United Methodist Crack-up Begins
This summer, United Methodist jurisdictional conferences are meeting to elect new bishops and assign all bishops to annual conferences. The Northeastern Jurisdiction, consisting of annual conferences from West Virginia to New England, is meeting this week, and in addition to its regular business, has declared war on the rest of the denomination over issues of sexual ethics. Mark Tooley of the Institute on Religion and Democracy reports at Juicy Ecumenism:
The declining, liberal dominated Northeastern Jurisdiction (NEJ) of United Methodism, meeting in Charleston, WV, this week, has declared defiance against the church’s teaching on sexual ethics.
Sixty one percent of the 227 delegates vowed their dissent. “Leaders of the conferences that comprise our jurisdiction, including cabinet members, bishops and members of boards and agencies of the annual conference, while bound to the Book of Discipline, are also bound to exercise their consciences and are bound by Jesus’s commandment to stand with the marginalized and the oppressed in our midst when called upon to enforce unjust laws, policies and procedures to the detriment of gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender individuals wishing to participate fully in the life of The United Methodist Church and those who minister faithfully to them; and be it further resolved, that the jurisdictional conference recognize that individuals who take punitive actions against others for offering the sacraments and rituals of the church on an equal basis do so contrary to the highest ideals of the United Methodist Church at the risk of causing grave harm to LGBT persons, their loved ones, their sisters and brothers in Christ, faithful clergy and the United Methodist Church itself.”
Translation from Methody-speak: damn the Book of Discipline, and full speed ahead on the ordination of sexually active gays and same-sex marriage.
Given that jurisdictional conferences are comprised of representatives of annual conferences, passage of this statement can only mean one thing. Many, possibly most, and maybe even all of the ten conferences that comprise the Northeastern have declared that they will not enforce the Book of Discipline and its prohibitions on ordaining sexually active homosexuals and conducting gay weddings. This is right out of the liberal activist playbook. For forty years they have used the tactic of disobedience to denominational rules to get their way by changing the facts on the ground, believing (as has already happened in the Episcopal Church, and likely will in the near future in the PCUSA) that institutional capitulation would eventually follow.
In Methodism, however, there’s a problem, which is that the growing African conferences actually get a vote on proposed changes to the Book of Discipline, which governs not just American but world-wide Methodism. That means two things:
1) Given the growth of the relative strength of evangelical Africa, it is virtually certain that the window for liberals winning their fight to overturn biblical standards on sexuality has already closed. Their only hope for victory was in somehow dividing the denomination into global regions, so that the primitives in Africa could no longer influence what America’s sophisticates did. That effort failed at the last General Conference.
2) That means the only recourse left to liberals is the one the Northeastern Jurisdiction has adopted, which amounts to a declaration of schism. The Book of Discipline is not a pick-and-choose document, at least not in its rules for governance. For a whole section of the denomination to state, in essence, that it will no longer observe rules of polity and ministerial practice that everyone else follows can only mean that the break-up of United Methodism has begun.
Comments
Facebook comments are closed.
13 comments
What is it about the NE??
[1] Posted by B. Hunter on 7-20-2012 at 04:00 PM · [top]
#1 - The assorted grandees and pashas in the NE are infatuated with their own wants and desires. Yet they blanch at the idea that they are just stampeding to the latest trendy saltlick, so they have to elevate them to matters of deep principle.
[2] Posted by Jeffersonian on 7-20-2012 at 04:10 PM · [top]
Good grief! They have been watching too much live video streaming from General Convention. Sounds like the same arguments used by the Episcopagans. God help them!
[3] Posted by SC blu cat lady on 7-20-2012 at 04:29 PM · [top]
#3, didn’t you realize that, according to the Diocese of CT:
“The triennial General Convention of The Episcopal Church ended, and the big news is that the bishops and deputies agreed on a plan that they believe will restructure The Episcopal Church (or at least lead that effort). “
Whatever might you be referring to?
Actually, if the TEo could bring these folks in, it might stem the bleeding for a few weeks ...
[4] Posted by elanor on 7-20-2012 at 05:19 PM · [top]
the marginalized and the oppressed
I know quite a few gay people and they are anything but marginalized and oppressed. They have the lives - often quite comfortable lives - they have chosen. Hyperbolic rhetoric about how saying “no” constitutes “abuse” should be met with a rational rebuff. It’s all dishonest and, frankly, hysterical. People who play the victim - particularly those who are victimizers themselves - should be called out for what they are: the real hate-mongers, bigots, and bullies.
[5] Posted by Words Matter on 7-20-2012 at 05:52 PM · [top]
Among other notable accomplishments, the Methodists in the North have a long history of association with Communism and Socialism. Up until 1968, there was still a Methodist Church North and a Methodist Church South. One of the problems with the UMC is that social justice is just a euphemism for works salvation. The priority on holiness, perfection, and sinless living in Methodism has historically bred, IMHO, a group of self-righteous Pharisees who want to compel the populace to conform to their code of behavior through force of law. In the 1920s it was Prohibition, today it is gay marriage. Who knows what tomorrow will bring. If the Methodists could bring themselves to acknowledge the total depravity of humanity and man’s utter helplessness to save himself, maybe they could climb back up the cliff off of which they are jumping.
[6] Posted by Daniel on 7-20-2012 at 07:45 PM · [top]
David F. - You said that the effort to divide the United Methodist Church into global regions failed at the last General Convention. The proposed constitutional amendments did pass in 2008 at GC, but failed to garner the necessary votes in the Conference voting.
Daniel, #6 - The reunification of the Methodist Church took place in 1939 (Methodist Episcopal North, Methodist Episcopal South, and Methodist Protestant). 1968 marked the union of Methodist Church with the Evangelical United Brethren Church, forming United Methodist.
<>< Ron Troup
[7] Posted by Ron Troup on 7-20-2012 at 09:10 PM · [top]
Oops, sorry Ron. You are right, of course. Things tend to linger in the South.
Makes it even more interesting to contemplate how the Southerners felt about the pacifism of the Northern Methodists leading up to WW II and the intimate association they had with Communists and Socialists.
[8] Posted by Daniel on 7-20-2012 at 10:58 PM · [top]
#8 - Daniel -
Things also tend to linger among former EUB’s.
David F. -
I’m not so sure of your translation of ‘Methody-speak.’ It seems that the Judicial Council has ruled that expressions of dissention from the Discipline are acceptable. As there are no actions being taken to ‘legally negate, ignore, or violate provisions of the Discipline,’ this is more of the same. See this correspondence .
<>< Ron Troup
[9] Posted by Ron Troup on 7-21-2012 at 06:36 AM · [top]
Ron: Thanks for your correction in #7. As for #9, I’ll stand by what I wrote. The resolution quoted in the post states that “leaders…are also bound to exercise their consciences…;” and ” that individuals who take punitive actions against others…do so contrary to the highest ideals of the United Methodist Church.” That may not technically violate the Judicial Council ruling, but it certainly does so in spirit. The first part encourages violation, and the second part strongly discourages enforcement. I have no hesitation, based on this resolution, predicting that within the foreseeable future, Methodist clergy in northeastern states that permit same-sex marriage will be performing such weddings, and doing so with impunity. We’ll see if bishops are willing to ignore the ordination standards as well.
[10] Posted by David Fischler on 7-21-2012 at 07:28 AM · [top]
Time to go back to the TEo playbook - Create facts on the ground, dare someone to do something about it, and the lurch towards heresy, anarchy, dissolution, and division progresses apace.
[11] Posted by Bill2 on 7-21-2012 at 08:47 AM · [top]
One of the ironies of all this is that it would be easier for the traditionalists, who thanks to the African and other global south are dominant in General Conference, to permit the reappraisers to exit graciously with their property (such an approach was proposed at GC in 2008), if the reappraisers had not attached a trust clause to the Discipline in the 1970s. Since the United Methodist Church is hierarchical, this has a better chance of standing up in court than the Dennis Canon. In addition, because of the Judicial Council in the United Methodist Church, the traditional reappraiser “civil disobedience” is more difficult. Pastors are brought up on charges though the result is often “jury nullification” as it was with Rev. DeLong. The TEo playbook is much harder to execute within the United Methodist polity because the Judicial Council has been willing to enforce the Discipline even when they disagree with it. They realize that, if they let the “facts on the ground” create the polity, then there is no reason to have a Judicial Council.
[12] Posted by ABQ Methodist on 7-22-2012 at 01:06 PM · [top]
This is a good thing. If the conservative leaders in the TEo had had the courage to force a parting of the ways with the liberals back in the 70’s when they were in relative control, the liberals would not have won. Instead the conservative leaders preached a big tent, and the liberals nodded in agreement while sharpening their knives, preparing them for the backsides of the conservatives.
The liberals in the Methodist Church want to leave the sand box in a huff? Good riddance. (Disclaimer: My family and I are in a Methodist church-lite where the Gospel is sort-of preached but there is a good children’s program.)
[13] Posted by robroy on 7-23-2012 at 08:21 AM · [top]
Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.
Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.