I never imagined writing this, but my naivete obscured reality, I guess. Call me crazy, but I assumed that when the Wesleyan Covenant Association morphed into the Global Methodist Church, we would "get on with the program" in our respective ways. I wrote with this assumption in a previous post I planned to be my last comment about the WCA/GMC.
In fact, some time ago, I listened to a podcast in which WCA leaders said as much. They commended an amicable separation, saying that it would create the missional space for each denomination to do its work unencumbered by the other group. [1] Naively, I guess, I took that to mean the WCA would "exit stage right" and celebrate they are free at last – off the UMC Titanic and no longer subject to Bishops and a system that is (in their view) has ceased to be orthodox or Wesleyan.
May 1 was their day of liberation, but in less than 24 hours some in the WCA are saying that it will remain in the UMC. [2] While getting on with their program, they will stay part of ours.
Say what?
After fifty years of turmoil and at least eight years of formal action to "leave the building," they are going to stay in it? After building their ship (the GMC) to "sail away," they are remaining tied to the dock?
Say what?
Well ... I say what Native Americans said when the lies of white oppressors were exposed, "Man speaks with forked tongue." The trajectory of intent to "get out" which we have seen and heard from the WCA for years, now becomes (within 24 hours of the commencement of the GMC) "but we will still be here."
So ... now we know that the construction of the GMC includes ongoing deconstruction of the UMC. By adding duplicity to their agenda, the WCA has itself given us another reason not to follow them out of the UMC into the GMC: they aren't leaving.
Say what?
Say...."Man speak with forked tongue."
[1] By googling "WCA" you will find a host of options for hearing directly from movement leaders, most of whom speak in some ways of the need to separate and move on for the sake of mission as they understand it – something they have stated for nearly a decade they were under constraints in the current UMC that made this increasingly impossible. This is what they say about themselves, not what others say about them.
[2] I have added this footnote to the post to make it clear that I realize members of the WCA are members of the UMC (individually and congregationally) until they are not. So, technically, they can operate (e.g. have meetings at Annual Conferences) inside the UMC. The point of this post is not about what is possible, but rather about what is ethical. That's why I used the forked-tongue metaphor. Native Americans used it to acknowledge that what white oppressors said was technically correct but morally indefensible. That's why the metaphor works now. The WCA can say, "We have a right to be in the UMC because we are still UMs." Technically correct, but given all the WCA has been up to ... their duplicity exposes their lack of ethics. The word 'integrity' means you can't have it both ways. So, WCA, "choose you this day whom you will serve" and get on with it. Put your feet where your heart already is.