On November 14, progressive United Methodist leaders across the U.S. and the globe came together online for the Inclusiveness Conference, organized by the United Methodist Association of Retired Clergy (UMARC). UMARC’s goal is to build a church committed to LGBTQ equality and racial justice.
Three bishops spoke – LaTrelle Easterling of the Baltimore-Washington Area, the controversial Karen Oliveto of the Mountain Sky Area, Bishop Rodolfo A. Juan of the southern Philippines. Other speakers included: Mark Holland, Director of the Mainstream UMC caucus ; Dr. David Scott, Director of Mission Theology for the General Board of Global Ministries (GBGM); Rev. Knut Refsdahl, a District Superintendent in Norway; Augustine Bahati, treasurer of the Rwanda Provisional Conference; and various people from the Mountain Sky Conference.
Dr. Scott spoke on understanding global trends in the UMC. Dr. Scott focused on heuristics, the mental shortcuts we all use to sort people into categories. “They’re right enough of the time to save us cognitive energy,” Scott said. However, he cautioned that the heuristics we use to sort American United Methodists break down quickly when you try to use them outside of the U.S. context.
Scott challenged the assumption that African United Methodists can be defined similarly to U.S. traditionalists. At GBGM, he has heard two contradictory assumptions. Some say, “Most Africans are opposed to queer inclusion, so they must be traditionalists,” while others say, “They value church institutions, so they must be centrists.” Scott urged thinking outside of usual boxes based on U.S. opinion patterns. Americans must slow down and listen better to Africans because “If we don’t understand Africans on their own terms, we’ll fail to understand them much at all.”
Instead of seeing the church in a two-way divide, Scott said if we take the time to see Africans as a distinct group, the global church is more so in a three-way standoff. As Scott put it, U.S. traditionalists and Africans are not pro-LGBTQ, while progressives and centrists are. He characterized Africans, progressives, and centrists as wanting to keep church agencies and other structures intact, while U.S. traditionalists do not. U.S. traditionalists, progressives, and centrists are willing to split over LGBTQ inclusion, but Africans may not be.
Scott reported that some African bishops have recently indicated that they see the Protocol in its current form as potentially undercutting their two objectives – keeping traditional doctrine on human sexuality and maintaining connections to denominational institutions – and are interested in renegotiating it.
Scott then pivoted to make claims about U.S. traditionalists’ connections to the church in Africa. He accused US traditionalists of “trying to make headway in Africa by using by using the Africa Initiative and other networks that they’ve helped create, and by exploiting internal divisions within local contexts to try to identify Africans who might be interested in joining a new traditionalist denomination.” He added that “the traditionalists seem very intent upon having their new denomination be global, I think because it serves rhetorically to support the sense they have of the righteousness of their cause.”
Beyond debates over human sexuality in the church, Dr. Scott also warned against falling into all too common patterns of racism against Africans. He said, “As people around the world consider the future of The United Methodist Church, I hope we all remember this moral statement: Black African lives matter.” He later added, “I am convinced that we must recognize the global nature of racism. We cannot make progress in the treatment of Black people in the United States if we continue to perpetuate anti-Black stereotypes and anti-Black views of Black people in Africa or elsewhere in the diaspora.”
Later in the conference, Bishop Easterling spoke on dismantling racism, and used both personal and historical accounts to show America’s need for anti-racist action. She recalled an incident in 1970 when a Massachusetts gas station called her father the n-word, and then how she herself was called the slur by members of her own annual conference just a few years ago.
The closing speaker was Bishop Karen Oliveto, leader of the Mountain Sky Area, whose controversial election to the episcopacy in 2016 inspired the creation of UMARC to support her and the inclusion of other LGBTQ clergy in the denomination.
Oliveto centered her talk around the story in 2 Kings 4:38-41, where the prophet Elisha arrived in Gilgal during a time of famine. Elisha purified a deadly stew that contained a poisonous plant and took away its ability to harm. “There is death in too many pots,” Oliveto said. The pandemic response has become politicized, and those taking precautions are sometimes bullied. Gays and lesbians, including herself and her wife, are worried their marriages will be invalidated by the Supreme Court. Without elaboration, she claimed that climate change has made forest fires worse in the Western United States, exposing her community to dangerous smoke-filled air. The UMC has death in its pot, too, she says, because of how it says LGBTQ people “are acceptable to the church only if we lie about who God made us to be and if we hide our love away.”
Oliveto’s call then, was for United Methodists to refuse the pot that holds death and serve each other “a stew of sustenance.” She prayed that the church would learn to accept LGBTQ people instead of “using the Bible as a weapon.” Such truths apply to seeking all forms of justice for all oppressed people, she said, and she re-echoed the sentiments on racism expressed earlier by Bishop Easterling.
Overall, the conference contained a strong undercurrent of hope despite the weight of a difficult year and continued division in the UMC. Progressive leaders are clearly hopeful they will soon be able to craft a church that meets their hopes for a greater focus on social justice and uncontested freedom to celebrate same-sex weddings and ordain partnered gay clergy. Although uncertainties remain about dates and details, there seemed to be a firm confidence that the split will come, finally allowing both sides to move forward.
Comment by Hope For What? on November 20, 2020 at 8:33 am
I am not sure what will happen in the church I participate in, but if there is a split I can’t wait to leave. I am so tired of being called a bigot and racist by many in a church I made a commitment to years ago, and it seems that every part of the institutional church is so tied up in these two crusades nothing else matters.
I know I have my sins and imperfections I have to answer for when I meet God, but it seems these people are so sure of themeslves they never consider if the people who oppose them are anything but pagans, or some kind of less than human being. Hopefully one day I will find out that I’m not what I am portrayed to be.
Comment by Jim on November 20, 2020 at 8:54 am
I believe the progressives will eventually get their way. They may find the victory hollow though. Traditionalists will disappear leaving churches empty. The young have already abandoned the church and show little interest in returning.
Comment by Reynolds on November 20, 2020 at 12:29 pm
Well, when their church declines they will blame the orthodox wing of the church. Then they will move over to try and change it. The PCA is having problems with liberal theocracy creeping in now. They are parasites looking to drain all the Christians out of every church
Comment by Star Tripper on November 20, 2020 at 1:15 pm
Most of this is fever dreams of the so-called Progressives in the UMC. The tide has turned against globalism and these UMC leftists are too weak in faith to confront that reality.
Comment by td on November 20, 2020 at 3:16 pm
This bunch is forever clueless. Probably because they are stuck in their politics.
The “divide” we have is christian / non christian. It doesn’t surprise me that they don’t see this divide- because they do not believe there is any bedrock Christian beliefs that would cause that divide. They are stuck in their worldly political views. Unfortunately, many on the other side have this same problem.
How many times has Jesus repeated that he is not a political leader?
Comment by Donald on November 21, 2020 at 8:12 am
I didn’t know there were still such things as telephone booths, where they could hold such a gathering.
Comment by Walt Pryor on November 21, 2020 at 3:07 pm
For those who love the Lord and want to follow Him this is very clear.
The human mind is capable of extreme self-deception and fantasy. Our will allows this.
Those who speak of “Racism” and LGBTQ “Rights” are obviously indoctrinated by years and years of propaganda by the Liberal Left. In fact, the Liberal Left cares nothing about “Rights” only about doing away with any remaining influence of God.
The real issue is, do we worship and obey God or Satan?
Comment by William on November 22, 2020 at 11:56 am
INCLUSIVENESS — they continue shouting this from the rooftops. Of course they’re talking about the full inclusiveness of LGBT+ sexual lifestyles without the call of REPENTANCE. Inclusiveness and Repentance will be mutually exclusive in this new post separation UMC — certainly with relation to sexual immorality. Take Commandment # 7 — how will this new PSUMC reconcile this commandment with this full inclusiveness they continue to demand? Even with their new definition of marriage to include same sex marriage, how will they offer full inclusiveness to all the various sexual practices across the LGBT+ community and reconcile that with the 7th commandment? Can others violating the other 9 commandments request full inclusiveness in this new PSUMC minus REPENTANCE?
1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall make no idols.
3.. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4. Keep the Sabbath day holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet.
Comment by John Smith on November 22, 2020 at 4:22 pm
And when Christian becomes the new n-word where will they stand? On what will they stand?
Comment by John Smith on November 22, 2020 at 4:26 pm
William,
You have the wrong table of laws. Those left the UMC a long time ago, not quite as long ago as the gospel but …
Now its
Thou shalt pay thine apportionment
Thou shalt obey thy bishop and elders
Thou shalt not question
Thou shalt elevate sex over god
Thou shalt set race over god
Thou shalt exclude those who disagree, abuse and attack them and strip them of their property.
You get the idea.
Comment by td on November 22, 2020 at 5:34 pm
The Liberal UMC’s use of scripture continues to startle me- for instance Oliveto’s comments on the poison stew. They start with a presumption of what God wants, and then they try to snip something out of the bible that, when stretched beyond its limits, can give it a scriptural basis. That is not christianity. Christians are not here to be provocative, political, and progressive; christians are here to witness to God’s ways.
Comment by William on November 23, 2020 at 9:15 am
John,
Dan concluded by pointing out the only thing liberals and traditionalists can agree on: “Although uncertainties remain about dates and details, there seemed to be a firm confidence that the split will come, finally allowing both sides to move forward.”
NOTE. Therefore, traditionalists must now see that the “new” traditional Methodist denomination (actually a continuation of the original Methodist Wesleyan Church) is launched so that we can finally be FREE of this liberal heresy and leave them what remains of a shrinking post separation UMC to fully liberalize and fund.
Comment by John Smith on November 24, 2020 at 7:34 am
William,
Do you really believe all the leaven will leave? Do you think the orthodox will finally hold elders and bishops to account in a new denomination? Do you not think they will say “Finally we can concentrate on what matters!” and overlook the little unpleasantnesses, questions, comments, etc that fester and grow? The original problems didn’t arise from nothing and this laser focus on sex/gender/identity as the problem rather than as a symptom doesn’t bode well for the follow-on.