The United Methodist Schism

[dreadnought]

I didn't know that.
And you are still there?

I think it's better to stand my ground and set a good example than flee.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I think it's better to stand my ground and set a good example than flee.

Only if they know that's what you are doing; otherwise you are condoning her. It must be very difficult for you.

 

[dreadnought]

Only if they know that's what you are doing; otherwise you are condoning her. It must be very difficult for you.

I'm not going to let a bishop drive me out of my church.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I'm not going to let a bishop drive me out of my church.

What are your plans?

 

[hedrick]

What are your plans?

There's a pretty good chance that in the 2019 meeting on this topic, provisions will be made for UMC churches that don't agree with the jurisdiction they're in. Possibilities range from two UMCs to "local option" within one Church. If I were a Methodist in a church I liked, I would wait a year to see if the result was going to be satisfactory.

Admittedly this has been going on for decades, but I don't think it can be delayed any longer. The jurisdiction Dreadnought is in is simply ignoring the Book of Discipline. It's hard to believe that will continue beyond Feb 2019.

 

[1stcenturylady]

There's a pretty good chance that in the 2019 meeting on this topic, provisions will be made for UMC churches that don't agree with the jurisdiction they're in. Possibilities range from two UMCs to "local option" within one Church. If I were a Methodist in a church I liked, I would wait a year to see if the result was going to be satisfactory.

Admittedly this has been going on for decades, but I don't think it can be delayed any longer. The jurisdiction Dreadnought is in is simply ignoring the Book of Discipline. It's hard to believe that will continue beyond Feb 2019.

It seems the denomination wants to be part of the "falling away." At least that won't include Dreadnought.

 

[dreadnought]

What are your plans?

I'll stick around. The bishop has very little to do with the local church. If she ever does come around, I probably won't see her, unless she comes to one of our services.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I'll stick around. The bishop has very little to do with the local church. If she ever does come around, I probably won't see her, unless she comes to one of our services.

All this must have been on my mind last night because I had a vivid dream about Methodists and perversions in the church body. And you and I didn't participate. But my ex-husband did. LOL

 

[dreadnought]

All this must have been on my mind last night because I had a vivid dream about Methodists and perversions in the church body. And you and I didn't participate. But my ex-husband did. LOL

You'll have to have a talk with your husband.

 

[1stcenturylady]

You'll have to have a talk with your husband.

My Christian abusive ex-husband left me for the wife of his best friend. He's a lost cause.

 

[dreadnought]

My Christian abusive ex-husband left me for the wife of his best friend. He's a lost cause.

I read your post wrong and missed the "ex" in front of the "husband." Sorry about that.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I read your post wrong and missed the "ex" in front of the "husband." Sorry about that.

 

[Anto9us]

In some ways I feel the UMC is TOO BIG -- global as it is -- there is going to be too much resistance to gay issue because of very conservative elements in Africa, the options hedrick mentions that may come about in 2019 might be a good thing.

 

[hedrick]

The bishops have just decided to support the One Church model. This avoids any parallel structures. It removes restrictive language from the Book of Discipline but allows churches and other entities to be more restrictive. In particular, Central Conferences, i.e. Africans, can adopt restrictive policies.

I note however that similar proposals have not gotten enough votes in the past. I’m not clear why that would change.

 

[seeking.IAM]

The bishops have just decided to support the One Church model...I note however that similar proposals have not gotten enough votes in the past. I’m not clear why that would change.

I have a friend who says the world changes one death at a time. I would add to that one birth at a time. Although I know what I am about to say comes from a different arena - politics not religion - my state legislature was trying to push through anti-gay legislation because their study said if they waited until another legislative session it would not pass due to the changing demographic of the voters. That is, that younger persons wouldn't have the same views as older. Could the church be changing in the same manner such that what wouldn't pass before can pass now? Or maybe people are just tired of it all?

 

[hedrick]

The Methodist church has a different demographic situation from any other mainline US church. The non-US portion of the church (primarily African) is becoming larger over time. This makes allowance for homosexuality less and less likely. However the more liberal areas have stopped being willing to wait, as other mainline churches and the culture as a whole have become more accepting.

I personally don't think a split can be avoided. However there's been an interesting alternative proposed: Which Way Forward?. Chris Ritter suggests a kind of partial split. He doesn't think any of the three options considered by the bishops will work. In particular, he doesn't think there are enough votes in the General Conference for the approach the bishops are recommending.

There is in the Book of Discipline a concept "affiliated autonomous conference." These are conferences with their own Book of Discipline that share with the main church institutions such as the pension plan and support agencies. They send representatives to the General Conference and Council of Bishops. These were created for non-US areas, but it could be used in the US.

It's an interesting proposal, but it still requires some degree of compromise, and I don't think that's going to happen. The recent bishops meeting was unable to get the necessary 2/3 majority for two changes encouraging equal treatment of women. I think it's really unlikely that they could get it for changes that would allow ordination of gays.

 

[dreadnought]

In some ways I feel the UMC is TOO BIG -- global as it is -- there is going to be too much resistance to gay issue because of very conservative elements in Africa, the options hedrick mentions that may come about in 2019 might be a good thing.

The Lord taught us that homosexuality is a sin (Leviticus 18:22). I think the resistance to that is among the liberals in America. It pains me to disagree with a Vulcan.

 

[1stcenturylady]

The bishops have just decided to support the One Church model. This avoids any parallel structures. It removes restrictive language from the Book of Discipline but allows churches and other entities to be more restrictive. In particular, Central Conferences, i.e. Africans, can adopt restrictive policies.

I note however that similar proposals have not gotten enough votes in the past. I’m not clear why that would change.

What is the Book of Discipline? It it Methodist or Presb.?

 

[hedrick]

What is the Book of Discipline? It it Methodist or Presb.?

Methodist. This whole discussion is about events in the Methodist Church.

 

[GoodLightSJ]

My Rev. has suggested that church property being denomination-owned may slow things down (because if a church decided to break away from the UMC, it would then have to forfeit their usage of those grounds).

We shall see.