After fifty years of fractious debate over sexuality, The United Methodist Church is about to divide into two or more denominations. This division would have occurred at the scheduled May 2020 quadrennial General Conference, now postponed until 2021 due to COVID-19.
If ratified next year, this schism will be the first organized division of a major national U.S. denomination since before the Civil War, when Methodists, Baptists, and others divided over slavery.
(Read the rest here.)
Comment by David on June 15, 2020 at 6:34 am
Your link for reading the rest is not working.
Perhaps this is addressed in the rest of the article, but there are actually several issues. Sexuality is one along with the authority of scripture, abortion, and women’s rights in general. The UMC has become more conservative in recent times as evidenced by having first approved of abortion rights and now taking the opposite position. Other denominations have experienced the same as the more liberal folk leave or disappear due to lower birth rates. The UMC is perhaps unique with its large Third World membership that tends to conservatism and literalism. References to slavery in the Bible were mentioned in the first schism debate.
Comment by JR on June 15, 2020 at 9:51 am
Perhaps this is putting the cart before the horse, but are there considerations of eventual merger between a new Traditional methodist church and other similar groups, like the Wesleyan Church?
Comment by Loren J Golden on June 15, 2020 at 1:31 pm
The Wesleyan Church formed as a split from the Methodist Episcopal Church in 1843 and thus has its own 177-year history independent of the United Methodist Church. It has just over half a million members worldwide, a little less than half of which are in North America, and its own unique culture and interpretation of secondary and tertiary doctrines.
According to Tooley’s article, the Traditionalist Methodist denomination that will be formed from the forthcoming UM schism could number as high as 7.5 million members by the time the dust settles, the overwhelming majority of whom will be located in Africa. Without the ongoing battle against the Progressive minority in power in the UMC to unite them, cultural differences and differences over the interpretation of secondary and tertiary doctrines within Traditional United Methodism will rise to the surface within a few years and will have to be settled before the new denomination will even be in a position to consider merging with another denomination.
The Wesleyan Church will not be at all eager to pursue merger talks with the new Traditionalist United Methodist Church until such internal differences have been identified and settled. And even then, once the new denomination has stabilized and resolved its own inherent internal differences, the Wesleyan Church will have a bitter pill to swallow, since such a merger would mean absorption by the much larger denomination and a loss of the distinctiveness it has gained over nearly 200 years.
So don’t look for merger talks between the Wesleyan Church and Traditional United Methodists to happen anytime soon.
Comment by Angel Bonilla on June 15, 2020 at 3:32 pm
But some individual members and churches may choose to joint the Wesleyan, Nazarene, Free Methodists, AME…churches rather the New Methodist group.
Comment by Loren J Golden on June 15, 2020 at 5:03 pm
Individuals always have the freedom to choose where they will worship, but that is not the point. JR was asking about the possibility of merger talks between two Protestant denominations—the Traditional Methodist Church that will emerge from the UMC schism and the Wesleyan Church—and I was pointing out certain practical realities that make such talks unlikely for the foreseeable future.
Comment by Diane on June 15, 2020 at 11:26 am
New SCOTUS ruling: federal law protects lgbtq employees from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Presumably, any religiously-affiliated higher-ed institution will lose federal funding if their policies indicate dismissal of employees who identify as lgbtq.
I attended a small southern religiously-affiliated college that was segregated up until two years before I enrolled. The only reason the school chose to integrate was loss of federal monies if they continued segregation. This was in the mid-1960s, following the passage of federal civil rights legislation. The SCOTUS opinion now defines “sex” in that legislation (insofar as employment) to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
The SCOTUS decision will require conservative religious institutions that rely in part on federal funding for operational expenses to decide if they want to drop federal funds as a source of income. If they choose to keep the funding, they cannot fire an employee who comes out as other than cisgender/heterosexual.
A UMC seminary using federal funds can no longer fire employees who come out as lgbtq.
Comment by Loren J Golden on June 15, 2020 at 12:07 pm
The logic escapes me as to why an institution dedicated to the training of pastors in the Church of Jesus Christ should so indenture itself, as to accept Caesar’s money, when Caesar would use that money to leverage hegemonic control over Christ’s Church. Do either Asbury or United, to your knowledge Diane, actually do this?
Comment by Diane on June 15, 2020 at 2:39 pm
No, I don’t. Just making an observation. Many private, religiously affiliated schools use federal funding. Bob Jones University in SC initially dropped federal funding so they could remain segregated.
Again, the southern, religiously-affiliated college I attended 1967-71, dropped discrimination on the basis of race only so they could keep federal funds and not end up in financial ruin (and having to close). As a woman with white privilege, would not have attended had it still been segregated.
I don’t believe Duke discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation/gender identity. But, have they not cut ties with UMC? I could be wrong, but Duke was probably once a southern segregated school.
Comment by JR on June 15, 2020 at 4:26 pm
You don’t like the GI Bill?
Asbury accepts federal funds in several forms. Federal School code for Asbury Theological Seminary is G01953.
Comment by Loren J Golden on June 15, 2020 at 7:03 pm
This is not a question about what I “like” or do not “like”. It is a matter of whether Caesar has the right to impose his will on what the Church of Jesus Christ teaches—in this case, on human sexuality. According to the Lord Jesus, we are required to “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Mt. 22.21, Mk. 12.17, Lk. 20.25) If Caesar’s money comes with the caveat that the Church must follow Caesar’s doctrine rather than God’s, then the Church is obligated to refuse Caesar’s money—even if it is proffered in the form of a popular bill, such as the GI Bill.
Comment by Lee D. Cary on June 16, 2020 at 3:34 pm
Loren, history may document that “whether Caesar has the right to impose his will on what the Church of Jesus Christ teaches,” or, whether it can even meet for worship, was definitively settled during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic of 2020.
(Please don’t suggest that voyeuristic distance worship is equivalent to the pew.)
Most clergy folded like cheap suits to their States’ demand to shut their doors as “non-essential,” while home improvement and liquor stores were deemed “essential”.
See https://canadafreepress.com/article/the-silence-of-the-shepherds
Comment by Loren J Golden on June 17, 2020 at 2:07 pm
“Please don’t suggest that voyeuristic distance worship is equivalent to the pew.”
Please explain to me, sir, where I suggested such a thing? “Voyeuristic distance worship,” as you put it, might be the only option available to shut-ins, but I find it a poor substitute for the in-person gathering of the Church of Jesus Christ, even in this age of the reign of terror occasioned by the COVID virus.
Comment by td on June 16, 2020 at 6:55 pm
The federal school code is for student financial aid that technically goes to students (for Asbury as loans to graduate students). I would not assume this means that religious colleges and seminaries have to meet all these rules against their beliefs to accept these funds from their students.
If we are talking about direct federal payments to the institutions, i am not sure exactly what funds we are talking about.
Comment by John Smith on June 20, 2020 at 8:28 am
This battle has been fought and lost. Any institute of “higher” learning whose students use federally funded student aid: Pell Grants, Loan Guarantees, GI Bill, etc. is considered to have accepted federal funds and is therefore subject to any and all regulations as decided by the government. Look up Hillsdale college and the fight they had.
Comment by Diane on June 15, 2020 at 2:46 pm
Actually, my observation was just a attempt of outloud wondering how the SCOTUS employment ruling would impact religiously-affiliated institutions with lgbtq exclusionary employment practices in general (not particularly UMC) that receive federal monies.
I am not UMC, but may join a progressive UMC in the community I just re-located to. Membership is in UCC, but there’s no UCC congregation in my new community.
Comment by JR on June 15, 2020 at 4:27 pm
I feel like there’s going to be a serious collision between say the Hobby Lobby decision and some of the ones that came out this term.
Comment by td on June 15, 2020 at 4:49 pm
Oh, this protocol always sounds so good and rosy on paper. But it will be bloody at the local church level in small town and rural america- places where the hurch has been more of a home, family, spiritual, and communal investment, and not something that was a choice like between different brands of potato chips.
These churches are already largely ignored and ridiculed by their politically and sexually liberal annual conferences- annual conferences that will not easily let their dollars leave no matter what gc approves.
Yes, US traditionalists may have settled down, but only because they have accepted that their leaders have largely left them to their own devices.
Comment by William on June 16, 2020 at 7:59 pm
td, if the Protocol passes as proposed, then the local church will be able to tell their annual conference to take a hike. They can affiliate with the new Methodist Church without the usual annual conference approval. As they declare their independence — let the annual conference take them to court and pay the legal fees from their depleting finds by challenging the Protocol itself. The only recourse the annual conference will have is to try and DECEIVE them into staying before the DS shows up to conduct the vote. That’s where the WCA and its local chapters to challenge the deceptions, tell the people the TRUTH, and challenge them to pick the right path. My guess is that many of these smaller, maybe more rural congregations will bolt quickly and seamlessly with the congregants hardly noticing as the annual conference will rendered powerless to stop them. For many of them, it will be like the exodus from Egypt.
Comment by John Smith on June 20, 2020 at 8:32 am
Because the progressives have shown themselves so willing to abide by agreements. I would love to see a study of the appointments from last year and especially the Covid obscured ones about where liberal and conservative elders went. Odds on conservatives being shipped to smaller, more obscure postings while liberals were upscaled to help “prepare” the more important (money & members) churches vote correctly?
Comment by td on June 20, 2020 at 2:24 pm
I disagree. It will only be easy for them to “bolt” if they are allowed to “bolt” easily. The annual conference will hold the cards here. If the annual conference wants to make it difficult for a church to leave, they will- no matter what the intent is of the plan passed by general conference. The math is simple- there aren’t enough pastoral assignments and money to employ all of the liberal pastors if very many local churches leave.
Kudos to you if you can trust your annual conference and district superintendent (and pastor for that matter) to act respectfully and in good faith. I lost that belief a long time ago.
Comment by Roger on June 15, 2020 at 4:52 pm
Hebrews 2: 3 begins with, “How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; “. The contrast here is that Jesus taught a gospel different from the Gospel of Grace. Yet, it was the Risen Saviour that gave Paul his gospel to give to the Gentiles. It took Paul 3 years in Arabia to get over following the Law and giving up a profitable place in the Jewish religion for this “better” Gospel, just requiring belief/ faith. Traditional Methodist can “begin again” with the Gospel of Grace and to not do so would be neglecting the Power of God to provide establishment of a regenerated Church. The old way was good for its purposes in days gone by. The regenerated Church would be “Better”. Abraham allowed Lot to choose which direction and land to possess. What appeared to be less, became more for Abraham as God blessed him exceedingly. We should not neglect such an opportunity to “trust” God and move forward to a Greater Church than the one before. Christians are horizon people and a new horizon beckons us to a more vital Faith and Witness.
Comment by Jim on June 16, 2020 at 6:52 pm
Good word Roger. The current UMC of North America is an apostate Church. The majority of those in the pews are unbelievers who “have a form of religion “ but they deny the power thereof. Those who are of the faith hear the voice of their Shepherd who is calling them out and into congregations of true Christ followers. The local shepherds of these congregations remain committed to the presentation of scripture. Once former Methodists hear the truth of scripture, their faith will grow proportionally. The tickle the ears stories that have commandeered a large number of UMC pulpits will then be recognized for what they were. Human philosophy from false teachers.
Comment by Douglas E Ehrhardt on June 17, 2020 at 4:48 am
Amen brother Jim.
Comment by Roger on June 23, 2020 at 4:47 pm
A Thumb’s Up
Comment by Ande Emmanuel Ikimun on June 20, 2020 at 7:29 am
It is quite unfortunate that African United Methodism is considered as a block of votes than a real people with equal rights. Personally , I do not see the possibility of the whole African United Methodism joining the new denomination as presented in this article. In my experience there will be only few African Annual Conferences who will joint the new traditional denomination. The African College of Bishops have already released a statement that, whatever happened at the postponed 2020 General Conference Africa will remain United Methodist. It is not entirely possible for one third of Africa to joint the new traditional denomination. This name United Methodist Church and the cross and flames runs in the DNA of the African United Methodism, therefore it will be hard for this to happen. What makes is worse is the way black people are treated in America.
Comment by Mark Snider on July 1, 2020 at 11:38 pm
It is always sad to see a formerly relevant and mighty institution die—whether the UMC, the Masons, newspapers, the Episcopal Church, the United Nations, or whatever. But it is a good thing when rotten institutions die and new relevant ones are born. But it is worth it to leave the UMC no matter what, for the sake of the Gospel and the whole point of being a member of God’s church, because it can’t be reformed. It is fundamentally unfair that conservatives “whose granddad paid for the church elevator” have their church ripped from them. But the liberal UMC is losing 10% of its members a year. Go join a new vibrant church like I have, be refreshed by hearing the Gospel preached, be encouraged my your brothers and sisters, and maybe go scoop up your granddad’s old church from the UMC when it totally folds in 2035.