The passing of parts of the Traditional Plan has awoken a slumbering giant. Regions that no one considered “progressive” have amassed open letters with significant signatories, purchased local media ads, and written legislation in order to denounce the Traditional Plan.
The following is a constantly-updated list, so come back if you find something that isn’t here.
We are all indebted to Julie O’Neal, Executive Assistant to the Bishop in the Desert Southwest Annual Conference, for collecting the majority of the below letters. Thanks Julie!
Advertisements and Open Letters in Local Media
In order to reach those outside the church, some regions opted to purchase local media ads or send in group letters to the editor.
- Massachusetts Reconciling Churches – Ad in Boston Globe – (see Facebook image)
- North Georgia – Ad in Atlanta Journal-Constitution (click to view letter) (final ad with signatories)
- North Texas – Ad in Dallas Morning News (click to view)
- Northern Virginia, DC and Maryland Area Churches – Ad in Washington Post – (see Facebook image)
- Oklahoma – Ad in the Lawton Constitution, Tulsa World, and The Daily Oklahoman newspaper (click to view Facebook image)
- Pacific Northwest, two responses:
- Clergy
letter to the Editor: (see internet link) - Regional clergy ad in Columbian (see internet link)
- Clergy
- Utah Clergy letter to the Editor – (see link)
Did your region do this? Send a copy or link to Twitter @umjeremy or the twitter username @ gmail.com
Open Letters and Petitions from Annual Conference Clergy + Laity
- Baltimore-Washington Clergy letter (see google doc)
- Dakotas Letter – (see google doc)
- Desert Southwest Clergy letter (see website)
- Greater New Jersey (google doc)
- Florida, two letters
- Clergy letter – (google doc)
- Laity letter – (google doc)
- Holston
Latiy and Clergy Letter – (google doc) - Indiana – (see photo)
- Iowa – (see google doc)
- Memphis Area (300 signers) – (see link)
- Michigan – two items!
- 1- clergy letter to Bishop Bard (see document)
- 2- Michigan General statement (see document) This also ran as an ad in 6 newspapers across the state on March 17: Ann Arbor, Detroit, Flint, Kalamazoo, Grand Rapids, Oakland County, and
Muskegeon .
- Minnesota – (see document)
- Missouri – (see google doc)
- New York – (see google doc)
- North Carolina – (see google doc)
- Northern Illinois – (see google doc)
- Rio Texas – (see google doc)
- South Carolina – (google doc)
- Susquehanna Conference – (see petition)
- Tennessee – (google doc)
- Texas – (see document)
- Upper New York – 2 letters
- An invitation to join the work for inclusion – (google doc)
- A charge to defy exclusion, for those called to bold action – (google doc)
- Virginia – (see document)
- West Ohio – (google doc)
- Western North Carolina – (see google doc)
- Wisconsin – (see google doc)
Did your region do this? Send a copy or link to Twitter @umjeremy or the twitter username @ gmail.com
Institutional Responses
The following official regional bodies have issued responses denouncing the Traditional Plan’s effect in their regions or their areas of supervision.
- Executive Committee of the German Central Conference (see English version) (UMNS coverage)
- Mountain Sky Board of Ordained Ministry – (see Facebook post)
- Michigan Board of Ordained Ministry statement (see document)
- Northern Illinois Cabinet letter to queer Clergy and Candidates – (see link)
- New England – 2 responses
- Conference Cabinet – (see link)
- Board of Ordained Ministry co-chairs – (see letter)
- Oregon-Idaho Conference Board of Ordained Ministry – (see statement)
- Pacific Northwest Conference Board of Ordained Ministry Letter to Candidates – (see link)
- Western Jurisdiction Mission Cabinet (bishops, DCMs, and leadership) – (see link + coverage)
- Wisconsin Board of Ordained Ministry – (see letter)
Did your region do this? Send a copy or link to Twitter @umjeremy or the twitter username @ gmail.com
Annual Conference Legislation
Legislation submitted (and models for others) for annual conference consideration in May – July 2019.
- Great Plains – Resolution to their Annual Conference with clergy sign-ons (see document) (original link)
- Upper New York – Resolution to their Annual Conference (see google doc)
- Norwegian Annual Conference – Resolution to their Annual Conference (see HX coverage)
Did your region do this? Send a copy or link to Twitter @umjeremy or the twitter username @ gmail.com
Other collective responses
- United Methodist Campus Ministry Association – (google doc)
- United Methodist Young Clergywomen Collective – (open letter)
- Korean Heritage United Methodists – (google doc)
Your Turn
Thoughts?
Thanks for reading, commenting, and sharing on social media.
Jeremy, what you are witnessing is the response of the outraged center of the UMC. An olive branch was offered at General Conference to traditionalists in a desire for unity and peace. The response was not just to keep the rules in the 2016 BOD but to add more punitive language, basically taking the olive branch and hitting all of us over the head with it. The landscape and feelings of the middle is very different than it was a month ago.
For Traditionalists, the One Church Plan was no olive branch. And that was said clearly and consistently during the entire Way Forward process! Problem is nobody took us seriously. Our beliefs are as important to us as your beliefs are to you. Progressives are now saying that they cannot live with the traditionalist plan. Well traditionalists could not live with the One Church Plan. Once church leadership endorsed the One Church Plan in the face of everything that had been said by traditionalists, there was no going forward as an intact denomination.
I find it interesting that the Traditionalists chose to go scorched earth in their process. They won the battle, but are going to lose the war as progressives shift off. How many churches can afford to lose even a small percentage of their membership these days? [The One Church Plan would have allowed for broad variety – I was even more of a fan of the Connectional Conference plan, which would have left loose allegiances between like-minded UMC members]
Here’s what I can see:
Some churches are going to leave, whether that’s a majority/full conference or individually.
The remaining UMC won’t be able to keep their current churches going, so there will be consolidation. My home church is not likely to survive losing 10% membership, which is what I think is the current track.
Pastors overall trend slightly more liberal than the members, but with the consolidation that won’t be a huge issue. Younger pastors (and retirement aged ones who lean progressive) will be the ones to jump.
Pensions are going to get tight, with reductions in future benefits
Apportionments are overall going to be higher, because you won’t have as broad a base (and the base will be certainly much older) for medical benefits.
That means less money going towards missions, etc – which is a main driver of bringing in new (young) people to the denomination. So the churches will slowly fade.
The church, the real church, is better without progressives. It is better to stand on the Word of God than to stand in sin to be accepted by a culture.
I fail to understand how districts and jurisdictions can openly defy the Discipline and decisions of the General Conference and wonder why enforcement language is needed on any major issue of church law? Homosexuality is not my issue but United Methodism is trying to stand for everything but hence stands for little of substance. I followed GC closely and prayerfully and I saw nothing but anger, discord, false stereotyping, and attacks not only on issues, but on character. A wrong decision may have been made, but if so it is the same wrong decision made by Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and most Protestants outside the mainline protestant churches outside North America and Europe, and the wrong view of Christian’s for 2000 years of tradition. Does the same fury and attacks apply to all those Christians as to traditionalist United Methodists? Civility is over and trust is broken beyond repair at this point.
What a witness to the world!
Re: Roman Catholicism, even the current Pope has made statements that run counter to the current law of his church. And per their belief, he has a straight line to God.
Wow, Maybe it’s time to move our pledges to churches in in the Great Plains or Upper New York conferences. At least until our progressive conference gets around to doing the same thing.
Beware some conferences are making positive statements because of the organizing efforts of a few… while harm is continuing to be perpetrated by those who would remove lgbtq persons from ministry and the track to ministry in those same conferences. So applause and appreciation is deserved for all of these witnesses, but we must not be deceived as to which speaking for the bishop & cabinet and /or the conference and which are speaking for the signers…
https://www.bwcumc.org/news-and-views/pastoral-letter-from-bishop-easterling-following-general-conference-2019/
A bishop that doesn’t quote the Discipline properly, should probably not be a bishop. It does NOT say, “homosexuality is incompatible with christian teaching” it says the practice is. The distinction is not that subtle. A bishop should know better.
So you think that as long as LGBTQ+ folks are celibate there’s no problem with our denomination?
Did you know that there are more references to homosexuality in the Book of Discipline (2016) than there are in the Bible?
Be careful with that line of reasoning. The Bible may not mention homosexuality as much, but it is more condemning of it than the book of discipline. It condemns it straight to Hell.
Bless you, brother – I can only pray that God will help you to open your mind and your heart. Both seem to be closed.
And as for your protests, you are the ones fracturing the church, making it inoperable:
“Whatever you think of the outcome of GC 2019, public reactions following it show that, from an organizational point of view, The United Methodist Church has lost integrity. Denouncing the GC decision and refusing to follow it are tantamount to pulling the house down on top of us. Again, short of direct divine action, coupled with confession, repentance, and forgiveness, it may be time to recognize that the property has been condemned and move on.” http://stephenrankin.com/a-churchs-lost-integrity/
Galatians 6:7.
Hello Jeremy,
I have added your compilation of resources to mine. Feel feel free to share alike. Thank you! Here is the link:
https://mailchi.mp/9ad0b83c1d49/resources-for-our-own-way-forward-2892953?e=%5BUNIQID%5D
Rev. Steve Scott, chair, Order of Elders, Wisconsin Conference
Bob Farr, Missouri Conference bishop, has stated he will be a compliant bishop and we will be a compliant conference. Of course, you were looking for the heresy and schism, right?
My pastor has stated publicly that he disagrees with the GC outcome, but that he has made an oath to the UMC and will abide by the Book of Discipline.
My church isn’t interested in taking a stand, they just want to keep their head down and assume all is fine.
I’m not playing those games, and expect to be in a more outspoken church this summer. Time will tell if I’ll remain a Methodist. I am standing up for what I believe, and expect better than I’m seeing from those around me.
Child abuse is traditional. Racism is traditional. Hate for homosexuals is traditional. Tradition is a really poor excuse for hate and for abuse. Amen
May I add that anti Semitism is also deeply Traditional as well? It waa only recently that the Jews were absolved by the institutional Church of killing Christ.
This is an ignorant inflamatory statement. The Traditional plan was the only BIBLICAL plan.
After fifty years of ministry in the church I love, I will be attending another denomination that maintains Scriptural integrity on this issue when I fully retire. My hope for 2020 is that those of a different opinion leave to form their own denomination. But I don’t expect that to happen. The fighting will continue and saving souls will continue to be dwarfed by this struggle.
The vote did maintain Scriptural integrity. So if you are leaving due to the vote, you need to examine Scripture. However, if you are leaving because of leadership allowing it to get to this position, I sympathize.