Conference Backs Replacing Cross and Flame

by

by

Comments (2)

Comment Feed

Change UMC logo

I, too, have never associated the cross and flames logo with racism, but I have not had a KKK cross burned in my yard either. Our life experiences shape our opinions.

I am in favor of a change in the logo for more practical reasons. First, I never cared for the logo. We could have done better.

Second, other denominations have copied the logo which creates confusion. People attend another church which they think is United Methodist only to discover that it isn’t. Or people ask why there is a new UMC nearby. Obviously our copyright has not protected the logo, or perhaps we were reluctant to make an issue of it.

There are examples of logos that can be mistaken for the United Methodist logo.
(Unfortunately, there is no way to include logos of other denominations)

However, considering our future, perhaps we should wait until that is resolved before we make changes, and then have to change it again.

Anglo-Methodist 122 days ago

Symbolism Over Substance

It means nothing to me, but I must comment that here we have another example the liberal focus on symbolism. Something must be torn down because it reminds somebody of something abhorrent 150 years ago or more. Even though the Methodist cross is obviously not burning and the flame is based on scripture, it is, after all these decades, wrong, insulting, and sends the wrong message. Should America stop growing cotton, too?
.
Also a main tenant of liberal logic is a disregard for the cost of the "protest" or the change. The numbers of Methodist churches has been in near free-fall for years. COVID suspensions have been like handing an anchor to a drowning person. There were financial shortfalls before COVID, but now the red numbers are on steroids! And, the liberal answer is to change the brand which will mean million$ in signs, printing, labor to attach new brand symbols to the exteriors. Lot's of unneeded expenses, but, hey, if it feels good, do it!

Reese 122 days ago