John Wesley Initiated the 'Trust Clause!'

by

UMC Future

Special to United Methodist Insight

In the ongoing denominational debacle that is disaffiliation from the United Methodist Church, there has been a constant reference to the term 'trust clause' as it relates to property (buildings, land, tangible assets). Those "things", those "treasures on earth," continue to be a very high priority for many who delightedly argue;  "we paid for the land, we paid for the building, we maintain and insure them; therefore the 'things' belong to us and we can do whatever we want with them; the 'things' do not belong to the 'institutional forces of evil' and we will not allow them to be stolen from us!" The question must be asked: isn’t this idolatry?  

Trust clauses in Methodism go back to John Wesley himself in mid-18th century England.

By 1750, John Wesley had accumulated three properties as meeting places and ministry sites for the Methodist societies. He wanted to make sure that local societies could not take control of these properties from the connection he was creating.  He was aware of some other religious societies where local society members had refused to accept or sought to remove clergy or other leaders sent to them by the leaders of the larger society of which they were part. Wesley had also seen situations where people in a local society became influenced by teaching contrary to those of the Methodist movement and sought to leave while taking the society's property with them. Wesley wanted to ensure that leaders chosen by him would never be shut out or removed by local societies.  He also wanted to make certain that Methodist properties were used only and always to teach established Methodist doctrine and be available to Methodists for their ministries. (1)

Several words and phrases jump off the page in that statement, e.g. "Connection" – Wesley was creating a connectional sydtem ion order to assure that everyone might be on the same page. Wesley wanted to avoid situations where clergy could be denied or removed haphazardly by whims of local people but rather the larger organization that had sent the clergy leaders would foster the "connection." Wesley's goal was to '"make certain that Methodist properties were only and always to teach established Methodist doctrine and be available to Methodists for their ministries." At this point, I'm sure that the specious strident deflection of "whataboutism" viz., "they did it first, they aren't following the Book of Discipline," would come to the fore as the primary justification for ignoring the trust clause.

In a recent article, the "traditionalists' perspective was made dramatically clear: "There is no trust clause in the Global Methodist Church. NONE." The author goes on to say: "The trust clause of the United Methodist Church is the mechanism preventing churches from being able to get to the theological home that best allows them to carry out their mission" (2) (emphasis mine).  In my opinion, that exactly is the reason John Wesley put the trust clause in place; to prevent a disconnect in the ministry. With that in mind, it is sad that those claiming to want to be "Wesleyan" seem to be choosing to deny a basic tenet put in place by John Wesley!  

Another document that is in place: 'The Transitional Book of Doctrines and Discipline of the Global Methodist Church' states in Paragraph 901: “God owns all of creation (Psalm 50-9-10): we are but stewards of it for a period of time. Property (real, personal, tangible, and intangible) deeded or titled in the name of the Global Methodist Church and its entities(including its local churches) is to be used for the glory of God and to carry out the mission of making disciples of Jesus Christ and to spread scriptural holiness across the land."(3)  Is this saying that the GMC will hold title and/or deed to property despite the fervent denial of having a trust clause?

The song we've taught the Sunday School children for years, “We are the church" makes the issue clearer: "The church is not a building, the church is not a steeple, the church is not a resting place. the church is people."

The deeply disappointing saga of negativity in the denomination is very damaging. The options seem to be narrowed to being a church and worshipping God or being a cult and worshipping buildings and pastors.  The choice, for me, is easy.  I will serve the Lord and work to "lay up treasures in heaven."  

In the words of Andrea Pickens, a lay member of the newly formed Market Place UMC in Texas. "We're still part of the connection to the United Methodist Church...we have a foundation"(4)

Concluding with the words of John Wesley: "Though we cannot think alike, may we not love alike? May we not be of one heart, though we are not of one opinion? Without all doubt, we may. Herein all the children of God may unite, notwithstanding these smaller differences."

Notes

(1) From "The People of the United Methodist Church"  produced by 'Ask the UMC, a ministry of United Methodist Communications'

(2) "Setting the Record Straight; No Trust Clause in the GMC" by Rev. Jay Therrell, February 21, 2023 in the Wesleyan Covenant Association newsletter

(3) "Transitional Book of Doctrines and Discipline of the Global Methodist Church"

(4) "North Texas Welcomes Market Street UMC"  by  North Texas Conference Communications April 6, 2023

Wil Meiklejohn is a certified lay minister in the Mountain Sky Annual Conference (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Montana and part of Idaho).