GC2019's Action Isn't the Final Word on LGBTQIA Stances



Comments (9)

Comment Feed


"Do understand: at this point, regardless of what the Special Session of the General Conference voted, nothing has yet happened. The Book of Discipline (¶508, bless you, Forebears) says that unless otherwise stated in the legislation, actions of the General Conference do not go into effect the following January 1. What we were doing before Feb. 23, is still the law of the church. "

Is that supposed to make me feel better?

The UMC has abused me ever since 1972, when The Book of Discipline first characterized me as a degenerate.

I cannot live under the current system, but you want me to relax in the knowledge that the new strictures of GC2019 are not in force yet?

I do not understand you, and you certainly do not understand me or mine.

Ben more than 2 years ago

The UMC is being conservative

Ever since the UMC reversed itself on abortion rights, the direction of the church has become clear. Expecting a change in the 1972 resolution on homosexuality is unrealistic at this point. Some years ago, I read an article on the church of love vs. the church of obedience. The second represented by conservative groups. The theme was that these groups are culturally different. As in politics, the country is increasingly polarized in religion as well.

David more than 2 years ago

Thank you

...for an encouraging analysis. The takeover of this denomination by an extremist group has indeed not come to pass, at least not completely. A constitutional system, governed by Robert's Rules of Order (best yet analysis of the effectiveness of RROO, btw), insures tyranny of the majority (at least on a procedural vote like this) will be miles and miles away and the extreme right-wing faction behind this perfidy will be left stewing in their own sweat as they see their victory is pyrrhic indeed - sort of like Pearl Harbor with an equal amount of treachery.

George Nixon Shuler more than 2 years ago

Let’s just split

“Takeover.” “extremest group.” “Tyranny.” “Extreme right-wing faction.” “Perfidy.” “Treachery.” You obviously do not believe ALL people are of sacred worth, certainly not Traditional believers in the larger jurisdictions, Africa, Philippines and Eastern Europe. We do not belong together. Will you let us leave with the buildings we built out of love for our faith or will you sue us to satisfy your lust for revenge because we will never, never, never accept your lifestyle as pleasing to and sanctioned by God? From your tone and use of words, I think I know the answer. You do not want to live and let live in separate Wesleyan denominations, you want us obliterated out of existence. That’s fine. Rant as you want. We Tradionalists are here and are not going to abandon our Faith and understanding of God’s will for us just to please modern culture. I do tend to agree with the author that we’ve created an ungovernable and unreformable denomination that leaves no one happy but the bulk of American Bishops and agency leaders who just want to preserve the status quo no matter the pain experienced by the laity. Keep those apportionments coming in and those folks are quite satisfied and happy. It’s all about the institution which needs our apportionments to keep funding it despite actively working against what many of the most faithful givers believe. Lots of decisions will be made in May and June after the Judicial Council meets in late April.

John more than 2 years ago

Taking it too far

I think if GC19 taught us anything its that there needs to be a split between those of us who desire a more moderate to liberal US-based church and those who wish a more global evangelical church. I think there is a desire to create a healthy break between the traditional and mainline movements. We may even share certain tools like Wespath for pensions. But there needs to be a break. It's not you and to me, it is not personal. John many evangelicals have expressed a concern that many moderates, in particular, have expressed a desire to leave the global mission field. I am one of these people. I feel that the experience in GC this year has clearly to us expressed that we are not welcomed fully in those contexts. And that is ok! The US context needs the attention of the church and needs to be evangelized. But many communities need a more moderate to a liberal expression of the church. Hopefully, the dialogue and articles here have reassured you that far from keeping the traditional church from leaving there is a desire to create a completely new expression of Methodism. In the end, the WCA and whatever we in the centre and on the left can create will exist separately and finally in peace!

eric more than 2 years ago

Your second sentence

assumes facts not in evidence. I love you but I hate your sin.

George Nixon Shuler more than 2 years ago

Too many assumptions.

George, what exactly is his sin? What evidence do you have?

John more than 2 years ago

I don't believe that's a good faith argument

Rather, what evidence do you have that those you hate and judge sin besides an interpretation of scripture which confirms your prejudice? I don't take the bait of bad faith arguments, sorry.

George Nixon Shuler more than 2 years ago


Two straightforward questions constitute an argument? You've made an unequivocal and unsubstantiated claim that you hate the "sin" of another person named John, and you've not named that sin. What's his sin? What evidence you have that he's committed it?

John more than 2 years ago