Methodists look to change church's LGBT policies

[GKMotley]

Yep. Though I was not a part of it any more, I watched this play out from afar. Some of my acquaintances surprised me by leaving for the Cooperative Fellowship.

 

[commenter]

ltwin:

In the case of the SBC, the conservatives won and kept the denomination. That is important because they get all the prestige and influence that comes from being “Southern Baptist”. The new liberal Baptist denominations are no where near as influential. In addition to keeping the denominational identity, they also kept control of all the associated agencies and educational institutions. The liberals had to start from scratch.

The article I quoted from above says, for example, that the nations largest UM church (which is in Kansas) is thinking of leaving and another church with 5,300 members is thinking of leaving. If a lot of churches like that leave, I’m sure that it would have a significant financial impact, not only here in the US, but also abroad since churches in places like Africa probably rely on financial help from money that comes from more wealthy congregations in the US.

That pastor (Rev. Hamilton) you cited was applauded by Newsweek in 2008 for his support for legal abortion.

I mention this to suggest there are other agendas going on. At present that group is putting most efforts into the same sex issues, but they have other plans too. I think they will leverage their money for both gay and abortion issues from within, rather than giving up their vote.

 

[Thorolfr]

You make it sound as if there is something nefarious going on when perhaps they are just fighting for sincerely held beliefs.

 

[ltwin]

There probably weren’t nearly as many of these other “liberal” Baptists as there were of the more conservative ones who stayed.

There was enough to give the SBC approval of abortion in many if not all cases.

Resolution On Abortion
St. Louis, Missouri - 1971
Be it further RESOLVED, That we call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother.

 

[Thorolfr]

There was enough to give the SBC approval of abortion in many if not all cases.

You’re assuming that only “liberals” back in 1971 supported allowing abortion under some circumstances. According to Wikipedia:

Former Southern Baptist Convention President W.A. Criswell (1969-1970) welcomed Roe v. Wade, saying that "“I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person,” the redoubtable fundamentalist declared, “and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.” This was a common attitude among evangelicals at the time. Criswell would later reverse himself on his earlier position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_and_Christianity

 

[ATraveller]

Righttt but that’s the point. When you have two sides, both sides are going to remain in disagreement over what is “in line with Scripture” — whatever the meeting happens to decide.

The difference is this: Has the Church itself been given authority to definitively decide things in council? I’d say yes: You see this in Acts 15. The Canon of Scripture itself presupposes an authoritative Church that can determine once-and-for all what is canonical. So goes for what is “canonical” teaching as well.

That’s a generally Catholic understanding.
One could argue in Acts 15 the Apostles were involved, which sets the Jerusalem Council in a manner different from that of subsequent ones.

 

[ATraveller]

the vast majority of LGBT people have been so wounded in the churches

That depends on what this means.
If it’s about marriage and sexual activity, there’s no way around it other than to morph into a Unitarian Universalist church.

 

[ATraveller]

but also abroad since churches in places like Africa probably rely on financial help from money that comes from more wealthy congregations in the US.

That’s a very condescending view. It’s very similar to the white saviour idea where poor Africans have no ability to help themselves and only white people in the West can save them.
As mentioned in previous posts, the African delegates would rather be poor than to give up the Faith. If finances were a problem, luckily for the African continent, things are improving contrary to what most in the West believe.

 

[commenter]

You make it sound as if there is something nefarious going on when perhaps they are just fighting for sincerely held beliefs.

It sounds nefarious because it is nefarious. In terms of the great majority of Method tradition, prior to a few decades ago, I am guessing most Methodists would call it nefarious, too.
Is there anyone who does not consider their beliefs sincerely held.

 

[GKMotley]

The same assumption was made with respect to the deep pockets new edition first world Anglicans, and the poorer African jurisdictions.

Reality: not so much.

 

[rightness]

Well, if Methodists do split, it’ll be like the Anglicans. It will do so much damage. Anglicanism in my area suffered greatly and many churches are closing or being sold to Muslims or non-denominationals.

An area with a population of 750 thousand was 40% Anglican 50 years ago. Now it’s 1.2% with the schism causing a sharp decline.

https://www.virtueonline.org/rapidly-diminishing-anglican-church-canada

There are more recent statistics released last year for 2016 but from a different dataset, the General Social Survey.

(

https://twitter.com/x/status/1085393708663615488

)

But how many actually attend. It doesn’t show a breakdown of different denominations but overall the weekly or more category has seen a very modest decline.

(How Unchurched is the White Working Class? | by Charles Fain Lehman | Medium)

Americans are blessed with amazing datasets. Such datasets and with such detail for every other nation on Earth are impossible to find.

That’s some good info. Nice to see Catholics being fairly steadfast even in the light of the scandals of 2005. I heard in a presentation that if France, Spain, and the formerly Catholic countries are going to stray away during the reformation, then God will raise up more faithfuls in other places through Mary in Mexico by the millions.

Logically, protestantism was definitely going to fall to secularism and atheism simply because there is no authority holding them together. Personal interpretation of the Bible is just going to lead protestants further from the virtues and the Word of God. I know there are a lot of fallen away Catholics that don’t really know their faith, but that chart really shows that we’re keeping up, whether through the New Evangelization or immigrants.

 

[ltwin]

You’re assuming that only “liberals” back in 1971 supported allowing abortion under some circumstances.

Not assuming anything. I’m aware of the evangelical shift on abortion. Part of that shift, in the SBC, was systematically removing liberals from leadership and moving the entire denomination in a more conservative direction.

Seems to me that if UMC evangelicals want to consolidate their win, they need to adopt a similar strategy. The UMC boards and agencies are loaded with liberals that can attempt to undermine General Conference pronouncements. Evangelicals are going to have to gain control of these or else the liberals will continue to have influence.

 

[ltwin]

That’s a very condescending view.

True. Many liberals openly assume that African Methodists are simply parrotting a colonial, missionary mindset in their opposition to same sex marriage, as if African Christians can’t think for themselves.

And you have to ask yourself would you rather have lots of money and empty churches or little money and full churches. The African Methodists are doing real ministry and reaching people with the Gospel. Meanwhile in the US . . .

At any rate, they will still have conservative financial support. It’s not like only liberal Methodists have money.

If anything, it’s the opposite. The most liberal Western jurisdiction is not financially self supporting.

 

[Thorolfr]

Thorolfr:

You make it sound as if there is something nefarious going on when perhaps they are just fighting for sincerely held beliefs.

It sounds nefarious because it is nefarious. In terms of the great majority of Method tradition, prior to a few decades ago, I am guessing most Methodists would call it nefarious, too.
Is there anyone who does not consider their beliefs sincerely held.

Changing a tradition is not necessarily a bad thing. Women weren’t given full clergy rights until 1956 and a woman wasn’t consecrated a bishop in the UMC until 1980. I think that allowing women to be clergy and bishops was a good thing.

 

[Thorolfr]

Thorolfr:

You’re assuming that only “liberals” back in 1971 supported allowing abortion under some circumstances.

Not assuming anything. I’m aware of the evangelical shift on abortion. Part of that shift, in the SBC, was systematically removing liberals from leadership and moving the entire denomination in a more conservative direction.

My point, however, was that people like Criswell who wasn’t a “liberal” also supported abortion, so the evangelical shift on abortion was not just brought about by removing liberals.

ATraveller:

That’s a very condescending view.

The African Methodists are doing real ministry and reaching people with the Gospel. Meanwhile in the US . . .

And accusing other Christians of not doing “real ministry” isn’t condescending?

 

[Tommy999]

For Catholics who have been following this issue with the UMC, I have a question. If you were advising the UMC conservatives who oppose homosexual ordinations and marriage, what advice would you give?

 

[commenter]

Changing a tradition is not necessarily a bad thing…

I wonder if Rev Hamilton, and like minded progressives he is reaching out to for possible collaboration, have - yet - arrived at the position of opposing any legal protection for “wrongly” born newborns. It is fair to ask, since others who previously took the same position as him on abortion in general, have moved on to this position.
It’s called changing a Tradition.

 

[yankeesouth]

For Catholics who have been following this issue with the UMC, I have a question. If you were advising the UMC conservatives who oppose homosexual ordinations and marriage, what advice would you give?

It is good that you are seeking to follow the teachings of Jesus. Now finish the journey and come Home to the One True Church that Jesus founded, the Catholic Church!

 

[commenter]

For Catholics who have been following this issue with the UMC, I have a question. If you were advising the UMC conservatives who oppose homosexual ordinations and marriage, what advice would you give?

I would suggest, for a definite period of time:

• Pray - constantly
• Fast - periodically
• Avoid the media as much as possible, especially any kind of relgious or secular current events
• If possible, seek out spiritual direction, not to help you understand denominations, but to facilitate you coming closer to God.
• Try not to even mentally compare denomination or congregation options during the first two thirds of your discernment period. Last third, do some specific thinking. Remember to differentiate the (current denominational) Faith from the particular Church. Base your choice more on “where is the Truth currently taught” than on where I feel comfortable.
• Remember the best choice for you might not be for someone else.
• Choose.

 

[ltwin]

And accusing other Christians of not doing “real ministry” isn’t condescending?

There are United Methodists doing real ministry in the US. Their efforts, sadly, are being undermined by a denomination on a path to self-destruction, inward-focused conflict, and open rebellion (which last I checked was still a sin). But that’s expected when you have ministers openly breaking their ordination vows to “be loyal to The United Methodist Church, accepting and upholding its order, liturgy, doctrine, and discipline . . .” all while assuming the mantle of integrity.

If you are a United Methodist member, elder or bishop and you disagree with the denomination’s teachings on same-sex marriage, you have only 2 just options:

1. Leave as a matter of conscience
2. Stay and comply with the Discipline while you work legitimately for change

But that’s too hard for some people. It’s much easier to embrace a spirit of lawlessness and sow confusion.