UMC Next logo
Now that the UMC Next meeting has concluded, participants are speaking publicly about the event. According to the earliest commenters, there will be many more conversations in all regions of the United States over the next several weeks. We will continue to post extracts from comments and links as they emerge. Here is a sampling of first comments, with links to longer posts.
Rev. David Livingston, Great Plains Conference (blog): "The key question for the moment – Is resistance futile or is resisting the resistance futile? One of the four commitments that we agreed to is rejection of the Traditional Plan and resistance to its implementation. Frankly, some forms of resistance are pretty easy to accomplish. It will begin with some annual conference sessions this year. It will expand after new rules take affect January 1. It will continue at General Conference 2020."
Rev. Lisa Schubert-Nowling, Indiana Conference (telephone interview): "The challenging part is that we were not in total agreement. The Spirit’s moving in different ways – contextual, generational, some with more investment in the institution, some who say the institution can’t be reformed. The Spirit’s moving in different ways and we’re going to honor those differences, return to our ministry settings and keep doing the hard, holy work that’s before us. My hope is that people really sensed the Spirit moving and building and giving us momentum. What’s important are the four principles. What's on the UMC Next website is the consensus version, condensed from 77 pages of input! I feel good about our goals and values, the work we did, and the movement going forward.”
The Rev. Dianne Louise Tobey, East Ohio Conference (Facebook): "The depth of the discussion is evidence of the strength of this movement and points toward an authentic new beginning. Participants from every U.S. annual conference took part in the gathering. The group found ways to work together, despite differences, and found many areas of common ground including [the] four commitments."
The Rev. Dr. Mark R. Holland, Executive Director, Mainstream UMC (blog):
- "There is a need for more coalition building. Progressives and Centrists seem a bit wary of one another following our failed joint effort to pass the One Church Plan. There are clearly different sensitivities and focus areas.
- "...There is no clear path forward for the church. In part, this is driven by different contexts. Those in local churches and annual conferences that are predominately progressive/centrist are suffocating. They are ready to leave. Those with divided congregations and conferences are more ready to resist.
- "...There were no Central Conferences present. It is not a surprise since the Central Conference delegates (those outside the U.S.) voted as a virtual block and provided 60% of the votes to pass the Traditional Plan. It is clear that many in the U.S. are ready to break up the global church over the harm being done by the Traditional Plan."
Media Mentions as of May 23, 2019
Group of United Methodist centrists and progressives vow to resist Traditional Plan – Atlanta Journal Constitution
Methodist leaders say they'll resist church's anti-LGBTQ policies but not break away – Kansas City Star
Group of United Methodist churches to stay, resist LGBTQ policies – KSHB
Mt. Horeb church joins Reconciling movement after divisive Methodist decision on LGBTQ issues – WKOW
Drew University 'rejects' Methodist gay bans, stands with LGTBQ community – Daily Record