Hypothetical Question

[Nihilistic Journey]

Not looking to delve into specific examples but if there was something that you were morally opposed to in the United Methodist tradition how would a lay person affect change?

 

[RomansFiveEight]

Specifics could be helpful in this context.

This is kind of a two way street. On the one hand, finding a tradition that is a good fit can be important. I've known folks who have stumbled upon the UMC for a variety of reasons; such as it being near their home, it being the church they were invited to, etc. Though theologically, they find themselves somewhere quite different. They often want to become an agent of change; meaning, they want the church to look a lot more like their own theology; perhaps something that would be more at home in the Southern Baptist Church, or the Roman Catholic Church. I once met a man who wanted the UMC to ban women from serving as Pastors. Something the UMC has been doing for decades and has long since decided upon. The UMC was not a good fit for this individual, whose theology was at home in more fundamentalist circles.

The other side of that is, yes, the UMC is an ever-evolving denomination, to the bane of some. Everyone likes progress; to a point. I mean that quite literally. Many of us like where the world has progressed to the point where we got used to it; and sometimes we're guilty of not wanting it to change from there. But what got us here were folks; lay and Clergy alike, who challenged the church to take a step forward. The Christian church (speaking broadly and not specific to any one denomination) no longer maintains the earth is flat and anyone who differs is a heretic; nor does it maintain that Slavery is God ordained. Even theologies like women being subservient second-class citizens are dissolving from mainstream Christianity.

In the UMC, the most practical way to be an agent of change is to get involved with the church. Interacting with the local church and district and conference events is a way to find like-minded people who might be able to make your message heard. Usually, first through the Annual Conference, in the form of a resolution, and then to General Conference. It's not an easy process; but then, it really shouldn't be. Or our theology would look as tattered as an American bill shredded through congressional staffers before finally being passed as only a somewhat recognizable version of it's original self; rife with compromises and usually becoming worthless to it's original intention.

The third, "bonus" side of this, is realizing that part of being a United Methodist is recognizing that we are not a strict doctrinal church. We certainly have our doctrine; but you can be a faithful United Methodist and not be in 100% agreement with every aspect of the church. I'm a United Methodist Pastor and there are aspects of our Polity and Doctrine I'd change. But on all of the essentials, and our core theology, I am wholeheartedly a United Methodist; so this is my home.

 

[Nihilistic Journey]

Romans what a reply. I feel moved that you went through so much to respond. I did a lot of research on theology before selecting the UMC. I went to three different congregations to ensure that I found the right one. The reason that I didn't want to go into specifics is that the issue I feel very strongly has gotten threads on the topic locked because people get upset discussing it. I really wanted this thread to be about how to make a difference in the UMC and not why the church should marry or not marry people.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

You might find some pushback, coming into the UMC and wanting to facilitate change; which is natural. I would encourage you to do a bit of self-inventory and try to determine whether these conflicts of morality are something you can or cannot live with in the UMC, compared with other conflicts in other traditions. i.e., You might find a tradition that agrees with you on the issue of marriage; but whose theology is outside of what you believe.

I don't want to push the issue, but if you're comfortable sharing your objections, maybe we can be helpful in guiding you towards organizations within the UMC who might be of a like-mind. I also find that there are mis-conceptions about UM theology and polity that are sometimes addressed. Sometimes, folks tell me that they object to the UMC because of a theology or doctrine that either does't exist; or that they don't fully understand our practice. For example, I had an individual tell me their objection to United Methodism was infant Baptism, and their understanding was that ours was similar to other traditions in that it "saved" the Baby, and that babies who weren't Baptized went to hell. Coupled with the consistent line "The child can't decide for itself". With an explanation of how UM's understand Grace, correcting the misunderstanding that we believe unbaptized babies fall outside of God's grace (we don't), and explaining the process of Confirmation and how Baptism, like salvation, is a lifelong journey and not a single event. It turned out they really resonated with the UM understanding of Baptism, and came to really appreciate it. Even though they didn't agree with the understanding they THOUGHT they knew (And I wouldn't either!)

You gave a hint about marriage. Well, even on that issue we are diverse. Certainly, our polity is pretty clear on this issue; but there are organizations within the UMC lobbying for or against our current polity in regards to Christian marriage. Both the confessing movement (made up of "Confessing Churches"), Good News, and a few others, which seeks to preserve the tradition language which has the UMC accepting only heterosexual marriage as valid; and the Reconciling Ministries Network which is a body of churches, laity, and Clergy who seek to restore relationships with LGBT persons and see the UMC move forward on the issue of marriage. The folks who make up RMN largely take the theological approach that a critical and discerning look at the scriptures can't justify a modern day ban on gay marriage, and seek to see the UMC change it's current stance.

 

[Nihilistic Journey]

Romans again thank you for all of your time and energy in your reply. The issue is indeed marriage. I would like to see our pastor able to follow their conscience in performing any marriage including same sex marriages.

Days before I took my vow before the congregation to support the church there was a pastor in a surrounding area that was dismissed for getting married to another man. I came really close to not joining. In the end I did join telling myself that I should help them from within the church. But so far all that means is that I wear a rainbow stole to services and yesterday I emailed my Bishop.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

You're not alone in that. Connecting with the Reconciling Ministries Network is probably a good next step for you.

 

[Nihilistic Journey]

Thank you Romans. I will check it out.

 

[BryanW92]

Romans again thank you for all of your time and energy in your reply. The issue is indeed marriage. I would like to see our pastor able to follow their conscience in performing any marriage including same sex marriages.

Days before I took my vow before the congregation to support the church there was a pastor in a surrounding area that was dismissed for getting married to another man. I came really close to not joining. In the end I did join telling myself that I should help them from within the church. But so far all that means is that I wear a rainbow stole to services and yesterday I emailed my Bishop.

Why didn't you join the ELCA, PCUSA, UCC, or TEC? They already celebrate gay marriage. Was it the theology or the polity that brought you to the UMC, or was it for the reasons you chose that particular screen name--a disdain for traditional values?

 

[circuitrider]

Romans again thank you for all of your time and energy in your reply. The issue is indeed marriage. I would like to see our pastor able to follow their conscience in performing any marriage including same sex marriages.

Days before I took my vow before the congregation to support the church there was a pastor in a surrounding area that was dismissed for getting married to another man. I came really close to not joining. In the end I did join telling myself that I should help them from within the church. But so far all that means is that I wear a rainbow stole to services and yesterday I emailed my Bishop.

I understand where you are coming from on this issue and, as you've suggested without starting another thread that causes an argument, you are asking really great questions about how to be a change agent. You are also pointing to the problem that there is probably no church that anyone could join that you would agree with everything 100%. United Methodists are better at acknowleding those differences than some denominations who want you to always think in lock step with everyone else.

I think RomansFiveEight has given you good advice on being involved in grass roots groups that are interested in seeing changes happen.

Ultimately decisions about rules like the marriage issue will be decided at the General Conference and Annual Conference level. It can take years to have a chance to get elected to serve as a General Conference delegate. But even if you can't do that the General Conference does take notice of the desire for change coming from rank and file members of the Church and from groups that organize to change (or not change) some rule or position of the Church.

Change comes slowly in a large Church like the UMC. That is both good and bad. It is good because the denomination doesn't make sudden changes which may not end up being wise. major changes may be discussed for years. On the other hand when our understanding on an issue has changed rapidly in the UMC, in the society, and in many other denominations it can be a bad thing for the UMC not to be able to make changes more quickly.

I believe that some changes will be made and must be made in small steps. We've done that in the past on several other issues and that has faciliated long term change.

 

[Nihilistic Journey]

Why didn't you join the ELCA, PCUSA, UCC, or TEC? They already celebrate gay marriage. Was it the theology or the polity that brought you to the UMC, or was it for the reasons you chose that particular screen name--a disdain for traditional values?

Thank you Bryan. I was raised as a Jehovah's Witness until I was 18 and could move on with my life. I didnt leave because I stopped believing all that I was taught my whole life. Rather I left because I couldn't stand all of the cognitive dissonance that came as a witness. This last winter I started questioning and rejecting everything I learned as a witness.

I love Wesley's take on Grace which is missing from the watchtower. Wesley's quote about not having to believe the same but could love the same was very meaningful to me. After living in an exclusive community my whole life Wesley's down to earth for the common person inclusivity was amazing. But the real reason I joined the UMC was the pastor in the congregation my wife and I settled on. He has been open and honest and very tolerant of my continued correspondence. He has been very nurturing of my historical critical approach to learning orthodox Christianity. He has literally been a Godsend.

I choose my name as a reminder of the feelings I had without God in my life. From the time I rejected the teachings I grew up on till I found my congregation I felt a hollow emptiness, a void of meaning, that made me question my very existence.

 

[Nihilistic Journey]

I understand where you are coming from on this issue and, as you've suggested without starting another thread that causes an argument, you are asking really great questions about how to be a change agent. You are also pointing to the problem that there is probably no church that anyone could join that you would agree with everything 100%. United Methodists are better at acknowleding those differences than some denominations who want you to always think in lock step with everyone else.

I think RomansFiveEight has given you good advice on being involved in grass roots groups that are interested in seeing changes happen.

Ultimately decisions about rules like the marriage issue will be decided at the General Conference and Annual Conference level. It can take years to have a chance to get elected to serve as a General Conference delegate. But even if you can't do that the General Conference does take notice of the desire for change coming from rank and file members of the Church and from groups that organize to change (or not change) some rule or position of the Church.

Change comes slowly in a large Church like the UMC. That is both good and bad. It is good because the denomination doesn't make sudden changes which may not end up being wise. major changes may be discussed for years. On the other hand when our understanding on an issue has changed rapidly in the UMC, in the society, and in many other denominations it can be a bad thing for the UMC not to be able to make changes more quickly.

I believe that some changes will be made and must be made in small steps. We've done that in the past on several other issues and that has faciliated long term change.

Thank you Circuitrider. I spent a solitude week hiking and contemplatively thinking this past week. I reminded myself of a qoute from St. Augustine about praying as if everything depended on God and working as if everything depended on me. I had become so involved with local ministry that I forgot about the burning ember in my belly.

 

[circuitrider]

Why didn't you join the ELCA, PCUSA, UCC, or TEC? They already celebrate gay marriage. Was it the theology or the polity that brought you to the UMC, or was it for the reasons you chose that particular screen name--a disdain for traditional values?

Kind of insulting question at the end there Bryan. I can't imagine anyone joining a church to "disdain traditional values."

You may not be aware that joining several of the denominations that allow for same sex marriage still, right now at least, isn't a guaranteed solution if you support same sex marriage in that several of them leave it up to a local option either by the pastor or the local church.

Be that as it may, until recently when conservative Christians raised it up as an ultimate concern, views on who can get married to whom is a pretty minor theological issue when joining a denomination/church.

Like Nihilistic Journey I became a Methodist because of John Wesley's views about grace. I grew up in Calvinist and semi-calvinist churches that generally followed a view of salvation that keyed salvation to a specific event where you had to walk the aisle and profess faith in a certain way. This despite the fact that "invitations" in worship weren't invented until the 18th century.

I much prefer Wesleyan theology over any other kind of theology I have learned about no matter what a particular denomination's position on issues of sexuality. If I waited around for a church I agreed with 100% I'd probably not be in church anywhere.

 

[Nihilistic Journey]

Not to derail my own thread but perhaps I do not know enough to feel insulted? I dont see nihilism as a rejection or disdain for traditional values. Nihilism is a loss of ones sense of purpose through the loss of ones deeply held belief system. Nihilism can be a very troubling situation as one tends to loose hope. I'm proud that I was able to go to the edge of nihilism and make it back again. It wasn't an easy journey to make.

Nor is disdain of traditional values necessarily a bad thing. Moses and the post exodus Isrealites had to move one when God introduced himself in a new way. Jesus had great disdain for the traditional values of his day as Wesley had disdain as to how the church didn't tend to the common people.

The journey is another attraction to Methoidism. Salvation like life is a journey. Everyday I try to be a little better than the day before in everything I do.

 

[Qyöt27]

Not to derail my own thread but perhaps I do not know enough to feel insulted? I dont see nihilism as a rejection or disdain for traditional values. Nihilism is a loss of ones sense of purpose through the loss of ones deeply held belief system. Nihilism can be a very troubling situation as one tends to loose hope. I'm proud that I was able to go to the edge of nihilism and make it back again. It wasn't an easy journey to make.

My guess is that it's due to the association of philosophical nihilism with Nietzsche (although there are a lot of popular misconceptions of what Nietzsche was actually talking about). That may or may not have anything to do with how you're using the term, though. The same thing tends to happen with existentialism as well, with or without acknowledging Kierkegaard*.

*for example,

That word — propositional — was a favorite term of the late Francis Schaeffer, the goateed guru whose influence on American evangelicalism can't be overstated. Schaeffer's writings were a prolonged fretting about what he saw as the decline of Western civilization — something he didn't clearly distinguish from Christianity itself. He traced that decline to, believe it or not, the Danish Christian philosopher Soren Kierkegaard, whom he blamed for the corruption and denial of "propositional truth." Schaeffer never said so explicitly, but all of his complaints about Kierkegaard also seemed to reflect his feelings about the Gospels and about Jesus himself, who preferred parables to propositions.

 

[circuitrider]

The journey is another attraction to Methoidism. Salvation like life is a journey. Everyday I try to be a little better than the day before in everything I do.

Amen!

One of the things I like about the UMC is the emphasis on the Wesleyan Quadrilateral. We get our faith from Scripture, Tradition, Reason and Experience. Bryan seemed concerned that you weren't following "tradition."

I've have no problem with tradition when it continues to serve a purpose. But not all traditions are worth maintaining. They also need to stand the test of the other three parts of the quadrilateral. Is the tradition scriptural as we currently understand the scriptures? Is the traditional reasonable? Does the tradition match our experience with God and of God's leadership in our life and the Church?

 

[RomansFiveEight]

For some Christians, human sexuality is an extraordinarily important topic in their own personal theology. For some, it's THE most important. So it's a natural question, if you support LGBT inclusion, why not just go to a denomination that agrees with you? But it's as much true for folks who support inclusion, as it is for LGBT persons who are in our congregations, and even in our pulpits. Because they genuinely are United Methodists. The history, theology, polity; it all makes sense. There is one exception, of course. As it was an exception decades ago when folks thought women should be ordained; and so forth. Social issues have always been divisive.

Even though we are similar to some other denominations, some components of our theology are very different. Leaving a denomination that I struggle with one or two social issues on, for a denomination for whom I disagree with several theological issues, doesn't quite make sense to me, although it may make sense for others. For some, their politics, and their social issues, are more important than anything else. And that's true across the spectrum.

There are some who clearly aren't a good fit; like I mentioned above. But there is diversity in the UMC and that's a good thing. I've commented before that the struggle between the left and the right in the UMC is like a game of tug-of-war. Each side is trying to pull the other side down but if the rope breaks; they'll all fall. I don't want to go to some church that has already broken the rope; and has two groups, one that's fallen all the way to the right and one that's fallen all the way to the left. I cherish the UMC's controversies and divisions; because they keep us honest and keep us from running away with our political ethos.

 

[circuitrider]

There are huge problems with being a one issue Christian.

There are some folks who would vote for the Devil himself for President as long as he came out as being against same sex marriage.

Make a single issue the only issue can really be short sighted. Some day the UMC and others will come to conclusions about same sex marriage. When that happens it isn't going to be the over arching issue it is now. If someone joins a church just because of a position of social issues, as R-5-8 puts it, then eventually you will realize there are much larger issues of theology that you've been ignoring.

You end up straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

Hyper-Calvinism is far more dangerous to the future of Christianity than any view on marriage equality.

 

[Celticflower]

(I love it when Romans and Circuitrider get going -- I learn so much! Thanks guys!)

 

[circuitrider]

You are too kind Celticflower

 

[BryanW92]

Kind of insulting question at the end there Bryan. I can't imagine anyone joining a church to "disdain traditional values."

I didn't choose the screen name that includes the word "nihilistic", which means a disdain for traditional values.