What Every Iowa United Methodist Needs to Know

John Lomperis on June 2, 2023

Last week, 83 Iowa congregations were approved to disaffiliate from the United Methodist Church, including some of the denomination’s largest in the state. This is part of a wider mass exodus, in which thousands of congregations across America have already left the UMC, with many more on the way.

This split is driven by how a liberal faction has now secured a takeover of the denomination’s governing bureaucracy, and are steering the denomination in a much more liberal direction on a range of issues. The denomination keeping the name “United Methodist” is no longer the UMC we have known.

United Methodist congregations in Iowa explicitly have “a limited right” to also disaffiliate from the new, liberalized United Methodism and keep their properties—but only if their church councils act before the end of June!

Iowa United Methodists who care about their congregation’s future owe it to their local church to make sure, this month, that their fellow congregants, especially the members of their congregation’s church council, are aware of this fast-approaching deadline and the realities of this split.

While I do not recommend this, disaffiliating congregations have the option of becoming non-denominational. But disaffiliation does not require giving up Methodist connectionalism. Congregations also have the option of remaining connected with fellow believers around the world who are also separating from liberalized United Methodism, and joining the new, rapidly growing Global Methodist Church.

Whether your congregation sticks with the rapidly liberalizing UMC or disaffiliates to explore other options, it is a major decision, either way.

To her credit, Iowa Bishop Kennetha Bigham-Tsai has allowed a somewhat later deadline than other annual conferences, by having a disaffiliation-focused special session later this year.

But on the other hand, she recently imposed heavy-handed new restrictions on freedom of discussion for moderate and conservative Iowa United Methodists still interested in disaffiliation. For so many congregations, what has been especially helpful has been inviting knowledgeable speakers, sometimes from the Wesleyan Covenant Association, and sometimes a balance of defenders and critics of the UMC’s liberal new direction. But the bishop’s new memo now apparently outlaws congregations inviting speakers of their choice to discuss matters related to disaffiliation. She requires that from now on, “presentations to churches about disaffiliation should be conducted by the District Superintendent or their designee or by conference staff,” and no one else.

Elsewhere, the UMC allows congregations to invite outside speakers to promote and practice non-Christian religions in United Methodist sanctuaries. But Iowa United Methodism now forbids congregations from inviting outside speakers to share accurate information about an explicit “right” congregations have under the UMC Discipline.

If there was legitimate concern about supposedly “inaccurate information,” then why not cite specific examples, and confront those responsible? Why not take the approach of other conferences of letting congregations invite whoever they want, but also have district superintendents attend presentations and be ready to correct any actual inaccuracies? Why not simply ask congregations to hear from different perspectives? Why not encourage church members to check for documentation on everything claimed, whether by conference staff, me, or anyone else?

But the infantilizing approach of Iowa United Methodism’s clerical elite treats church members as if they must only hear from one side. Iowa district superintendents and conference staff generally have liberal biases. And they have a notable financial interest in your congregation keeping its property and yearly apportionment payments perpetually in their conference.

We at IRD/UMAction have nothing to financially gain by any disaffiliation. We simply want you to be informed and to find what is best for your congregation, which may or may not be the liberalized new United Methodism.

Iowa United Methodism’s suppression of free speech raises the question of if you really want to stay with a denomination of such heavy-handedness.

Iowa United Methodists still have every right to read this article, check the documentation, share this link widely, and bring this before their church council before the upcoming deadline.

Key Issues in the UMC Split

The Situation in Iowa

What Iowa United Methodist Congregations Can Do

Speaking of heavy-handedness, Iowa United Methodists should know that under the UMC system, any bishop, acting together with annual conference officials under the alarmingly broadly worded UMC Discipline ¶2549.3.b, has the ability, “in their sole discretion,” to suddenly seize the property of any congregation, with few effective checks and balances. Here is a recent case study of a liberal bishop in another conference ambushing a historic, self-sustaining conservative congregation in this way. As long as your congregation remains United Methodist, there will always be the potential that your current and future bishop could do this to you.

With the push for church celebrations of gay weddings, consider where this may lead, including how the departures this provokes will shift the balance of what is left of the UMC.

It must also be remembered that the even before this present season of separation, American United Methodism was already a sinking ship, steadily losing members in Iowa and across the country every year. 

The UMC was already deeply divided on more foundational doctrine about the authority of Scripture and beliefs about Jesus Christ. Yes, the UMC’s official “on paper” doctrine is theologically conservative on such matters, and has not been officially changed. But just as the UMC’s similarly “on paper” rules forbidding same-sex weddings and “self-avowed practicing homosexual” ministers are now widely disregarded in practice, the official “on paper” doctrine has not been consistently taught and enforced.

Even at the highest levels of denominational leadership, we have seen a bishop elsewhere in the North Central Jurisdiction (which includes Iowa) deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ, while another bishop denies His sinlessness. Such doctrinal divides are also seen among Americans in United Methodist pews, with one recent survey revealing that 38 percent believe that “Jesus committed sins like other people” (which is likely higher now that so many conservatives have departed) and only 29 percent cite Scripture as “the most authoritative source of their personal theology.” This is documented here.

Against this background, before she was elected, Bishop Kennetha Bigham-Tsai was asked directly at a meeting with my Indiana delegation if United Methodists could at least agree on who Jesus Christ is, to which she firmly replied, “No, it is not important that we agree on who Christ is”! You can see her answer, in context, in this video.

Meanwhile, many liberal United Methodists are pushing the denomination’s sexual revolution beyond gay weddings, especially with the strong support seen (including among many General Conference delegates) for more broadly retracting church disapproval of pre-marital sex.

Many top United Methodist officials are also promoting a much more left-of-center approach to abortion than the nuanced, moderate position of the current UMC Social Principles.

With so many conservatives leaving, the restraints on these and other liberal agendas are being removed.

The jurisdictional conferences held across the country in November already shifted the UMC denomination dramatically leftward. I served as a delegate to the North Central Jurisdictional Conference, which includes Iowa, Illinois, and Minnesota, and offered my firsthand observations here. Another traditionalist delegate, Pastor Andy Adams, shared about having a similar experience. The Western Jurisdiction elected the UMC’s second openly-partnered gay bishop, in open defiance of the UMC’s “on paper” standards. Nationwide, we saw all regions of American United Methodism overwhelmingly adopt a resolution on what the denomination should “center” in its life together: not making disciples of Jesus Christ, but rather “Justice and Empowerment for LGBTQIA+ People.”

This raises the question what sort of tolerance may be left for conservative United Methodists who genuinely love and welcome self-identified members of the LGBTQ+ community but who do not accept secular LGBTQIA+ liberationist ideology. Here is what we have already seen:

  • At our 2022 North Central Jurisdictional Conference, all delegates and other leaders present from our region were subjected to an ideological re-education session of over two hours, featuring heavy-handed presentations about how unquestionably mean it is for the church to not affirm same-sex unions and transgenderism. We were all pressured to recite and applaud words reflecting this ideology, and invited to wear LGBTQ+ pride flags. Assembled leaders from across our jurisdiction actually applauded an official speaker at this event for pointedly rejecting the idea that the UMC could welcome diverse views, because the full range of LGBTQIA+ liberationist ideology “is a matter of justice,” and “It is not possible for a church to be not of one mind on an issue of justice, and to continue on thinking otherwise is to delay justice!” (See the 1:59:13 mark of the official video.)
  • One prominent caucus leader has admitted that in November’s elections of new U.S. bishops, there was a nationwide “theological litmus test” barring anyone from such UMC leadership if they were not committed to LGBTQ+ “full inclusion” ideology. The Northeastern Jurisdiction went to extraordinary lengths to prevent even one of over a dozen new bishops elected from being even a “compatibilist” traditionalist. In our own North Central Jurisdiction, it was pointedly made very clear that even a non-conservative candidate would be unelectable if she would not promise to use the office of bishop to block enforcement of the UMC’s “on paper” rules forbidding gay weddings and non-celibate gay ministers. 
  • Within our North Central Jurisdiction, the Minnesota Conference, under the leadership of Bishop Lanette Plambeck (formerly a prominent leader in Iowa), has a outlined its vision and boundaries for “Living and Leading Together.” In addressing the “place for traditionalists,” the statement states that traditionalists are welcome if they are willing to be “active contributors in living into this vision” already set by liberal conference leaders, which includes LGBTQ+ inclusion ideology. In rubber-meets-the-road realities, this statement imposes on traditionalist clergy unwilling to perform gay weddings the expectation that “they will, out of pastoral concern for the couple involved, seek out a pastor who will perform the ceremony and a setting in which their wedding can be celebrated” (emphasis added). Such expectations offer no place for traditionalist pastors who cannot in good conscience even indirectly facilitate such a ceremony that they believe to be unfaithful and harmful.
  • Shortly after her election as the UMC’s first openly partnered lesbian bishop, Karen Oliveto devoted much of her time to visiting every congregation in the Mountain Sky Conference, for “very short ‘in transit’ stops.” Oliveto used these to note and remember those congregations under her thumb who were not enthusiastic about welcoming their new lesbian bishop and her wife. Other jurisdictions will face growing pressure to elect their own first non-celibate gay bishops.

The clear track record already established by United Methodism’s now-dominant liberal faction and the logical implications of their own words about the great injustice of disapproval of gay weddings (particularly the moral equation made with racism) show why any Iowa United Methodist with a biblical view of marriage cannot count on being tolerated indefinitely in the new UMC.

If your theologically traditionalist congregation stays United Methodist, your pastor will eventually retire. Then will there be any remaining traditionalist Iowa United Methodist pastor available to become your next pastor? These new trends will largely discourage traditionalists from even trying to pursue United Methodist ordination, while the few who do can expect discriminatory barriers.

If your Iowa congregation chooses to remain United Methodist, at some point you can expect that someone appointed as your pastor will have been spiritually formed by a typical United Methodist seminary. So you should be informed about the “woke,” left-wing political activism and theological radicalism being pushed in UMC seminaries, including open promotion of non-Christian religions, funded by apportionments taken perpetually from the offering plates of congregations who “stay UMC.”

Either choice involves financial costs. There is a significant exit fee to disaffiliate in Iowa (albeit much less than in some other UMC annual conferences). But this is a one-time expense, and loans are available to spread out payments. Congregations who transfer into Global Methodism are finding their one-time disaffiliation costs surpassed by long-term savings.

If your congregation remains United Methodist, this would require major yearly costs in perpetuity, to fund a bloated bureaucracy and controversial agendas about which you should be informed.

The Situation in Iowa

For decades, the “trust clause” asserting the denomination’s rights over all local-church property has held hostage congregations dissatisfied with the UMC.

But then the 2019 General Conference adopted Discipline Paragraph 2553, which gives congregations “a limited right” to disaffiliate from the UMC and keep their properties. This provision expires after this year. So we are approaching the end of a very historically unique window of opportunity! 

Iowa United Methodist leaders appear to have taken a stricter interpretation than other conferences over the permissible “reasons of conscience” for which congregations may use Paragraph 2553. This provision’s opening section lists two reasons congregations may have for disaffiliation:

  • ●       “reasons of conscience regarding a change in the requirements and provisions of the Book of Discipline related to the practice of homosexuality or the ordination or marriage of self-avowed practicing homosexuals as resolved and adopted by the 2019 General Conference”

OR

  • “reasons of conscience regarding … the actions or inactions of its annual conference related to these issues which follow.”

The second reason clearly applies to any Iowa United Methodist congregation which disagrees with the Iowa Annual Conference session’s action in 2019 to overwhelmingly adopt a resolution, “Disapproval of the Traditional Plan,” opposing the 2019 General Conference’s maintaining and reinforcing bans on gay weddings and non-celibate gay clergy (see pages 60/62 – 61/63).

On a side note, other controversial resolutions adopted by the 2022 Iowa United Methodist Annual Conference session urged defeat of the “Iowa Right to Keep and Bear Arms Amendment” (which was later overwhelming approved by Iowa voters) and demonized “Christian Zionism” (see page 53).

Many Iowa United Methodists object to several additional 2553-relevant actions of their annual conference leaders.

Since 2017, the leadership of the Iowa Conference board of ordained ministry has had a policy to “not consider sexual orientation or gender identity to be sufficient reasons” to deny anyone approval for ordination (in other words, refusing to follow the UMC’s on-paper prohibition of “self-avowed practicing homosexual” ministers).

Since 2021, Iowa United Methodist Conference officials have imposed a policy called “Leading Now,” through which they admit the annual conference is allowing “its clergy to violate” the UMC Discipline’s prohibition of gay weddings. Bishop Bigham-Tsai has effectively continued this policy in Iowa.

Furthermore, as a candidate for bishop, she made clear her support for indefinitely “holding charges in abeyance” (i.e., blocking accountability) for ministers who violate the UMC’s “on paper” prohibitions of same-sex weddings and non-celibate gay clergy.

For Iowa United Methodists, here are some results:

In Iowa United Methodism today, the de facto reality is that the denomination already celebrates gay weddings and has non-celibate gay clergy. 

If your Iowa congregation stays United Methodist, it should expect increasing pressure to affirm leftist LGBTQ+ liberationist ideology. You may eventually have a non-celibate gay pastor imposed on you some day through the UMC’s top-down appointment system.

What Iowa United Methodist Congregations Can Do

For congregations who do not wish to be part of the UMC’s liberal new trends, the latest Iowa disaffiliation policy explanation makes clear that Iowa United Methodists have an urgent deadline of June 30!

If your congregation wants to preserve its right to disaffiliate from Iowa United Methodism under Paragraph 2553, then well before that date, your church council (or equivalent) must vote to pursue disaffiliation, with only a simple majority required, and then the pastor or church council chair must send a letter declaring that “the local church intends to pursue separating from the Iowa Annual Conference via the Disaffiliation Agreement” to both their district superintendent and to the Rev. Elizabeth A. Bell (the Conference Board of Trustees President). The latter’s contact info is listed as:

Rev. Elizabeth Bell

Adel UMC

115 S 10th St

Adel, IA 50003

pastorelizabethbell@gmail.com

To be on the safe side, congregations should make sure that their letters are received, and confirmed as received, by both Bell and their DS before June 30 (such as by both sending a hard copy of the letters via certified mail and also sending the letters’ message via emails in which you request “read receipts”).

Please understand that sending these two letters is just a first step, and does NOT irreversibly bind your congregation to actually disaffiliate! The main actual decision to disaffiliate comes later, with a vote of the whole congregation. Disaffiliation requires multiple steps between now and the end of November. If any step is not completed, then your congregation forfeits its right to disaffiliate.

So while taking a church council vote and sending the two letters this month are serious first steps, by themselves, these are not binding decisions for your congregation to disaffiliate – but rather preserve your congregation having the option to disaffiliate, if that is what members ultimately want to do.

Because of the Iowa Conference’s June 30 deadline, at this point, voting to send the letters, thus keeping your options open, would be less of a rash decision than declining to do so.

Throughout this time period, before and after your church council votes, your congregation should engage in ongoing discernment about its decision, through town-hall meetings and other means.

In your congregation’s internal discussions, it is okay to discuss the implications of disaffiliation on issues other than gay weddings. Such issues are documented in this article’s links and at www.umchoices.org. With such a major decision, it would be irresponsible to ignore wider consequences.

However, every disaffiliation-related town-hall or other meeting or communication in your congregation should also include at least some discussion of, in the words of Discipline Paragraph 2553, your “reasons of conscience regarding a change in the requirements and provisions of the Book of Discipline related to the practice of homosexuality or the ordination or marriage of self-avowed practicing homosexuals as resolved and adopted by the 2019 General Conference, or the actions or inactions of its annual conference related to these issues which follow.”

And you want to be sure to exclusively focus on these quoted words in all communications with your DS and other Iowa United Methodist officials.

Elsewhere, congregations citing in writing any other reason for disaffiliating have sometimes found their disaffiliation process rather heavy-handedly blocked or stalled by denominational officials claiming that their reasons for disaffiliation did not qualify under Paragraph 2553.

Let’s be honest. Major life decisions—where to pursue higher education, what career path to explore, etc.—are usually driven by multiple reasons, even if one reason is primary.

Any congregation’s decision on disaffiliation is influenced by multiple reasons. But this process requires you to only focus on homosexual practice as what you cite in all official forms and communications with the conference. This is just how the system is set up.

Iowa United Methodists concerned for their congregations’ future should share this article with others in their congregation and make sure their church council discusses the matter before time runs out.

  1. Comment by Gary Bebop on June 2, 2023 at 12:09 pm

    Thanks for doing the necessary “grunt work” to inform, enlighten, and energize local churches to make a timely decision.

  2. Comment by Tom on June 2, 2023 at 5:37 pm

    Granted that I haven’t lived in Iowa since 1951 (!) and am not a Methodist. But this article does make me sad. Iowa, of all places! My family first settled in Iowa in 1860 and lived there for the better part of a century. I like to think that the solid Midwestern values that I continue to have are rooted in Iowa and am sorry to see such a solid, sensible place corrupted by non-Biblical left-wing values and the homosexual steamroller that demands submission and affirmation from all.

  3. Comment by Wade Compton on June 3, 2023 at 8:10 pm

    John,
    You are presently the greatest light for the truth in the darkness of this United Methodist divide over faithfulness. God bless you.

  4. Comment by David S. on June 4, 2023 at 1:36 pm

    I urge all Methodists who are on the fence contemplating staying, consider the experience of your brethren in the PC(USA) and TEC, following the liberalization of their polity.

    In August 2020, the PC(USA) in a statement on the now discredited BLM organization, indirectly acknowledged its polity allowing diversity of thought for those who had concerns about the organization, but then backhandedly said, if you disagree with us, your a racist, under the veneer of you should remember white supremacists in the past made these allegations of Marxism in the 50s-60s. This was despite the BLM organization explicitly referencing Marxism in its statement before being changed, and one of the founders making the claim of being trained in Marxist tactics or ideology.
    Fast forward to March through June 2022 and all pretence of respecting the denomination’s polity on dissent was not even acknowledged.

    Firstly, the Stated Clerk, the Moderator of Presbyterians Women, and the Women’s Committee in separately issued statements condemning those supporting efforts to ensure sex and gender course materials and books in public schools were age appropriate, parents had appropriate rights of information, and that minors who have gender identity issues as being anti-LGBT should not be medicalized with through life altering procedures before they are at least of the age of majority. This statement was despite the fact that broad swaths of society, not just conservatives, have supported a more conservative public policy on these matters. One of the statements then presented the very broadly touted, yet very questionably supported JAMA study supporting the use puberty blockers. This was reaffirmed in March 2023 by the Stated Clerk, and the Women’s Committee is getting ready to issue an updated formal statement on the matter, probably this month. However, based on a recent video discussion, I do not expect any moderation on this issue, especially if 303 Creative is this year’s Dobbs decision.

    Secondly, a commissioner drafted, General Assembly resolution in response to the Dobbs ruling explicitly stated that those opposed to abortion or in favor of certain types of restrictions were not engaging in good faith debate, but were doing so due to the now usual false witnessing charges – white supremacy, paternalism, patriarchy, etc. No mention or acknowledgement of the Imago Dei arguments were included and the much more moderate 2012 GA statement was explicitly repudiated. The resolution was amended to allow for the statement of theological reflection to be presented for GA consideration in 2024.

    Then, in July 2022, the TEC House of Deputies passed a resolution, which the Bishops actually showed backbone in rejecting, of condemning crisis pregnancy centers, even as these centers were being vandalized by the group Jane’s Revenge.

    If calling good evil and evil good where children and babies are concerned is not the most explicit evidence of people or institutions being abandoned in judgment by God to their sins, then I do not know what is.

    I urge traditionalists to even moderately leftist Methodists, to consider, do you wish to remain in such situation? The PC(USA), UMC, and TEC are the only mainline denominations with trust clauses. The TEC decided to waste millions in court. The PC(USA) permitted presbyteries to take a more reasonable approach, though some presbyteries were more adversarial where the largest churches were concerned. For the UMC, God has graciously granted you the least costly out, as compared to TEC and PC(USA), to preserve the legacy of your local church, before the lampstand is removed and “Ichabod” is written over the door of the psUMC as He has done with TEC and PC(USA) in passing judgment on them for rejecting Him.

  5. Comment by Dave, on June 19, 2023 at 1:13 pm

    Thankfully our pastor has guided us through the disaffiliation process however I think the stress has led to health issues. I am eager for July 1st to get here since we will then be a Global Methodist Church. We have lost a significant number of members but it seems as though those of us left have really stepped up to meet all obligations. Even better than that, many members are commenting about people seeming so much warmer toward each other. There is a tension that has left the sanctuary.

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.