• United Methodists are on a path toward breakup over LGBTQ policies
    24 replies, posted
https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-united-methodists-lgbt-20190420-story.html There's at least one area of agreement among conservative, centrist and liberal leaders in the United Methodist Church: America's largest mainline Protestant denomination is on a path toward likely breakup over differences on same-sex marriage and ordination of LGBTQ pastors. There highly likely of a American Methodist schism happen over the acceptance with its own LGBT issue.
I have a sneaking suspicion a name change might be in order.
Soon it will be called 'The Artist Formally Known as United Methodists'
This is literally the opposite of what happened with the PCUSA. The fundamentalist anti-gay presbyterians were the ones that split from the existing denomination, cause the PCUSA had voted to welcome gay people into the church.
To add a bit to the article, the same day the vote was made on the Traditional Plan there were two other plans up for vote, the Simple Plan, which was just changing the rules to accept all LGBT+ persons and fiddle with the rules a bit to make it work, and the One Church Plan, where it would be up for the conferences to rule on LGBT ordination and to specific clergy to rule on gay marriages. The One Church Plan was rejected by a vote of 494 to 323, and the Simple Plan was rejected by a vote of 436 to 386.
My old Presbyterian church became nondenominational because homosexuality policies of the PCUSA. Then a year afterward, the pastor came out to the congregation as gay and majority of the hardliners left the church anyway. Now it's just pro-LGBT nondenominational and nothing was really accomplished
So it’s this the schismatic denomination your referring to? With really weird naming choice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECO:_A_Covenant_Order_of_Evangelical_Presbyterians And according to PCUSA’s Wikipedia page, this is their third time and newest one of a vocal minority (right-wing schismatics), as well in the current incarnation of the original Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, to spilt from them.
Yes I am Roman Catholic, but I was raised Presbyterian.
Here's some more context: the final decision was strongly influenced by non-American Methodist congregations - particularly ones located in africa. The majority of Methodist churches in the US are not happy about this decision at all.
Hmm, so what your main reason to convert into a other Christian denomination rather than stay as your raised denomination or to non-Christian religion/irreligious?
Disillusionment with the inconsistencies, overly diversified nature, and continual fracturing of Protestantism. If Christianity is to be true, then not all factions of it, which many have very different theological views, can "all be correct". I wanted and needed something that had been consistent for centuries from the very beginning, which lead me to Rome. The fact that my wife was born Catholic played a small factor in it as well, but not a great, great deal. My Presbyterian church broke off from the main PCUSA over what I felt were more political reasons than theological and the whole idea of a church fracturing like that at all was upsetting. I've always been Christian and I find the Christian faith the most good and righteous. When a faith's religious text has the line "God is love" in it, there's bound to be something good about it. Probably an overly simplified answer, but the best way to articulate it. I believe in God and always have. And so if there is a God, surely he's made his presence known in some capacity. I have always found generic "spiritualism" as just "lazy faith". If you believe in God, you ought to seek him out because there's so much more than "he exists and that's it" in regard to that belief. Irreligious but belief in God has always struck me as a "feel good" self-interested belief to make oneself feel good about themselves rather than to have an actual faith.
The not-so-united-anymore methodist church should find better things to be upset and offended by.
Good. Let the bigoted destroy themselves and whither away. The power of religion doesn't deserve any sway in the modern world anymore.
the traditionalist plan reads almost satirical given the reality of the membership of the church and present day attitudes.
It's because the non-american churches I mentioned might as well be a completely different denomination. The divide between them and the American methodist churches is just as great as the divide between the PCA and the PCUSA. BTW: christian fundamentalists here in America have had a hand in pushing anti-gay laws in countries like Kenya and Uganda. Yeah, I'm talking about the laws that would prescribe life in prison or the fucking death penalty for being gay, if passed.
I don't want to be overly cruel but I hope you are at least aware of the fallibility and silliness of this statement, honestly. Especially considering a lot of the Bible deals with the sheer wrath of God for often minor slights. Not that I'm one to try and coax others out of faith -- and I think you are well and truly entitled to it, I just feel like this is a statement that needs some challenging, even if the faith it represents doesn't.
More sinful and less sinful people have asked these questions for ages, you aren't alone in that matter in any regard, from laymen to the greatest theologians. My experiences with different Protestant sects, especially the more "laid back" ones that barely even reference scripture, seem to have the general mentality of merely believing in god is the only thing necessary. "Sin all you want, it's fine so long as you believe in God," so to speak when that is just not the case. One has to be truly remorseful, sorrowful, and penitent for their sins. And it's not a matter of showing that to people, leaving wonder if they're being honest or trying to lie their way out court because in the final court, there aren't any lies that can be hidden. Even clergy aren't immune to having poor wording or having sinful neglect. If you're seeking faith, you shouldn't put the issues for one particular person to resolve. There is 2,000 years of Christian history full of theologians that have written and grappled with tons of topics regarding sin, nature of God, - and even if God even exists. There are people today who get BA's in just one theologian's philosophies and thoughts, let alone to consider, read, and understand dozens of theologians. If you can, perhaps you should take into reading what they have written. Thomas Aquinas is pretty well rounded with a large number of theological questions he answered throughout his life and could be a good starter for this. In my RCIA class, the nun who gave the class told us that "the Church is the Body of Christ. Wherever you do show love to your fellow man, that is the presence of Christ." While there are a number of do's and don'ts in Christianity, for most part it all just boils down to the Great Commandment and in the end, I really think that's what God is going to focus on us all the most after death.
You present a very good argument and I'm glad you've responded to a personal post like mine with such care. I appreciate the time you took to make this post, even if it doesn't really make me feel better about the historical strife I suffered as a result of my religion and the apathy I saw in other religious people, it legitimately does put me at ease to know I was legitimately encountering a twattish sect. I won't lie to you boldly and say that it's changed my opinion of organized religion, but I appreciate the post nonetheless.
Well that's something we can agree on, even if it comes from opposite ends if the spectrum. Organized religion might be bullshit, but at least it's bullshit with a history and pedigree.
As a Husband of a PCUSA woman pastor - the PCUSA has major problems that are going to kill it within a few decades. The most hardcore people left a long time ago when the PCUSA spilt into the PCA, ECO and such are much more moderate people who are increasingly feeling like the PCUSA is losing its mind with increasing focus on dumb topics like is the trinity true, don't ever use male pronouns to talk about God, etc. The breaking point for most churches will be if and when the PCUSA forces all PCUSA pastors to marry gay people in their churches regardless of what that pastor or church congregation thinks on the issue - and the majority of those people are perfectly fine with gay marriage being a state-sponsored thing with full rights and benefits, they just can't justify it in a church context with scripture. It kind of sucks for everyone.
I'm only a layman and I don't know everything, but I've done a good bit of reading through several books and websites. I can answer a good sum of questions or give clarification on a number of things you need to know. All I ask is to not make the assumption of, if I say "I don't know/don't have the answer" it means "it cannot be known/there is no answer".
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-methodist-church-gay-marriage-clergy-lgbtq-20190426-story.html This gonna happen for most of all them.
I wonder, when the split occurs, which side will ironically keep the original "United Methodist" name.
They will likely creating new names with using the United Methodist or not, after the post-schism rather than keep using a ironic name to bared their shame by all them?
Given the nature of break ups, it will be one group "leaving" the main group and the main would likely keep the original name. It's just that in this specific case, the group has the word "United" in it, making it a tad humorous to keep.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.