I talked to my pastor after the Michigan Annual Conference held at the beginning of June. I also heard from a couple friends who attended. The pastor and the friends said what the Annual Conference did could be described as a progressive sweep, a repudiation to the disastrous anti-LGBTQ General Conference in February. Three weeks have passed since the conference ended, so I’m relying on the report from the United Methodist News Service.
The actions in response to GC:
* Approved an aspirational statement “to live into an expression of Methodism that includes LGBTQIA people in full life and membership of the UMC.”
* Took a straw poll of conference members to guide Michigan leadership: 69% favor policies to allow but do not require clergy to officiate at same-gender weddings and allow ordination regardless of sexual orientation. This is 69% who disagree with the current Book of Discipline and with the actions taken at GC.
* Of those commissioned for church leadership were two openly LGBTQ persons, one of them in a same-gender marriage.
* Delegates elected to go to next year’s General Conference were all progressives. The group is also much younger than previous delegations. The delegates for next year’s Jurisdictional Conference are likewise all progressives.
For my non-Methodist readers, an annual conference is a small region, a state or part of a state, though in the West it might be two states. It’s called an annual conference because there is a big meeting every year of all the clergy and delegates from all the congregations. A Jurisdictional Conference covers a multi-state area. There are five of them in the US. They hold meetings every four years, just a few months after General Conference. And GC is the primary rule making body and has delegates from around the world.
Not all annual conferences have happened yet. For those that have I’m not interested in wading through dozens of reports on UMNS to pull out the GC related nuggets – especially if someone else is doing it. That someone is Rev. Jeremy Smith, who writes the blog Hacking Christianity.
Smith lists numbers from David Livingston of Kansas about the South Central Jurisdiction (Nebraska to Texas, New Mexico to Arkansas): 69% of the delegates being sent to GC 2020 from SCJ oppose the Traditional Plan passed in GC2019. 28% of those delegates support the Traditional Plan. This is important news from the American South.
Those on the Wesleyan Covenant Association (conservative) delegate slates in annual conferences across the country barely topped 30% of the vote. Many of the WCA leadership lost their bids to be delegates. It seems to be a rout.
On the progressive side there was an intention to make sure the delegates were younger and include more people of color and more who are LGBTQ. This will be the most diverse US delegation. The entire delegation from Oregon-Idaho, clergy and laity, is queer. The entire New England clergy delegation is queer. There are even some queer delegates from the Old South. For the first time since 1988 progressives will lead all five US jurisdictions.
Does a youthful delegation mean “inexperienced,” as some have claimed, and unable to meet the needs of GC or should we rejoice that “a whole bunch of young, diverse UMs just said they cared enough about the future of the denomination to be elected to General Conference?”
In violation of the Book of Discipline (GC2019 didn’t change the rules, only made punishment more severe) five other conferences also ordained LGBTQ clergy – including one in the South!. All of this is a strong rebuke of what GC2019 did.
Smith crunches some numbers and says that with the more progressive delegates from the SCJ and elsewhere GC2020 comes very close to being able to overturn the Traditional Plan. But it may not be enough. Conservatives need only 100 out of 482 American votes to combine with delegates from other conservative countries to prevail – by probably less than 2%.
So, now what? Do we try to overturn the Traditional Plan? Or is it better to use this enhanced progressive presence to negotiate a more equitable separation rather than expulsion? Is it worth keeping the existing UMC – along with its many structural problems – around? Or do we concentrate on something new?
I mentioned the Michigan Conference also elected a progressive slate to next year’s Jurisdictional Conference. So did most other jurisdictions. While it doesn’t matter to what happens at GC2020 it does matter to the future of the denomination. Jurisdictions elect bishops and there will likely be at least a dozen new progressive bishops. Various denomination boards and agencies will receive an influx of progressive members, people who are suspicious of the straight white power structure.
Sunday, June 23, 2019
Thursday, May 2, 2019
The Judicial Council ruled on the Traditional Plan
I was reminded this week that many members of the United Methodist Church don’t know about denomination structure. Most of the time they don’t need to. They may hear the big news items, such as the way the General Conference voted in February. But they don’t hear about the smaller yet important items. It is only people like me who know the structure because we need to.
So, a bit of refresher. The United Methodist Church constitution lays out governance similar to the United States Constitution. GC takes the role of Congress in making church laws and updating the *Book of Discipline*. The Judicial Council acts as the Supreme Court in verifying that what the GC does aligns with the constitution and handle disputes within the denomination. The Council of Bishops act as the President, carrying out what the GC approves.
GC approved the Traditional Plan at their special meeting in February. Also at that meeting the Traditional Plan was referred to the Judicial Council for review – just as the plan was referred to review right after it was announced as an option last summer. It didn’t pass then.
The JC has now met and handed down its ruling. The Traditional Plan is made up of 17 pieces and some of them were ruled unconstitutional. Some were ruled as valid. The JC did not say that because parts of the plan are unconstitutional, then all of it is. It ruled on each piece separately.
Some of the parts declared illegal (my summary):
* Bishops can be forced out for ordaining LGBT pastors.
* Local boards of ordained ministry have to certify adherence to the entire Book of Discipline. They must decline candidates to ministry who do not meet the standards of sexuality.
* Annual (regional) Conferences must certify nominees or face financial penalties.
Some of the parts declared legal:
* A marriage certificate for a same-sex marriage is evidence of being a “self-avowed practicing homosexual.”
* Bishops are prohibited from ordaining homosexuals, boards of ordained ministry are prohibited from approving homosexual candidates. Bishops cannot elevate a homosexual to bishop.
* A bishop cannot dismiss a complaint against a pastor’s action unless there is no basis in law or fact. The complainant must be a part of the complaint’s resolution.
And a separate piece declared legal:
* There are certain circumstances in which a congregation can leave the denomination and retain local church property.
This last one isn’t a part of the Traditional Plan, but is important because the Plan passed. This is the first step in allowing a denomination split.
There are, of course, reactions to the ruling from both conservatives and progressives.
This is the season when youth join the church. In much of the United Methodist tradition a child is baptized as an infant and usually as a teenager confirms as their own what was said at their baptism. This is seen as a rite of passage to adulthood. The youth is given full membership. My own congregation welcomed five youth last Sunday.
The confirmation class of First United Methodist Church of Omaha, Nebraska was a bit different. The eight youth did not go through with the confirmation service. They wanted to wait to see how their local church responds to GC and its LGBT prohibitions. This was done in a congregation where the pastor supports LGBT equality. In their delay the youth have the support of the pastor and the congregation. If we don’t deal with this more youth will decline to join.
Here’s a video of their statement to the congregation. From comments it looks like the video shut off just before a standing ovation.
So, a bit of refresher. The United Methodist Church constitution lays out governance similar to the United States Constitution. GC takes the role of Congress in making church laws and updating the *Book of Discipline*. The Judicial Council acts as the Supreme Court in verifying that what the GC does aligns with the constitution and handle disputes within the denomination. The Council of Bishops act as the President, carrying out what the GC approves.
GC approved the Traditional Plan at their special meeting in February. Also at that meeting the Traditional Plan was referred to the Judicial Council for review – just as the plan was referred to review right after it was announced as an option last summer. It didn’t pass then.
The JC has now met and handed down its ruling. The Traditional Plan is made up of 17 pieces and some of them were ruled unconstitutional. Some were ruled as valid. The JC did not say that because parts of the plan are unconstitutional, then all of it is. It ruled on each piece separately.
Some of the parts declared illegal (my summary):
* Bishops can be forced out for ordaining LGBT pastors.
* Local boards of ordained ministry have to certify adherence to the entire Book of Discipline. They must decline candidates to ministry who do not meet the standards of sexuality.
* Annual (regional) Conferences must certify nominees or face financial penalties.
Some of the parts declared legal:
* A marriage certificate for a same-sex marriage is evidence of being a “self-avowed practicing homosexual.”
* Bishops are prohibited from ordaining homosexuals, boards of ordained ministry are prohibited from approving homosexual candidates. Bishops cannot elevate a homosexual to bishop.
* A bishop cannot dismiss a complaint against a pastor’s action unless there is no basis in law or fact. The complainant must be a part of the complaint’s resolution.
And a separate piece declared legal:
* There are certain circumstances in which a congregation can leave the denomination and retain local church property.
This last one isn’t a part of the Traditional Plan, but is important because the Plan passed. This is the first step in allowing a denomination split.
There are, of course, reactions to the ruling from both conservatives and progressives.
This is the season when youth join the church. In much of the United Methodist tradition a child is baptized as an infant and usually as a teenager confirms as their own what was said at their baptism. This is seen as a rite of passage to adulthood. The youth is given full membership. My own congregation welcomed five youth last Sunday.
The confirmation class of First United Methodist Church of Omaha, Nebraska was a bit different. The eight youth did not go through with the confirmation service. They wanted to wait to see how their local church responds to GC and its LGBT prohibitions. This was done in a congregation where the pastor supports LGBT equality. In their delay the youth have the support of the pastor and the congregation. If we don’t deal with this more youth will decline to join.
Here’s a video of their statement to the congregation. From comments it looks like the video shut off just before a standing ovation.
Thursday, April 11, 2019
Three views on splitting
Rev. Jeremy Smith is a pastor in the United Methodist Church. He writes the blog Hacking Christianity and has had several posts leading up to and after the February General Conference. Smith has posted two essays by guest writers, one urging a split and another discussing the harsh consequences of a split. Smith wrote a third – how progressives can stay and fight.
On the split side is O. Wesley Allen, Jr. of the Perkins School of Theology at Southern Methodist University. He lays out his reasons why a split is both inevitable and necessary. Some of his reasons:
Neither side can win this battle. Because of the way the denomination is shrinking in America and growing elsewhere in the world progressives will never have enough votes to change the denomination’s stance on homosexuality. But conservatives don’t have enough votes to change the denomination’s constitution to get the kinds of accountability and penalties they want. They can’t force the Western Jurisdiction to get rid of a lesbian bishop, stop the ordination of gay clergy, or punish clergy who preside over same-sex weddings. We’re at a stalemate with each side demonizing the other and moderates trying to distance themselves from both the left and right.
There is a theological divide. Allen says there are three relationships that need healing – between human and God, between one human and another, and between a human and himself or herself.
Conservatives emphasize the human – God relationship and see personal purity and obedience to God as most important. Being LGBT is seen as a moral failing, violating both personal purity and obedience to God.
Progressives emphasize the human – human relationship and see it as an expression of the human – God relationship. They see this as the foundation of social ethics. We are to be just, inclusive, and loving of all people. Being LGBT is as natural and of God as being straight. So they consider the ethics of same-sex relations in the same way they look at straight relations.
Allen says these two views of LGBT people are irreconcilable. We must split.
Allen suggests we shouldn’t look at this as a divorce. This is more like siblings dealing with the death of a parent. Even while in grief and while not getting along there are tasks to complete, such as how to divide up the inheritance and how to live when the parent is no longer there.
Most of the 61 comments agree with Allen. David brought up an important point – what will a split do to a local congregation? There are related questions: What happens when the only Methodist church in town takes the direction you don’t like? What happens when a congregation is divided?
Rev. Rebecca L. Holland reminds us of what we lose if we split. In her view we would lose too much.
We might lose the guaranteed appointment system. All elders (ordained pastors) will be assigned to a church, no matter their gender, skin color, or abilities. This appointment system means a bishop can make cross-racial and cross-cultural appointments, which fosters diversity. This system protects women, people of color, and people with disabilities. Holland is all three.
A split could cause her to lose vital health insurance. It is especially vital to her because of her disability. She wonders if a Progressive Methodist Church would offer health insurance. I wonder of a Progressive Methodist Church would have enough institutional resources to provide heath insurance.
Holland got through seminary through extensive aid. Would a smaller denomination be able to afford supporting seminarians, especially those of minority groups? We could lose the diversity of our new pastors.
A split could damage global missions. One example is UMCOR, the United Methodist Committee on Relief, which often gets to disaster scenes before the Red Cross. One can donate by designating a bit extra in their offering. A few years ago United Methodists donated significantly to reduce malaria and the work brought more than a 50% reduction in malaria deaths. A church that isn’t global and connected as ours is wouldn’t have been as effective.
There were a dozen comments to Holland’s post. Sarah wrote the first:
In Smith’s essay he suggests we can all stay in the same denomination and, like seat belts reduce the harm of fatalities in auto accidents, we progressives can reduce the harm of the Traditionalist Plan. In the same manner that the Western Jurisdiction has said they will ignore the Traditionalist Plan, the North Central and Northeastern Jurisdictions can do the same. This would require the bishops in those areas to issue written commitments that they would not enforce the Plan.
Since neither side has the 2/3 majority to change the denomination constitution the South Central and Southeastern Jurisdictions won’t be able to meddle in the ways the Western Jurisdiction defies the Traditionalist Plan. In this way progressives can keep church unity – or prompt conservatives to leave.
Smith admits a big problem with this idea – there would be no harm reduction for LGBT people in the South Central and Southeastern Jurisdictions.
Smith says this mass Biblical Obedience (a better name for Book of Discipline disobedience) depends on a question: Is preserving the current United Methodist denomination worth it? Is a split worth risking the hospitals, seminaries, and 35,000 churches? Is it worth risking the highly effective United Methodist Women, the ethnic ministry, the joint effort we can accomplish with our apportionments (what the local congregation gives to the national and global church), our ordination of women, and the 47% that see a shared future with LGBT people?
Commenters shared three main responses: (1) We need to resolve the issue, not keep battling. Both sides no longer want a church with the other side in it. The only resolution is a split. (2) I don’t have the energy for such a prolonged fight. (3) LGBT youth still see their worth still up for debate.
On the split side is O. Wesley Allen, Jr. of the Perkins School of Theology at Southern Methodist University. He lays out his reasons why a split is both inevitable and necessary. Some of his reasons:
Neither side can win this battle. Because of the way the denomination is shrinking in America and growing elsewhere in the world progressives will never have enough votes to change the denomination’s stance on homosexuality. But conservatives don’t have enough votes to change the denomination’s constitution to get the kinds of accountability and penalties they want. They can’t force the Western Jurisdiction to get rid of a lesbian bishop, stop the ordination of gay clergy, or punish clergy who preside over same-sex weddings. We’re at a stalemate with each side demonizing the other and moderates trying to distance themselves from both the left and right.
There is a theological divide. Allen says there are three relationships that need healing – between human and God, between one human and another, and between a human and himself or herself.
Conservatives emphasize the human – God relationship and see personal purity and obedience to God as most important. Being LGBT is seen as a moral failing, violating both personal purity and obedience to God.
Progressives emphasize the human – human relationship and see it as an expression of the human – God relationship. They see this as the foundation of social ethics. We are to be just, inclusive, and loving of all people. Being LGBT is as natural and of God as being straight. So they consider the ethics of same-sex relations in the same way they look at straight relations.
Allen says these two views of LGBT people are irreconcilable. We must split.
Allen suggests we shouldn’t look at this as a divorce. This is more like siblings dealing with the death of a parent. Even while in grief and while not getting along there are tasks to complete, such as how to divide up the inheritance and how to live when the parent is no longer there.
Most of the 61 comments agree with Allen. David brought up an important point – what will a split do to a local congregation? There are related questions: What happens when the only Methodist church in town takes the direction you don’t like? What happens when a congregation is divided?
Rev. Rebecca L. Holland reminds us of what we lose if we split. In her view we would lose too much.
We might lose the guaranteed appointment system. All elders (ordained pastors) will be assigned to a church, no matter their gender, skin color, or abilities. This appointment system means a bishop can make cross-racial and cross-cultural appointments, which fosters diversity. This system protects women, people of color, and people with disabilities. Holland is all three.
A split could cause her to lose vital health insurance. It is especially vital to her because of her disability. She wonders if a Progressive Methodist Church would offer health insurance. I wonder of a Progressive Methodist Church would have enough institutional resources to provide heath insurance.
Holland got through seminary through extensive aid. Would a smaller denomination be able to afford supporting seminarians, especially those of minority groups? We could lose the diversity of our new pastors.
A split could damage global missions. One example is UMCOR, the United Methodist Committee on Relief, which often gets to disaster scenes before the Red Cross. One can donate by designating a bit extra in their offering. A few years ago United Methodists donated significantly to reduce malaria and the work brought more than a 50% reduction in malaria deaths. A church that isn’t global and connected as ours is wouldn’t have been as effective.
There were a dozen comments to Holland’s post. Sarah wrote the first:
These issues are why we should make the split happen in a conscious, intentional way rather than smaller groups splitting off here and there. The splitting is happening [and] the question before us is how to do it well.Mike’s comment started with a quote from James Baldwin, which sums up my feelings of Holland’s post:
We can disagree and still love each other unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist.Yes, diversity in appointments, health insurance, and UMCOR are all vital issues But LGBT people are the targets of institutional violence. If there is no split we’re the ones who will bear the damage and would want a realistic plan for ending the damage.
In Smith’s essay he suggests we can all stay in the same denomination and, like seat belts reduce the harm of fatalities in auto accidents, we progressives can reduce the harm of the Traditionalist Plan. In the same manner that the Western Jurisdiction has said they will ignore the Traditionalist Plan, the North Central and Northeastern Jurisdictions can do the same. This would require the bishops in those areas to issue written commitments that they would not enforce the Plan.
Since neither side has the 2/3 majority to change the denomination constitution the South Central and Southeastern Jurisdictions won’t be able to meddle in the ways the Western Jurisdiction defies the Traditionalist Plan. In this way progressives can keep church unity – or prompt conservatives to leave.
Smith admits a big problem with this idea – there would be no harm reduction for LGBT people in the South Central and Southeastern Jurisdictions.
Smith says this mass Biblical Obedience (a better name for Book of Discipline disobedience) depends on a question: Is preserving the current United Methodist denomination worth it? Is a split worth risking the hospitals, seminaries, and 35,000 churches? Is it worth risking the highly effective United Methodist Women, the ethnic ministry, the joint effort we can accomplish with our apportionments (what the local congregation gives to the national and global church), our ordination of women, and the 47% that see a shared future with LGBT people?
Commenters shared three main responses: (1) We need to resolve the issue, not keep battling. Both sides no longer want a church with the other side in it. The only resolution is a split. (2) I don’t have the energy for such a prolonged fight. (3) LGBT youth still see their worth still up for debate.
Monday, March 4, 2019
A day of discussion and healing
A busy and gay weekend.
Saturday evening I went to the LGBTQ Comedy Fest put on by Motor City Pride. The show featured four stand-up acts. Three were quite funny, one not so much. Much of the material is not safe for blogging. The show didn’t keep track of time very well – they started almost 10 minutes late, the intermission ran long, and the raffle took lots of time. So the show ended at 11:10, making me a bit annoyed because I had to be at church early the next morning to rehearse the bell choir.
Early Sunday afternoon the Dedicated Reconciling United Methodists (I’m on the leadership team) hosted a program to hear from Rev. Melanie Carey, one of the clergy delegates at last week’s General Conference, and pastor of Nardin Park United Methodist Church where this program was held.
That morning Rev. Carey held a service of reconciliation. A few people who attended said the service was a reason they decided not to leave the church. One effect of the GC was that progressive and moderate congregations can no longer be quiet on the issue of LGBTQ inclusion. They see they must actually say something. Rev. Carey did that in the service. The church sign out front now includes “LGBTQ People Welcome Here.”
Rev. Carey talked about what happened and what it means, though I knew most of it from my work in following GC. Her biggest point was that because of the way the United Methodist Church is structured there can be no legislative solution to the current crisis facing the church.
Rev. Carey then opened the floor for questions. A few of the questions were about splitting the denomination. I asked one of those questions: If there is a legislative proposal to split the denomination in next year’s General Conference do you think it would pass? She did. This is one legislative solution that could work. Conservatives and Africans are also looking for a split.
What did the denomination get for this four-day General Conference? A bad reputation with a publicity nightmare, and a waste of $3.5 million.
After the session ended I talked to many of my friends who were there. To one of them I mentioned the idea that if there is a split the progressive side has a chance to rebuild of the denomination and that can and should include removing the misogyny, racism, homophobia, and other such things that have been the foundation of the denomination since it’s formation in 1968 and part of the parent denominations well before then. This friend responded by naming one of the prominent pastors in Kansas, who seems to be leading the discussion on a denominational split, and said he and old straight white men should get out of the way. It is the women, people of color (especially women of color), and LGBTQ people who should be leading the redesign.
In May regional conferences will be held and one of their tasks will be to elect delegates to next year’s General Conference. My region covers Michigan. I’m not a delegate, so I talked to a few who are, suggesting two things, that a proposal to split the denomination be forwarded to GC and that the delegates from our region be under 35, women, people of color, and LGBTQ. They all liked the idea, though one said, good luck with that!
On to a third event. Towards the end of last week I got an email from Rev. Jeff Nelson. I knew and loved him from his time as the pastor of my church. He moved on to Royal Oak three years ago. The email invited me to a service on Sunday evening, but didn’t explain much of what was to happen. I didn’t think I needed yet another service.
In talking to people Sunday afternoon I heard more of what the service would be about. When a couple friends suggested I ride with them and have supper with them I decided to go. I’m glad I did. The place was full with some people standing and others in an overflow area. More watched by livestream (though I heard that stopped working about halfway through) and a video will be posted later.
It was a service of healing. Pastor Jeff began by saying the denomination got it wrong. His church in Royal Oak will continue to be welcoming and a safe space. Parents don’t have to be ashamed of their LGBTQ children. Same-sex couples don’t have to use euphemisms like “longtime companion.”
At one point Pastor Jeff asked other pastors in attendance to come forward and, one at a time, to say their name, their church, and that all were welcome at their church. I counted 45 pastors who came forward covering the area Monroe to Flint to Lansing. Alas, that doesn’t include every United Methodist Church in the area.
The offering for the evening went to Affirmations LGBTQ Community Center in Ferndale (two miles from the church in Royal Oak) and the Ruth Ellis Center in Highland Park (seven miles from the church). I volunteer at the Ruth Ellis Center and donate to both. A representative of the Ruth Ellis Center spoke, first sharing a bit of history, and then explaining their mission to help LGBTQ youth. The top reason why LGBTQ youth are homeless: rejection by parents. The top reason why parents reject their children: religious doctrine – such as what General Conference passed last Tuesday. Which is exactly why Pastor Jeff wanted the evening’s offering to go to them. Pastor Jeff said, “Whatever amount you were thinking of giving, add a zero.” I don’t know how much was raised.
Pastor Jeff invited three people to speak. One was a pastor in Flint, known for his social justice poetry. He turned the mic over to his lesbian daughter, who read a poem she had written (with help from her father). She addressed the 430 delegates who had voted for the Traditional Plan: I am not angry. I don’t have time for that. I’ve got better things to do. However, I am resolved.
The second speaker was Nicole. Nicole’s wife wanted to check out the Royal Oak church, so for several months Nicole sat in the parking lot while her wife went inside for services and meetings. Pastor Jeff invited her in and she finally did. Soon she was a regular and contributing member. This past week when Pastor Jeff called her, she said you’re asking me to drop my membership, aren’t you. He said, no, I’m asking you to tell your story.
The third speaker was Pastor Julie, a lesbian, from my own church, welcomed and hired by Pastor Jeff. Her message was brief (Pastor Jeff’s introduction was just as long). When she heard the news on Tuesday she wanted out. She even started packing her office. Then she realized: Who will stand up for me if I leave?
Then came the sermon from a gay pastor in Lansing. He is allowed to serve because he doesn’t have a partner. But that means slowly dying inside. His passion is being a pastor. He also yearns for a partner to love. The current denomination rules won’t let him do both.
The evening included four soloists, one of them singing with a choir that came an hour early to rehearse. There was also communion, served with gluten-free bread to make sure no one was excluded.
As part of his closing Pastor Jeff asked can you feel a new church being born tonight?
The whole service was long – 2:20. I appreciated every minute of it. I may have felt differently if I was hungry, but friends and I had a good supper at Pronto!, a gay-owned restaurant next door to the church. A reception was held at Pronto! after the service, which I heard was donated by Pronto! I didn’t go. It had already been a long day.
Thank you to Rev. Melanie Carey for your work at GC and for sharing your experience. Thank you to Rev. Jeff Nelson for your healing service.
Saturday evening I went to the LGBTQ Comedy Fest put on by Motor City Pride. The show featured four stand-up acts. Three were quite funny, one not so much. Much of the material is not safe for blogging. The show didn’t keep track of time very well – they started almost 10 minutes late, the intermission ran long, and the raffle took lots of time. So the show ended at 11:10, making me a bit annoyed because I had to be at church early the next morning to rehearse the bell choir.
Early Sunday afternoon the Dedicated Reconciling United Methodists (I’m on the leadership team) hosted a program to hear from Rev. Melanie Carey, one of the clergy delegates at last week’s General Conference, and pastor of Nardin Park United Methodist Church where this program was held.
That morning Rev. Carey held a service of reconciliation. A few people who attended said the service was a reason they decided not to leave the church. One effect of the GC was that progressive and moderate congregations can no longer be quiet on the issue of LGBTQ inclusion. They see they must actually say something. Rev. Carey did that in the service. The church sign out front now includes “LGBTQ People Welcome Here.”
Rev. Carey talked about what happened and what it means, though I knew most of it from my work in following GC. Her biggest point was that because of the way the United Methodist Church is structured there can be no legislative solution to the current crisis facing the church.
Rev. Carey then opened the floor for questions. A few of the questions were about splitting the denomination. I asked one of those questions: If there is a legislative proposal to split the denomination in next year’s General Conference do you think it would pass? She did. This is one legislative solution that could work. Conservatives and Africans are also looking for a split.
What did the denomination get for this four-day General Conference? A bad reputation with a publicity nightmare, and a waste of $3.5 million.
After the session ended I talked to many of my friends who were there. To one of them I mentioned the idea that if there is a split the progressive side has a chance to rebuild of the denomination and that can and should include removing the misogyny, racism, homophobia, and other such things that have been the foundation of the denomination since it’s formation in 1968 and part of the parent denominations well before then. This friend responded by naming one of the prominent pastors in Kansas, who seems to be leading the discussion on a denominational split, and said he and old straight white men should get out of the way. It is the women, people of color (especially women of color), and LGBTQ people who should be leading the redesign.
In May regional conferences will be held and one of their tasks will be to elect delegates to next year’s General Conference. My region covers Michigan. I’m not a delegate, so I talked to a few who are, suggesting two things, that a proposal to split the denomination be forwarded to GC and that the delegates from our region be under 35, women, people of color, and LGBTQ. They all liked the idea, though one said, good luck with that!
On to a third event. Towards the end of last week I got an email from Rev. Jeff Nelson. I knew and loved him from his time as the pastor of my church. He moved on to Royal Oak three years ago. The email invited me to a service on Sunday evening, but didn’t explain much of what was to happen. I didn’t think I needed yet another service.
In talking to people Sunday afternoon I heard more of what the service would be about. When a couple friends suggested I ride with them and have supper with them I decided to go. I’m glad I did. The place was full with some people standing and others in an overflow area. More watched by livestream (though I heard that stopped working about halfway through) and a video will be posted later.
It was a service of healing. Pastor Jeff began by saying the denomination got it wrong. His church in Royal Oak will continue to be welcoming and a safe space. Parents don’t have to be ashamed of their LGBTQ children. Same-sex couples don’t have to use euphemisms like “longtime companion.”
At one point Pastor Jeff asked other pastors in attendance to come forward and, one at a time, to say their name, their church, and that all were welcome at their church. I counted 45 pastors who came forward covering the area Monroe to Flint to Lansing. Alas, that doesn’t include every United Methodist Church in the area.
The offering for the evening went to Affirmations LGBTQ Community Center in Ferndale (two miles from the church in Royal Oak) and the Ruth Ellis Center in Highland Park (seven miles from the church). I volunteer at the Ruth Ellis Center and donate to both. A representative of the Ruth Ellis Center spoke, first sharing a bit of history, and then explaining their mission to help LGBTQ youth. The top reason why LGBTQ youth are homeless: rejection by parents. The top reason why parents reject their children: religious doctrine – such as what General Conference passed last Tuesday. Which is exactly why Pastor Jeff wanted the evening’s offering to go to them. Pastor Jeff said, “Whatever amount you were thinking of giving, add a zero.” I don’t know how much was raised.
Pastor Jeff invited three people to speak. One was a pastor in Flint, known for his social justice poetry. He turned the mic over to his lesbian daughter, who read a poem she had written (with help from her father). She addressed the 430 delegates who had voted for the Traditional Plan: I am not angry. I don’t have time for that. I’ve got better things to do. However, I am resolved.
The second speaker was Nicole. Nicole’s wife wanted to check out the Royal Oak church, so for several months Nicole sat in the parking lot while her wife went inside for services and meetings. Pastor Jeff invited her in and she finally did. Soon she was a regular and contributing member. This past week when Pastor Jeff called her, she said you’re asking me to drop my membership, aren’t you. He said, no, I’m asking you to tell your story.
The third speaker was Pastor Julie, a lesbian, from my own church, welcomed and hired by Pastor Jeff. Her message was brief (Pastor Jeff’s introduction was just as long). When she heard the news on Tuesday she wanted out. She even started packing her office. Then she realized: Who will stand up for me if I leave?
Then came the sermon from a gay pastor in Lansing. He is allowed to serve because he doesn’t have a partner. But that means slowly dying inside. His passion is being a pastor. He also yearns for a partner to love. The current denomination rules won’t let him do both.
The evening included four soloists, one of them singing with a choir that came an hour early to rehearse. There was also communion, served with gluten-free bread to make sure no one was excluded.
As part of his closing Pastor Jeff asked can you feel a new church being born tonight?
The whole service was long – 2:20. I appreciated every minute of it. I may have felt differently if I was hungry, but friends and I had a good supper at Pronto!, a gay-owned restaurant next door to the church. A reception was held at Pronto! after the service, which I heard was donated by Pronto! I didn’t go. It had already been a long day.
Thank you to Rev. Melanie Carey for your work at GC and for sharing your experience. Thank you to Rev. Jeff Nelson for your healing service.
Friday, March 1, 2019
General Conference and dreaming a new church
I get it if you’re tired of reading about General Conference. Even so, I have a couple things to share.
Pastor Sarah writes a blog she calls A Snarky Pastor’s Rantings. She offers an FAQ on what happened. Here are some of her interesting points.
The Traditional Plan was written haphazardly by a small group of rogue conservative bishops. The Commission on a Way Forward hadn’t considered the doubling down on punishment, so these bishops did. Then they used back-channels to get it on the GC floor.
There is an exit plan. It got passed in a hurry with few people actually reading it. Pastor Sara says no need to figure out what it says – it’s unconstitutional.
A charge of bribery was referred to the Ethics Committee.
The United Methodist Church is not technically dead. But, says Pastor Sara:
The second thing to share is by Joey Lopez, who used to live around here. It is posted in the blog Hacking Christianity.
For too long we’ve been seeking incremental improvements to the church, one little piece at a time. But if the UMC dies, this is an opportunity to completely redesign the church and how it works. We can avoid the sexism, misogyny, and homophobia that are a part of the foundation of the UMC. We must be honest about and confess the sins we will likely carry with us so we can true both to our history and our commitment to being something different. It is time to dream of a new church.
Pastor Sarah writes a blog she calls A Snarky Pastor’s Rantings. She offers an FAQ on what happened. Here are some of her interesting points.
The Traditional Plan was written haphazardly by a small group of rogue conservative bishops. The Commission on a Way Forward hadn’t considered the doubling down on punishment, so these bishops did. Then they used back-channels to get it on the GC floor.
It was not meant to pass. It was meant to scare people into letting the conservatives leave. (It may have worked.)Parts of the Traditional Plan have been ruled unconstitutional by the Judicial Council. The whole thing now goes to the JC in April. The presiding bishop has said the JC is supposed to rule on the Plan as a whole – it is all constitutional or none of it goes into effect.
There is an exit plan. It got passed in a hurry with few people actually reading it. Pastor Sara says no need to figure out what it says – it’s unconstitutional.
A charge of bribery was referred to the Ethics Committee.
Terrifyingly, it only got 52% of the vote. One of my African brothers responded, "that means that 48% of the delegates were involved in bribery."The bribe appears to be laptops and tablets handed to the African delegates.
The United Methodist Church is not technically dead. But, says Pastor Sara:
For the first time in my life though, I think the answer may be: morally and theologically, yes.
The movement for LGBTQIA+ rights in the church has been fighting for 47 years, which is 9 years longer than I've been alive. This morning after, for the first time in my life, I don't know that this is a church whose soul is worth fighting for.
The conservative plan since 2004 was to make the UMC untenable for progressives to live in any longer. I fear they have finally succeeded.
The second thing to share is by Joey Lopez, who used to live around here. It is posted in the blog Hacking Christianity.
For too long we’ve been seeking incremental improvements to the church, one little piece at a time. But if the UMC dies, this is an opportunity to completely redesign the church and how it works. We can avoid the sexism, misogyny, and homophobia that are a part of the foundation of the UMC. We must be honest about and confess the sins we will likely carry with us so we can true both to our history and our commitment to being something different. It is time to dream of a new church.
Thursday, February 28, 2019
After General Conference, a bit of hope
Some words of hope from a member of the DRUM leadership, posted with permission:
There are several things that could happen over the next few months but I am doubtful that they will have any real effect on the overall outcome or will impact GC2020 in a big way. There is speculation that the entire Traditionalist Plan could be declared unconstitutional. Will the jury verdict be back in at the end of the Judicial Council's meeting in late April? I doubt it. From a psychological and theological perspective, that meeting happens immediately after we have celebrated Christ's resurrection but I do not believe that anything in that meeting will be celebrated as a resurrection moment - lol. The JC has traditionally been very slow in rendering a ruling - I think it must be in their own precepts that they are supposed to muddy the water with being slow with their decisions - all in the name of discernment - lol!
The Western Jurisdiction is already looking at and discussing what to do, Church of the Resurrection (Adam Hamilton's church) is studying the situation -I have not heard anything from Gatlinburg, OH (Mike Slaughter's church) but I would not be surprised if Mike and Adam are already having meetings- just the two of them. Whatever they decide will indeed have an impact on the ultimate outcome. Whatever happens, it is not going to be quick.
MFSA is planning a gathering in Lansing on Saturday, March 16 to begin the arduous task of discerning what is our next step. It promises to be a very interesting day. It will just be us-no celebrity pastors, no Bishops, etc. However, Bishop Bard's letter to our conference clergy will have been delivered and clergy will have had almost 2 weeks to process it - I believe it will be delivered as early as this weekend. It is not intended to be a meeting to discuss a plan of action or to have one in place. I am interested to know, however, what the thought processes are down the road (sooner than later) of what some of Michigan's mega churches are planning to do - like Grand Rapids FUMC, Kalamazoo FUMC, Birmingham, Ann Arbor, Royal Oak, Nardin Park, etc Jeff Nelson is very outspoken as is the lead pastor at Kal-zoo First. I do know that Elbert Dulworth is absolutely devastated and has asked that no one contact him for a statement regarding his thoughts or what Birmingham will do-he wants to be reclusive for a little bit - at least this seems to be the posture there after I spoke with Doris Hall yesterday.
Whatever happens I firmly believe that we should not expect or even hope that either side will emerge from GC2019's decision and rally to be the same church. If the Tradionalist Plan is declared unconstitutional in its entirety - the WCA [the conservative Wesleyan Covenant Association] will be gone. If it is declared constitutional the Progressive Methodist Church(that's my own name for it right now-lol) will be birthed. The schism will happen now - there is no more speculation. Wes Brun says that the schism has been happening since 2004 when the Good News people tried to effect a split then.
I do believe our eyes and ears should be tuned to the Western Jurisdiction. I have always said there are no accidents. It is not an accident that the Western Jurisdiction elected a lesbian bishop last Jurisdictional Conference. And I believe Bishop Karen, whom I know personally, has what it takes to lead a new movement. We also need the power of people like Bishop Deb(even though she is retired as well as other retired's: Bishops Talbert, Hoshibata and probably soon to be retired Palmer), David Bard, Sally Dyck, Laurie Haller, Tracy Malone, Carcano, etc to decide to be with us. The bureaucracy on the Episcopal office is beyond my comprehension at the moment so I am not sure how the Council of Bishops splitting would impact their pensions, etc.
The decision for you, me and our brothers and sisters is to say, "I'm done!" or to stay around a little while longer to see how it plays out. I fear the former is going to be the case in many of our really good strong fighters who are tired and can only take so much. Unfortunately, we have to discern that action totally on an individual basis.
There are several things that could happen over the next few months but I am doubtful that they will have any real effect on the overall outcome or will impact GC2020 in a big way. There is speculation that the entire Traditionalist Plan could be declared unconstitutional. Will the jury verdict be back in at the end of the Judicial Council's meeting in late April? I doubt it. From a psychological and theological perspective, that meeting happens immediately after we have celebrated Christ's resurrection but I do not believe that anything in that meeting will be celebrated as a resurrection moment - lol. The JC has traditionally been very slow in rendering a ruling - I think it must be in their own precepts that they are supposed to muddy the water with being slow with their decisions - all in the name of discernment - lol!
The Western Jurisdiction is already looking at and discussing what to do, Church of the Resurrection (Adam Hamilton's church) is studying the situation -I have not heard anything from Gatlinburg, OH (Mike Slaughter's church) but I would not be surprised if Mike and Adam are already having meetings- just the two of them. Whatever they decide will indeed have an impact on the ultimate outcome. Whatever happens, it is not going to be quick.
MFSA is planning a gathering in Lansing on Saturday, March 16 to begin the arduous task of discerning what is our next step. It promises to be a very interesting day. It will just be us-no celebrity pastors, no Bishops, etc. However, Bishop Bard's letter to our conference clergy will have been delivered and clergy will have had almost 2 weeks to process it - I believe it will be delivered as early as this weekend. It is not intended to be a meeting to discuss a plan of action or to have one in place. I am interested to know, however, what the thought processes are down the road (sooner than later) of what some of Michigan's mega churches are planning to do - like Grand Rapids FUMC, Kalamazoo FUMC, Birmingham, Ann Arbor, Royal Oak, Nardin Park, etc Jeff Nelson is very outspoken as is the lead pastor at Kal-zoo First. I do know that Elbert Dulworth is absolutely devastated and has asked that no one contact him for a statement regarding his thoughts or what Birmingham will do-he wants to be reclusive for a little bit - at least this seems to be the posture there after I spoke with Doris Hall yesterday.
Whatever happens I firmly believe that we should not expect or even hope that either side will emerge from GC2019's decision and rally to be the same church. If the Tradionalist Plan is declared unconstitutional in its entirety - the WCA [the conservative Wesleyan Covenant Association] will be gone. If it is declared constitutional the Progressive Methodist Church(that's my own name for it right now-lol) will be birthed. The schism will happen now - there is no more speculation. Wes Brun says that the schism has been happening since 2004 when the Good News people tried to effect a split then.
I do believe our eyes and ears should be tuned to the Western Jurisdiction. I have always said there are no accidents. It is not an accident that the Western Jurisdiction elected a lesbian bishop last Jurisdictional Conference. And I believe Bishop Karen, whom I know personally, has what it takes to lead a new movement. We also need the power of people like Bishop Deb(even though she is retired as well as other retired's: Bishops Talbert, Hoshibata and probably soon to be retired Palmer), David Bard, Sally Dyck, Laurie Haller, Tracy Malone, Carcano, etc to decide to be with us. The bureaucracy on the Episcopal office is beyond my comprehension at the moment so I am not sure how the Council of Bishops splitting would impact their pensions, etc.
The decision for you, me and our brothers and sisters is to say, "I'm done!" or to stay around a little while longer to see how it plays out. I fear the former is going to be the case in many of our really good strong fighters who are tired and can only take so much. Unfortunately, we have to discern that action totally on an individual basis.
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
Thoughts on the outcome of General Conference
Lying in bed last night and this morning I thought about what happened at General Conference. So I offer a few opinions on the matter. Though I write this blog under the banner of Dedicated Reconciling United Methodists, these are my opinions and may differ from the DRUM leadership.
First, a bit of history that should be well known to most of us. The United Methodist Church was formed by combining two denominations in 1968. The first General Conference of the new denomination was in 1972. As part of creating the Social Principles, the phrase “homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching” was inserted to the Book of Discipline, the denomination’s governing document.
Progressives have been trying to get that phrase removed at every General Conference since then. Conservatives have for just as log been trying to add restrictions to LGBTQ people (can’t serve as pastors, can’t be married) using this incompatibility phrase as justification. Some of those restrictions have been approved.
In the 1980s the vote to remove the incompatibility clause lost by about 80% (I don’t have exact numbers). By 2008 the vote lost by only 54%. That was enough for me to feel 2012 was our year and I went to General Conference as an observer to experience the joy when the clause was removed.
That year it lost by 60%. It was a painful day. Conservatives were waiting with more restrictions, such as requiring church trials for pastors who officiated at same-sex weddings. We avoided more harm by running out the clock.
In 2016 tensions were high. More harm was avoided by creating the Commission For a Way Forward, which culminated in the just concluded special General Conference.
So, on reflection, I’m not surprised the Traditional Plan, the one to heap on more LGBTQ punishments, passed. Yes, disappointed, but no longer surprised. A good number of its provisions were ready to be voted on in 2012, a time when the denomination was getting tired of negative publicity of pastor trials, yet conservatives wanted them to continue. I suppose I should be heartened that this year the plan passed with only 53% rather than the 60% or more of 2012. Given a chance to approve more restrictions on LGBTQ people, GC did.
In yesterday’s post I wrote about the influence of the Institute for Religion and Democracy, a non-Methodist group funded by the Koch brothers who also fund the GOP and the Tea Party. Though not naming names, a letter this morning from Reconciling Ministries Network confirms my understanding:
I see this mess as a failure of leadership, mostly a failure of the United Methodist Council of Bishops. They guide the denomination (under the BoD set by General Conference), but there hasn’t been a lot of guiding over the last several years. This is a longstanding complaint and comes from many people. Some of my complaints:
Before General Conference I told people I couldn’t predict an outcome. As I mentioned above I’m not surprised by what happened. But I think the bishops should have had a strong understanding of the likely outcome. If they didn’t want this outcome, they could have prepared to prevent it. They didn’t.
The bishops put together the Commission, but didn’t do such things as actively promote what the Commission recommended. Once the Commission was done the bishops didn’t make sure the GC was about the outcome they recommended. Instead, they offered options – allowing GC to choose the worst one.
The progressive plans were written by the Commission and were designed with the rules of the denomination in mind. According to Rev. Jeremy Smith of the blog Hacking Christianity, the Traditional Plan was not written by the Commission, rather a small group of conservative bishops. There are a lot of ways this Plan was outside the normal channels. Since it was not a part of the Commission’s work, it did not need to be a part of this General Conference. The bishops had a chance to halt this plan before it was included in the GC agenda.
A big part of the GC in 2012 and 2016 was about preventing more harm, preventing harsher penalties from being approved. And here the bishops essentially handed conservatives an opportunity to do a great deal of harm.
The bishops have consistently chosen unity over harm reduction of LGBTQ people. I agree that we would be better as a denomination with both progressive and conservative members. But conservatives were insisting on more and more harm. It has been clear to me for quite a while that to reduce harm a split should be made to happen. Instead, harm continues.
There has been talk since at least before the 2012 GC to implement a way for American congregations to make decisions about LGBTQ people without conservative votes from Africa. The Africans already have the ability to change the global rules to fit their culture. The American church cannot. Efforts to make this change didn’t get much support from the bishops and didn’t get very far.
The bishops didn’t call out the influence of outside groups such the Institute for Religion and Democracy. This influence and money has damaged the church.
The bishops haven’t prepared for a split. The conservatives have, creating a structure congregations could move to if the GC vote didn’t go in their favor. There is no such structure on the progressive side.
The Traditional Plan has been approved. It has, I think, 17 parts. Half of them were declared in violation of the denomination’s constitution. Some were modified before voting. But, yeah, delegates voted for a proposal they knew didn’t have constitutional approval. They approved it anyway. The Judicial Council will convene in April and will likely invalidate many of the parts. Even with them gone, the remaining pieces are still pretty bad for LGBTQ people and their allies. Those pieces will officially become part of denomination law. Also approved proposals about how congregations exit the denomination and still protect pensions. But GC did not address anything about how the denomination might split in two. That will likely (hopefully) be a big topic for next year’s GC.
Yes, I’m angry. I’ve been a member of the United Methodist Church ever since I’ve been old enough to be a member of any church. What happened yesterday has a very good chance of destroying the denomination, the conservative side because few youth want to be associated with such bigotry, especially against their LGBTQ friends, the progressive side because of a poor effort to gather the leaving congregations into a connected denomination and because a much smaller denomination may not be financially sustainable.
As some of my progressive friends have said to blow up the United Methodist Church over this issue is silly and stupid. I agree.
The only ones who win in this situation are IRD. The destruction of the denomination is their goal.
There is a lot of muttering about the conservative Africans, that if they didn’t vote on American issues the Traditional Plan wouldn’t have passed – that the American delegation was 2/3 in favor of the One Church Plan that would have allowed each region to set its own rules for how to treat LGBTQ people (and allowing African congregations to keep restrictions).
But don’t blame Africa. Though African delegates supplied the votes, the effort and desire to get the Traditional Plan passed came from conservative Americans, including the IRD, which isn’t a part of the denomination and not even particularly religious. That conservative effort has, over the years, included some shady methods by the Americans to get the Africans to vote their way.
So now what?
There is a regular two-week General Conference 14 months from now. Will the bishops guide what happens or will they be bystanders? Will they help create a progressive structure for congregations or regions that refuse to operate under the restrictions of the Traditional Plan? What about the other denomination assets, such as the United Methodist Building just north of the Supreme Court in Washington? What about the publishing company? Boards and agencies that advocate for justice? And the one I’m most worried about – UMCOR, the United Methodist Committee on Relief, which rivals the Red Cross and certainly outdoes FEMA in responding to disasters. Are plans being proposed about how to handle all this so that GC in 2020 can approve it?
I’ve thought of leaving the denomination and my local church. However, I’m willing to stick around long enough to see what happens at GC 2020.
First, a bit of history that should be well known to most of us. The United Methodist Church was formed by combining two denominations in 1968. The first General Conference of the new denomination was in 1972. As part of creating the Social Principles, the phrase “homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching” was inserted to the Book of Discipline, the denomination’s governing document.
Progressives have been trying to get that phrase removed at every General Conference since then. Conservatives have for just as log been trying to add restrictions to LGBTQ people (can’t serve as pastors, can’t be married) using this incompatibility phrase as justification. Some of those restrictions have been approved.
In the 1980s the vote to remove the incompatibility clause lost by about 80% (I don’t have exact numbers). By 2008 the vote lost by only 54%. That was enough for me to feel 2012 was our year and I went to General Conference as an observer to experience the joy when the clause was removed.
That year it lost by 60%. It was a painful day. Conservatives were waiting with more restrictions, such as requiring church trials for pastors who officiated at same-sex weddings. We avoided more harm by running out the clock.
In 2016 tensions were high. More harm was avoided by creating the Commission For a Way Forward, which culminated in the just concluded special General Conference.
So, on reflection, I’m not surprised the Traditional Plan, the one to heap on more LGBTQ punishments, passed. Yes, disappointed, but no longer surprised. A good number of its provisions were ready to be voted on in 2012, a time when the denomination was getting tired of negative publicity of pastor trials, yet conservatives wanted them to continue. I suppose I should be heartened that this year the plan passed with only 53% rather than the 60% or more of 2012. Given a chance to approve more restrictions on LGBTQ people, GC did.
In yesterday’s post I wrote about the influence of the Institute for Religion and Democracy, a non-Methodist group funded by the Koch brothers who also fund the GOP and the Tea Party. Though not naming names, a letter this morning from Reconciling Ministries Network confirms my understanding:
The Traditionalist Plan was passed by the efforts of organized opponents to gospel inclusion who have funded and promoted the demise of Christian witness across denominations who have dared to call out a white nationalist strain of Christianity. For decades, they sought the decline of biblical justice-rooted Christian traditions and have built the infrastructure and narrative that has now risen to power in The United Methodist Church. What has transpired today is an effort to weaken the Church and the local church, its global witness and reach, and the work of the Holy Spirit.
I see this mess as a failure of leadership, mostly a failure of the United Methodist Council of Bishops. They guide the denomination (under the BoD set by General Conference), but there hasn’t been a lot of guiding over the last several years. This is a longstanding complaint and comes from many people. Some of my complaints:
Before General Conference I told people I couldn’t predict an outcome. As I mentioned above I’m not surprised by what happened. But I think the bishops should have had a strong understanding of the likely outcome. If they didn’t want this outcome, they could have prepared to prevent it. They didn’t.
The bishops put together the Commission, but didn’t do such things as actively promote what the Commission recommended. Once the Commission was done the bishops didn’t make sure the GC was about the outcome they recommended. Instead, they offered options – allowing GC to choose the worst one.
The progressive plans were written by the Commission and were designed with the rules of the denomination in mind. According to Rev. Jeremy Smith of the blog Hacking Christianity, the Traditional Plan was not written by the Commission, rather a small group of conservative bishops. There are a lot of ways this Plan was outside the normal channels. Since it was not a part of the Commission’s work, it did not need to be a part of this General Conference. The bishops had a chance to halt this plan before it was included in the GC agenda.
A big part of the GC in 2012 and 2016 was about preventing more harm, preventing harsher penalties from being approved. And here the bishops essentially handed conservatives an opportunity to do a great deal of harm.
The bishops have consistently chosen unity over harm reduction of LGBTQ people. I agree that we would be better as a denomination with both progressive and conservative members. But conservatives were insisting on more and more harm. It has been clear to me for quite a while that to reduce harm a split should be made to happen. Instead, harm continues.
There has been talk since at least before the 2012 GC to implement a way for American congregations to make decisions about LGBTQ people without conservative votes from Africa. The Africans already have the ability to change the global rules to fit their culture. The American church cannot. Efforts to make this change didn’t get much support from the bishops and didn’t get very far.
The bishops didn’t call out the influence of outside groups such the Institute for Religion and Democracy. This influence and money has damaged the church.
The bishops haven’t prepared for a split. The conservatives have, creating a structure congregations could move to if the GC vote didn’t go in their favor. There is no such structure on the progressive side.
The Traditional Plan has been approved. It has, I think, 17 parts. Half of them were declared in violation of the denomination’s constitution. Some were modified before voting. But, yeah, delegates voted for a proposal they knew didn’t have constitutional approval. They approved it anyway. The Judicial Council will convene in April and will likely invalidate many of the parts. Even with them gone, the remaining pieces are still pretty bad for LGBTQ people and their allies. Those pieces will officially become part of denomination law. Also approved proposals about how congregations exit the denomination and still protect pensions. But GC did not address anything about how the denomination might split in two. That will likely (hopefully) be a big topic for next year’s GC.
Yes, I’m angry. I’ve been a member of the United Methodist Church ever since I’ve been old enough to be a member of any church. What happened yesterday has a very good chance of destroying the denomination, the conservative side because few youth want to be associated with such bigotry, especially against their LGBTQ friends, the progressive side because of a poor effort to gather the leaving congregations into a connected denomination and because a much smaller denomination may not be financially sustainable.
As some of my progressive friends have said to blow up the United Methodist Church over this issue is silly and stupid. I agree.
The only ones who win in this situation are IRD. The destruction of the denomination is their goal.
There is a lot of muttering about the conservative Africans, that if they didn’t vote on American issues the Traditional Plan wouldn’t have passed – that the American delegation was 2/3 in favor of the One Church Plan that would have allowed each region to set its own rules for how to treat LGBTQ people (and allowing African congregations to keep restrictions).
But don’t blame Africa. Though African delegates supplied the votes, the effort and desire to get the Traditional Plan passed came from conservative Americans, including the IRD, which isn’t a part of the denomination and not even particularly religious. That conservative effort has, over the years, included some shady methods by the Americans to get the Africans to vote their way.
So now what?
There is a regular two-week General Conference 14 months from now. Will the bishops guide what happens or will they be bystanders? Will they help create a progressive structure for congregations or regions that refuse to operate under the restrictions of the Traditional Plan? What about the other denomination assets, such as the United Methodist Building just north of the Supreme Court in Washington? What about the publishing company? Boards and agencies that advocate for justice? And the one I’m most worried about – UMCOR, the United Methodist Committee on Relief, which rivals the Red Cross and certainly outdoes FEMA in responding to disasters. Are plans being proposed about how to handle all this so that GC in 2020 can approve it?
I’ve thought of leaving the denomination and my local church. However, I’m willing to stick around long enough to see what happens at GC 2020.
Tuesday, February 26, 2019
General Conference, final vote
The Traditional Plan passed, 53% to 47%.
A motion to send the Traditional Plan to the Judicial Council and their April meeting passed by just over 50%.
UM News story here.
A person sent me an email earlier today saying she and her family and likely several friends have had enough. They’re strongly considering leaving the United Methodist Church. I’ve been thinking the same thing.
However, before I walk out the door, I want to find out what my own congregation and progressive congregations are going to do.
The conservatives said if the Traditional Plan didn’t pass they would leave. They already have an association to which they could go.
Progressives don’t (yet) have that. Currently, if a progressive congregation leaves, they’re on their own.
So, will this be an expulsion of the progressive congregations (or maybe just progressive members) or will this be a schism, where there are two denominations with some sort of Methodist name? That question hasn’t been answered. This General Conference didn’t provide a way to answer that. Maybe GC 2020 will.
From my reading over the past few days (alas, I don’t have a link to share) is that one of the driving forces on the conservative side is the Institute for Religion and Democracy. It isn’t a group within the United Methodist family, but a group outside. Even so, they provided assistance to the conservative side. When I first heard of IRD many years ago I quickly figured out they should really be called the Institute for Religion Without Democracy. They objected to denominations that decided things, including doctrine, in a democratic way – which is what GC is. They want all denominations to have a person or central group to issue doctrine by decree.
What I’ve learned in the last few days is that IRD has been funded the Koch brothers, the same guys that have donated heavily to the Republican Party and the Tea Party. I began to understand they targeted the UMC because of our strong advocacy for justice. And they’ve succeeded in damaging that. Which means what happened today at GC is part of much broader push for conservatives to seize control both nationally and around the world.
Many of us are grieving. General Conference has said they don't want us. Many of you are like me -- my confirmation was about the time the denomination was formed back in 1968 and I've been a member since. It is strange and scary to contemplate going to some other denomination.
Twitter user Lance Presley from Jackson, Mississippi wrote a thread about leaving the UMC. The church has made it uncomfortable for LGBTQ people for a long time. Those of us still here love the UMC and belong to it just as much as conservatives do. As for leaving, yeah, the Episcopal Church and the United Church of Christ are welcoming to LGBTQ people, but such congregations don't exist in rural Mississippi. There are two UCC churches in the state. And there is a UMC in every small town and poor neighborhood. It just won't be the progressive voice in town.
A motion to send the Traditional Plan to the Judicial Council and their April meeting passed by just over 50%.
UM News story here.
A person sent me an email earlier today saying she and her family and likely several friends have had enough. They’re strongly considering leaving the United Methodist Church. I’ve been thinking the same thing.
However, before I walk out the door, I want to find out what my own congregation and progressive congregations are going to do.
The conservatives said if the Traditional Plan didn’t pass they would leave. They already have an association to which they could go.
Progressives don’t (yet) have that. Currently, if a progressive congregation leaves, they’re on their own.
So, will this be an expulsion of the progressive congregations (or maybe just progressive members) or will this be a schism, where there are two denominations with some sort of Methodist name? That question hasn’t been answered. This General Conference didn’t provide a way to answer that. Maybe GC 2020 will.
From my reading over the past few days (alas, I don’t have a link to share) is that one of the driving forces on the conservative side is the Institute for Religion and Democracy. It isn’t a group within the United Methodist family, but a group outside. Even so, they provided assistance to the conservative side. When I first heard of IRD many years ago I quickly figured out they should really be called the Institute for Religion Without Democracy. They objected to denominations that decided things, including doctrine, in a democratic way – which is what GC is. They want all denominations to have a person or central group to issue doctrine by decree.
What I’ve learned in the last few days is that IRD has been funded the Koch brothers, the same guys that have donated heavily to the Republican Party and the Tea Party. I began to understand they targeted the UMC because of our strong advocacy for justice. And they’ve succeeded in damaging that. Which means what happened today at GC is part of much broader push for conservatives to seize control both nationally and around the world.
Many of us are grieving. General Conference has said they don't want us. Many of you are like me -- my confirmation was about the time the denomination was formed back in 1968 and I've been a member since. It is strange and scary to contemplate going to some other denomination.
Twitter user Lance Presley from Jackson, Mississippi wrote a thread about leaving the UMC. The church has made it uncomfortable for LGBTQ people for a long time. Those of us still here love the UMC and belong to it just as much as conservatives do. As for leaving, yeah, the Episcopal Church and the United Church of Christ are welcoming to LGBTQ people, but such congregations don't exist in rural Mississippi. There are two UCC churches in the state. And there is a UMC in every small town and poor neighborhood. It just won't be the progressive voice in town.
Saturday, February 16, 2019
Program – What Happened at GC? March 3
General Conference begins in about a week. This short Conference is to consider and vote on the various proposals that came out of the Way Forward Commission last year.
Please join us on Sunday, March 3, 1:30 – 3:00 at Nardin Park United Methodist Church.
Rev. Melanie Carey, a clergy delegate, and Alex Plum, a lay delegate, will share their General Conference experiences and the GC decisions on the direction of the denomination and LGBTQ inclusion in the worldwide church.
Finger foods and beverages will be provided.
The event is hosted by the Nardin Park Church and Society Team and Dedicated Reconciling United Methodists. The church is at 29887 W. Eleven Mile Rd, Farmington Hills. That’s just west of Middlebelt.
Please join us on Sunday, March 3, 1:30 – 3:00 at Nardin Park United Methodist Church.
Rev. Melanie Carey, a clergy delegate, and Alex Plum, a lay delegate, will share their General Conference experiences and the GC decisions on the direction of the denomination and LGBTQ inclusion in the worldwide church.
Finger foods and beverages will be provided.
The event is hosted by the Nardin Park Church and Society Team and Dedicated Reconciling United Methodists. The church is at 29887 W. Eleven Mile Rd, Farmington Hills. That’s just west of Middlebelt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)