Realism, Not Cold Water

June 11, 2019

11:39 AM

Realism, not cold water.

That is my message to all my friends in Metho-nerd land today.

For the past two weeks, we’ve had the breaking news of General Conference delegate elections from all across the country. It is fair to call it a “wave election,” toward the Moderate-Progressive side. It’s STUNNING in some places.

My DMs are blowing up with “Did you see this?!!! Did you hear that?!”

And, yes, it’s all AMAZING….AH-May-Zing.

Let us pause and give thanks to God for this awakening of God’s Spirit, happening (by no accident, I am sure) during the week of Pentecost.

God’s people are rising up, all across America, and RESISTING…

But.

But, we have to immediately make sure we understand what the result of this will be. I’m already hearing lots of friends (here in North Texas and across the nation) mistake this wave for a sign that the United Methodist brand can be “won back” from the Traditionalist Plan.

The math is something like….Flip 50-70 delegates or so, and the Traditional Plan can be defeated, and something else can pass.

Let me push this….here comes the “Realism, not cold water” part…

Let’s pretend we can flip 150 delegates. (Far beyond what *any* observer believes possible…)

What does that get us?

A “winning” margin of perhaps 55-58% percent.

And while, yes, that’s an impressive swing, what it means is the UMC will STILL be deeply divided.

We cannot “win” this battle legislatively, with plans for a unified United Methodist future. I hope you have all heard me say this consistently and carefully since the afternoon General Conference ended in February. That fight is OVER.

Continuing it….fighting to “flip” delegates to get a “winning” percentages into the mid 50 percent range…means signing up for a protracted Vietnam-style land war….fighting hill-by-hill…for decades yet to come.

Friends: No progressive I know, in our part of the country, will sign up for that war. We know the costs. We know that people are more important than brand, and we will not fight and die for a brand.

These amazing results DO point to something postive, however. They show that the American Church is decidedly Center-Left. This is a statement I have been making for over a decade now. The American Church, however, has (to borrow a phrase from politics) been a non-voting area.

Now, the true social views of the American Church are being revealed. We are Center-Left. We need a Center-Left polity.

These elections show us that we have the political strength to come to the negotiating table with the WCA and work out a future for us all…one that ends the land war for all time.

That last sentence…that’s the deeply hopeful message of these elections.

And, make no mistake, it’s deeply helpful and hopeful.

Negotiated peace? Yes, please.

Protracted, decades long land war? Hell no, we won’t go.

So, friends, I simply offer this reality check, which I hope does not strike you all as cold water…but as warm and hopeful realism.

There is indeed a hopeful future for American Methodism, and we are seeing it be born in front of our eyes.

It makes me more hopeful than I’ve been in years.

How about you?

I’ll end by posting the questions from my last post (analyzing the elections in our own annual conference….)

What does it mean to *really* include all of our people of color as full partners in a church of the future?
What does it mean to fully support and welcome our LGBTQ brothers and sisters?
What does it mean to potentially still be in different theological places, and yet maintain that very Wesleyan desire to “walk hand in hand” with those whose hearts are the same as ours?
What does it mean to support our rural churches, which have different contexts from the city?
What does it mean to listen to the feedback of the Minneapolis and Kansas City gatherings, and incorporate some of the values and goals from those gatherings into our future dreaming in our conference?

I will hope and believe that all these delegates being elected are ready to dream a new church based on these questions…

Buckle your seatbelts.

You’ve never seen anything like what’s about to happen in American Methodism.

Eric Folkerth

Rev. Eric Folkerth

The Rev. Eric Folkerth serves as pastor of The Woods UMC in Grand Prairie, Texas. This post is republished with permission from his blog, When EF Talks.

Comments (12)

Comment Feed

A key beleif that drives traditionalists

"God's intent for the exercise of his good gift of human sexuality has become clear in Scripture, as interpreted and understood by over 1,200 years of Jewish history and the additional 2,000 years of the Christian church. Some who propose to change the definition of marriage to include persons of the same gender may not fully appreciate what it means to say that every single biblical scholar of the church, bishop, and defender of the faith for 2,000 years has been wrong in their understanding of God's word. The heavy weight of that much accumulated wisdom and piety is not to be lightly cast aside by a majority vote of a General Conference." http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?m=1108936514096&ca=ac723621-4f5b-4f70-8482-1b7fa3794e84

The entire article provides a good explanation of what traditionalists believe. It does not critique what progressive believe, it does not say traditionalists are right and progressives are wrong, it simply states here is how we understand who we are and who God is. We simply see things from an entirely different perspective than progressives and we are as committed to beliefs and understandings every bit as much as progressives are committed to theirs!

betsy more than 5 years ago

I agree

As a traditionalist I agree with the authors call to end the war. It looks like the traditionalists came out on top
Barely. The even bigger divide is between the clergy and the laity who are far more conservative than the clergy. I pray both sides will sit down and come up with an amicable split. Then hopefully we can get back to serving Christ.

Scott more than 5 years ago

The reality of the American UMC

It really is this big theological tent under which nobody is on the same page with anybody else. So, when one faction keeps insisting that it has to be the driving force for the entire church, it is ludicrous to expect that everybody is going to toe the line. Many traditionalists grasp that reality, many progressives do not; that is why traditionalists attempted to provide an exit plan and the One Church Plan did not. There is no unity to be had when all we have in common is a name and a symbol.

betsy more than 5 years ago

Hi Betsy

You've confused me here.

"So, when one faction keeps insisting that it has to be the driving force for the entire church, it is ludicrous to expect that everybody is going to toe the line."
So you... support the OCP, and not the Traditionalist Plan? Because the TP is holding the line, and ... that's ludicrous? Or is it only ludicrous when it's not the way that you feel is right? I hope you can understand my confusion here.

"that is why traditionalists attempted to provide an exit plan and the One Church Plan did not. "

Except that there were 5 exit plans submitted, including at least one from OCP supporters.

"The Rev. Tom Lambrecht, who was a member of the Commission on a Way Forward, said an exit plan was always something the commission felt was important — no matter what direction the church takes."

The one that was approved wasn't even one that was originally acceptable according to the Traditionalists.
[90066, at the bottom - http://tomlambrecht.goodnewsmag.org/revisions-to-the-modified-traditional-plan/]

JR more than 5 years ago

There is no unity left when...

Because of my beliefs I have been labeled regressive, homophobic, and a bigot. Furthermore, UMCNext has made if perfectly clear that my beliefs which are grounded in 2000 years of Christian understanding are all of a sudden contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ!

And just because some electioneering went on to insure that more progressive delegates are present at GC2020 is no proof that the feelings of the rank and file person in the pew are being adequately represented. After all, it is at the level of the pew that the American UMC is truly coming unwound. And to date, no other mainline denomination that went progressive has seen an influx of people to counter the number of people who exited. Start living in the real world with the rest of us flawed human beings.

betsy more than 5 years ago

2000 years of Christian understanding?

https://www.forgeonline.org/blog/2019/3/8/what-about-romans-124-27?fbclid=IwAR2qS5rIbFPePEauIiztAwmXtl3eaJDwej0Vly40UxfAz_BD2i4P-oOAUM8

"And to date, no other mainline denomination that went progressive has seen an influx of people to counter the number of people who exited."

So I'm confused, is it about the butts in the seats or is about being true to scripture?

JR more than 5 years ago

both

JR, being "true to scripture" results in "butts in the seats." https://vancouversun.com/opinion/opinion-younger-theologically-conservative-clergy-are-packing-the-pews

Mike more than 5 years ago

I find it interesting that progressives...

Only talk about negotiating with traditionalists only when progressives have the upper hand. Why is it so hard for you to treat us as equals who need to sit down and end a no-win war that has gone on for way too long? I do not want any connection with progressives because you do not know how to treat us with the respect due to people who simply disagree with you. Your inability to show that respect proves that your heart is not as mine. What progressives believe about sexuality is not nearly as problematic as the heavy handed way in which you try to force everybody to embrace your viewpoints and anybody that disagrees with you is an inferior being.

betsy more than 5 years ago

Realism

The progressives are in full afterburner mode to overturn GC 19. Right now we are in a winner take all situation. If the progressives succeed then the traditionalists will be exiting. If the traditionalists succeed then the progressives will exit. Staying together is not going to happen. That ship has sailed.
We have to understand that our membership numbers are shifting to Africa and we know how those votes go. The war we are engaged in must move to its ultimate conclusion before we negotiate the peace terms.

Kevin more than 5 years ago

Perfectly said

This shift isn't about 'winning'. Nobody wins if we fight, and barring a shift to extremes (90%) that is not possible, all we will have is a fight.

But a show of strength here changes the negotiations. IF the progressive side has the strength to stand up and say 'NO', to roll back the GC2019 changes, to even go farther for a time - that changes the calculus for the negotiated outcomes. Suddenly maybe the Connectional Conference Plan, previously deemed 'too heavy a lift', might actually be the best result. A show of strength here allows for us to negotiate on Constitutional Amendments to move forward. Working TOGETHER becomes more possible when there is no chance of victory.

It's a lesson we should have heeded previously. Better late than never...

JR more than 5 years ago

Hasn’t that ship sailed?

Dear JR,
It seems obvious to me Humpty Dumpty cannot be be put back together again after the acrimony and condemnations and accusations that have flown from both sides. The Progressives will not rest until their agenda is imposed on the entire denomination and the Traditionalists (of which I am one) will not stay in a denomination which we believe ignores Scripture as we read them. The Connectional Conference Plan satisfied no one. The only plans I’m interested in hearing about is the amicable separation plan that allows individual congregations to keep their assets and so they can move on. Hopefully there will be two organized denominations with the structure to maintain our episcopal system and connection within the new organizations and those two may choose to cooperate in funding certain general agencies, like UMCOR, which both organizations choose to support. I don’t care about the name and logo, as they are just names and brands, and damaged ones at that.

John more than 5 years ago

I agree, John

The question is, can we find some common ground (like UMCOR, which I think pretty much everyone even remotely aware is in support of), or do we have to have a full disaffiliation?

The Connectional Conference Plan wasn't unsatisfactory in theory (when originally considered) - it was deemed too complicated to pass. To quote Sherlock Holmes, whenever you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable.... since we've eliminated the Simple Plan, the OCP, the Traditionalist Plan... if there's any interest in retaining common factors like UMCOR, it's going to have resemble the CCP.

Certainly what mush also be considered is what a truly equitable exit plan should look like. It shouldn't be puntiive, but it also shouldn't be an easy hop. And to be honest considering the issues with the Episcopals, Lutheran, Presbyterians in recent years, a better exit plan years ago should have been put together years ago.

JR more than 5 years ago