UMAction is pleased to announce our strong support of the Covenantal Unity Plan, also known as the CUP proposal.
We have reported extensively about the crisis facing our United Methodist Church from a relatively tiny but extremely disruptive minority of renegade UMC clergy, actively aided by some sympathetic bishops, openly breaking our denomination’s clear, compassionate, biblical policies forbidding pastorally harmful same-sex union ceremonies. We and others have noted with alarm how this disobedience movement has threatened to split our beloved church, and asked what basis is left for trust and meaningful organization in our denomination if bishops and other clergy, in at least many areas, are free to flippantly betray their own promises to God and the rest of us United Methodists to uphold our agreed-upon governing standards.
But what can we do to positively move our church forward in mission?
As its name suggests, the Covenantal Unity Plan is a carefully developed, well thought-out, serious plan that would protect as much of the unity of our church as possible, not with shallow and completely ineffective empty rhetoric, but rather by restoring Christian covenant to our denominational community.
Unlike Adam Hamilton’s “A Way Forward” (analyzed here) or the Connectional Table’s plan to impose even more sexually permissive policies than those that split the Episcopal Church (analyzed here), CUP does not reward and encourage further covenant breaking, and does not open door to the further moral anarchy promoted by the covenant breakers.
It would go a great ways towards restoring peace and unity in our denomination across the spectrum, from those who are strongly theologically orthodox to moderates to institutional loyalists to those progressive United Methodists who have personal integrity to be men and women of their word and who are still interested in constructive cooperation with more conservative United Methodists.
It does not go nearly as far as my own Automatic Penalties Plan, an admittedly radical overhaul of our accountability system that we will continue to promote as important and necessary, and which would go much further than CUP or any other plan to stop the spiritual rebellion within our UMC.
But CUP would achieve several important steps that are not at all in conflict with the proposed policies of my Automatic Penalties Plan.
And it is worth noting that as far as I am aware, the Covenantal Unity Plan is the ONLY major General Conference big-picture plan, on any issue, that has public endorsements from all five of our denomination’s U.S. jurisdictions, every other continent in which our denomination has a presence (Africa, Europe, and Asia), and every one of the central conferences in Africa.
The origins of this plan lie with two devoted United Methodist biblical scholars who as trainers of the next generation of our clergy are concerned for the spiritual health and integrity of our church: Old Testament Professor Bill Arnold of Asbury Theological Seminary and New Testament Professor David Watson of United Theological Seminary. Both are also members of our denomination’s University Senate.
In a 2014 blog post, these two professors promoted several ideas for restoring covenantal unity. Two West Ohio pastors, Jeff Greenway and Greg Stover, subsequently led a process of refining and revising these initial ideas into six concrete proposals:
First, CUP would reform the “just resolution” process, the mechanism intended to allow for accountability for wayward clergy without needing to have a major church trial, at least sometimes. Some bishops sympathetic to the disobedience movement have outrageously abused this process to institute “just resolutions” that involve no meaningful consequences for the covenant-breaking clergy beyond them getting to brag that they “won” and having permission to vow to continue to break covenant by performing additional same-sex unions in the future. Proposal #1 would require the inclusion in any “just resolutions” of the person actually bringing the complaint against covenant-breaking clergy, preventing how bishops in New York and elsewhere rudely excluded such covenant defenders from just resolution processes. And Proposal #2 would require any just resolutions for clergy who have openly admitted to breaking violating the Discipline’s standards to actually apologize for their wrongdoing and promise to be faithful in the future to their vows to uphold our Discipline.
For clergy who refuse just resolutions and insist on facing a church trial for violating the ban on performing same-sex unions, Proposal #4 would require some serious, minimum penalties that would create deterrents for other clergy similarly breaking covenant: suspension for at least one year for the first offense, and removal from United Methodist ministry if they perform a second same-sex union. The reality is that we have seen cases of clergy given suspensions for as long as three months and as little as 24 hours for performing same-sex unions, and such “slaps on the wrist” have proven to be woefully insufficient for bringing wayward clergy to repentance or discouraging others from following their bad example.
But the sad fact of the matter is that we can close all the church loopholes in the world, and that will not make much difference in some area. All the active bishops in the Western Jurisdiction (the western third of the lower 48 states plus Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam) have, to one degree or another, made clear their sympathies for the disobedience movement. When bishops flatly refuse to follow the biblical, covenantal standards of our Book of Discipline, they too can face formal complaints. However, the current system of accountability for bishops who break covenant keeps the process within the bishops of each region. The way retired Bishop Melvin Talbert was basically let off scot-free for invading a Southeastern bishop’s territory to perform a publicity stunt same-sex union made clear that the Western Jurisdiction bishops will never keep each other accountable to our Disciplinary standards against homosexual sin. The same may also be true in either or both of the northern U.S. jurisdictions. Furthermore, even accountability for bishops was lodged within the full, global UMC Council of Bishops, rather than each region’s college of bishops, most of the available evidence points to an extreme overall unwillingness of bishops of all regions and theological persuasions to do much to hold each other accountable. (When was the last time you heard a single quietly orthodox U.S. bishop have the courage to publicly speak out against the disobedience-enabling actions of renegade bishops in the Western Jurisdiction and elsewhere?)
So Proposal #3 establishes a new process (broken up into six inter-related General Conference petitions) to keep bishops – the highest ranked, most powerful, and currently by far the least accountable UMC clergy – accountable via a global oversight process of key church leaders. This avoids the proven ineffectiveness of keeping bishops accountable only to fellow members of the bishops’ self-protecting club or only within their respective regions. Proposal #3 helps our UMC better realize our God-given potential as a truly global church, allowing a system of true interdependence and accountability without any of us allowing ourselves to avoid being challenged on the various “blind spots” that exists within the cultures of all of our respective nations and jurisdictions.
Finally, the Covenantal Unity Plan gives dissenters from our denomination’s historic, biblical, and democratically confirmed standards on sexual self-control (if they are unwilling to be taught our church’s faith) a clear church: either support the United Methodist Church by honoring our covenantal standards (which could potentially include working to try to change those standards through the proper channels of persuasion), or else stop trying to undermine our denomination’s covenant, integrity, and cohesion from within.
Much of the same sentiment was expressed in a resolution adopted last spring by the Eastern Pennsylvania Conference, which “call[ed] upon those clergy who feel that they can no longer abide by our common covenant to withdraw themselves from our connection, rather than continue to cause damage to our ministry through ongoing judicial proceedings.”
The last part of the Covenantal Unity Plan does NOT “kick out” anyone, but it does remove barriers that may serve to financially coerce dissenters into unhappily staying within the UMC.
Proposal #6 would ensure that clergy who choose to leave our denominations will be able to keep their pension benefits intact. While this has been the current practice, actually writing it into the Book of Discipline would give much more protection to the pensions of clergy who leave us.
While the properties of United Methodist congregations are owned by their respective annual conferences, proposal #5 sets up a process through which a congregation can leave the denomination and keep its property, but is narrowly tailored to only apply to congregations who are leaving over dissenting from the UMC’s official policies on homosexual unions. So under Proposal #5, if a liberal congregation really wants to host same-sex union ceremonies, they could do so without anyone facing any complaints or charges, as long as they first left our denomination, thus keeping the name of the rest of our churches out of it. This proposal was deliberately crafted with care to avoid opening the floodgates of congregations leaving for all sorts of other reasons. It only applies to congregations threatening the sort of disobedience on the one matter that threatens to split our church apart.
These last two proposals makes the difficult, but necessary decision to tell those unwilling to live in Christian unity with the rest of us, “Okay, then we will no longer force you to pretend to do so.”
The Covenantal Unity Plan has a nifty website, with more detailed description of each of the six proposals, along with helpful Preamble and FAQ sections along with a place where you can add your own endorsement of the plan: www.covenantalunity.org
UMAction appreciates the good, diligent work that clearly went into producing this Covenantal Unity Plan. We will be working hard to help advance CUP and other key reform proposals at this General Conference.
Comment by breed7 on March 29, 2016 at 4:49 am
This is disgusting. Your “beloved” church is using bigotry and discrimination to terrorize those in the church who behave in a Christ-like manner.
Your behavior only serves to drive good people away from the church, leaving only the uneducated and unintelligent to uphold its traditions of turning away those who are already marginalized. Of course, that is the goal, so you’re accomplishing it well. The United Methodist Church deserves to wither up and blow away like so many fallen leaves.
Congratulations on your work to turn people away from God. Jesus must be so proud of you!
Comment by A. L. Locasio on March 29, 2016 at 7:01 am
I am a lesbian former United Methodist clergy. After reading this travesty, I can only say this:
You have worked hard to force LGBTQ people, their sympathetic family and friends, and others out of the church. You have succeeded admirably with me. And with other LGBTQ people. And with many of their family and friends. The “nones” (no religion) and the “dones” (done with church) form a big and growing club which we’re helping to populate.
The UMC in the United States has less than 14 years left to live. If that. Then the people of this country will move on without you.
Some call this karma. I call it reality. What we put out into the universe will always come back to us. The message we give is the message we get. When you make so many people feel so unwelcome, the end becomes inevitable.
As the church doors clang shut, as buildings are sold and altar crosses auctioned off, rest assured that the country and its people will move on successfully without you. We are seeing the end of “church” and the birth of a new spiritual awakening. I see that new awakening, where I and my LGBTQ friends are welcome! The old church is dying, and a new one is being born.
You may ask how I can be so sure. Answer: Because I know so many young adults, and closely follow matters that concern them as a whole. Most of them can’t stand this kind of thing. They have gay friends. If you’re going to get between these young adults and their friends, the friends win and the church loses. One survey showed that among young people who have left the church, the number one way they describe the word “Christian” is ” antihomosexual.” Millennial Christian author and blogger Rachel Held Evans, speaking on CNN, said that young people perceive the church to be “too political, too exclusive, old-fashioned, unconcerned with social justice, and hostile to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people.”
Something to think about.
Comment by the_enemy_hates_clarity on March 29, 2016 at 7:39 am
The Bible, both NT and OT, strongly opposes homosexual behavior. Christian commentaries and tradition for the past 2000 years have strongly opposed homosexual behavior. The christian consensus everywhere, always and by everyone is that homosexual behavior is sinful. Only in the last 50 or so years, in tiny segments of the European and North American churches, is there any support for homosexual behavior; and those churches are getting smaller and smaller. If your thesis was correct, the United Methodist Church would be getting smaller in Africa and bigger in the Western Jurisdiction. The opposite is happening.
This is not a political battle over trade or taxes or entitlements. It is a battle for our very souls. 1 Corinthians 6:9.
In Christ,
The enemy hates clarity
Comment by Jenny Bond on March 29, 2016 at 10:33 am
Repeating a lie does not make it true. It only makes it obnoxious and dangerous. The bible supports slavery, oppressing women and selling children. It does not condemn mutually consenting, adult, committed life long relationships.
This IS a battle for our souls. Will you choose the false security of your human version or purity or Jesus’ radical call to stop calling what God has sanctified “unclean”?
In Christ,
The enemy loves your hatred.
Comment by Skipper on March 30, 2016 at 10:03 am
One of the many verses prohibiting same-sex relationships is Romans 1:26. So, just where does the bible support slavery, oppressing women and selling children? I ask because I am not aware of such verses.
There are people in the bible who own slaves, but that does not mean God had given His approval of it. I Timothy 1:10 speaks of sexual perverts and kidnappers. Slavery would be kidnapping. In the Old Testament, Exodus 21:16 speaks of those who kidnap and sell people and the punishment for it. The bible also calls for decent treatment of servants.
Comment by The_Physetor on April 3, 2016 at 9:52 am
You must be living in a dream world. You think homosexuals’ relationships are “committed”? Christians are under no divine mandate to support sexual relationships which are exploitive and unhealthy. Christianity is about rescuing people from their sins, not telling them that sin is a good thing. You need to read the New Testament, it is anti-sin, not pro-sin.
Comment by gui1hermegano on April 5, 2016 at 5:42 pm
What are the chapter and verse of Jesus’ “radical call to stop calling what God has sanctified ‘unclean'”? You liberals are always saying that Jesus said NOTHING about homosexuality. Has that changed?
Comment by Jenny Bond on May 6, 2016 at 2:56 pm
gaah! I missed this reply. Anyway, the answer to your questons is Acts 10:9-32. Especially 10:15.
Comment by Skipper on March 29, 2016 at 11:06 am
Christian Perfection is the hallmark of Methodism and cornerstone of Christianity. Open your bible and read and you will see that it is basic and necessary to follow Christ – “striving for the fullness of love and absence of sin.”
This is where the Progressive movement gets into so much trouble. They say “Nobody’s perfect, so why bother?” They tell people they can live a life of debauchery, as long as it is done “in love”. And sexual perversion is now acceptable as clean and holy.” But God’s rules (Commandments) haven’t changed. When God said “Be holy, because I Am Holy,” God is speaking and we need to listen. Progressives will tell you two cents worth of faith is all you need, so “live as you feel.” Jesus said we must live a New Life, putting away our old life – a total change! That takes a huge amount of faith for most people. But the reward is worth it!
You may not like God’s Plan of Order and family structure, but His plan of Created Order is there to help us! Why not give it a second look? You will find everything in life goes better when we obey God! It may seem less exciting at first, but in time you will see and understand that God, who created us, knows what is best for us. His love shines through his suggestions on living – try this soon, if you will.
Comment by DannyBoyJr on March 29, 2016 at 7:44 pm
All the mainline churches are in decline, but it is the LGBTQ-affirming denominations that are declining the fastest. The UMC is declining in the promiscuous West while it is growing in the still-religious global south. The nones and dones haven’t help offset the losses of our sister mainliners in the UCC, ELCA, and TEC.
The fact is that the progressive christians are secularized and individualistic and are less likely to be part of corporate worship. I am glad that you are a former clergy, that you would no longer defile your office with what the bible calls an abomination. Now you can live your inauthentic faith in all its debased glory.
Comment by breed7 on March 30, 2016 at 3:25 am
The “promiscuous west”? Now I know you have neither credibility nor education. The Deep South has the largest consumption of Internet porn — and gay porn — in the nation. Southern states have significantly higher rates of teen pregnancy and out-of-wedlock births.
You are the abomination here, using the Bible to hurt good people. Maybe if you had gotten an education, you would know better, but there is obviously no hope for you.
Comment by DannyBoyJr on March 30, 2016 at 3:44 am
Are you uneducated? Did you think the global south is the same as the deep south? Global south = The non-first World nations, usually in Africa, Asia, South America, etc. Deep south = There be American rednecks.
You see, I am not even American, and yet I know what it is you are referring to. So it is you, and your licentious ways, that is uneducated. Please, learn your own language. English is my 3rd language.
As for education, I did get a university degree in a Catholic school here in the Far East. It may not be fancy, but it made me more knowledgeable and more moral that your kind.
Comment by A. L. Locasio on April 7, 2016 at 11:43 pm
You’re making a lot of assumptions about me. You have no proof that I have in any way “defiled my office” and, in fact, nothing like what you have accused me of even happened. Knowing nothing about my story other than what I said, you have condemned a fellow human being who has done nothing to harm you or anyone else. This vividly illustrates that those who want me and others like me out of the church don’t really believe the “persons of sacred worth” part of the UM Discipline. In vain do people say that it’s the behavior and not the person that’s the issue; your words prove otherwise. Second point: Others on this thread have noted that liberal churches are declining faster than conservative ones. That is true, but what’s noteworthy is that conservative churches have begun to decline also. What was said for a long time is “people prefer churches to be conservative.” But now everyone’s in the same boat: a religious bear market. The same dynamics that once afflicted mainline denominations are now making themselves felt in conservative ones. Turns out the main reason for decline isn’t related to being conservative or liberal, but to something else entirely! (As polarized as we are, not everything comes down to that dichotomy.) Even the once mighty Southern Baptist Convention has been in decline for ten years. As to the absence of young adults: Many young adults, like me, were raised in the church but have had bad experiences there with feeling judged and condemned and have no desire to return. They, in turn, will raise their own children to avoid the church. That’s one reason why we’re seeing the end of “church” and the birth of a new spiritual awakening. Jesus said he would establish His church on earth and even the gates of hell would not prevail against it. But nowhere did He say that the form of church had to be the American United Methodist church. That can end, and probably will, with His mission being carried forward in other ways.
Comment by DannyBoyJr on April 8, 2016 at 12:25 am
What a bunch of word salad, and your only pertinent assertion is that even conservative churches are in decline. Yes, some are losing a few members like the SBC, but not as much as the liberal denominations. While the TEC, the ELCA, and the UCC are really in their death-throes, the SBC may have just peaked and are rebounding.
And it is only half-true statement, as the conservatives churches that are growing fastest. The area of fastest growth are in the global south (not the deep south, some people don’t seem to know nomenclature), and they are choosing evangelical, pentecostal, and/or charismatic churches.
Show me a liberal denomination or church that have consistently grown for more than a few years. Show me an LGBTQ-affirming church that has grown substantially by accepting LGBTQ refugees from conservative churches. They don’t exist.
It is still churches that are faithful to historic Christian teachings that are growing. It is still these faithful churches that are accomplishing the mission to spread the Gospel. Where are the LGBTQ missionaries? Where are they planting churches? Where are they witnessing the Gospel to the unchurched? What a joke. Are you, AL Locasio, doing your part as a clergyperson to bring people to Christ, or are you just playing activist in local districts and conferences?
Comment by Namyriah on March 30, 2016 at 9:22 am
Seriously?
It’s just the opposite – homosexuals and feminists have forced Christians out of the mainline churches. I am one of millions – no exaggeration – of former UMs in America. There are millions of people like myself, “faith exiles” who left the mainlines to find churches that were Christian, not social clubs for white liberals.
The Lutheran Church lost a half-million members in the year following their decision to ordain homosexual – half-million in ONE YEAR. So who is getting forced out, pray tell?
Comment by Namyriah on March 30, 2016 at 10:44 pm
Rachel Evans is no Christian.
Her denomination, the Episcopagans, is on the road to extinction. They will probably get there before the UMs.
Comment by SunnyL on April 9, 2016 at 2:51 pm
Hopefuly this is a movement by the LGBTQ to leave the denomination!!!! Please go!
Comment by Bob on March 29, 2016 at 11:44 am
My mother, father, sister, and myself all gradually left the UMC church as it transitioned to a bastion of intolerance. Perhaps the UMC church should focus on their members whose sin is to touch the skin of a pig, rather than the imagined sins of LGBTQ members.
Comment by The_Physetor on April 3, 2016 at 9:50 am
Most of the traffic is going in the other direction. There are lots more UMs who transfer to Christian churches than vice versa.
Comment by Keith D. Ray II on March 29, 2016 at 1:53 pm
Why does this recall for me an earlier time in our history when we provided a path for separation at General Conference? It was 1844 when “A few days later dissidents drafted a Plan of Separation, which permitted the annual conferences in slaveholding states to separate from The Methodist Episcopal Church in order to organize their own ecclesiastical structure. The Plan of Separation was adopted, and the groundwork was prepared for the creation of The Methodist Episcopal Church, South.” http://www.umc.org/who-we-are/the-slavery-question-and-civil-war
Comment by Namyriah on March 30, 2016 at 9:25 am
Comparing discrimination against skin color with discrimination against a sexual practice that the New Testament condemns heartily is silly and stupid. The Bible does not condemn people for their skin, it does condemn homosexuals.
Comment by Keith D. Ray II on March 30, 2016 at 9:37 am
I’m comparing the processes of the General Conference. But we must honestly face the reality, too, that the NT, building on the teachings of the OT, determines slavery to be a viable institution in the Christian life. Paul even instructs slaves to endure their mistreatment, something we would hardly advocate today. Indeed, slavery and LGBTQI rights are two different matters but the General Conference process of dividing the church is similar to what is advocated here. Further, the question of how we interpret the Bible as God continues to reveal to us the implications of the gospel life is, I believe, worth our consideration.
Comment by Namyriah on March 30, 2016 at 10:45 pm
Slavery has NOTHING whatever to do with homosexuality.
Zip.
You’re just dodging.
Comment by The_Physetor on April 3, 2016 at 9:49 am
Playing the race card. How original.
Comment by Keith Ray on April 3, 2016 at 12:42 pm
We call it “intersectionality.”
Comment by gui1hermegano on April 5, 2016 at 5:39 pm
If you are going to create sock puppets, you might want to change names.
Comment by Rev. B on March 29, 2016 at 4:29 pm
May I suggest you add a public flogging using the Book of Discipline as a paddle to part of the penalty phase? We need to make these rogue clergy hurt a little and what better way than to discipline with the Discipline?
And just a quick clarification, did Mitt Romney help out with the crafting of the final portion of this? Your plan sounds vaguely like “self-deportation.”
In all seriousness, aren’t there more important issues that our church should be concerned with? You all spend an inordinate amount of time concerning yourselves in a crisis of your own imagining.
Comment by the_enemy_hates_clarity on March 29, 2016 at 4:46 pm
Why can’t people just keep their word, or if no longer able to do so, just gracefully exit?
In Christ,
The enemy hates clarity
Comment by Valerie Marshall on March 29, 2016 at 9:44 pm
Boy, am I glad I live in New Zealand, where marriage equality is a reality, and where the Tau Iwi (all those not belonging to Taha Maori) component of the MCNZ are discussing the issue like civilised adults. The Taha Maori component have already got this sorted out, and their Tumuaki (head) is a lesbian …
There are any number of books available, written by Biblical scholars, which examine in close detail, the Hebrew and Greek of the original “clobber” passages – and in every case they are talking about practices (e.g., temple prostitution) in their cultural context and which are damaging to loving relationships with God, self, and others.
From my reading of Scripture, God is a loving God – and what is being proposed in this Covenantal Unity Plan is not loving, especially with regard to its exclusion of LGBTQ people just because they love someone of the same gender or have transitioned to the opposite gender in keeping with their inner wisdom about themselves and who they are.
This is not about retaining membership of the UMC – it is about fear, exclusion, hatred – the very antithesis of what Jesus told and showed us about the God he called “Father.”
Comment by Namyriah on March 30, 2016 at 9:23 am
I’m also glad you live there.
Comment by revlar on March 30, 2016 at 12:34 am
These resolutions are an abomination to the UMC. All I can say is an absolute and emphatic NO!!!!
Comment by The_Physetor on April 3, 2016 at 9:48 am
An “abomination” to take a stand for Christianity?
Comment by JustNTyme on March 30, 2016 at 10:20 am
With all due respect, the UM needs to go ahead and split. It’s long overdue. You cannot permanently have two rival religions in one denomination. It’s like two people who live a thousand miles apart, they may be legally married, but the marriage is a sham. There is no unity any more.
Comment by Keith Jenkins on April 7, 2016 at 4:37 pm
I have no intention of expressing a view one way or the other, in this particular venue, on CUP, this article, or any of the sexuality-related issues now threatening to divide the UMC because I have no desire to be the subject of vicious, mindless verbal attacks. I wish only to point out one thing: those who are expressing one set of views in this comment thread seem to be much more civil (dare I say more Christlike) in their responses than are those expressing views on the other side of the issue. Some of the most vocal proponents on one side frequently employ language that accuses, condemns, and demeans. Don’t take my word for it. Lay aside for a moment your views on the issue as much as you can and read through the comments on the thread. Then ask yourself this: Overall, whose tone and word choice are most civil and least abusive?
I often find it interesting to click on the profiles of the angriest and most bellicose contributors to a heated exchange to see what they are like at other times. Sometimes, their unpleasant tone is an outlier, limited to a particular comment thread or to a topic about which they are passionate. More often than not, though, I find them to be consistent in their tone, especially if that tone is the kind of self-righteous verbal abuse that emanates from a certainty of being right and a decidedly unChristlike glee in condemning others.
Comment by Byrom on April 13, 2016 at 10:44 am
As a second-time United Methodist of some 14-1/2 months on a restoration of membership basis, I was well aware of the controversies facing our Church. However, of all of the church choices which I had, non-Methodist and Methodist, God led me only to a local conservative UMC community. I am not afraid to be called names or endure disparaging slurs in this forum.
I think in this area of dissension, as well as others, we as Christians have been influenced too much by vocal parts of the world and culture around us. We too easily forget what the Bible tells us Jesus said directly and through Paul about being in the world, but not of the world. I offer as references (NIV) John 15:19, John 17:14-16, Romans 12:12, and 1 Corinthians 2:12.
Not only do we forget our place in the world, we are too easily intimidated to stand up for the truth. We allow ourselves to be bullied too easily. We are not willing to pay the cost for our beliefs.
There are other denominations to which those in favor of forcing the LBGTQ agenda upon the UMC can go and fellowship with like-minded persons. But, that is not the objective of the Enemy.
If we in the UMC must split, because those who oppose orthodoxy and adherence to Scripture and the teachings of our Risen Lord will not go elsewhere, so be it. We cannot keep “kicking the can down the road.” I left the UMC many years ago over an issue of theology in my local UMC congregation, rather than stand up for the truth. I intend to not do that again – as long as I can.
Regarding “homosexual” not being in the Bible, that is true, but then again
“Trinity” is also not there. Yet, the characteristics of each are well described in Scripture.
Comment by Thomas More on September 7, 2017 at 6:25 pm
God bless the orthodox at the United Methodist Church. You are fighting the good fight. We hope and pray that you will prevail. If someone has to leave your denomination we hope it would be the revisionists.