Which Way Forward?

by

by

Comments (2)

Comment Feed

Interesting, but with one seeming flaw

Under this plan, progressives would have to voluntarily choose to leave (which they will not do since they view it as a civil rights imperative to change the UMC and abandoning that goal would be viewed as "selling out") or they would have to be forcibly removed (which will not happen since legislated rules added to the BoD to make this happen will simply be ignored by those progressive regions which are already in schism by disregarding the BoD). The only way to avoid this is for the majority to come together and expel the schismatic regions (which also will not happen since the controlling bureaucracy and infrastructure is heavily progressive themselves).

Paul W. 24 days ago

Response to Paul

IMO, the term "Progressive" is not appropriate...perhaps those supporting moving the church further away from the teachings of the scriptures would be more appropriately referred to as "Regressive". Nonetheless, the so-called progressives have not adhered to the wording of the discipline in its current form nor has the leadership of the church chosen to administer the discipline as it is written. It is regrettable that we "traditionalists" are not as voiciferous about our views nor as aggressive as progressives. If the church remains unified, count on continued pushing by the other side to take the church away from its traditional views. The battle will not be over until: A. They accept that the PRACTICE of homosexuality/choice of the gay lifestyle is a sin and should be no more tolerated nor nurtured than any other sin; B. The traditional membership relents and succumbs to the pressure to accept their point of view on the subject or C. Both sides go separate ways. Personally, I see "C" as being the most likely option.

Rick A Mattox 16 days ago