by Steve | Apr 21, 2023 | In the News, Perspective / News
Departing from the Faith
By Rob Renfroe
“Jesus did not die for your sins.” That is the message a professor at United Methodist Iliff Seminary posted two days before Good Friday earlier this month. Professor Miguel De La Torre titled his article “What if Crucifixion Is Not Salvific?”
It may come as a surprise to some that a professor at a UM seminary would promote such a view, but it is a belief that is not uncommon among UM pastors and professors. Last year on Good Friday a UM pastor posted the same declaration on the UM Clergy Facebook page and received the same complimentary responses as Professor De La Torre did from UM pastors – “thank you for telling the truth,” “thank you for saying what so many of us believe,” “thank you for stating that God would never require a sacrifice to achieve our salvation.”
According to De La Torre, “Jesus’ death neither pays a ransom nor is a substitution for us.” In fact, the idea that the cross secures our salvation, the professor states, is a “eurochristian” invention that disenfranchises the marginalized and threatens women. All this despite what the Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (I Corinthians 15:3). Despite John presenting Jesus as “the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” (John 1:29). Despite Peter writing that that Jesus “bore our sins in his body” upon the cross (I Peter 2:24). Despite Jesus himself saying, “This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:28) and “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).
One might think De La Torre is an isolated example. In a blog entitled “Hope for Regeneration” posted on Easter Sunday (!), Rev Mark Y.A. Davies bemoaned “the substitutionary atonement theology of Jesus being a human blood sacrifice for our sins to satisfy what could rightly be seen as a sadistic God, and the emphasis on a miraculous supernatural physical resurrection of Jesus.”
Davies goes on, “Members of the Christian tradition who insist on adhering to a theology of substitutionary atonement that requires the shedding of Jesus’s blood to take away the sins of the world would do well to remember that violent shedding of blood by an oppressive empire does not redeem us. … Persons can be followers of Jesus and the way of bringing good news to the poor and liberation to the oppressed without making the crucifixion be the plan of a sadistic God who requires a gruesome human blood sacrifice for our sins to be forgiven.”
Regarding the resurrection, Davies asks, “What if the focus on physical resurrection has actually diminished the core message and meaning of Jesus’s life? What if the physical resurrection has become an idol of the Christian faith that hinders persons from engaging the life and teachings of Jesus in this world?” This despite Paul arguing for the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus and stating, “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. … And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (I Corinthians 15:14, 17).
Ironically, Davies is not only an ordained United Methodist elder, but he is also a professor of social and ecological ethics at Oklahoma City University. In addition, he is a member of the UM University Senate, “an elected body of professionals in higher education created … to determine which schools, colleges, universities, and theological schools meet the criteria for listing as institutions affiliated with The United Methodist Church.”
Davies has abandoned United Methodist beliefs, as defined by our doctrinal standards – the Articles of Religion (AoR) and Confession of Faith (CoF). “The offering Christ freely made on the cross is the perfect and sufficient sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, redeeming man from all sin, so that no other satisfaction is required” (CoF Article VIII). “Christ did truly rise again from the dead, and took again his body, … wherewith he ascended into heaven, and there sitteth until he return to judge all men at the last day” (AoR Article III).
Yet, Davies is deemed qualified to judge whether colleges and seminaries are sufficiently United Methodist to be affiliated with our denomination! In fact, he writes, “You can be a follower of Jesus’ way … without believing that Jesus miraculously came back to life after the Roman authorities in Jerusalem executed him for sedition.” You can be a Christian without believing that Christ died for your sins and rose bodily from the grave as the first fruits of eternal life.
Not only is Davies wrong about what it means to be a Christian and a United Methodist, he is allowed to teach and preach these mistaken beliefs and even hold a position of authority within the UM Church in deciding which colleges and seminaries promote UM doctrine. No one is holding him accountable for departing from the faith.
We are told by centrists in the UM Church that they will not let the UM Church drift from its historical, biblical roots. But they already have. No one is holding professors or pastors who deny the central claims of the Gospel accountable. Not centrist leaders or bishops. It’s time to be honest. The chief shepherds of the UM Church, elected or self-appointed, are unwilling to defend our doctrines or protect their flocks from false teaching – even a doctrine that is as foundational to the Christian faith as “Jesus died for our sins and rose again on the third day.”
A close friend of mine accepted Jesus shortly before I did when we were both teenagers. It was at the same time as the “Jesus Revolution” depicted in the recent movie. My friend became a beautiful witness of a Christ-centered life. In college, though, he drifted from the faith and studied all the world’s religions. Eventually, he renounced his commitment to Christ and chided me for my simplistic faith. As an adult, he lived a promiscuous life and became very successful professionally. Years later, praise God, he came back to his first love and rededicated his life to Christ. When I asked him what brought him back to Jesus, he said, “I studied all the religions of the world and every one of them has some important truth to share. But as I looked at my life, I realized I didn’t need more truth to live up to – I couldn’t live up to the truth I already had. What I needed was a Savior who could save me from my sins. And there is no other Savior than Jesus.”
De La Torre, Davies, and other UM professors and pastors may not feel the need for a Savior. But my friend did. I do. And if you do – his name is Jesus. He died for your sins, he paid a ransom for your soul, he was buried and on the third day he rose from the dead. Because of his shed blood, you can be made right with God and live an abundant life in this world and eternally with the God who made you to be in relationship with himself.
De La Torre, Davies, and other professors at UM colleges and seminaries will continue to teach future UM pastors and leaders that Jesus did not die for our salvation and that he did not rise again from the grave. Those charged with protecting our doctrines and promoting our faith will continue to be silent. Many in our pews will continue to be oblivious or unconcerned because they love their local church or they feel a need to defend an institution. But our Lord Jesus will continue to be the Lamb of God whose death reconciles our sinful souls to a holy God and whose resurrection is the hope of the world.
Rob Renfroe is a United Methodist clergyperson and the president and publisher of Good News.
by Steve | Apr 14, 2023 | In the News, Perspective / News
By John Lomperis
Congregations who wish to disaffiliate from The United Methodist Church (UMC) have a historic, rapidly expiring opportunity to keep their church buildings and parsonages. Despite the historic nature of this opportunity, proceeding with United Methodist disaffiliation can seem scary, even in conferences where the bishops have not effectively locked the exit doors.
Yet, it is important to understand that your congregation not voting for United Methodist disaffiliation before your final annual conference session this year is itself a major decision. That would be a decision to permanently stay United Methodist. There are no clear exit alternatives that your congregation would have after your annual conference’s final session this year (usually no later than June, although some conferences have scheduled special sessions in the fall). Any promises some bishops have made to potentially offer an alternative exit path within your annual conference after 2023 can be unilaterally rescinded by one UMC official or another, just as easily as we have seen so many bishops rescind other solemn vows and promises in recent years.
It is a major decision, either way.
But I have recently gathered detailed testimonies from several congregations who have decided that they needed to pursue United Methodist disaffiliation, even with all the daunting challenges of building consensus in the congregation, raising the finances required from the UMC, and questions about the future.
Obviously, every congregation’s story is unique. But as your own congregation perhaps considers stepping out in faith and pursuing United Methodist disaffiliation, it may be helpful to consider the testimonies of others who have gone before you. Thanks to their brave steps, these are no longer uncharted waters. These congregations span a range of sizes, internal cultures, and contexts, from a range of different states and annual conferences.
Building consensus is one major challenge.
In one larger South Central Jurisdiction congregation, lay opposition to United Methodist disaffiliation centered on skepticism that denominational leaders would openly defy the official rules of our denomination. This skepticism was quickly mollified by the sharing of the official report of how the New England Annual Conference had formally committed to “nonconformity” with the biblical, duly established moral standards of the UMC Book of Discipline. There are plenty of other examples that could have been shared from across the country. But for this congregation, that was enough, and their vote to disaffiliate was nearly unanimous.
Facts are our friends.
In one Midwestern congregation, a relatively small group within the membership eagerly rushed forward to hurry the congregation into United Methodist disaffiliation. But the reasons why they wanted this, or even what the congregation was really being asked to decide, were not clear to many outside this limited group. Predictably, things did not go well with this group’s initial failures to communicate.
But then this congregation stepped back and tried a different approach, consisting of multiple town hall meetings offering a wide range of information and involvement throughout the congregation. It is vitally important that in such discernment, members of a range of perspectives be given a chance to share information and have their concerns heard. In this congregation, the more members learned the facts about the current situation in the UMC, the more consensus steadily built. By the time of the church conference, this congregation, which had previously been divided on the question of United Methodist disaffiliation, voted by well over 90 percent to disaffiliate!
Even congregations that are theologically divided have reached strong consensus to pursue United Methodist disaffiliation as members, through ongoing discernment, learn the facts about the UMC’s dysfunction and decline as well as the increasingly unchecked liberal extremism and intolerance of its leaders.
From another congregation, one couple shared:
“For years we have been warned that the United Methodist Church was becoming more liberal and moving away from traditional Biblical theology. Being a small, rural congregation, we ‘assumed’ this would have no effect on us. We continued to worship, using the Bible as our guide, all the while maintaining our obligations to the United Methodist Church.”
But then their lay leader returned from their annual conference session with a report of a new liberal stance their region of the UMC had taken, along with the denomination’s growing intolerance of non-liberals. Now the once seemingly distant problems of the denomination were coming much closer.
This couple continued:
“This was a scary thought. How would we as a couple react? We have worshipped in this church 50+ years, we have been very active, and our church family has been very important in our Christian walk. We wondered if we should walk away and try to find another church? It was a very stressful and unsettling time.
We felt the United Methodist Church was changing the rules, becoming more worldly, more politically correct, and ignoring God’s Word.
God’s timing is perfect. A Pastor was sent to us who was willing to inform us of the disaffiliation process and guide us through it.
The United Methodist Church would not allow us to just walk away, many obstacles were put in place, none were easy to complete, and the financial ‘ransom’ fee felt unreasonable as well as unreachable. All of this was infuriating.
The vote to disaffiliate was nerve racking, requiring 2/3 of the membership, not just a majority. The time of the vote came. It seemed the counting took forever. The results were announced, what a BLESSING, 99 percent were in favor of disaffiliation. Relief, joy, happy tears, filled the sanctuary that evening.
God has been faithful, our documentation was complete in the allotted time, by people working diligently, and finances were made available.
The day the announcement was made that we were officially disaffiliated, it was met with much joy, at last we would be able to worship as the Bible says and have ownership of our building.
This decision has hopefully eliminated tears, sleepless nights, and that unsettled feeling for many. PRAISE GOD!”
The lay leader from this same small, rural congregation shared that what was instrumental for building consensus on United Methodist disaffiliation was having meetings where they could hear from one conservative and one liberal leader within their annual conference, to fairly hear both sides.
Overcoming financial obstacles
It must be remembered that staying United Methodist is itself a very long-term and costly commitment, financially and otherwise. However, paying the large one-time fee required for disaffiliation, which some annual conferences have needlessly and greedily inflated, can still seem daunting.
This same lay leader shared about how his small, rural congregation of 60-80 people raised more than $85,000 within two months, including a collection of $45,000 on a single day. He said, “I firmly believe that God blessed us miraculously and affirmed our decision to leave the UMC.”
The pastor of a Southern congregation averaging over 400 in worship told me: “My own church … had a disaffiliation number of $484,000. We set out to raise the figure and two weeks later had raised $750,000. We paid our disaffiliation, set up designated funds for children, students, and missions, and [are] moving forward in a mighty way.” While that congregation is larger and faced fewer annual conference barriers than many others, that is rather dramatic fundraising over a short period of time.
I spoke at length with a pastor of a congregation in a Northern jurisdiction, whose annual conference leadership was choosing to charge them much more than was required by the Discipline. The price tag they were given was roughly equivalent to the congregation’s entire annual budget, or about half of its earlier-assessed property value. It was intimidating.
But this second-career pastor drew on his business background. He told the story far and wide about how the congregation was taking this major step to pursue faithfulness. They raised some 25 percent of the funds they needed from outside the congregation, including friends who live elsewhere and people in the community who were impressed with their stand for faithfulness. For their part, some members sold possessions to help raise the money. At one point, the pastor suddenly came into possession of an unneeded car, which he promptly sold to give the proceeds towards disaffiliation fundraising.
This congregation ultimately ended up raising enough money to fully cover disaffiliation costs and also get into a strong enough financial position to pay off a second mortgage!
One woman from a large congregation (whose United Methodist bishop was notoriously heavy-handed) told me of her congregation being charged a needlessly “exorbitant fee” to disaffiliate, forcing them to borrow money. The pastor and leaders helped the membership understand the hefty price tag. As this lay member recalled:
“Fair or unfair, they knew the story. Even with the unfair fees being required by the conference, our church members still wanted to disaffiliate from the UMC. We wanted to contend for the Lord and His Word…all of them.”
They borrowed what they needed in the early fall of last year.
“Before the close of 2022, less than four (4) months later, on Christmas Eve, our borrowed funds had been paid back! Our church members stepped up to the plate and paid off our loan. We are now debt free and planning on worshiping passionately, loving extravagantly, and witnessing boldly as a new Global Methodist Church. The air seems fresher and cleaner at our congregation now. We wish this for all those considering disaffiliating from the United Methodist denomination.”
Facing fears of loss
With United Methodist disaffiliation, as with any other major change in a congregation, there are understandable worries about potentially losing people in the transition. But we need not let such fears paralyze us.
One pastor recalled, “We lost a few people who hated to pay the disaffiliation fee.” But then the congregation “has had more visitors and more join in the last five months than in the previous five years.” Its worship attendance has now significantly increased, which the pastor credits to “God at work drawing people in.”
There are other stories of congregations growing after they disaffiliated, even making up for the losses of others.
For example, I recently learned of one little congregation that for the last several years had only seen an average of 30 people in worship, but after they disaffiliated on December 10, saw their average weekly worship shoot up to 80, which is far more than doubling!
Whether your congregation chooses United Methodist disaffiliation or to remain, it is a major decision either way. Either path brings significant costs and uncertainties.
But United Methodist disaffiliation is no longer as uncharted as it was a couple years ago. If you go that route, there are now over two thousand congregations who have gone before you.
If your congregation is considering United Methodist disaffiliation, there are many helpful things you can learn by seeking out and hearing about the experience of other congregations near you who have already made that transition.
John Lomperis is director of UMAction, a program of the Institute for Religion and Democracy, and a three-time delegate to General Conference.
by Steve | Mar 31, 2023 | In the News
By Thomas Lambrecht —
As The United Methodist Church goes through this season of disaffiliation, there is much change ahead. Many disaffiliating congregations are uniting with the Global Methodist Church, forming a new Methodist expression that continues our historic Wesleyan, orthodox understanding of Christianity. A much smaller number of disaffiliating congregations are remaining independent or joining networks of churches that are forming. Those remaining United Methodist also anticipate much change in both how the church is governed and the message that the church promotes.
In this time of change, it is important to grasp the reality that God is working in all of these situations to do something new. While some may want to pass judgment on the “new thing” that God may or may not be doing in someone else’s church, God’s verdict is the one that counts, and we may not know that verdict for decades or until we get to heaven.
In the meantime, how can we ourselves participate in the new thing that God is doing? Isaiah has some suggestions.
“Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past.
See, I am doing a new thing!
Now it springs up; do you not perceive it?
I am making a way in the desert and streams in the wasteland,
To give drink to my people, my chosen,
The people I formed for myself, that they may proclaim my praise”
(Isaiah 43:18-21).
We can begin by releasing our focus on the past. “Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past.” Whether we are forming something new or renewing something currently in existence, we can certainly learn lessons from what happened in the past. It will be important to apply those lessons to the new thing that is forming.
However, we cannot live in the past or focus on the past. We cannot dwell on what happened in the past. Many have experienced painful circumstances during this season of disaffiliation. Relationships have been harmed or even broken. People and congregations have been treated unfairly. The process of disaffiliation has been costly, both in financial resources and in emotional and spiritual resources.
But if we bear a grudge over how we were treated in the past, we will never be able to move forward into the new thing God is doing in and through us. The word “forgive” in Greek means “to release or let go.” We can move into a spirit of forgiveness toward those who have hurt us, releasing them – and ourselves – to move forward unencumbered into a new reality. Why would we want to carry with us into a new season the baggage of a hurtful past?
We can focus on the new thing God is doing. “See, I am doing a new thing! … Do you not perceive it?” The exhortation that Henry Blackaby put forward in Experiencing God rings true to our current situation: Find out what God is doing and join him in his work.
Some are part of starting a whole new congregation. Others are revitalizing an existing congregation with new mission or programs or priorities. Some are even forming new annual conferences, districts, and a whole new denomination. Wherever we find ourselves, where can we see God working? What is God doing in the arena where we serve?
A focus on the new thing God is doing can provide the momentum and guidance we need to carry us forward and recover from the trauma of recent experience. The important question is, “How can I join in to what God is doing, joining him in his work?” It will take every person putting in our time, resources, and abilities to participate in the Body of Christ to form or reform the new thing God is doing. Sitting on the sidelines or, worse yet, taking potshots of criticism at those doing the work will not help God’s new thing to come into fruition. We can focus on what God is doing and join in.
We can rely on the promises of God’s provision. God is making a way for us, even when it seems like there is no way. God is the way-maker and promise keeper. We just need to keep looking and asking him to show us the way forward. For each of us, the way may be a bit different, depending upon our unique circumstances. The way may not be easy (through the desert or wasteland?), but by God’s grace it will be doable.
Furthermore, God promises to provide for us on that way. “I am making … streams in the wasteland to give drink to my people.” Water brings refreshment and new life. And don’t we need that refreshment and new life right now, as we begin to come out of this very difficult season? That refreshment is mostly spiritual, as we sense God working in new ways in and through us.
Water is also symbolic of the Holy Spirit, the presence of God with us now. “’Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.’ By this [Jesus] meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive” (John 7:38-39). We can count on God’s presence with us, as we travel the way God makes for us into a new reality. As Moses said, “If your Presence does not go with us, do not send us up from here. How will anyone know that you are pleased with me and with your people unless you go with us? What else will distinguish me and your people from all the other people on the face of the earth?” (Exodus 33:15-16).
God promises to be with us, to never leave or forsake us. He will help us get where we need to go, as he creates a way for us through difficult circumstances and sustains us on the journey.
We can acknowledge who we are as God’s people. The point behind the new thing that God was doing in Isaiah’s time – and in ours – is to form a people for himself. We are God’s people, belonging to him. There is no higher status than that!
Knowing who we are and whose we are gives our lives and ministry purpose and meaning. We are not calling the shots. We are responding to God’s working in our lives through his Spirit. We are attempting to live our lives the Jesus way, informed and formed by God’s Word. We have a unique identity, different from how the world sees us or sees itself.
Our identity first and foremost is as God’s chosen people. Within that awareness, we have a sub-identity as part of the Wesleyan/Methodist family. And within that family, we have individual identities as denominations and congregations. In our focus on the smaller identity, we must never lose focus on the overarching one. Everything we do is in service to being part of God’s people.
This identity is something God is forming in us. Through his individual formation of each one of us as a disciple of Jesus Christ, we become formed into a group, a congregation, a denomination. We are not “holy solitaries,” as John Wesley put it. We are formed into a people of God, a community of faith. The attraction of being part of a denomination is that it helps us understand ourselves as part of something larger than our individual selves or our individual congregation. It helps us visualize ourselves as part of the larger people of God, working and serving together around the world.
Acknowledging ourselves as God’s people enables us to fearlessly grasp the new thing God is doing among us.
Finally, our ultimate purpose is to proclaim God’s praise. We are not building our own kingdoms, but Christ’s. We are not exalting ourselves, but Jesus. We are pointing, not at what we have done, but what God has done.
Keeping the focus on the praise of God and the proclamation of his glory helps us keep our priorities straight. It helps us know our place in the universe. And it puts the new thing that God is doing in proper perspective.
God’s new thing is not primarily for us, although we do benefit. His new thing is for the sake of a broken and needy world. And primarily, his new thing is “for the praise of his glory” (Ephesians 1:12).
Let us by God’s grace and in his time put the past behind us and strive to bring to fruition the new thing that God is doing in Methodism today, that we might exalt our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and proclaim the praise of our glorious God!
Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and vice president of Good News.
by Steve | Mar 24, 2023 | In the News
By Thomas Lambrecht —
In two decisions just released, the Judicial Council has clarified several matters related to the upcoming 2024 General Conference and addressed some shortcomings in the Congo Central Conference.
Another General Conference
In Decision 1451, the Judicial Council ruled that the General Conference session to be held in 2024 was really the postponed 2020 session. In doing so, the Council in effect lengthened the 2017-2020 quadrennium to include the years 2021-24. It mandated that the same budget should continue that was approved for 2017-2020. It allowed all officers in place to extend their terms until the next General Conference (2024), when they should have expired in 2020. So, we are currently in an eight-year quadrennium. (See my previous article on this decision.)
Now, in Decision 1472, the Judicial Council is mandating a “make-up” General Conference to be held sometime in 2025-27, prior to the regular General Conference to be held in 2028. They base this decision on the tortured logic of Decision 1451 that allowed them to postpone the 2020 General Conference, rather than taking the more common-sense step of cancelling it altogether. “The Constitution ‘establishes the minimum frequency at which the General Conference must convene, not the actual year when this occurs,’ by setting the number at once every four years in ¶ 14. JCD 1451. Since ¶ 14 stipulates one session per every four years, another regular session of General Conference is therefore required.”
It should be noted that the Judicial Council already violated its “once per every four years” statute when it allowed the 2020 General Conference not to be held for 8 years. There was no regular General Conference held during the quadrennium of 2017-2020, just the called special session in 2019. And rather than insisting that the “postponed” 2020 Conference be held as soon as practicable, it allowed that conference to be scheduled in the very last year of the 2021-2024 quadrennium.
This decision continues the disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic to reverberate through the general structure of the church, rather than seeking a return to normalcy at the earliest possible moment. The General Conference generally meets before the next quadrennium to set budgets and elect officers for the quadrennium to follow. It therefore does no good for the 2020 General Conference to meet in 2024 to set budget and elect officers for a quadrennium that expires at the end of 2024!
Rather, the 2024 session of General Conference would set budgets and elect officers for the 2025-2028 quadrennium. However, the mandate of another General Conference to be held in 2025-2027, followed by another General Conference in 2028, means that the actions of the 2024 session (as well as one held one to three years later) will have limited lifespan.
It should be noted that four of the nine Judicial Council members (one short of a majority) registered their dissent from this mandate for an extra General Conference. Member Beth Capen points out in her dissent that “Our very structure is quadrennial and any attempt to hold a Regular Session of General Conference in less than four years will have a chaotic structural effect and the consequences will likely be far more egregious than the difficulty that has been experienced by the denomination’s need to continue to exist within the confines of rules and legislation that were subject to amendment in 2020.”
Many of the officers elected at General Conference, jurisdictional and central conferences, and annual conferences, have four-year terms. Those terms were extended to eight years by the postponement of the 2020 General Conference. But if another General Conference meets in 2026, does that mean the terms of those elected in 2024 would only last two years?
Capen gives the example of Judicial Council members, who are elected to eight-year terms. Under the Judicial Council’s reasoning, only the Judicial Council members whose terms expired in 2020 will be replaced by electing new members in 2024. They would actually have served 12-year terms instead of eight. If another General Conference is held in 2026, the members whose terms expired in 2024 would be replaced at that time (since it is in effect the “postponed 2024 session” of General Conference). They would actually have served 10-year terms instead of eight. Those elected in 2024 would be replaced at the 2028 General Conference, having served only four years instead of eight. Then, those elected in 2026 would be replace at the regular 2032 General Conference, having served only six years instead of eight. Are you confused, yet?
On the other hand, if the officers elected and budgets approved in 2024 are really for the whole quadrennium 2025-2028, then there is no compelling reason for the General Conference to meet again in between, save the overly legalistic, rigid reading of the Constitution proposed by the Judicial Council.
This same chaos and confusion would affect the election of other General Conference officials, such as members of the University Senate, General Commission on General Conference, general secretaries of general boards and agencies, and board members of all the general boards and agencies. It would also affect annual conference officials, including the election of lay members of annual conference, the conference chancellor, members of the conference Board of Ordained Ministry, the Administrative Review Committee, and other annual conference agencies, as well. Most annual conferences have ignored this train of thinking and have adapted the terms of office to fit the exigencies of the current situation. But it shows how unworkable the Judicial Council’s thinking on these issues is.
Finally, there is the matter of cost. We have been told that it costs $10 million to hold a General Conference of the normal length. By mandating an extra General Conference session, the Judicial Council just added $10 million in costs to a budget that is already projected to be cut by one-third from that of the previous quadrennium. Is it fair for a small group of (in this case) five Judicial Council members to commit the church to spend that amount of money?
All these problems could have been avoided by taking the simple step of Judicial Council cancelling the 2020 General Conference and designating the 2024 General Conference as that very thing. That would have put the operating schedule of the church back on its normal quadrennial footing immediately. Instead, Decisions 1451 and 1472 are prolonging the chaos, confusion, and pain caused by the original decision to postpone the 2020 General Conference until 2024. The Judicial Council has not served the church well in this matter.
Filling Vacant Delegate Spots
In the same Decision 1472, the Judicial Council reaffirmed that persons who are elected as delegates to General Conference, but whose status has changed since their election, are no longer eligible to serve. This most commonly applies to laypersons who become ordained clergy. In this time of disaffiliation, it would also apply to clergy and lay members who have left the denomination. Unfortunately, some delegates also die or experience health problems that makes it impossible for them to continue serving.
Ordinarily, when a person dies, resigns, or is no longer able to serve as a General Conference delegate, they are replaced by the next elected reserve delegate. If there are four General Conference delegates, there would also be four Jurisdictional Conference delegates who act as reserves. Then there are normally four Jurisdictional reserves, who could also move up. Two-thirds of the delegation would have to remove themselves from serving for there to be a problem at General Conference. It is more likely to be a problem at the Jurisdictional level since there are fewer reserves available there.
The Judicial Council made clear that delegates going off the delegation need to be replaced in order by the reserves below them. Only in the case when the delegation runs out of reserves may the annual conference hold a special election to elect more delegates and reserves. Again, this is more likely to affect the jurisdictional conference delegates than the General Conference ones, but it is helpful to have this clarity.
Issues in the Congo Central Conference
In Memorandum 1471, the Judicial Council stated it did not have jurisdiction to decide on complaints that Fair Process procedures for clergy and lay members in the Congo Central Conference had been violated. The Council noted that “since April 2020 to current, numerous clergy and lay members of the Congo Central Conference have submitted complaints to the Judicial Council” about the fact that the Congo Central Conference had not established an Episcopacy Committee, a Committee on Investigation, or a Judicial Court.
Five members (a majority) of the Judicial Council (including all three African members) admonished the Congo Central Conference about its need to establish the required committees and court, along with ensuring that clergy and lay members are treated fairly and have the right to appeal any action against them. These are all required by the Book of Discipline but have been ignored in the recent history of the Congo Central Conference. As noted in previous Perspectives (here and here), this has resulted in clergy being defrocked without trial or removed from all appointments and in laity being excommunicated from the church.
The Council also noted that they had been referred to a purported 2020 Book of Discipline adopted by the Congo Central Conference. Since the most recent general Book of Discipline is the 2016 one, the Council declared that a 2020 version does not exist. This calls into question whether the changes adopted by the Congo Central Conference – most notably a shift to lifetime episcopacy – are still valid. The Judicial Council did not rule on that question since it was not before them.
One hopes that the Congo Central Conference will work diligently to bring its structure into compliance with the requirements of the Discipline, for the sake of fairness and brotherly love in the way that members are treated.
Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and vice president of Good News.
by Steve | Mar 21, 2023 | In the News, March/April 2023
By Keith Boyette —
The process of church disaffiliation has completed its second wave, with churches disaffiliating through special sessions of their annual conferences in the fall. This piecemeal process of disaffiliation is not what we had hoped for when I joined other traditionalist, centrist, and progressive leaders to announce the Protocol for Reconciliation and Grace through Separation agreement three years ago. If General Conference had met in 2020 or even in 2022, there would have been a uniform process for disaffiliation that would have allowed annual conferences and local churches to make an informed, prayerful, conscience-driven decision on where their congregation could best serve the Kingdom of God.
Unfortunately, we have a dysfunctional situation that is causing increased conflict and power plays to block disaffiliation in some places. Despite the challenges, over 2,000 churches have already disaffiliated from The United Methodist Church (UM Church) and many more are in the process to do so during this year.
Now that two waves of disaffiliation have been completed, people wonder what progress the Global Methodist Church is making in its formation.
The GM Church began operations on May 1, 2022. In its brief life, it has welcomed more than 1,200 persons as clergy members and officially welcomed 1,100 local churches that applied to align with it. The GM Church is already larger than the Congregational Methodist and Free Methodist Churches and should soon pass the Wesleyan Church in size. These clergy and churches are from Angola, Bulgaria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, England, Panama, the Philippines, Slovakia, and the United States.
And hundreds of additional clergy and local churches are on the cusp of completing the process of disaffiliation from The United Methodist Church in order to align with the GM Church. Also, more than 50 new GM congregations have been launched globally with more being added each month. And the truth is, many more would have already joined the GM Church, or be well on the way to doing so, were it not for the obstacles UM Church bishops and conferences have placed in their way.
The GM Church’s primary focus is on its mission – to make disciples of Jesus Christ who worship passionately, love extravagantly, and witness boldly. It is a Church that intentionally empowers local congregations to have maximum discretion in the way they organize and deploy resources for ministry. The denomination maintains a small institutional footprint to ensure local churches have the resources to support the ministry to which they are called. The GM Church exists to empower local churches; to serve, not to be served.
Considerable time has been devoted to organizing for ministry in the various regions of the world. The GM Church currently has nine provisional annual conferences and districts around the world. These conferences and districts have presidents pro tempore and presiding elders appointed to serve. Some have already held convening conferences. Others are holding such conferences soon. It also has ten transitional conference advisory teams preparing for the launch of additional provisional conferences and districts in the coming months with more being organized monthly.
The process of organizing the church internationally involves registering the GM Church with the government of each country. It has completed this process in Bulgaria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Philippines, and Slovakia. Registration is underway in a number of other countries around the world. Ultimately, the GM Church will be registered in nearly all of the countries of Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe. The denomination is also in discussions with non-UM clergy and churches around the world, many of whom are steeped in Methodist heritage and traditions. For them, the GM Church offers an opportunity to join a new, vibrant movement grounded in the warm hearted Wesleyan expression of the Christian faith.
Navigating such a dynamic environment requires exceptional sensitivity to, and dependence on, the work of the Holy Spirit. The GM Church’s Transitional Leadership Council (TLC) is diverse, globally representative, and composed of exceptional leaders. Recently, Bishops Mark Webb and Scott Jones have joined the TLC, along with new members Rev. Arturo Cadar (Eastern Texas, Deacon), Rev. Bartolomeu Dias Sapalo (Angola, Elder), Rev. Dr. David Watson (Allegheny West, Elder), and Rev. Bazel Yoila Yayuba (Nigeria, Elder). The TLC will continue to guide the GM Church through its critical transitional period, even as it joyfully looks forward to the new denomination’s convening General Conference.
Of course, starting a new denomination requires significant financial resources. Thanks to hundreds of gifts from faithful Methodists from all around the world, at its inception, the GM Church received over $1 million as a substantial seed money grant from the Wesleyan Covenant Association’s Next Methodism Fund, which had been specifically raised for that purpose. In addition to this gift, individuals, local churches, and other entities have continued to generously support the Church in its transitional season. Through December 31, 2022, it has received $210,000 in direct contributions, enabling it to fulfill its calling in its early days.
As local churches join the denomination, they are now supporting the ministries of their provisional annual conferences and the general church through connectional funding. The TLC, when requested, has granted relief from connectional funding for congregations that have incurred substantial financial burdens as part of withdrawing from the UM Church.
The GM Church is also equipping and encouraging congregations to fulfill its calling to be a global missional partner with Christian movements around the world. It is a platinum sponsor of the Beyond These Walls conference that will be held at The Woodlands (TX) Methodist Church from April 27-29, 2023. It will gather Christian leaders from around the world, many of whom will be GMC clergy and laity, and will challenge us to share the good news of Jesus Christ with all people.
In this space, I can only focus on a few highlights, but all the people of the GM Church celebrate the way in which God is at work in our midst. We have much for which we give thanks. We have only just begun. We will keep our focus primarily upon our mission – to make disciples of Jesus Christ who worship passionately, love extravagantly, and witness boldly. God expects great things from us. By God’s Spirit, we strive to accomplish great things for God, all so that Jesus will be glorified.
The Rev. Keith Boyette is the Transitional Connectional Officer of the Global Methodist Church, its chief executive and administrative officer. A version of this article appeared in the GM Church’s Outlook (globalmethodist.org).
by Steve | Mar 21, 2023 | In the News, March/April 2023
By Kimberly Constant —
Every spring as nature awakens from its winter slumber and life bursts forth anew, the church revisits the heart of the gospel message. An old rugged cross. The discovery of an empty tomb. The wonder of a risen Lord. The promise of an eternal kingdom in which all will be made whole. Peace will reign. Love will flourish. Year after year we engage in our rituals of remembrance. Maundy Thursday.
Good Friday. Easter Sunday. We wash one another’s feet, we mourn at the foot of the cross, we rejoice in the good news of the risen Christ. All to evoke the germination of a real, miraculous hope.
But, year after year there is one element of the Easter story that fades as our familiarity with it grows. The element of surprise. Lost amongst the realities of life and a world that often seems unmoved by the events of that glorious morning, perhaps, like me, you long to reclaim the life-changing surprise of the empty tomb.
The truth is that the very first Easter provided not just one surprise, but a series of them. Stumbled upon by the most unexpected of people. Women. Women, who in Roman times, did not hold much agency or status, who often occupied the margins of society. Women who, against all odds, had been invited into the ministry of Jesus. Accompanying him on his mission to make God’s kingdom known. Staying near to him even unto the cross to bear witness to his suffering and death. Pushing through their grief and despair in the early morning hours after Sabbath to attend to him, one last time. We imagine they could not have fathomed the surprise that awaited them. Mired in grief, their minds churned over the most practical of details, perhaps as a means of maintaining sanity amidst the unrelenting pain. How, they wondered, could they care for Jesus’ body when there was a giant stone blocking the entrance to the tomb? It was a worry that was dismissed fairly quickly because where they expected to find a hindrance to their Lord, instead the women discovered the first surprise. The stone had been rolled away.
Their next surprise varies from gospel to gospel. No doubt the breathless shock of the morning generated some difficulty in clearly recounting the events that ensued. Whereas Mark recorded the women meeting a young man in white sitting inside of the tomb, Matthew mentioned an angel sitting on top of that rolled away stone. Luke, on the other hand, noted the presence of two young men who glowed. John wrote of two angels in white. This being (or beings) confirmed what the women saw with their own eyes. Jesus was not there. Luke, and potentially Mark if we follow the earliest manuscripts, provided this as the only encounter the women experienced that morning. In those gospels, the women returned from that bodyless tomb to give the news to the disciples. According to Luke and John, it was information that prompted Peter, and per John another disciple, to run and see for themselves the discarded strips of linen that had once encircled the body of their friend.
But Matthew and John (and later Markan manuscripts) made note of a more intimate encounter. Jesus, in all of his resurrection glory, appearing to Mary Magdalene (and perhaps to one of her other female companions). Matthew did not provide much detail aside from noting the amazement and reverence of the women as they fell at Jesus’ feet. However, John relayed an interaction between Mary Magdalene and Jesus that spoke to the tenderness of that staggering encounter.
In his version, Mary’s discovery brought forth a flood of tears. The terrible thought that Jesus’ body had been stolen. Perhaps vandalized. Turning from the tomb she noticed a man whom she mistook as the gardener. Not yet ready to surrender to hope, she asked aloud, was he the one who had taken away the body of the Lord? No. This was no gardener. This man was the Lord. A realization that dawned when he spoke her name, “Mary.” A name that means “obstinate” or “rebellious,” and also by some accounts, “love.” A name that encapsulates that most profound of meetings. The stubborn rebelliousness of humanity greeted with the unconditional, unending, undefeatable love of God.
What a thrilling surprise. Not just for Mary. Not just for the disciples who would hear about these events and later be met themselves by the risen Lord. But for us all. What an unexpected revelation. The triumph of Jesus over sin and evil and death announced not via a host of angels singing songs of praise in the early morning sky. Not via a sudden appearance in Pontius Pilate’s bedchamber or in the courtroom of the Sanhedrin. Guess what guys? You got it all wrong. Not even via an inbreaking into the room where Jesus’ nearest and dearest had gathered to mourn. Not yet anyway.
The first revelation of the resurrection occurred there, in that garden which was created to house the vestiges of death. To a woman who had once been inhabited by evil itself, Jesus revealed his triumph. His glory. His power. His love. All encapsulated in the beautiful pronouncement of her name. No trace of bitterness detected. No anger or disappointment or even sorrow on display. Just our Lord and Savior making his presence known. The truth of Jesus’ resurrection as humble and miraculous and surprising as his birth. As his ministry of reconciliation. As the company he kept. As the teachings he espoused. It was a moment which brought restoration to all of humanity. But also, in a particular way, to women, who for thousands of years had carried the weight of Eve’s actions, the first to fall prey to the temptation of the tree and the lies of the enemy in another garden long ago.
In this new garden, Jesus gifted a woman with the mission to be the first to tell the good news, the glorious news of his resurrection. The message of hope issued from the most unlikely of preachers. How remarkable!
What emerges from the somewhat varied tales of utter shock and awe that morning fundamentally finds consistency in its centering of the core truth of our Christian faith. Jesus is risen. That tomb was not his end. Nor is it ours. Sin and evil and death no longer have an unyielding hold on the human race. God has invited all of us to enter into God’s eternal kingdom. His grace has enabled a community in which all of us are rendered pure. Holy. Men and women from all different cultures and backgrounds made equal under the authority and lordship of Jesus Christ. Our unique gifts and attributes finding their best expression in concert with one another as we continue to spread the greatest news of human history. Jesus is risen. Indeed. The rest, as they say, is just details.
But maybe, like me, you wonder. Is it possible to recapture that element of surprise, that uncontainable joy of witnessing resurrection power, when sometimes it feels as if nothing has really changed? When sometimes we wonder if the surprise at the tomb still reverberates in a society that eschews surprise and mystery altogether, sacrificing them at the altars of human knowledge and scientific discovery. Incessant accomplishment. Never-ending work. How do we hold onto the wonder of the resurrection when sometimes it feels like we are living in a time in which hope grows more and more dim? By surrendering. Like Jesus, who did not succumb to death, but instead chose, willingly, to give up his spirit. Along with, according to Mark, a loud cry. A battle cry of victory expressing the surprising and glorious truth that Jesus willingly died on that cross for the sake of us all. Jesus chose to surrender so that in our own acts of surrender we too might overcome, as he did.
The surprise of Easter morning wasn’t something hidden away, only able to be discovered by the power of human knowledge or ingenuity. That surprise was waiting to be found by those willing to surrender. The ones humble enough to be surprised. Women who surrendered to the pull to make that early morning journey to attend to the body of one who was so dear. Men who were willing to touch Jesus’ side and surrender their doubts and fears and worship their friend as their Lord. Brothers and sisters in Christ throughout the years who each, in their own way, have humbled themselves and surrendered to the truth that human beings do not, cannot, have all the answers.
The surprise of that empty tomb still waits to be discovered by those of us willing to surrender to the truth that not all mysteries can be explained. Those of us willing to admit that maybe, just maybe, peace is not secured by fighting every foe. Wisdom is not earned by constant striving for more and more knowledge. Success is not won by the accumulation of accomplishments and things. But all of these and more are found in surrendering to the one who already has gained victory over anything in this world that stands against us. By surrendering to the one who already has accomplished for us that which we could never earn for ourselves.
Jesus tells us that he stands at the door, knocking. A surprise waiting to be discovered by everyone willing to surrender their way to his will. Not just once in a lifetime. Not just once a year at Easter. But every day. From moment to moment. In hospital beds and rush hour traffic and family reunions and voting booths and work cubicles and online forums. We can discover anew the wonder of his grace. The surprise of his mercy. The depth of his provision. In surrender. In humility. Allowing ourselves to remain open to the continual surprises of faith that lie before us. Reminding ourselves that, truly, there is nothing that God cannot overcome. There is nothing that can contain the glory of our God. Even a society that denies him is no match.
The surprise of the empty tomb and a resurrected Lord still wait to be stumbled upon in the most unexpected ways. By the most unexpected of people. In the most unexpected places. In rest. In relationship. In quiet trust.
As we journey together once more this Easter to the foot of the cross and the open doorway of an empty tomb, may we surrender. May we embrace the unexpected surprises that lie in wait. May we receive with fresh wonder the glorious truths. We are loved. We are forgiven. We are redeemed. We are recipients of a kingdom that will, without a doubt, defy our wildest expectations and offer up an eternity of wonderful surprises. All stemming from the best surprise of all. He. Is. Risen. He is risen, indeed.
Kimberly Constant is a Bible teacher, author, and ordained elder in The United Methodist Church. You can find out more about Rev. Constant at kimberlyconstantministries.com.
