The following document was developed by Greater Northwest participants at the Pacific Northwest Annual Conference 2019. It was distributed in paper form to the participants—here’s an edited version with the local references removed. Reprint and add local contacts for your community or conference
Engage:
Active Resistance &
Intentional Welcoming
Are you ready to do something? Here is a broad list of ideas that will hopefully inspire further creativity for those seeking to resist the Traditional Plan adopted at General Conference 2019.
Worship
- Each church can host acts of repentance in worship. Lift up the inclusive official statements and policies your church has adopted. Be creative in making a statement. (For example, one church in the GNW burned pages of the Book of Discipline.)
- Ask your pastor to invite LGBTQIA+, people of color, and/or young guest preachers.
- Use worship materials produced by marginalized people and credit them.
- Enfleshed.com is a great source for these materials.
- Honor significant LGBTQIA+ dates such as Pride Month, Trans Day of Remembrance, World AIDS Day, National Coming Out Day, Trans Day of Visibility, etc. (in worship and social media.)
Local Church Hospitality
- Add welcoming signals that to your church affirms LGBTQIA+ children of God:
- Include personal pronouns on church name tags and in Sunday morning introductions.
- Designate a gender-neutral bathroom and reference it during your welcome orientation to the building at the beginning of worship.
- Host a youth night to talk about what’s going on in the UMC right now. Make sure they have enough information to participate fully in the conversation and include them.
Education
- Expand your vocabulary related to sexual orientation and gender identity, then teach others.
- This blog written by UMC clergywoman Ann Lock is a good starting point for vocabulary: https://www.pnwumc.org/news/lgbtq-and-you/.
- Learn about intersectionality (“overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage,” according to Oxford English Dictionary).
- Refer to this Collaboration Guide from Our Movement Forward: https://um-forward.org/collaboration-guide. In particular, see the reading list for allies.
- Learn about the origins of the word “intersectionality” from its originator, Kimberlé Crenshaw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akOe5-UsQ2o
- Learn more here: https://rmnetwork.org/intersectionaljustice/.
- Work to end racism, sexism, ageism, heterosexism, ableism, classism, bourgeois feminism, colonialism, oppression rooted in imperialism, etc.
- Raise your awareness of implicit bias. Start with these online tests: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html.
Networking with Others
- Gather people who are passionate about inclusion rather than only looking to the usual committee chairs, the youth, or other people assumed to be allies.
- Then readily include those who want to participate, welcoming them as they are.
- Record 10-20 second videos of your church members saying why inclusion matters to them or what inclusion looks like at your church.
- Post individual videos or edited compilations on social media with #SacredWorth.
- Coordinate your efforts with your annual conference communications staff person.
- Join Reconciling Ministries Network (RMN). It’s free, helpful, and something individuals can do as well as churches. More than 5,000 people have joined RMN since GC2019.
- Form a Reconciling small group or encourage one that already exists to join RMN and work for inclusion. Churches, individuals, and small groups (Sunday school classes, committees, etc.) can officially join RMN.
- Begin or further conversations about being fully inclusive with resources from RMN: www.rmnetwork.org.
- Connect with your Annual Conference’s RMN Chapter.
- Begin an active relationship with youth shelters in your community. (LGBTQIA+ youth are especially vulnerable to homelessness.)
- Reach out to PFLAG or ecumenical LGBTQ+ advocacy groups to see how an individual or congregation can be helpful.
- Donate to the Safe Harbor Fund in the Greater Northwest Area by texting “SAFEHARBOR” to 44321. This fund allows the annual conferences of the GNW to receive clergy into annual conference membership here so their credentials are not removed by hostile annual conferences. Even if you are outside of the GNW, supporting this effort allows this region to continue this important work.
- Participate in your local Pride parade and other Pride festivities. (Find local events across the US here: https://www.gaypridecalendar.com/calendar.)
- Write letters of support to Bishop Karen Oliveto and the Mountain Sky cabinet. (Mail: 6110 Greenwood Plaza Blvd., Greenwood Village, CO 80111-4803. Email: bishop@mtnskyumc.org.)
Policy & Institutional Efforts
- Create a policy welcoming LGBTQIA+ couples to be married in your church building. If the pastor at your church cannot preside at those weddings, you or another lay person can offer to become licensed (by state or online) to officiate.
- The church or administrative council can adopt an official public statement making it clear they will resist exclusionary policies and welcome LGBTQIA+ clergy in future appointments.
- Write legislation for General Conference 2020, due in September 2019. (Find details and exact timeline here: http://www.umc.org/events/detail/2020-general-conference.)
Your turn
How else can a local church or individual practice active resistance to the Traditional Plan and intentional welcoming of marginalized persons, especially members of the LGBTQIA+ community? Sound off in the comments!
Thoughts?
Thanks for reading, commenting, and sharing on social media.
For congregations in buildings without single stall restrooms, consider training greeters and volunteers to be bathroom allies and have them wearing “I’ll go with you” buttons. http://www.illgowithyou.org/
That’s just plan creepy! Seriously?
Doesn’t sound like you’ve tried to use the restroom that doesn’t match your gender presentation. Accompaniment is appreciated in those risky situations.
Maybe even just changing (if possible) restrooms from being male or female to unisex.
Or, since you no longer wish to be orthodox Christians, you could leave the UMC.
I wasn’t aware that orthodoxy had anything to do with Anti Gayness.
You apparently don’t know what it means to be a Christian. You have lots of company.
Reject church companies (e.g. church management software or church website hosts) with very conservative theological statements of belief that you’re required to agree to and live by. (They’re more common than you might suspect.) Make sure your church database is not limited only to male/female in the gender field.
If you dislike the official UMC beliefs, you should leave. If you somehow became a member of the KKK, but disagreed with the KKK’s stated beliefs, would you stay in the KKK?
The Traditional Plan is something the KKK would support. In so many other ways, the United Methodist Church is not like the KKK, so that is why I don’t leave. Many, many thousands of United Methodists disagree with the Traditional Plan and many are now really speaking out.
Also, every United Methodist Congregation that I have been a part of either was or has become Reconciling. Even the first United Methodist Church I joined in 1978 recently became Reconciling. Should all Roman Catholics who don’t agree with their Church on female Ordination leave it? It actually would be easier to change the United Methodist Church on this issue than the Roman Catholic Church on female Ordination, because we are more Democratic. We are PART of the way like the Southern Baptist Convention. If I leave, then the United Methodist officially will become bad on ALL issues, rather than on just some issues. The KKK, just like the Southern Baptist Convention is bad on the great majority of issues. The United Methodist official stance on the majority of issues is good.
How would one ‘somehow’ become a member of the KKK without being aware of their stated beliefs?
Also, one wouldn’t reasonably expect the KKK to change on certain beliefs, but could reasonably expect the UMC to do so, considering there was a pretty sizeable movement (and supporting votes) to do so.
The stated beliefs of the UMC have been in effect for 50 years. How is that a surprise?
Dave, beliefs against laity having a vote at General Conference we’re in effect for over 100 years. Then they weren’t.
Beliefs against women‘s ordination were in effect until 1952. Then they weren’t.
Beliefs against African Americans pastoring white churches were in place from 1939-1964. Then they weren’t.
Your argument is invalid. The weight of Methodist history is not easy on those who are intent on excluding people groups.
@unjeremy
Love ❤️
Amen! Unlike the KKK, our beliefs evolve as we learn more about the Bible and also learn to practice love instead of hatred.
But I don’t think the discrimination against LGBT persons was ever passed overwhelmingly. Many United Methodists disagree with Discrimination. Virtually everyone in the KKK would agree with the Traditional Plan.
The KKK wraps Christianity around sanctioned bigotry of inborn characteristics, just as the UMC does. It makes no difference how many members agree or disagree, it is the stated policy and thus any member is guilty of the hatred simply by their membership (just as any Trump voter is proclaimed to be complicit of his hateful actions).
So why would you not stay in the KKK to change it such as you are staying in the UMC to change it? It is a totally analogous situation even though you don’t want to admit it.
Makes it pretty obvious you are interested in just “winning a war” over the corporate banner known as “UMC” rather than truly pursuing an expedient way to serve righteousness in a new denomination. Or…… could it be the pensions and other benefits you think you will gain from the remnants of the UMC? There are no other conclusions possible, and God is embarrassed at your actions.
P.S. The KKK is showing great progress, as the amount of lynchings has diminished from the 1950’s. Just like the UMC is showing great progress by allowing women pastors. Your ideas of progress and appeasement are not impressive.
Well, Dave, I was married in a Methodist church, wholly unaware of what the BoD said.
I joined a Methodist church, wholly unaware of what the BoD said. It didn’t at all come up in the new member class. It wasn’t preached from the pulpit.
I was a couple of years in before it was actually discussed openly.
Certainly there have been ongoing discussions about it for longer than I’ve been a Methodist, but like most people in the pews it was under the radar.
Here’s a parallel – how long have you been an American? Off the top of your head, what’s the Constitution say about what the threshold is for a civil case to be guaranteed a jury? The US Constitution is a much simpler document, and the vast majority of American’s can’t answer that question.
We’ll JR, I did not know about the BoD for most of my Methodist involvement and I did not agree with all teachings either. But when I found myself chafing at the church each and every Sunday, I knew it was best for me to leave. Not do I know what the Constitution says about jury threshold, but if I looked into it and found it was something untenable to me, I would move to another place that met my needs. Pretty doggone simple, ain’t it?
Well, Dave, I have (left the UMC). But that’s more complicated than ‘I disagree with the BoD’.
My issues with your points are:
“The KKK wraps Christianity around sanctioned bigotry of inborn characteristics, just as the UMC does. It makes no difference how many members agree or disagree, it is the stated policy and thus any member is guilty of the hatred simply by their membership.”
Not ‘just as’. The KKK is very straightforward about their bigotry. It shouldn’t come as a surprise. The UMC isn’t straightforward about it, because much of the American UMC disagrees with it (as we are seeing). It’s more of the ‘bigoted uncle’ who you only see on certain special occasions. So no, not the same. And it certainly DOES matter how many members agree or disagree, as if you have an organization that is 99.9% of one mind vs one that is pretty close to 50/50, the chances of change within one are very different than the other.
[I disagree partially with your Trump point – original voters might not be wholly complicit, but those who continue to support him might be considered so, but that’s really a side issue]
I find it interesting that you wholly avoided Jeremy’s argument – things HAVE changed over years, so it’s not unreasonable to work to have them change again – particularly with the 50/50ish split as noted above.
“… (I don’t) know what the Constitution says about jury threshold, but if I looked into it and found it was something untenable to me, I would move to another place that met my needs.”
Color me doubtful. But even there – the Constitution has stuff in it that you don’t know, so you don’t even know if you’d find it unacceptable to live under (if it’s not being promoted or used). And some people work to change the rules (Prohibition ring a bell? Slavery? Presidents limited to 2 terms?), while others might decide to move to another country (Vietnam draft comes to mind, among other issues).
[For the record, the 7th amendment notes that the right of trial by jury for civil cases cannot be involuntarily waived for cases dealing with at least $20 in value. At the time, that could get you a decent horse or an acre of land.]
I’m surprised that you only see one solution to such a problem.
So JR, pray tell, why are you arguing with me??? You obviously understand and agree with my advice that being involved in a ” War of the Roses” as Jeremy advocates is tantamount to self destruction. Why do you wish that for others? Very hypocritical!
Well, Dave, I’m arguing with you because you are wrong, and this is the internet.
You advocate that there is only one answer here – if you don’t like the way it is, you need to leave. It’s very black and white (how…. Traditionalist in your philosophy, if not your theology).
I conceive that different people have different views, AND that there are multiple paths that can be taken. Furthermore, some of those paths are not (at present time) exclusive – there are a few options that will have to have decisions made, but those decisions are down the line (e.g. Connectional Conference Plan vs full schism; at this point in time they can be the same people supporting both, as the difference is the degree of ‘distance’ between the Traditionalists and the Progressives).
Take this to heart – IF I had been in a progressive congregation who had stood up against the TP, I’d still be there. I was in a moderate ‘mushy’ congregation who did not. If the OCP had passed, I’d also still be there. It’s the combo that made me make a choice as to my direct involvement.
For those who are in congregations that fully align with their values on this (and other) issues, they are going to want to stay and fight for what they see as the best of cases. While that can be harmful to the overall UMC, they are also walking their faith. Similarly, TP supporters in conservative churches are doing the same thing. While I may disagree with them on theological points, I don’t fault them for advocating their faith (but I will argue with them about those theological points and where I see hypocrisy).
In short:
Sometimes you have to leave
Sometimes you have to stay and fight
Sometimes you win
Sometimes you lose