The Traditionalist claim that they have a majority at General Conference is deceptive and ultimately irrelevant to the future of The United Methodist Church .
Annual Conference Referendum on the WCA
The phrase “all politics is local” means that politicians may be nationally recognized but their re-election depends on connecting with their constituents. In the United Methodist world this week, we see this sentiment confirmed as the powerful Wesleyan Covenant got their Association handed to them by their constituents.
The election of waves of progressive/centrist delegates to General Conference and the passage of resolution after resolution against the Traditional Plan has revealed that the denomination-devastating policies that are popular at General Conference do not play well at home. Many conferences saw the WCA-endorsed candidates for delegates barely break 30% of the votes. Entire slates of progressives and centrists were elected in the first round of several conferences, completely shutting out the WCA Traditionalists (Final numbers will be released after the last conferences meet).
The WCA has looked itself in the mirror and thought they were looking cute, but the national obliterating politics they traffic in do not have appeal close to home. In the first election since the WCA began, they lost in droves.
But along with the quantity comes the quality of delegates: WCA Leadership Council Leader who were delegates in 2016 and 2019 were not voted back for 2020. Tim McClendon in South Carolina, Jessica LaGrone in Texas, Christopher Ritter in Illinois Great Rivers, Joe DiPaolo in Eastern Pennsylvania (lost out for the last spot to queer clergywoman Hannah Bonner—how poetic), and the former WCA Chairperson Jeff Greenway (by withdrawal) all failed to make the delegations again. In addition, WCA President Keith Boyette was a reserve delegate in 2016/2019 and he has retired so is not on the delegation, and Indiana Confessing Movement chair Beth Ann Cook was a delegate in 2016/2019 and will not be in 2020. Finally, Confessing’s Joe Kilpatrick will not be back from North Georgia (it would have been his eighth GC!), and Kim Reisman, daughter of conservative legend Maxie Dunnam, was not elected out of Indiana.
(Edit: removed a name per the comments)
Top to bottom, a rout. I wonder how they will respond?
Traditionalists:”We didn’t lose, we actually won!”
In order to stem the tide of bad news and demoralizing conferences (the Florida WCA even stopped voting at the end, abdicating their responsibilities to their local church), the Vice President of the Good News movement and submitter of the Traditional Plan Rev. Thomas Lambrecht penned an article with the provocative title: “Traditionalists Secure General Conference Majority.” It’s such a mixture of fact and fiction that we could spend this whole article going through line-by-line; instead we’ll focus on a few points.
First, Lambrecht claims that the laity held strong, claiming “as noted in a previous Perspective, all of the loss of traditionalist delegates fell on the clergy side.” That’s not the case. Iowa’s delegation was led in 2016 by a WCA laywoman who didn’t even make the alternates for the Jurisdictional delegation in 2020–they flipped 6 seats by most spreadsheets. Total sweeps in Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, Central Texas, and Arkansas yielded new progressive laity seats. While it is true that overall the WCA-endorsed laity did better than the clergy (41% of laity are WCA slates, compared to 17% of the clergy), there isn’t as wide a gulf as alleged by Candler School of Theology’s Dr. Kevin Watson.
Second, Lambrecht laments the loss of the delegates who are Traditionalist fixtures and worries that the lack of experience will be a detriment. But the reality is that many of those organizing the slates were very intentional to promote young people and people of color delegates and queer delegates, people who reflect the values of inclusion and diversity. This is the future of the church as reaches out to our US context.
We don’t need more of the tired old methods of the past. Lambrecht laments the loss of straight white voices while the rest of the world celebrates the most diverse delegation in history (one entire delegation is queer [Oregon-Idaho] and one entire clergy delegation is queer [New England] with some SEJ queer delegates as well for the first time).
But wait: are the Traditionalists right?
Finally, Lambrecht’s claim that “traditionalists have a majority at General Conference” is substantiated here:
Enough U.S. traditionalist delegates have been elected that, together with conservative delegates from Africa, the Philippines, and Eastern Europe, the traditional position should have the majority in Minneapolis
Two points.
- First, those central conference delegations haven’t even been elected from those regions yet. Lambrecht is assuming that they would be conservative or Traditionalist, just as he would have made the same assumption of American delegations that ended up going the other way than expected. He wrote that WCA pickups were likely in Virginia and North Carolina, and they were completely shut out. Is it likely that Lambrecht is right? Yes. Is it presumptuous and colonialist thinking? Also Yes.
- But second point is that, in the end, yes, Lambrecht is correct as we mentioned in a previous post. If those central conference delegations vote uniformly Traditionalist, they do have a slim majority. Less than 30% of the American delegates were supported by Traditionalists, only 10 annual conferences out of 54 are Traditionalist majorities, but that is enough to maintain a majority when combined with the central conference traditional pattern of voting.
Traditionalists are spinning this devastating loss of credibility and numbers as a win because they are able to eek out a 1-2% majority, down significantly from previous years. Given that caucus groups like Good News run on money, then it is not surprising they would make this claim to not lose fundraising dollars. But the “win” is far from the spin.
Big Picture – Jurisdictional Leadership
The WCA doubled down on punitive measures and the United Methodists in the United States have said NO. Ordinations of gay clergy in 6 conferences—one in the South! Progressives swept delegations. And this wave means that the hardline goal of the WCA—progressive expulsion and control/liquidation of UMC assets—will no longer be in reach.
It will no longer be in reach because of the Jurisdictional structure, which was ironically created to preserve Traditionalist values by keeping Northern bishops from serving in the South. Each jurisdiction is over 60% progressive/centrist. That means no matter what General Conference does, the jurisdictions will be able to:
- Elect a slew of progressive bishops—at least 12—who will keep accountability in their regions and can block prosecutions if they band together. It’s an impossible task for WCA delegates in any jurisdiction be able to mobilize support for a Candidate needing 60% of the vote when they only have 23-35% of the available votes. It’s a lock if progressives choose good candidates.
- Boards and agencies will receive an influx of bright new progressive board members, creative thinkers, and people suspicious of the straight white power structure to dismantle.
The TraditionalIsts have a slim majority at General Conference. Progressives, for the first time since 1988, will represent and lead all five US jurisdictions. So the governance of the UMC for the next four years is in much more stable hands than the reactionary forces of the past few quadrenniums.
That’s good. But that’s also bad.
The Warning: Don’t pour this blessing into Old Wineskins.
So much of the above is about control and influence in the old wineskin of the UMC as it is known now. But unless there is structural change in 2020, it will just be a flash in a pan.
I would encourage progressives to see that they have an opportunity to reshape Methodism into something new. They might be tempted because of the influence they will have in the current system. They can take the bait of influence in the old wineskin, or they can truly lead the denomination (in ways the Bishops and the Way Forward Commission have failed) into a new wineskin. Their episcopal candidates will lead annual conferences. Their delegates will lead boards and agencies. Any plan of unity or disaffiliation or dissolution will be in their control after General Conference 2020 so they will be able to implement the particulars of a new structure.
As we reach the end of this article, we realize this was an American-centric conversation, but America is only 53% of the votes come May 2020. The worldwide connection can either together with progressives to find a way forward together or apart with blessings not curses, or United Methodism abroad can watch their connections be cast asunder because they put all their eggs in one WCA basket, and watched them be thrown away.
Your Turn
Thoughts?
Thanks for reading, commenting, and sharing on social media.
I would simply exercise caution: who we elect to General Conference – even Annual Conference – are often the privileged few laity and clergy. They are not necessarily representative of those in the pew (much like the average Congressperson is rarely an “average” American.
A short piece about it here: https://revdsky.blogspot.com/2019/06/the-problem-of-labels-assumptions-and.html?m=1
Sky, this is a good point and we should caution extrapolation. I would only add that the nature of our polity means that lay representatives to annual conference in my conference are far more conservative than the average UM. I serve a church that worships 500 a Sunday. We get 4 reps to AC: two lay and two clergy. A church with 4 people in worship on a Sunday gets 2 reps: 1 lay and 1 clergy. The long tail of these tiny churches (of which we have an abundance) drive much of our lay voting
That’s a great point – I have been thinking long and hard about this as well. There’s a big disparity in some districts and conferences where you have many tiny churches – numerically my former church had the attendance of 3-4 small churches, but didn’t have a proportional voting power at annual conference.
It’s similar to the electoral college, where low population states have inordinate influence. And the same counter argument exists, that if we were ‘truly proportional’ the tiny states/churches would have no real influence at all.
The opposite can be said for clergy. About a third of the clergy, and probably the majority of clergy in small churches are Local Pastors, few of whom get to vote for GC or JC delegates. They have to complete course of study, which the majority have not done. Many of them are part-time or bi-vocational pastors who are older and it often takes 8-10 years to complete course of study. Therefore the majority of clergy who vote for clergy reps to GC (1/2 of all delegates) are determined mostly by elders who pastor urban or large churches and retired elders. If you allowed all local pastors to vote for GC and JC delegates (never mind retired ones) the results would have been very different and the traditionalists would win the majority of delegations. This is why the elders will fight to prevent this from ever happening.
Hi Sky,
I don’t disagree with anything you said, in particular this line:
“We often forget that for many, Methodism is the meeting place for many who cannot abide the extremes of Roman Catholic and Fundamentalist dogma.”
And yet, the more flexible plan that allowed congregations and conferences to decide where along the line they were comfortable… that was cut down at GC2019.
To quote Theseus Scamander, “The time’s coming when you’re gonna have to pick a side.”
When one side demands that ‘you are either with me or you are against me’…
Now I would also suggest this, to the wider UMC. IF there’s enough votes to push OCP through, and IF therefore the WCA decides to abandon ship and go their own way, the UMC that remains should ALSO hold to the OCP. That would allow for conferences and/or congregations to work through this, AND it would show that the end game wasn’t to ‘win’ but to get to common ground. It would show a stronger position to those ‘middle grounders’ as well as the apostates who left.
And each area could work at having expressions of methodism that embrace the more progressive view while still allowing for the middle to work into it (new church plants would be more heavily progressive, I would think).
Jeremy, I appreciate the cautionary warning at the end. I’m not sure exactly what a “win” looks like. But I’m assuming it doesn’t look like 51% vote to turn over parts (or the whole) of the Traditional Plan.
Agreed. That’s not remotely enough.
Yep, exactly. I understand that the WJ is working on new structural changes for the UMC, but I’m not sure those proposals would be ready in time for GC. Things like making the US its own Central Conference.
As usual, you come across as a sanctimonious jerk. Your gloating defines you.
Hopefully, the orthodox (aka Traditionalists) at GC will remind you and your friends that you joined this organization and made promises to it as a condition of membership. When you and others break those promises, you need to be removed, much like the cancer you are. All the machinations of the rainbow coalition won’t keep the Africans from upholding Scripture. The schism can’t come soon enough. Take your unbiblical nonsense and go spread it somewhere useful. I hear there are plenty of fields in need of fertilizer.
We do keep our baptismal vow to “Do you accept the freedom and power God gives you
to resist evil, injustice, and oppression in whatever forms they present themselves?” The Traditionalists violate that vow big time.
What about the vow saying you will uphold the BOD? Is that like a “white lie”, and isn’t really something to worry about?
I would be proud to have an upstanding Christian like Richard teach my children. Huh?
Wowza.
Um, I never promised to follow, obey, or be bound by the Book of Discipline. The closest our baptismal covenant comes is the promise to serve Christ through the United Methodist Church and to remain faithful to the Church and it’s ministries.
‘Course, I’m only a layperson. Clergy may make different promises.
I guess “remain faithful to the Church and it’s ministries” is not clear enough for you. It is so simple, but you really can’t see that?
I had to walk away from this 3 times, lest I say things that I regret later.
Dave, when you say “Church”, what exactly do you mean?
Unfortunately, your tone is so ugly that it only reinforces my progressive views. Shame on you for your language. You were the only one who chose to defame and name call personally.
Richard’s tone is ugly? What about the good “reverend’s” words and snarky tone?? Hypocrite.
That is why we Progressives also have to increase our outreach to the overseas conferences. Yes, we do some, but we need to do a lot more.
YES. We need to do active, in-person outreach, build real relationships, and support those LGBTQ-friendly groups overseas that already exist. We need to help do advocacy work, community organizing, and lots of education.
But not just LGBTQ+ friendlies.
We need to show that we’re all in – even if you are Traditionalist.
We need to build bridges, not walls.
I’m very happy to see your final conclusions about “new wineskins,” and also to read the incredible depth of analysis here.
Yes, “all politics IS local,” and the ACs and the Jurisdictions are both localities in their own right. Your analysis here is spot on.
I’ll continue to bang the drum that these elections do not “solve” the deep divisions and problems within the UM family. Some are suggesting the Moderate/Progressive coalition might indeed be able to flip enough votes for a slim majority. I don’t share that optimism, but I sure can’t rule it out either.
Finally, I’m grateful for your noting the general youth and inexperience of many of the delegates. That’s been a cause for some concern, even here in North Texas, among some moderate friends I am hearing from…
But, as one “old timer” said to me, after our gavel fell, “A whole bunch of young, diverse UMs just said that they cared enough about the future of our denomination to be elected to General Conference…whatever happens, that is deepl hopeful and we should listen to them.”
Amen.
Love the “old-timer” quote! Agreed!
I accept that conservatives have gerrymandered and won at General Conference for decades. Their clear malice, however, turned off many who voted this summer at annual conferences. My concern is that even if moderates/progressives gain enough leverage to shape the denomination, we’d still be inheriting an institution rife with neocolonialism. I’d hate to see us trying to move forward by only placing bandaids on our doctrine.
I wish that we could just undo the Traditionalist Plan if we have the votes, and replace it with the One Church Plan. But what I am seeing from those who supported the TP and are now leaving the local churches because we can’t make you folks in the Western Jurisdiction behave (I am kidding. I am in the Illinois Great Rivers Conference now- but my HOME Conference is Oregon-Idaho) – tells me that there is no willingness on the part of the conservatives to remain in a denomination where others disagree with them. Sadly, even my husband is in that group. For 36 years we practiced our own version of the “One Church Plan”; but GC 2019 has forced us to take sides. We will need to have two separate expressions of Methodism coming out of GC 2020. Neither side can demand unanimity to maintain Unity. And the Traditional Plan supporters can’t tolerate any lack of unanimity.
This ought to be a wake up call to the WCA and it’s affiliates that it’s time to get down to business and figure this out. Neither side is going to ‘agree to disagree’.
Time to start seriously brokering a deal. It’s either that or mutually assured destruction.
“One entire delegation is queer [Oregon-Idaho]…” I think that might come as a surprise to at least a couple of people in the delegation, right?!
Haha. Only the official delegation. The rest of the reserves are more diverse 🙂
Now I get it! You, of course, are correct.
When I retired from being a UMC clergy, I started filling the many vast holes in my education. First, I read out on the Civil War. Then the quality movement, in first Japan and then US manufacturing. And eventually, for several years now, the Progressive movement in America starting at about 1880 – just about when Biblical literary criticism was taking root in Germany.
I learned Progressives were instrumental in many laudatory ventures (e.g., erasing child labor, women suffrage) but failed miserably in others (e.g., eugenics, prohibition, abortion on demand, and social security – a giant Ponzi scheme headed toward inevitable bankruptcy).
Progressives typically claim the benefits of their successes, and ignore the damage done to others in their failures.
The now inevitable dismemberment of the UMC will be compared by Progressives to the end of slavery in America. In reality, it will be the death of the last of the once strong, protestant Seven Sisters. But the most dreadful damage done will have been to the UM’s in Africa – looked upon as backward children by the most enlightened of the elite Progressives. Their contextual differentiation from us just isn’t…modern.
As the UMC ceases to be an international church, the social justice warriors will face each other and wave their rainbow flags in victory, and not look upon the faces on the continent of Africa.
Respectfully, I disagree on a couple of points.
“Progressives typically claim the benefits of their successes, and ignore the damage done to others in their failures.”
Everyone does this. Everyone. Check out the GOP tax plan – they ignore that supply side economics has failed completely. That military spending has a terrible ROI vs domestic infrastructure spending (or any other domestic investment for that matter). Even the WCA is spinning the ‘win’ as noted above [Lambrecht], while disregarding the detriment to the denomination.
Don’t pin that solely on progressives. Everyone does it.
Secondly, Prohibition was a rousing success. Read up on the reasons FOR it, and the fact that one generation was all it took to ‘break the back’ of the problem. It might seem backward NOW, but that’s looking through the wrong lens.
Thirdly, the UMC was slouching towards death as it was. There’s a chance here to re-energize the denomination, most likely through multiple expressions of Methodism – it would be nice if we could keep reasonably connected throughout, I don’t think the WCA has any intention of doing so.
There are a lot of potential problems to come in the near and mid future – I don’t think that a UMC that is more solidly progressive in America turning it’s back on Africa is one of them.
The military has a horrible ROI?? Do you even know what the military do around the world? Do you understand ANY OF THE SACRIFICES MADE by service members and their families??? I would say this country gets MUCH MORE THAN IT GIVES when it comes to our military!!! There is obviously unnecessary spending, but that’s usually by the people at the Pentagon and such; the troops in the field are much more conservative with their spending because they know what they need and how much they have to spend to cover it. Local installations and units are more like families when it comes to budgeting. The Commands and overlords in Congress and the Pentagon are the wasters. And you can’t tell me that there aren’t wastes when it comes to infrastructure. Seen any “shovel ready projects” in the last decade? In particular, any that were done on time and within budget??
As for the UMC dying… I would say that’s because there’s been no authenticity in decades. Saying one thing and allowing another is not authentic, and people can tell when leadership does it. If you’ve paid attention, small, independent, Biblically conservative churches are doing fabulously. Because they know what they believe and people head towards those beacons of light.
Yes, Ellen, military spending has horrible ROI. Some of the worst in government spending, as a matter of fact. That’s not a judgment from me on whether some things should or should not be funded, so temper your own judgment on that. We could literally reduce our military funding by almost 1/3 and see almost no effect on ‘what we get’ out of our military spending. There are lots of studies on that, feel free to educate yourself on the topic. Certainly some things should be funded to a certain level regardless of the ROI, but even those – if funded to reasonable levels – wouldn’t generate a terrible ROI. It’s when you fund them unnecessarily that you get into uncomfortable territory.
And there is waste in every project, government/private sector, military/infrastructure, etc. Again, lots of studies on the ROI in various areas, Google is your friend. ‘On time and under budget’ are only peripherally related to ROI – a project could take twice as long and cost twice as much and still generate a positive ROI.
“…small, independent, Biblically conservative churches are doing fabulously.”
I HAVE been paying attention, actually. Here’s what I see with those:
#1, they have a person or two willing to be the major funder. Someone offers up land, or had deep pockets to help get it going. This person is usually an older man with money to burn, and there’s more than a little ego involved here.
#2, they are friends in some way with a charismatic personality who is a driver of the small church. Usually this is the ‘lead pastor’.
#3, without any outside accountability or apportionments, there’s a certain cult of personality that is established within the small church. The lead pastor and his confidants run the show. This allows for other members to simply ‘be’ in the church without responsibilities for committee work that is important to the ongoing life of the church. On the plus side, it becomes really easy for people to invite their friends to join a ‘low involvement’ church. That’s where you see the growth you have been seeing.
#4, unless this ‘small church’ is able to get up into the mega-church range within the tenure of the lead pastor, it’s not going to survive his retirement. It will suffer the same downward trend as the other churches in the region, potentially faster as the successor will likely have conflict with the previous ‘inner circle’.
#4b, if it does get up to a size that allows for survival, there will be multiple pastors to survive a retirement. This church will offer more programs to attract younger members (coffee bar, sports teams, etc). The danger here is that power corrupts. There are higher risks with respect to financial corruption, inappropriate behavior, etc – because there’s no higher authority within the church.
Keep an eye on those small, independent ‘beacons of light’. My bet is that, like small businesses, most don’t last all that long or have all that much of an impact on the world around them.
JR,
Here’s a distressing fact for you: If all the membership of the independent, non-denominational congregations were added together as a “denomination,” they be the second largest in the U.S. – behind the Southern Baptists.
I know that’s difficult to grasp, but then the truth will set you free, after first making you mad.
L Cary
“Here’s a distressing fact for you: If all the membership of the independent, non-denominational congregations were added together as a “denomination,” they be the second largest in the U.S. – behind the Southern Baptists.”
Not distressing at all. Not sure why you think it should be distressing to me.
“Where did you get your economics degree from? I got mine at N. IL Univ. It’s the protestation of Keynesian economics by liberals that has failed us into a $22+ trillion debt.”
You might want to go back and ask for a refund. If you blame all the debt on the liberals, you have no idea what you are talking about. [I’m not at all saying liberals are blameless on that point, but since supply side economics hasn’t generated any economic growth as predicted by the proponents, the logic is pretty easy to follow.]
“”Prohibition was a rousing success.” You’ve clearly read very little about it. It fostered a rise in organized crime. See Chicago, for example.”
Unintended consequences. The intent of Prohibition was to break the dependence on alcohol among the lower class. It was immensely successful on that measure. Moving the goalposts doesn’t win you the argument.
““…it would be nice if we could keep reasonably connected throughout,” The progressives don’t want a diverse denomination. They want control.”
Psst. Your bias is showing throughout your arguments. You might want to try not doing that.
This has been fun, though. Enjoy your retirement, I’m hoping that I can get there someday.
1. “Check out the GOP tax plan – they ignore that supply side economics has failed completely.” Where did you get your economics degree from? I got mine at N. IL Univ. It’s the protestation of Keynesian economics by liberals that has failed us into a $22+ trillion debt.
2.”Prohibition was a rousing success.” You’ve clearly read very little about it. It fostered a rise in organized crime. See Chicago, for example.
3. “…it would be nice if we could keep reasonably connected throughout,” The progressives don’t want a diverse denomination. They want control.
L Cary
JR,
“Bias” is a word those who disagree with a position use to discount its credibility. ”
“Unintended consequences” means things didn’t work out as intended by the initiator of the action. It’s a consequence of error, not an excuse.
“You might want to try not doing that.” Why, so why do we need to think alike?
“Liberal” economic policies has, for most of my adult life, bi-partisan behavior. And when sovereign debt default approaches, each party will blame the other, and they’ll both be right Failure to recognize that is the ultimate bias.
L Cary
Ellen, you’ve stated reality clearly and concisely. Well done.
“As for the UMC dying… I would say that’s because there’s been no authenticity in decades. Saying one thing and allowing another is not authentic, and people can tell when leadership does it. If you’ve paid attention, small, independent, Biblically conservative churches are doing fabulously. Because they know what they believe and people head towards those beacons of light.”
The hierarchy – Bishops and Boards & Agency professional bureaucrats – are unable to face the failures of the pyramid organization, with them at the top.
When I retired from being a UMC clergy, I started filling the vast holes in my education. First, I read out on the Civil War. Then the quality movement, in first Japan and then US manufacturing. And eventually, for several years now, the Progressive movement in America starting at about 1880 – just about when Biblical literary criticism was taking root. .
I learned Progressives were instrumental in many laudatory ventures (e.g., erasing child labor, women suffrage) and failed miserably in others (e.g., eugenics, prohibition, abortion on demand, and social security – a giant Ponzi scheme headed toward inevitable bankruptcy).
Progressives characteristic claim the benefits of their successes, and ignore the damage done in their failures.
The now inevitable dismemberment of the UMC will be compared by Progressives to the end of slavery in America. In reality, it will be the death of the last of the once strong, protestant Seven Sisters. But the most dreadful damage done will have been to the UM’s in Africa – looked upon as backward children by the most enlightened of the elite Progressives. Their contextual differentiation just isn’t…modern.
As the UMC ceases to be an international church, the social justice warriors will wave their rainbow flags in victory, and not look to the continent of Africa.
I have been contacted by many LGBT persons and activists on Facebook. LGBT persons exist in all races and cultures. I have also personally known many African American Gay Men, one of whom lived with me for two years. Homophobia and Transphobia were western imports into Africa.
I think it comes down to how we interpret the word of God and how we decide to use it. I had a Methodist preacher awhile back that got me to read the Bible from cover to cover. It changed my life. I wonder how many of our church leaders have done the same?
I also wonder if someone introduces a Bible to someone in a 3rd world country or a different area, and they decide to heed its teachings, how are they to react when someone tries to tell them that some of the things they interpreted from the Bible as sin is not actually a sin? It may get very confusing? I guess it comes down to what the individual seems acceptable to God?
“I guess it comes down to what the individual seems acceptable to God?”
Ah, yes, it’s all about “contextual differentiation”. Called “Modernism” in the first part of the 20th Century.
As Prof. Rudolf Bultmann, the guiding light of mid-late 20th Century systematic theology teachers in several UM seminaries said, ” We cannot use electric lights and radios and, in the event of illness, avail ourselves of modern medical and clinical means and at the same time believe in the spirit and wonder world of the New Testament.
Rudolf Bultmann ” And,
“Contemporary Christian proclamation is faced with the question whether, when it demands faith from men and women, it expects them to acknowledge this mythical world picture from the past. If this is impossible, it has to face the question whether the New Testament proclamation has a truth that is independent of the mythical world picture, in which case it would be the task of theology to demythologize the Christian proclamation.”
Lastly from Rudolf: “Man is always on the way.” But to where?
Better question is, “who gets to choose which sins matter and which ones don’t?”
Speaking of new wineskins, I wonder if our central conferences would support the US becoming its own central conference? On paper, and without knowing all the intricacies, it seems ideal for lots of reasons…and I wonder if our overseas church members would appreciate the way it puts everyone on a level playing field, as opposed to the colonialism inherent in our current structure?
I would think that would be a good option, but that would still lead to schism in the US.
The opposite can be said for clergy. About a third of the clergy, and probably the majority of clergy in small churches are Local Pastors, few of whom get to vote for GC or JC delegates. They have to complete course of study, which the majority have not done. Many of them are part-time or bi-vocational pastors who are older and it often takes 8-10 years to complete course of study. Therefore the majority of clergy who vote for clergy reps to GC (1/2 of all delegates) are determined mostly by elders who pastor urban or large churches and retired elders. If you allowed all local pastors to vote for GC and JC delegates (never mind retired ones) the results would have been very different and the traditionalists would win the majority of delegations. This is why the elders will fight to prevent this from ever happening.
That’s not new though – that’s been the rule for a long time.
I wonder if there’s a notable difference in the voting between the LPs who have completed their course of study and the elders/retired elders.
Jeremy, Just to correct a fallacy, I am not on any WCA governing council and have attended just 3 meetings. I appreciate the backhanded compliment and I am an unashamed orthodox Wesleyan who loves ALL.
Thanks for the care to accuracy, Tim. I’ll make the correction. My apologies at the error.
That hate and disdain for anyone who doesn’t follow the progressive line is quite obvious in this article. I don’t know if the author is actually a minister, but he’s a poor example of one if he is. Pitiful.
😉
Ellen,
I disagree. The tone is fair and the topic is parsing fact from spin regarding who has the power to make the next set of changes in our churches. Stating one’s opinion while citing evidence is not hateful. It may be incorrect. It may be inconvenient. It may be in-your-face. But it’s not intolerant.
We are going to have to learn to hear each other make arguments like those in this article. We will have to look past the assertions with which we disagree, to find points that, though we can’t accept as our own, we can affirm as valid to the person we disagree with. We have to learn to say, “I hate your argument, and I love you.” When presented with conservative articles, this is what I will commit to doing.
Sometimes parents have to get a divorce. It matters a lot how they do it.
Jeremy, when I read this article, it makes me think you care deeply about the “children” aka congregants of the “divorcing parents” aka Traditionalists and Progressives. It also makes me think you side with Progressives and have a deep care for the marginalized people they believe they’re fighting for. Both of these are deeply pastoral, mature, and in line with Discipleship of Jesus Christ as I see it outlined in scripture as well as lived experience through the Spirit of the Living God. Thanks, bro!
Andy
Perhaps you missed the obvious tone that Jeremy mostly wants to count votes and WIN!
Provide spirituality? Not so much.
I also wonder if someone introduces a Bible to someone in a 3rd world country or a different area, and they decide to heed its teachings, how are they to react when someone tries to tell them that some of the things they interpreted from the Bible as sin is not actually a sin? It may get very confusing? I guess it comes down to what the individual seems acceptable to God?