetrack this thread with rabbit trails.

 

[BryanW92]

I'm not a Free Methodist, but I got this from their website. It is from their GC 2011.

http://fmcusa.org/files/2014/03/HOMOSEXUALITY-ACCORDING-TO-THE-BIBLE.pdf

They are pretty firm in their beliefs regarding homosexuality.

This is their position on same-sex marriage.

http://fmcusa.org/files/2014/03/Fra...1st-Century-Issues-Same-Sex-Relationships.pdf

They clearly do not support it.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Grace,
It's not to side-track, nor a rabbit trail, (my question/post),
but goes to the basis on which the Free Methodists position is based - on God's Word, and Why.
What Bryan posted is good, about the Free Methodists position,
and what I posted is in total support of , and points to the Scriptural reason, God's reason, God's Decree, why they have that position.(hopefully)

By checking/testing/seeing what God's Word says about it (and why) can eliminate a lot of the confusion, right ?

Shalom in Yeshua,
jeff

p.s. for what it's worth, I was in the WESLEY FOUNDATION in college, for about 6 years, and enjoyed the company and fellowship there more than any other college group I was in in that time - even more than I did the Lutheran group(s) even though I was still Lutheran at the time.
It is worth noting, the girls/women (Wesley members) at that time still blushed fairly frequently(they were modest and God-reverent), vs the general immorality elsewhere on campus(NOT in christian groups, but in general) and in the following decades.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

I'm not a Free Methodist, but I got this from their website. It is from their GC 2011.

http://fmcusa.org/files/2014/03/HOMOSEXUALITY-ACCORDING-TO-THE-BIBLE.pdf

They are pretty firm in their beliefs regarding homosexuality.

This is their position on same-sex marriage.

http://fmcusa.org/files/2014/03/Fra...1st-Century-Issues-Same-Sex-Relationships.pdf

They clearly do not support it.

The question I have is how much division there is over the issue.

If all I had to go by was the UMC's doctrine; I could easily say the same. We are pretty firm in our beliefs and clearly don't support it. Our book of discipline says "Incompatible with Christian teachings". That's pretty darn clear. If something is 'incompatible with Christian teachings' then it's wrong. Period. So we're making a pretty serious, pretty bold statement there. As good as the UMC is at dancing around an issue and beating around the bush; our statement on homosexuality is pretty sharply drawn. Agree or disagree with it; it is what it is. What our clergy and laity feel about the issue though is, often times, at a conflict with the clear-cut words of the Discipline. But there's no literature to indicate that (such literature was struck down by the General Conference of last).

It's only because of my experience within the UMC that I know it's a divisive issue. If all I had to go on was what I could find on UMC.org; I could draw the same conclusion about both denominations.

(Just playing the devils advocate. For all I know they are all in total agreement. Or, for all I know they too are split down the middle over the issue).

 

[BryanW92]

The question I have is how much division there is over the issue.

If all I had to go by was the UMC's doctrine; I could easily say the same. We are pretty firm in our beliefs and clearly don't support it. Our book of discipline says "Incompatible with Christian teachings". That's pretty darn clear. If something is 'incompatible with Christian teachings' then it's wrong. Period. So we're making a pretty serious, pretty bold statement there. As good as the UMC is at dancing around an issue and beating around the bush; our statement on homosexuality is pretty sharply drawn. Agree or disagree with it; it is what it is. What our clergy and laity feel about the issue though is, often times, at a conflict with the clear-cut words of the Discipline. But there's no literature to indicate that (such literature was struck down by the General Conference of last).

It's only because of my experience within the UMC that I know it's a divisive issue. If all I had to go on was what I could find on UMC.org; I could draw the same conclusion about both denominations.

(Just playing the devils advocate. For all I know they are all in total agreement. Or, for all I know they too are split down the middle over the issue).

I read both documents in full. They go to the trouble to lay out scriptural cases, in detail, against homosexuality and gay marriage. The UMC version on our web site is just a short statement that Progressive clergy and laity use to make claims that our stance is not only socially wrong, but is actually scripturally wrong (such as the ludicrous claim that Romans 1:28 is about pedophilia).

If the FMC is split on the issue, then it is not because the church did not make a strong case. It is simply due to people demanding that God fit into their cultural beliefs.

 

[GraceSeeker]

Folks, I'm NOT interested in a discussion of what we SHOULD believe. I'm only interested in learning what it is that Free Methodists ACTUALLY DO believe, and how much time is given to this topic WITHIN the Free Methodist Church.

My thanks to those whose posts have contributed to the thread with such information.

 

[graceandpeace]

I am not Free Methodist, but I have a friend who's husband I believe now ministers in one. Prior to that ministry, they attended a Church of the Nazarene that I was a member of & from my understanding the two churches are very similar. If that holds true in all regards, then they are probably mostly unanimous in any rejection of gay marriage, etc. I am speculating of course.

 

[RainsInApril]

Our family attended a FM church for about six months last year. Obviously, my experience is limited...but the issue never came up. Everyone we got to know while we were there seemed fairly conservative in general, though.

Someone linked the official position upthread - obviously, that doesn't mean much if the membership doesn't agree with it. However, it seems like there is a lot less room to "agree to disagree" in the FM church than there is in the UMC, as the FMC membership vows include an affirmation of their Book of Discipline.

4. Do you accept the Book of Discipline of the Free Methodist Church, with its Articles of Religion, Membership Covenant and its principles for the lives of its members and the governance of the church?

I'd imagine that that statement makes for a much more unified body than exists in the UMC, and is actually one of the reasons that our family is still looking for a church home - we couldn't make that vow in good conscience.

 

[actionsub]

LGBT rights and same-sex marriage is not nearly as divisive an issue in the Free Methodists, due to their more conservative stance on everything. While many UMC leaders will try to not take a position for fear of alienating somebody, the FMC leaders and laypeople are simply, "Nope. Nope nope nope nope."

The question I have is how much division there is over the issue.

If all I had to go by was the UMC's doctrine; I could easily say the same. We are pretty firm in our beliefs and clearly don't support it. Our book of discipline says "Incompatible with Christian teachings". That's pretty darn clear. If something is 'incompatible with Christian teachings' then it's wrong. Period. So we're making a pretty serious, pretty bold statement there. As good as the UMC is at dancing around an issue and beating around the bush; our statement on homosexuality is pretty sharply drawn. Agree or disagree with it; it is what it is. What our clergy and laity feel about the issue though is, often times, at a conflict with the clear-cut words of the Discipline. But there's no literature to indicate that (such literature was struck down by the General Conference of last).

It's only because of my experience within the UMC that I know it's a divisive issue. If all I had to go on was what I could find on UMC.org; I could draw the same conclusion about both denominations.

(Just playing the devils advocate. For all I know they are all in total agreement. Or, for all I know they too are split down the middle over the issue).

 

[GraceSeeker]

LGBT rights and same-sex marriage is not nearly as divisive an issue in the Free Methodists, due to their more conservative stance on everything. While many UMC leaders will try to not take a position for fear of alienating somebody, the FMC leaders and laypeople are simply, "Nope. Nope nope nope nope."

actionsub, that may be so. But how is it that you know this? How is it that you are able to answer for Free Methodists; I thought you were UMC, not Free Methodist?

I served UMC churches in both Lawrenceville and Carmi, so I know most of the UMC pastors in the area. May I ask who your pastor is?

Bill Bunnage at Evangelical?
Ed Davis at Trinity or Adam's Corner?
Deetta Gaither at Allendale?
Patti Hanzel at Lancaster or Nye Chapel?
​

 

[actionsub]

actionsub, that may be so. But how is it that you know this? How is it that you are able to answer for Free Methodists; I thought you were UMC, not Free Methodist?

I served UMC churches in both Lawrenceville and Carmi, so I know most of the UMC pastors in the area. May I ask who your pastor is?

Bill Bunnage at Evangelical?
Ed Davis at Trinity or Adam's Corner?
Deetta Gaither at Allendale?
Patti Hanzel at Lancaster or Nye Chapel?
​

I've recently moved there, so I haven't found a church out there yet. I had talked to a number of Free Methodists in the St. Louis area while waiting to move because I was considering making a jump, so that's how I can answer for their POV.

Part of what's hindered that search is that I had been serving a seminary field ed internship at a UCC congregation in Fairview Heights until today (Eden's semester ends this week, and I will be transferring to Oakland City in the fall, which is causing even more UMC problems since they're not a University Senate school...)

 

[GraceSeeker]

Does Oakland City even offer graduate level classes at all? I just thought they were an undergrad university.

 

[actionsub]

Does Oakland City even offer graduate level classes at all? I just thought they were an undergrad university.

Yup, they have a very small seminary attached to the school.

 

[GraceSeeker]

Yup, they have a very small seminary attached to the school.

Huh. Learned something new today. Of course, that's an improvement, 7 years ago I didn't even know there was any school at Oakland City, but then I had one of my church kids go to school there.

 

[A Rhys]

Having come from the Holiness Movement, the FMC is not a 'mainline' denomination. There tends to be less division because the worldlings are free to move on and join the UMC or whatever.

 

[BryanW92]

Having come from the Holiness Movement, the FMC is not a 'mainline' denomination. There tends to be less division because the worldlings are free to move on and join the UMC or whatever.

I like that term "worldlings". It does accurately describe the people who choose culture over Christ, doesn't it?

 

[circuitrider]

I like that term "worldlings". It does accurately describe the people who choose culture over Christ, doesn't it?

Interesting Bryan, I found the term insulting. Conservatives don't like to be called "Bible thumpers" and Holiness folks surely don't appreciate being call "pew jumpers" or "holy rollers." But I've heard them called that.

Can we exchange different ideas about our theologies without insult to someone else's views?