The Shakedown in The United Methodist Church

by

Special to United Methodist Insight

The United Methodist Church, America’s second largest Protestant faith group, is being shaken-down by the so-called “traditionalists” in its own denomination.  For decades, these selectively Bible-quoting traditionalists have been the main proponents of the Church’s doctrine that “homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.”  This belief has led to discriminatory doctrines, including: homosexuals are not to be ordained as ministers, same-sex marriages are not to be performed in United Methodist Churches, and ministers who officiate at such marriages will face church trials and possible expulsion.  This blatant discrimination has caused much rejection and pain.

 As the years progressed, resistance to The Church’s anti-homosexual doctrines grew – so much so that a showdown took place at a special General Conference in February of 2019.  There the traditionalists barely had their way, with the General Conference delegates voting 438-384 in favor of their plan – which continues to condemn homosexuality as “incompatible” with biblical teachings, provides stiff penalties, including expulsion for a second offense, for ministers who perform same-sex marriages and also severe penalties for accommodating bishops, including involuntary retirement.  

The traditionalists’ position was backed by a reported “coalition of members from African nations, the Philippines and European and American evangelicals.” (“United Methodists Tighten Ban on Same-Sex Marriage and Gay Clergy,” By Timothy Williams and Elizabeth Dias, The New York Times, Feb. 26, 2019)

Many of these non-American delegates are the heirs of conservative American Methodist missionaries, who used belief in the inerrancy of The Bible as their authority to convert the “unsaved”.  Their missionary zeal is believed to be now coming home to roost.

But a high majority of the seven million United Methodists in the U.S. have pushed back against the traditionalist plan, which restrictive anti-homosexual policies were to take effect in January of 2020.  This strong American resistance led a group of 16 unofficial United Methodists, representing traditionalists, centrists and progressive groups, to meet with nationally known negotiator, Kenneth Feinberg.  With his guidance, they worked out a compromise called a “Protocol of Reconciliation & Grace Through Separation” – to be presented to the May 2020 General Conference for the delegates’ deliberation.  Their reported Protocol: “High among the priorities . . . is that all administrative and judiciary action regarding complaints involving LGBTQ clergy and same-sex weddings will be halted until the 2020 General  Conference.” (“United Methodist Traditionalists, Centrists, Progressives and Bishops Sign Agreement Aimed at Separation,” by United Methodist Churches of Indiana, Jan. 2, 2020)

 Then the shakedown: “The Protocol anticipates the formation of a new traditionalist Methodist denomination.”  And, “Once formed the new church would receive $25 million over the next four years and give up further claim to the UMC’s assets.”  Furthermore, “all administrative or judicial processes addressing restrictions in The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church related to self-avowed practicing homosexuals or same-sex weddings . . . would be held in abeyance until the separation is completed.” (Ibid)  It is anticipated that, after the traditionalists leave, all discriminatory homosexual passages will be removed from the denomination’s Book of Discipline.  But that is not a given.

To make the shakedown more palatable, the 16-member group is reported to propose that $39 million be allotted “to insure there is no disruption in supporting ministries for communities historically marginalized by racism.” (“United Methodist Traditionalists, Centrists, Progressives and Bishops Sign Agreement Aimed at Separation,” For Immediate Release, Council of Bishops, The United Methodist Church, Jan 3, 2020)  The $39 million is reported as representing “acknowledge[ment] of the historic role of the Methodist movement in systemic racial violence, exploitation and discrimination.” (“United Methodist Mediation Team proposes protocol of separation,” By United Methodist Council of Bishops, www.stlamerican.com, Jan. 16, 2020)  

Another reported agreement makes the trade-off even more palatable. “Under the protocol, the post-separation United Methodist Church would contribute $26 million to the above stated fund and the remaining $13 million would come from monies the proposed new traditionalist Methodist Church agreed to divert from the initial $38 million it was to receive.”  (“Minority funding critical to separation deal,” by Jim Patterson, UM News, Han. 22, 2020)  It is assumed that the traditionalists’ decades-long preoccupation with biblically-based discriminatory policies toward homosexuals enabled them to avoid addressing their own involvement in the marginalization of people of color in their midst and in society.  The fixation on homosexuality also has enabled Methodism to avoid addressing other major issues, like America’s imperialistic global war on terrorism.

Concerning the “communities historically marginalized by racism”: they evidently were not adequately represented in the 16-member group.  Had they been, they might well have challenged the $25 million payoff to the traditionalists. 

One could call the maneuvering of the traditionalists extortion.  Not long ago, it was not about them leaving, but them wanting everyone else to leave who opposed the denomination’s anti-homosexual doctrines.  In an article on “What’s in the Traditionalist Plan?,” Rev. Thomas Lambrecht, vice president of the conservative group Good News, wrote, “Those annual conferences unwilling or unable to enforce the Discipline are encouraged to withdraw from The United Methodist Church.”  He also included local churches and clergy and bishops, “who could not live within the boundaries of the conduct established by the Discipline.” (July 19, 2018)

In an article on “Is the Traditionalist Plan Punitive?,” Rev. Lambrecht also argued that, for the sake of “unity,” other United Methodists should leave The Church, not the traditionalists.  He said, “The only way to recover unity is to enhance accountability and request that those unwilling to abide by those shared practices to withdraw from the denomination.”  The traditionalist plan, Lambrecht concluded,  “balances stricter accountability measures with an open door for annual conferences, congregations, and clergy to leave the denomination without penalty.” (Good News Magazine, Oct. 22, 2018)

After decades of pushing discriminatory doctrines against LGBTQ persons, which has created much rejection, grief and division, the traditionalists themselves are offering to leave The Church – for a price.  It’s their form of a quid pro quo.  Or, more bluntly, ransom. 

A New York Times story reveals the traditionalists’ assumed shakedown this way: “Conservatives, who seem to have the upper hand after the vote tightening a ban on same-sex marriage, would get $25 million once their new denomination is formed and incorporated.”  Traditionalist leader, Rev. Lambrecht is then quoted: “It is not everything that we would have hoped for, but we think it is a good agreement that gets us out of the decades-long conflict that we have experienced and enables us to focus on ministry in a positive way.” (“United Methodist Church Announces Plan to Split Church Over Same-Sex Marriage,” By Campbell Robertson and Elizabeth Diaz, Jan.3, 2020)

 These words from a leader whose group has provided the opposite of a “positive” ministry to LGBTQ persons -- a group also with little engagement in issues involving racial and economic justice and U.S. imperialism.  For many traditionalists, “positive” ministry is about right belief, not just behavior.

United Methodist Insight editor Cynthia B. Astle points out that, while “winning” at the 2019 General Conference meeting,  the “traditionalists had their butts handed to them in the backlash because U.S. United Methodists finally had enough of conservative warmongering.”  Astle also notes that the traditionalists had already created “the bare bones of a new denomination,” which may lead many to question that maybe they feel “confident enough to leave the UMC behind.” (“Random Thoughts on Watching the ‘Protocol’ Team,” United Methodist Insight, Jan. 14, 2020)

The United Methodist traditionalists use The Bible to justify their rejection and punitive treatment of LGBTQ persons and their supporters.  Their reasoning:  Rev. Rob Renfroe, president of the pro-traditionalist group Good News, states, “We honestly believe the Scriptures are ‘God-breathed’ and, therefore authoritative for our lives.”  He was emphatic: “We are utterly convinced that the [Holy] Spirit never contradicts what the Scriptures teach because the Scriptures are Spirit-inspired.” (“Failure of Leadership,” July 10, 2018)

If that is true, how come the traditionalists finally changed their biblical tune about black persons and women?  United Methodists who believed that The Bible was “God-breathed” used Paul the Apostle as one of their authorities to denigrate and rationalize segregating black Methodists: “Slaves be obedient to your masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.” (Ephesians 6: 5)  In 1939, The Methodist Church segregated black members into a separate Central Jurisdiction, which existed until 1968 -- when the civil rights movement had become strong and was leading public opinion; and the white-controlled Methodist Church sought to catch up.

Then there are these so-called “God-breathed” Scriptures: “Women should remain silent in the churches.  They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission as the law says.  . . . If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.” (I Corinthians 14:34-40)  But the feminist movement undermined the biblical respectability and enforcement of patriarchy.  Thus today, more and more women are occupying United Methodist Church pulpits and being consecrated as bishops.

But LGBTQ persons remain culturally stigmatized and thus easier prey of so-called traditionalist United Methodists, for whom religion is about authority and power over people.  And that is their bottom line.  It is not just about the authority of The Bible, but the authority select passages of The Bible give to the traditionalists.  Their authoritarian need for certainty drives them to use The Bible to gain power over people, employ “enhanced accountability measures” to control people, and punish those judged to be biblical outcasts.  Thus the decades of conflict over their rejection of LGBTQ persons.  Mediator Kenneth Feinberg, asks the group of 16 United Methodists who negotiated the Protocol: “What is the alternative to decades of strife, tensions and stress?”  Evidently property, assets and funds, and power are at the center of the alternative.  Not the question: why does a small numerical General Conference vote victory, based on fear and bias linked to the Bible, legitimize destroying the ministries of persons and the ministry of the United Methodist Church?”  

The relationship between Homophobia and Negrophobia needs to be seen.  Methodism has admitted its history of fear-based slavery and segregation of blacks; and the creation of the UMC in 1968 eliminated its institutionalized fear of blacks.”  Why then in 2020 do we reward, rather than resist, institutional fear of homosexuals?  How do we justify that those who since 1972 have done damage to LGBTQI persons, same sex couples, and clergy who marry them, are the recipients of a financial reparations fund as they depart?  Far larger than reparation funds for those whom they have wounded and a UMC they have destroyed?  Racism is alive and well.  Homophobic heterosexism is its companion. 

Sister Sledge sang, “We Are Family.”  All those gathered with the mediator were UMC Family.  But why did our brothers and sisters, who since 1972 have been engaged in weaponizing The Bible to harm brothers and sisters, leave the negotiations with a financial settlement?  While those whom they have harmed did not?”   A friend has said, “The UM terrorists received a settlement.  Those whom they terrorized/terrorize did not.”

On trial here is The United Methodist Church’s motto of “Open Hearts.  Open Minds.  Open Doors.”

The Rev. William E. Alberts  and Rev. Gilbert H. Caldwell  are both retired United Methodist ministers, both have served United Methodist Churches is Boston, and both have performed the marriages of same-sex persons.