UMCNext: Pathways to a More Just Church

by

by

Comments (7)

Comment Feed

women's supplementary materials

What do you mean when you say "women's supplementary materials" referring to what traditionalists have developed? "But the Traditionalists have showed us they can walk on two paths at the same time. They have their own parallel denomination ready to go without The UMC—with all the books, revivals, women’s supplementary materials, seminaries, Missions, and fellowship that they would need"

Kathe 89 days ago

This is what traditionalists are after

Absolutely no "think" about it--they said it time and again:

"Some would think that the path being poured is the path of surrender and obedience: that Traditionalists want a tight polity that holds people accountable when they deviate from it, and that anyone who can stick to that polity is welcome to continue in Big Tent Methodism."


It is how John Wesley and Francis Asbury both functioned.

betsy 159 days ago

yes.

Sure, progressives can walk two paths. But progressives can't keep walking the UMC path if they refuse to follow the rules that are legitimately determined. Such a path would be a walk in bad faith because they are saying "we don't want to leave the UMC, but we aren't going to follow the rules while we are in the UMC."

So, let's say that progressives "win the day" at GC in 50 years after not following the rules for 50 years, does that mean that traditional believers are allowed to walk 2 paths just like progressives did by not following the new progressive rules? Or will you force them to teach, accept, and affirm the new teachings on marriage and sexual behavior? Will you accept new clergy for ordination if they profess beliefs contrary to the new teachings? We all know the answers to these questions- a church can not disagree with itself on matters of such basic importance- let us all be honest about that.

If progressives do not intend to and commit to following the rules, they have no legitimate argument for staying within in the UMC.

td 164 days ago

That New Path

Your statement "the Traditional Plan is toothless and will only be implemented in a patchwork fashion." worries me because it assumes that those "patchwork" instances will be so hurtful to those who experience them. However, I know that a clergy whose credentials were removed was fully accepted as part of the Western Jurisdiction, so maybe those instances of harm can be justified.

Karen Bueno 164 days ago

?

I don't understand what would be harmful for persons to lose their jobs for not following long standing rules. Are you saying that these people were actually confused about what kind of sexual actions were not allowed with the earlier wording? I can't believe anyone did not understand that the old general definition meant anything different than the new one. Certainly no one legitimately thought that being in a same sex civil marriage or living or having sex with a same sex partner was allowed by the old standard.

td 161 days ago

Maybe we can just stone them

Simplifies all the issues, right? That was a 'long-standing rule' for a couple of thousand years, if I recall.

After all, it's all their fault anyway. They deserve what comes their way.

https://slate.com/human-interest/2019/06/indecent-advances-stonewall-homophobic-crime-polchin.html



The actual question, from my point of view, isn't what the rule says - it's whether the rule is just.

JR 160 days ago

Stoning is no longer required

Because Jesus has already paid the death penalty in this life for our sinfulness. The question is what is required of us in this life in order to have eternal life with God? And that is where we are at an impasse: Progressives seem to believe that humanity has become evermore in enlightened when it comes to understanding God. Whereas, traditionalists believe we are as inherently broken as we have always been and need to be saved from ourselves so that we can truly become the people God intended when he created us and called us good--and it was good before humanity decided that we knew better than God. Result is we have two completely different perspectives on what is just in this life.

betsy 159 days ago

ONLINE GIVING RETURNS

TO UNITED METHODIST INSIGHT!

     TEXT your contribution to 84-321 with "(amt) Insight" via your smartphone or go to https://ststephenumctx.churchcenter.com/giving/to/um-insight Your additional contribution of the 2.2 processing fee will make your donation go farther.

     Make checks payable to our sponsoring congregation, St. Stephen UMC, and write "UM Insight" on the memo line. Then mail to United Methodist Insight, c/o St. Stephen United Methodist Church, 2520 Oates Drive, Mesquite, TX 75150.

Thank you!


Get United Methodist Insight Weekly!

* indicates required