Crisis Manufacturing
In many African countries, Nestle Corporation gave women free formula in the hospitals. They even dressed their salesman like nurses in some hospitals to promote the use of formula and discourage the breastfeeding of infants.
As a result, the new mothers left the hospital with diminished ability to produce breastmilk. To feed their babies, African families had to buy formula at prices they could not afford. The crisis of health and money came about because Nestle worked against women’s free source of nutrition and then sold them the only alternative: a Nestle product.
Nestle is rightly criticized as creating a crisis by their action and miseducation, and then selling a way out of it.
Sadly, the same thing happens in many industries.
- Soft drink manufacturers sponsor health groups that issue recommendations about diabetes.
- Cosmetics cause side effects to your skin, which requires more cosmetics to fix.
- Breast cancer research organizations pocket more money than they spend on research while investing in industries that cause cancer.
- The company that turned Grenfell Tower into a flaming deathtrap now profits from removing their flammable material from other properties
- The petroleum industry cleans up oil spills like Deepwater Horizon and Exxon Valdez with a petroleum-based cleaner: Dawn detergent.
In every industry, there are manufactured crisis agents who create the conditions for a critical need, and then sell the victims the solution.
And the same is true in the Church.
Confidence for the Future?
The United Methodist Church is in crisis, closest to schism or breaking up than any time in the past 50 years. And yet the same group of people who have brought us to this brink is now advertising they alone can fix it.
The new tagline for the Wesleyan Covenant Association’s latest marketing campaign to United Methodist churches is “Confidence for the Future.” The tagline is on their website, “About Us” video, and glossy pamphlets (picture above).
Their messaging focuses on being able to weather the storm for United Methodism. Through slick videos featuring megachurch pastors who glitter, they promote their success to attract churches to join their group.
But like Nestle’s miseducation causing a demand for their product, the precursors to the WCA bear responsibility for the problems the WCA is selling themselves a way out of today.
The crisis in United Methodism today
The crisis in United Methodism is threefold:
- Failure to develop a robust sexual ethic that connects the 1st with the 21st century.
- Failure to encourage minority perspectives to maintain a “unity in diversity” structure to fulfill the mission of Jesus Christ.
- Failure to play fair with the General Conference-created process to navigate Crisis 1 & 2.
In our past and present, we see the same actors create the crisis to which we are now mired.
Sabotaging Sex Education
From the beginning of its contemporary structure, The United Methodist Church was influenced by a key group to removing resources from the theological study of human sexuality.
The Good News Magazine (and other affiliated caucus groups) advocated against a study of human sexuality (voted down at GC 1976), supported removal of funding from any ministry associated with homosexuality, including AIDS ministries (GC1976), and advocated to stop the General Board of Discipleship from holding forums on sexuality (1978) which ultimately was ended at GC 1980.
By these actions, Good News and its affiliates advocated for the United Methodist Church to be kept in the dark about human sexuality and the deadly effects of the AIDS epidemic until it was too late. Like Nestle in Africa, they created a crisis through miseducation and misplaced advocacy.
While they were silencing the United Methodist structure, Good News was flooding United Methodist mailboxes with narratives against LGBTQ people. A friend of the blog– an Asbury Theological Seminary graduate, which has a vast collection of Good News Magazine archives–reported that every other issue had an article about homosexuality or “sexual deviance” (i.e. homosexuality) or lack of following the Discipline (i.e. prosecuting homosexuals).
In short, our lack of a sexual ethic connecting the 1st and 21st centuries is in part due to the decades that The UMC was not allowed to educate or develop comprehensive sexual ethics. And behind every action to accomplish this result was the Good News Movement and their affiliates.
Sabotaging minority voices
It is relevant to talk about the Good News Magazine because their membership and their narratives now prop up the WCA. The WCA’s originating documents reveal a Good News staff member started the WCA, and their governing board contains Good News, Confessing, and other caucus group supporters, staff, and board members.
Since Good News’ inception, it has opposed the voice and existence of minority group voices. Rev. Charles Keysor was the originator of the Good News Magazine (1966) and subsequent caucus groups for conservative advocacy in The United Methodist Church. In Keysor’s response to the 1972 General Conference, he denigrated the theologies created by ethnic identities and women unlike straight white American men like himself:
“women’s theology, liberation theology, black theology, Third World theology, theologies of human rights…the primary accent is upon man’s ideas and problems instead of God’s truth.”
Keysor’s opposition to such contextual theology developed into his catchphrase: minority mania. In a 1974 editorial, Keysor lays out his opposition to minority groups doing theology informed by their identity:
“One of the most common forms of humanism is minority mania–the preoccupation by the church with minorities which represent only a small fraction of the whole membership…this variety of humanism replaces God as the primary object of love and concern with “sexist” obsession and “racist” obsession over being white, black, yellow, red, or brown-skinned.
The opposition to “minority mania” continues from 1974 to today as the IRD and other supporting organizations of the Wesleyan Covenant Association regularly criticize feminist, Latino and black liberation, queer, and other theologies that speak about God out of their ethnicity, gender, and identity. While some ethnic minorities and women are part of the WCA today, the WCA’s existence is built on suspicion of those who do theology from those identities.
If you’ve wondered why conservative evangelicals are so against the local option or unity in diversity approaches, they have been fed a constant diet of hostility and suspicion of minority experiences of Christ. Charitably, they have little awareness this hostility originated from Keysor’s opposition to theologizing outside of the white male experience.
Sabotaging A Way Forward
Finally, as described earlier, efforts by precursors and supporters of the Wesleyan Covenant Association have stacked the deck against the bishops’ “A Way Forward” process receiving a fair hearing.
Years of manufacturing distrust and trafficking in outrage have planted seeds of distrust in the Episcopacy. Conservative Evangelicals, despite clergy trials of progressives for decades, believe the narrative that the bishops do not have their best interests at heart.
Recent documents published by the WCA and Good News Magazine revealed their intent to entirely oppose A Way Forward through alternative legislation and steps towards schism.
If “A Way Forward” fails, it is not because of the merits of the proposal, but because these powerful groups have seduced the Methodist Middle to oppose the best things for the UMC at every turn.
Confidence Men At Work
While the rest of United Methodism seeks A Way Forward, the Wesleyan Covenant Association is peddling A Way Out.
To brazenly assert “confidence in the future” is to pivot from any responsibility of the amount of dysfunction, disruption, defunding, and denigration of the episcopacy that the WCA and its precursors have been causing for decades.
But worst of all is, like any manufactured crisis, they will be able to create it again.
LGBTQ children will continue to be born to those WCA megachurch congregants. WCA’s loyal pastors will have changed hearts after personal experience with LGBTQ friends and congregants. You cannot insulate against the Holy Spirit, and you cannot keep LGBTQ persons standing outside the catechetical door.
The same cycle will start again for the WCA in the coming years. And those churches and clergy that thought they were escaping the crisis will instead realize too late they sold their buildings to the very creators of that crisis.
Confidence in the Future, indeed.
Your turn
The best way out of this crisis is to remove the obstacles to full inclusion of LGBTQ persons in the life of the church by allowing marriage and ordination opportunities. That’s the only way to break this chain of beliefs and actions that have led us to this point. Any other direction keeps the crisis in our future, and places entire generations of money and property in the pockets of those peddling “Confidence.”
Thoughts?
Thanks for reading, commenting, and sharing on social media. Be sure to share with General Conference 2019 delegates with which you have a relationship.
Great article, Jeremy!
How did you not include gun manufacturer’s on your sample list of crisis manufacturers? Perhaps NRA and WCA are so close as to cause confusion? 🙂
I truly appreciate your exploration of the WCA. Your voice continues to help balance the far right. I wanted to share, however, my concern with your conclusion. Your article says that the WCA predecessors silenced minority voices. I would hate to do the same. I don’t believe that the best way forward is to force full inclusion on those who are not ready, but to create space in which both can find a way forward together. Yes, it will keep some elements of the conversation in our future, but those who oppose dialogue and unity in diversity will leave, which means that the crisis dissipates. I believe that the best way forward is to support the Commission on a Way Forward. Only in compromise can we achieve unity in diversity and bear with one another in love. Only by doing so can we grow as Christ’s followers, for we need one another.
John Wesley said do good. Do not harm.
I am sure there are different definitions of good, but I do not understand how total (you are not good enough) rejection of anyone would not be understood as doing harm.
Majorie are you referring to Jeremy’s rejection of the WCA? Could you please clarify?
Thank you for your perspective, but the only means you employed in terms of persuasion were indictments against the WCA and “conservative evangelicals” for creating the mess they claim to be cleaning up. Ironically, the hyperlinked clause “Years of manufacturing distrust and trafficking in outrage” takes me to another article that inveighs against conservatives. Is it meant to persuade, or to air a grievance? And what can such catalogues of stubborn errors be expected to produce if not mistrust of those being hauled onto the carpet and outrage over their recalcitrance? Why not present at least a skeletal outline of a “robust sexual ethic”? As open as I try to be to alternative viewpoints and ways of thinking, I must at least know what they are. To be told, peremptorily, that the “best way” is “full inclusion of LGBT persons in the life of the church” is at best a wink and a nod to right-thinking people (aka “virtue signaling”), but to outsiders not already persuaded it comes off as patronizing and condescending; moreover, it lacks any ethical dimension, and merely creates a negative space into which one may insert whatever sexual ethic (if any) is implied by the socio-political construct “LGBT persons”.
I’m wondering if you are old enough to have been around when the 1988 General Conference mandated the formation of a Committee to Study Homosexuality, which brought its report to the 1992 GC. The majority of the committee recommended the removal of all negative references to homosexuality from the Book of Discipline and the development within the UMC of a thoroughgoing study of human sexuality in general, not just homosexuality. A minority of the committee recommended maintaining the anti-gay language. The GC “received” the report, because “accepting” it would have meant accepting the conclusions of the majority and making the majority’s position the official position of the UMC. The GC did, however, instruct the General Board of Discipleship to produce study materials that included the full report of the committee along with the majority and minority recommendations, so that members of local churches could consider what the committee had discovered and discussed and, having become more well-informed on the subject, could then work locally and encourage their GC delegates to work on the denominational level to come to a well-considered position with which United Methodists could live without further conflict. Those materials were produced under the title “The Church Studies Homosexuality” in 1994. By 2005, when I asked the UM Publishing House how many copies had been sold, only around 50,000 student books had been purchased, and fewer than 5,000 leader’s guides that included a recommended lesson structure for study groups, an audio cassette of some of the committee’s report before the General Council on Ministries, and a student study book. In other words, only about 6/10 of 1% of the membership of the UMC had purchased study materials produced by the UMC on the subject. In part because of this, in 2005 the General Council on Christian Unity and Interreligious Concerns assembled a study packet that included the committee’s report along with a range of materials to encourage healthy dialogue, some of which were viewable from DVDs and others were printable from CDs. The packet was titled “Can We Talk?” I checked several years ago to find out how many of these packets had been purchased and was told that fewer than 1,000 had been bought. In other words, people in our churches have no interest in discussing human sexuality in general, let alone homosexuality in particular. They would much rather just buy into the narrative that their gut tells them is the most comfortable one for them to live with, because most of them either don’t know anyone who is LGBTQ, or don’t care about those they know who are; and they have more pressing concerns in their lives – until their son or daughter or grandchild or someone else close to them commits suicide, because their loved ones made it clear they didn’t want to deal with the subject of sexuality, let alone a sexuality that society still hasn’t embraced fully and come to accept as natural and as having the potential for the expression of love and commitment equal to that of heterosexuality. The WCA is a conglomeration of groups and people who want to keep people in ignorance around many issues, particularly of human sexuality, and under their bigoted and ungodly control. They are a prime example of what it means to take the Lord’s name in vain as they claim to hold the “godly position”; but it is members of the LGBTQ community and those who love us who bear the brunt of their sinfulness.
The UMW produced curriculum for Mission U a few years ago entitled “The Bible and Human Sexuality”. I wonder how many people have studied that curriculum through Mission U and/or the UMW. I suspect those numbers would betray the conclusion that “people in our churches have no interest in discussing human sexuality in general, let alone homosexuality in particular”. Format and accessibility matter. And the need for a whole sexual ethic persists.
I read that particular book cover to cover. Twice. And it failed to even touch upon fundamental considerations of Christian theology—primarily the deceitfulness of the human heart and the reality of sin. If sin is real, then what we observe humanity to be is not what it ought to be; consequently, secular understandings (psychologies) of human sexuality, which are based on observed behavior and geared toward self-perceived psychological well-being, will produce inaccurate conclusions and potentially disastrous recommendations.
Thank you for letting me know those resources exist. During my time at Perkins school of theology (2007-2011), none of these events or studies were mentioned.
Years ago when, as a news reporter and a member of First-Houston, I covered the news conference announcing the formation of the Confessing Movement, my heart sank and it took all the strength I could muster to go back and report the story. Being gay I knew good and well what was really going on: a well orchestrated movement to go after and denigrate homosexuality and minorities from the pulpit! While the CM talked about their primacy of scripture and other so called plans, their loud and clear, sole purpose was aimed directly at homosexuality and minorities. So one faction has turned into two or three more spewing the same vitriol, all the while claiming to be people of God. Thank you for this blog; your words are powerful and 100% on point.
Goodness. Prayers for you and yours, Sarah! Thanks for your reflection and kind words.
The WCA is “seducing” those in the middle? I guess those in the “middle” are too stupid to think for themselves and will be “hoodwinks” by the dastardly WCA.
GIve me a break. Do you even take yourself seriously?
Advertising and marketing are powerful and play on human emotions, no matter how educated or savvy. So that’s not a slam to moderates as all humans have the same sensitivity.
Oh, I don’t think so. Let’s put the blame on those who turned a blind eye to open violations of our discipline. Leaders in our church who ordained partnered homosexuals in violation of our rules which they swore to uphold. And how about that lesbian bishop who was improperly consecrated and after being directed by our highest judicial body to move toward compliance have yet to do anything. Willful acts of disobedience and poor leadership by our bishops are the causes of our current crisis.
I do agree that civil disobedience is important to move dialogue forward in some cases, I have to agree with you that the clergy, rather than laity, making these moves sends a signal to those inside UMC and outside that our denomination is unstable and doesn’t adhere to any set rules. That doesn’t instill confidence in anyone looking to become a UM. I’ve been UM my entire life, but it’s hard to say whether I would have ever joined as an adult. While I support same-sex couples who practice monogamy, (I love everyone, we all sin, let me make that clear), I believe it’s extremely important that we maintain a code of sexual ethics that can be easily understood by those inside UMC and outside.
For a different perspective, I am a young person who became United Methodist again in college precisely because I discovered that there were UM pastors willing to risk their ordination in order to include LGBTQ people in the life of the church. If I had not been fortunate enough to meet individuals willing to remain in the UMC while holding strong disagreements about the Book of Discipline I don’t know if I would be a church member, let alone considering seminary. For me, finding a local UMC that welcomed and affirmed all people was much more important than having everyone in the global UMC follow set rules.
A problem for WCA is it appears to me that their entire purpose is to oppose LGBT-affirmation in the UMC. They are claiming an orthodox position, which is fine, but I’m not sure if they realize they will forever be known as that “church” formed specifically to exclude the gays. Their other orthodox positions won’t even be considered, just the gay one.
My question for those pushing for full marriage equality though is what will you do when nothing happens at conference? Which is very likely. I mean, will you leave if it’s the status quo? I’ve asked myself that question many times, and I always answer with a definite, no, I don’t plan to leave the UMC. It’s my church too, and I’m not going to burn it down over the language of the BoD. I care too much about the church, it’s missions, and people to do that. If the UMC is going to maintain their current language, I’m not going anywhere; however, I strongly suggest they add to the BoD what ministry roles they suggest for LGBT people if they are going to maintain that stance.
I believe that WCA could somewhat change perceptions of their group by making it absolutely clear they are accepting of LGBT people, just not the practice of sex outside of hetero marriage. That’s a pretty common Christian teaching, so it wouldn’t be quite as offensive as your group appearing to be exclusively formed to be anti-gay.
My issue with LGBT-affirming groups like RMN is that I don’t feel they’ve made their full intentions clear enough. While I’m supportive of same-sex couples who are monogamous, no exceptions, I’m not supportive of this revolution of sexuality, promiscuity, that seems is being pushed by RMN and other LGBT-affirming groups. We are all sinners. We also must repent in order to fully embrace God’s grace. That’s something I hope we can all agree with for the most part.
I guess if you are this far “left” it is understandable if your view of the historical and conservative is askew. The WCA can hardly be accused of creating the current divide. We are not the ones defying the Book of Discipline.
After decades of accepting the abuse heaped on me by the UMC — this includes well-meaning but ultimately complicit “gay-friendly” pastors — I am now not only an ex-Methodist, but also an ex-Christian. Being gay and Christian feels to me like being a Jewish Nazi. While there might be some good Christians out there, they are ultimately unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to make life truly better for the outcast.
I spent my childhood being conditioned to understand that people like me were inherently evil. I spent my college years hearing that I could never be good enough to lead a church. I spent my adulthood knowing that I could never get married in my own church.
I finally realized that this was abuse, plain and simple. And it is ultimately something that could never change, since it is codified into a book of mythology that somehow billions of people have been deluded into believing is somehow true, despite the fact that more evidence exists for the reality of Harry
Potter than for the reality of a magic old man in the sky.
You know what? My life got better once I accepted this. I had been clinging onto it so desperately for decades, but I finally grew up. No matter how good anyone’s intentions are, brainwashing children into believing this stuff is ultimately far more harmful than it is beneficial.
I’ve been able to let go of the self-hatred that was drilled into me from birth. I’ve been able to understand that I don’t have to feel punished for things that are beyond my capability to control. Unfortunately, the damage is already done, though, and I will never feel truly comfortable with myself because of what so-called good people did to me.
All I can do is try to convince others to be comfortable in leaving behind religion — ALL religion. Until we abandon these caveman-level superstitions, we will never be able to realize our true potential as humans.
I’m so sorry you feel this way. I largely grew up in a non-religious household and depended on my grandmother to introduce me to Jesus Christ. Christianity is not a problem, it’s a solution. When you say Christians made you hate yourself, you didn’t say that Jesus made you hate yourself. In order to truly surrender and love ourselves in God’s infinite grace, we must deny ourselves and put others before ourselves. That means identity as well. Whether you are LGBT, a gun owner, a Republican, Democrat, Green, etc. Your first and foremost identity should be in Christ. That’s helped me greatly in understanding my faith doesn’t hinge on my sexuality, regardless of what others tell me.
Life isn’t all about sex and marriage. The faster Christians learn this the better it will be for society. Sexual ethics are crucially important however to a stable society, because promiscuity has the potential to be so damaging to those involved. That’s something I pray LGBT and heteros also both understand. Sex is NOT everything, no matter how much Satan tries to convince us otherwise.
The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians, called us to put God first and discussed how marriage can actually hinder your relationship with Jesus Christ. We all have our calling. While I don’t believe at all that sex is a bad thing, I do believe people certainly use sex and relationships to gain happiness. People should be bestowed more dignity than their ability to have sex. Sex will never be permanent. Your only true happiness is an identity in Jesus Christ who died on our behalf so that we may actually live.
A great book on this subject is called “The Truest Thing About You,” by David Lomas.
Hi Breed7,
I’m a Unitarian-Universalist and grew up Catholic, so what do I know. But I couldn’t help but be moved by your pain from feeling excluded from church and your renunciation of religion. I hope this doesn’t come off as presumptuous, but in my own journey I’ve found sort of a middle ground between traditional Christianity and rejection of religion, and goodness, it strikes me as truer than either of the former. I wonder if you’ve read Karen Armstrong’s “The Case For God”? That book is SO GOOD! It was able to put into words what I bet a lot of us feel – there is a place for awe, for wonder, for compassion and love, there is a way to encounter the world in a reverential way – and that’s the case for God. (Read the book, that was a very lousy synopsis). Anyway, good luck on your journey – I suspect, if you are like me, you are not at the last station stop.
I’m 71 years old. Three months ago, I withdrew my lifelong membership in my small town United Methodist Church. It was an emotional decision, because my entire extended family have been members there over the years, and indeed my great-grandfather helped to found the church in the late 1800s. I have been aware of the WCA and it’s determination to keep the church in the Dark Ages concerning the issues mentioned in the article above. I’m in complete disagreement with their aims, and began to feel like a hypocrite for attending a church of a denomination that excludes certain people from holding office, getting married, or holding positions of responsibility and/or authority. In the eyes of Jesus, NO ONE is less than. Then I learned that the local district superintendent is on the board of the WCA. That was the final straw. Without looking back, I withdrew my membership and transferred to a loving and open Episcopal congregation. The spirituality and rituals of the Episcopal form of worship are exactly what I need. I now look forward to attending church instead of just going along to get along and feeling a sense of dread.
I’m so sorry to hear about your experience. Truly, no one is “less than”, but there are many reasons to “exclude certain people from holding office.” For instance: prior to ordination, ordinands are asked whether they have debt “so as to embarrass their ministry.” This restriction (and others) are in place because many immature in the faith look to “leaders” for examples of righteous Christian living. They are still suffer from ingrown eyes, and are still at a point where their lives & happiness are governed by self-esteem. Butt the “good news” is not “God approves of everything we approve”, but that we are all sinners saved by grace. What breaks my heart is seeing how many people on every side continue to root their faith in their own “goodness” as affirmed by others (and the church) rather than in the faithfulness and mercy of God.
“Let us do what we want and you continue to subsidize it” is the revisionist position in a nutshell.
Jeremy continues his polemics against the orthodox, but I have seen nothing that addresses the catastrophic effects that revision of ordination standards has had on the Episcopalians and Presbyterians much less the utter failure of the UCC to grow by leaps and bounds. You cannot have a connectional polity if the leaders only choose to enforce the connection to pay to maintain the institution.
The 1844 split occurred because a bishop put their own interests above the vote of General Conference. It would be shame if a split happens because history has repeated itself.
Even more Conservative Denominations are no longer growing by leaps and bounds. Even the Southern Baptist Convention has been going down in overall numbers lately. The fastest growing group religiously is the “None” group, not Evangelicals, at least not anymore.
Those revisionist mainline denominations are dying faster than anyone else. The Western Jurisdiction has the highest loss rate in The UMC. Telling someone dying of cancer that you want to give them a heart attack is not good medical care.
Depending on which survey data you look at, the “nones” are not a very cohesive, much less permanent, group either. But, there is more movement from mainline to none than the other way.
One reason many people are leaving the Church is the anti gay teaching of it. Many younger Evangelicals now know Gay people and they can’t reconcile their relationships with LGBT persons with common (not universal) Evangelical beliefs about LGBT persons.
You know, you named your page correctly. “Hacking” has no good connotations. It means the unauthorized use of or entry into someone else’s computer system, usually with the intention of doing harm. In gemology, it means the unskilled striking of a rock or gem.
Hacking Christianity is both. An unskilled beating of God’s Word, attacking (hacking at) those who refuse to surrender to Satan, and breaking into Scripture wit the intent to do harm to the Word of God.
Your master must be very proud of you. I’m sure he’ll get you an air conditioned room when you arrive.