by Steve | Apr 1, 2011 | Magazine Articles
By Steve Wende
As always when I read Dr. George Hunter, I want to say “amen and well done!” when he is finished. However, I would raise a concern—and perhaps a word of hope.
I believe that the damage done by the 1972 General Conference was far deeper and more wide reaching than is commonly recognized. Whatever we may want to accomplish, the decisions of that General Conference have made true accountability at the upper levels of our church, as presently organized, impossible to enforce, and as a result have made a true missional focus for our denomination impossible to achieve.
Let me explain. The 1972 General Conference did much more than change the membership and size of the General Boards. It structured the nominating process and leadership of the key boards in such a way as to make them functionally independent. The consequence has been lack of true oversight. If a board, such as Church and Society, interprets its objectives in a way that is out of step with the mainline thinking of the church, there is no way to bring it back into line with the majority.
Before 1972, such oversight was understood to be part of the role of the bishops. In fact, during the great growth periods of our church, it was the bishops who led. The Council of Bishops understood it as part of their responsibility to help the church grow evangelistically and missionally and to use all the resources of the church, including the Boards and Agencies, in the service of that task.
Now, was life perfect back then? Of course not. As humans, we will always have problems. But when there were problems, the lay leaders and pastors knew what to do: share their concerns with the bishops, who had the authority to influence the situation.
Presently, if there is a problem in the boards or agencies, like damaging publicity or apparent misuse of resources, who do you call? Do you know the names of those in the boards and agencies? Do you have a clue how to get a name or phone number or email address? And if you did find out such information, except perhaps in extreme situations, how much good do you think it would do?
In addition, when you think of the vast resources of the United Methodist Church, wouldn’t it be a good idea for someone to have the authority to coordinate all those resources for maximum effectiveness between General Conferences? Until you read this article, I’ll bet you assumed someone did! In fact, the ability to focus resources in a coordinated way is fundamental to the recommendations made by the Call to Action report. Yet, at present, that is exactly what we cannot do as a church.
You see, what at first seems to be a small organizational difficulty actually gives birth to very significant problems—and these have definite theological and spiritual implications. In fact, it was one of our leading theologians, Dr. Albert Outler, who led the opposition to the reorganization when it was considered in 1972. In the statement he made before the General Conference, he listed the problems that would come out of the reorganization, and they read like a synopsis of the problems named in the Call To Action report: theological disarray, missional confusion, separation of the hierarchy from the people, and on and on.
Does all this mean that the only challenge before us is organizational? Heavens no! Our church needs our best efforts on a variety of fronts. But here is a word of hope: if an organizational decision made 39 years ago has over time given birth to so many problems, isn’t there a good chance that undoing that decision will reduce some of the problems?
Think about it. Pray about it. Who should lead us between General Conferences? How will that authority be expressed and accountability enforced? There are many ideas on the table. What is crucial at this stage is that we begin to understand the breadth of the problem, and to ask the right questions.
Steve Wende is the senior pastor of First United Methodist Church in Houston. He serves as contributing editor for Preaching Magazine and has been elected to the last four United Methodist General and Jurisdictional Conferences. Dr. Wende serves as a Director of the Methodist Hospital of Houston, a Director of the Texas Methodist Foundation, and a Trustee of Huston-Tillotson University.
by Steve | Apr 1, 2011 | Magazine Articles
By B.J. Funk
Something in our human nature makes us doubt stories in which the bad guy wins, especially when he has done nothing to earn his victory. In this story of the prodigal (Luke 15), the impertinence of a renegade son is wiped away overnight by an unbelievably loving father. The greedy youngster turns from his sinful behavior as he runs into the welcoming arms of his father. The point is easy to understand: God’s love toward sinners is incomprehensible. His mercy far exceeds anything we can imagine. When we stray, God waits with open arms to receive us back. That is powerful!
Of course, there is no recorded conversation after the son asks for his share of the inheritance. He asks for it, and in the very next verse, he gets it! After the son wastes his father’s money, he finally “comes to his senses” and returns home. He is welcomed as royalty. The father lavishes his love on this squandering son. Instead of disowning him, the father owns him. He orders a banquet with a fat calf as the main menu, an abundant homecoming meal. The story is entirely beautiful in its content.
The events leading up to that reunion puzzle me. My father would never have agreed to give me my share of the inheritance before his death. A firm “No” would have left me wondering why I even asked. And, if I did ask, his “because I said so” would be ample response. I would not ask again!
I wonder how long the son sits at the table. I wonder if he becomes fat and satisfied in the feast of his father’s goodness. Does he receive the meal with gratitude, and then later go back to his old ways? If we knew the rest of this story, would continuing dialogue show a self-serving son? Or, would we instead see a son who, after realizing the healing comforts of forgiveness, gets up from the table and shares that love with someone else? It would be nice to think that he looks at his older brother, incensed by all the excitement poured on his little brother, and invites him to feast with him at the Table of Reconciliation.
We’ve seen this story repeated in our churches. A repentant son comes home to God, and the church rejoices. We welcome him as he sits down in our services to drink in the sweet juice of forgiveness. But, he never gets up. He picks and chooses the food he will eat, and not all of it makes him comfortable. Maybe he squirms at the pastor’s challenges each Sunday. As he stuffs more meat into his mouth, he begins to think the Table of Reconciliation gives him special privileges. It is, after all, all about him, right? Imagining himself exempt from expectations of the Christian faith, he disregards the high calling of a son, while at the same time indulging in the privileges of a son.
Suppose the prodigal begins to think he deserves the fattened calf. Self-importance rises to interrupt any thoughts of gratitude. He then becomes a welfare recipient of God’s goodness, always expecting more and never taking responsibility for his own growth in God.
Are you still sitting? Have you gotten up yet and shared the love you found from the fattened calf?
The meal was meant for celebration, not stagnation. The scrumptious food taught a valuable lesson: God loves us in spite of where we have been or what we have done. When we repent, we can eat at his kingdom forever. But, there is a more: We are to go and do likewise.
Wouldn’t it be nice if this son sliced the prime beef and gave the best parts to the servants who had always had the scraps? It would make great sense if he opened his own soup kitchen out in the front yard. He could reciprocate his father’s generosity by doing unto others as his father did unto him.
Each Sunday, our pews are lined with those who are staying too long at the table of the fattened calf. They are content to receive but not to give. They have never learned to cut a piece of the meat of God’s Word and share it with someone.
I’m guilty. I like roast beef more than I like giving out Bibles. I am much more comfortable with prime rib than I am with bringing someone to Christ. It’s time I move away from the table. Will you come with me?
B.J. Funk (bjfunk@bellsouth.net) is associate pastor of Central United Methodist Church in Fitzgerald, Georgia. She is the author of The Dance of Life: Invitation to a Father Daughter Dance, a regular contributor to the South Georgia Advocate, and a frequent speaker at women’s retreats.
by Steve | Apr 1, 2011 | Magazine Articles
By Frank Decker
My mind was swirling because our family had just moved the previous day. And now it was Christmas Eve and in the midst of our box-infested life I was seeking some infusion of peace, of presence; a place for repose in the silent night.
We actually attended services at two different churches that night. Our base church is a United Methodist congregation that is less than four years old called The Vine. My son led the worship, which caters to the predilections of the hundreds of 20- and 30-something adults who comprise the majority of the congregation. Christmas Eve at The Vine was marked by electric guitars, contemporary praise songs, video screens, and exuberant worship. I usually leave our worship services with a sense of excitement and joy, and this evening was no exception.
Dashing out at the close of that service, I then sped 35 miles down the interstate to another church in our denomination for their next Christmas Eve service. Why? This is where my oldest daughter is a member, and she was scheduled to sing a solo. As I quieted my soul after hurrying into that service, I was struck by the stark contrast with the one I had just left. Instead of electric guitars, the music was accentuated by a pipe organ, (and the song my daughter sang was a traditional Catalonian carol “El Noi de La Mare”). Rather than video screens, dozens of bright red poinsettias captured my eye as they sat perched across the front of the well-appointed sanctuary. And instead of a pastor and worship team in jeans there were six ministers adorned in black robes, flanked by four acolytes. I am not as accustomed to more traditional forms of worship, and yet I was overcome by the sense of awe and wonder about the story of Jesus that came to rest upon me there. I left with a sense of gratitude to be a part of a denomination that embraces diverse worship styles in adoration of The King.
Now fast-forward two weeks into January where I find myself in a third church, literally on the other side of the world. My work with The Mission Society has brought me on a trip to Asia at the foothills of the Himalayas, where malaria and other endemic diseases exacerbate the extreme poverty. Even an official with UNICEF, himself an African, told me that this specific province is the poorest he’s ever seen. Spiritually, it’s no more promising. One mission journal describes it as “one of the least-evangelized mega-populations in the world.”
In this setting we have gathered in the January fog and chill, the only thing protecting us from the elements is a corrugated roofing sheet propped above the brick walls of a small courtyard. A few of the believers are huddled around a small fire for warmth and we all are wrapped in layers of clothing. In this particular gathering, two people share testimonies of how God has intervened miraculously in their lives. One lady shared about how her unborn child, confirmed dead by a doctor, was born perfectly healthy the next day.
My coworker Dick McClain, president of The Mission Society, wrote in an email, “The Christ followers we were with today never doubt that Jesus will heal and do miracles … and He does. And as a result, people believe.”
Now, here you may expect that I would take a shot at the easy target of our prosperity in America as a hindrance to dependency on God. That would be predictable and somewhat unfair, as both of the American congregations also have small group ministries in which people encounter the Lord. (And, through my familiarity with The Vine, I am aware of some astounding miraculous healings.)
The point, rather, is this: Whether we find ourselves in prosperity or material want, we will only see Jesus after we accept our utter need for him. The apostle Paul said, “I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret…both of having abundance and suffering need” (Philippians 4:12). John Wesley’s covenant prayer included the lines, “Let me be full, let me be empty. Let me have all things, let me have nothing.”
The good news of Jesus is that wherever he is sought, he will be found. Whether it is among those huddled around a fire in Asia or amid persons neatly seated in a beautiful sanctuary; he comes to occupy the willing heart.
by Steve | Apr 1, 2011 | Magazine Articles
While the United Methodist Church’s U.S. membership has continued to shrink, its growth elsewhere in the world has put it over the 12 million-member mark for the first time, newly released statistics show.
The church’s membership in Africa, Europe, and Asia grew from 3.5 million to 4.4 million in the five years ending in 2009, according to the United Methodist Council on Finance and Administration.
In that time, worldwide membership increased from almost 11.6 million to nearly 12.1 million.
“The major growth has been in Africa and the Philippines,” said Scott Brewer, connectional services director for the finance council.
The Rev. John H. Southwick, research director at the United Methodist Board of Global Ministries, asked an African colleague her take on the rapid growth. She told him the people in Africa are looking for hope. “Most have very challenging life circumstances, and anything they can grab onto has appeal.”
That growth has occurred despite further slippage in U.S. membership. U.S. professing membership in 2009 was down 1.22 percent from 2008, to a 7.8 million members, according to new data from the council.
The United Methodist Church remains the third-largest religious group in the United States, and its membership trends—decreases in the United States and increases in other countries—have mirrored those of other mainline denominations.
“There is no future for the United Methodist Church in the U.S. unless it can demonstrate that it can reach more people, younger people and more diverse people,” declared the Rev. Lovett H. Weems Jr., professor at Wesley Theological Seminary, Washington, D.C.
The decline did not start yesterday.
Other denominations reflect similar trends
Weems, who also directs the Lewis Center for Church Leadership, said the denomination’s membership decline tracks with that of other mainline denominations since 1966.
Mainlines include the American Baptist Church, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), and the United Church of Christ.
Weems attributed United Methodist losses in part to the U.S. population’s migration from the denomination’s traditional rural base to more metropolitan areas where the church has been weaker.
Other factors, he said, include “the retreat for many years from starting new churches where the people were moving and the failure to reach the emerging younger and more diverse population.”
The trend of emptier pews is not limited to mainline Protestants.
Most Protestant denominations reported declining U.S. membership between 2008 and 2009, according to the 2011 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches.
For example, the evangelical Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s second largest religious group, reported a 0.4 percent decline to about 16.1 million members. The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, another evangelical denomination, reported a 1.08 percent decrease to about 2.3 million.
According to the yearbook, the United Methodist Church saw the smallest declines of any mainline denomination.
The Roman Catholic Church, the nation’s largest religious group, is an exception to the shrinking trend, reporting nearly 0.6 percent growth to 68.5 million members. Two Pentecostal denominations—the Assemblies of God and the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee)—also saw their numbers climb. Likewise, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the Seventh-Day Adventists experienced increases.
Church thrives in Africa, the Philippines
Meanwhile, United Methodism outside the United States continues to thrive, led by the Congo Central Conference during the 2005-09 period, according to the Council on Finance and Administration.
Weems likened church growth in Africa and the Philippines to that of American Methodism in the early 19th century “when the Methodists went from being the smallest religious group in the country to the largest.
“While United Methodism in the U.S. shows signs of a mature and struggling denomination,” he added, “many central conferences outside the U.S. reflect something more like the early stages of a movement.”
From 2008 to 2009, average U.S. worship attendance decreased 1.85 percent, to nearly 3.2 million. The figures are based on records from local churches and annual (regional) conferences.
But the Council on Finance and Administration sees signs of hope. U.S. congregations reported nearly 280,000 people enrolled in covenant discipleship groups, more than 1 million children participating in vacation Bible schools, more than 800,000 people served by church daycares or community-education ministries, and more than 15 million people nurtured by community ministries for outreach, justice or mercy.
“This data tells an exciting and compelling story about the impact our churches are making in the world,” said the finance council’s Brewer. “In the church, as with many organizations, we struggle with how to make our administrative structures and processes truly support our mission. I hope this new data can help support that mission more effectively.”
Although membership was down for the U.S. church at large, five conferences reported membership increases, and eight reported growth in worship attendance.
The conferences reporting membership growth in 2009 included Central Texas, North Georgia, Red Bird Missionary, Tennessee, and Virginia. Those with attendance increases were Alabama-West Florida, Detroit, North Carolina, Pacific Northwest, Red Bird Missionary, Rocky Mountain, Rio Grande, and Yellowstone.
Conferences with the largest membership declines were Alaska Missionary, Troy, West Ohio, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Those showing the biggest decreases in attendance were Iowa, Northern Illinois, Peninsula-Delaware, West Michigan, and West Virginia.
Congregations use new data in to support mission
“Some of the acceleration in declining membership could be a result of changes in the statistical forms,” Brewer said. “These changes allowed churches more easily (to) reconcile their statistical reports with their membership records and may have contributed to the greater decrease.”
Deb Smith, best practices director at the United Methodist Board of Discipleship, said the denomination loses most members by death and removal by charge conference. However, she added, the denomination is receiving more new members from other denominations than it is losing. Between 2008 and 2009, the United Methodist Church received 56,000 members through transfer, while about half that number transferred to other denominations.
“We added by profession of faith almost one and one-half times those who withdrew,” Smith said.
The racial/ethnic breakdown for U.S. United Methodist membership indicates 91.2 percent white, 5.9 percent African American/black, 1.1 percent Asian, 0.9 percent Hispanic/Latino, 0.4 percent multi-racial, 0.3 percent Native American and 0.2 percent Pacific Islander.
Relationships attract seekers
As U.S. demographics continue to change, immigration will continue to encourage congregations “to be in mission and ministry with those who live in and around their communities,” said Samuel Rodriguez, director of Hispanic/Latino New Church Starts for the Board of Discipleship.
“Areas where the presence is new can learn from conferences (that) have been in this type of ministry for decades. Providing places where immigrants can worship in their native tongue is yet another opportunity for our conferences to share the good news of our Risen Savior, Jesus Christ.”
Often, the best way to draw people, especially young adults, to the church is not by inviting them to worship.
“The increasing ranks of the unchurched will very likely not encounter the congregation first in worship because that is the last place they would want to go on their own, no matter how ‘cool’ it is,” said the Rev. Taylor Burton-Edwards, director of worship resources at the Board of Discipleship.
“They will encounter Christians they know through relationships with them and perhaps through groups or mission efforts they become involved in outside the congregation. They may eventually be invited to worship and, maybe, over time, grow to be disciples. But most of that actual growth remains more likely to happen outside the congregation proper rather than within it.”
He often asks people to describe a time in their life when their discipleship to Jesus radically deepened. Most describe something that happened outside, rather than inside, a congregation.
“The assumption that congregations are primary venues for discipleship seems unsupported by what I’m hearing,” Burton-Edwards said.
“John Wesley planted exactly zero congregations. The Methodist societies were not congregations, nor were class meetings, bands or field preaching. They were para-congregational groups that helped disciple people, send them in mission and connect them to congregations.”
Barbara Dunlap-Berg is internal content editor for United Methodist Communications. This is a special UMNS Report.
by Steve | Apr 1, 2011 | Magazine Articles
In early February 2011, a group of retired United Methodist bishops issued “A Statement of Counsel to the Church—2011” in which they called upon The United Methodist Church to remove statements in ¶ 304.3 of The Book of Discipline that declare “The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching” and instruct that “self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church.”
The decision on our church’s doctrine and polity on these matters is reserved solely to the delegates to General Conference, and this group of retired bishops has neither voice nor vote in such deliberations. We are dismayed that bishops who have agreed to live within the covenant defined by our Book of Discipline and who are charged in the Book of Discipline “to uphold the discipline and order of the Church” are undercutting that very discipline and order, encouraging dissension and disunity, and advocating on behalf of positions that have been repeatedly rejected by our General Conference after focused prayer, study, and holy conferencing.|
The retired bishops who have joined in the statement are a minority of the active and retired bishops who are part of the Council of Bishops. We call upon the Council of Bishops as a whole to defend the church’s belief and discipline, and to hold one another accountable for such defense.
After ten General Conferences (1972-2008), numerous dialogues, at least two General Church study commissions, official study resources, dozens of convocations, a plethora of books, demonstrations and disruptions of the General Conference business, and extended impassioned debate, our denomination has consistently affirmed a holistic position that is pastoral and biblical, compassionate and redemptive.
The denomination’s statement on the practice of homosexuality is a balanced position that affirms the “sacred worth” of all persons, even while acknowledging that as Christians we cannot affirm every expression of human sexuality. Clearly, there are certain sexual practices that contradict biblical standards, and as faithful disciples we must be willing to declare them to be incompatible with Christian teachings. The United Methodist position does this with mercy and grace.
The retired bishops’ statement is woefully inadequate in its failure to address the clear pronouncements of Scripture in both the Old and New Testaments and almost 2,000 years of Christian history. The teaching of The United Methodist Church on human sexuality is consistent with the teaching of the Church universal.
In essence, the retired bishops’ statement is a plea for the church to accommodate to the world and compromise with the relativism of our age. Scripture and Christian history steadfastly warn against such accommodation and compromise.
To a watching world, the position of The United Methodist Church is a necessary and reasonable statement of ethical clarity in an age of murky morality. It is a statement of theological honesty in an age of religious ambiguity. It is a prophetic statement to a world that offers no boundaries to sexual expression.
As recognized in our Book of Discipline, faithful followers of Jesus Christ are called to celibacy in singleness and fidelity in marriage. The Scriptures and almost 2000 years of Christian theology have permitted sexual activity only within the boundary of marriage. The Church universal in its orthodox expressions has defined marriage as the covenantal relationship of supreme love between a man and a woman. The United Methodist position is and must remain consistent with this understanding. The retired bishops’ statement provides no rationale for deviating from this position, except for arguments based in convenience—convenience for those who find difficulty administering the church’s position rightly and for those who choose to persist in engaging in sinful practices. Maintaining our position keeps faith with the supremacy of Scripture and accords with tradition, experience, and reason.
The position of The United Methodist Church is a prophetic message of life to a broken and hurting world. The biblically prophetic message has always been more interested in truth and transformation than in consensus and conformity to the propositions advanced by the world. What the world often finds excusable and acceptable, the church does not and cannot. Even though our debates have historically focused exclusively on homosexuality, The United Methodist Church must learn how to provide effective and compassionate ministry to all persons who struggle to live lives of sexual purity. All persons, whatever their sexual temptations or inclinations, are welcome in The United Methodist Church, but sexual relationships outside the biblically and historically defined boundary of Christian marriage between a man and a woman must be named for what they are—sin. The Gospel also includes God’s gracious promise that those who confess and repent will be given the power for new life and transformation.
We live in a hypersexualized culture—as evidenced by the more than 40-year-obsession of those who would change our sexual ethics. United Methodism must deal seriously—and here we are speaking to conservatives as well as liberals and moderates—with the crippling spiritual devastation that sexual brokenness brings into our local congregations. Many who sit next to us in our pews have been victimized by sexual abuse or by an unfaithful spouse. Others in our congregations struggle with promiscuity, are addicted to pornography, suffer with sexually transmitted diseases, are confused about their sexual identity, or wrestle with same-sex attractions. All such persons need to know that The United Methodist Church is prepared to minister to their needs while uncompromisingly standing for biblical truth and the transformative power of a relationship with Jesus Christ.
The path urged by the retired bishops, if adopted, will leave The United Methodist Church barely distinguishable from the culture, particularly in the Christian West. All this would be done for the sake of expediency and convenience, a desire for “relevance,” and a misapplied sense of social justice. In reality, the retired bishops’ position is in a distinct minority across the Church universal and has only resulted in dissension, schism, and the weakening of the Church where it has been adopted. We urge our brothers and sisters in Christ in The United Methodist Church to reject the counsel of these retired episcopal leaders.
Endorsed by The Renewal and Reform Coalition:
The Confessing Movement within The United Methodist Church
Good News
Lifewatch
Renew
Transforming Congregations
United Methodist Action
February 16, 2011
by Steve | Apr 1, 2011 | Magazine Articles
By Rob Renfroe
Thirty-six retired United Methodist bishops have now signed on to a public statement calling for the denomination to drop its belief that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Furthermore, they have called for the ordination and appointment of self-avowed, practicing homosexuals.
Well, it doesn’t happen often but I don’t know how to respond the statement from the retired bishops. My problem has to do with where to begin.
Commenting on their hubris might be the proper starting point. Imagine the level of self-importance required for thirty-six denominational leaders who oversaw the loss of some three million members to imagine that persons in the pew have been eagerly awaiting their trumpet blast to turn the tables on 2,000 years of Christian sexual ethics. Most observers view the last generation of bishops as emblematic of the ineffective and failed leadership that led to the sad decline of the UM Church. In all honesty, people in the pews view this class of retired bishops more as problematic voices of a (hopefully) bygone era, not as a guide for a more effective future.
Furthermore, it is understandable that people in the pews are skeptical of “leaders” who suddenly discover a moral voice only after they face no personal or professional consequences in retirement. Moral authority is more legitimately valued when leaders take public stands while it is costly to do so. Latter day bravery is rarely considered a profile in courage. Though some had spoken out publicly on this issue, most had not.
Is it possible that those signing the statement fail to appreciate that the world has changed? As the people in the pews are keenly aware, we no longer live in a top-down world where those in high positions (or who once were) make pronouncements from on high and that the masses will get in line and follow? We live in a time where change and new ideas and movements bubble from the bottom up, not vice versa. If the defeat of the proposed amendments from the past General Conference taught us nothing else, all of us should have learned that change does not occur because we are told what’s good for us by those “above” us.
Ironically, this statement provides no Scriptural basis for changing United Methodism’s widely-debated position. Nor does it make any appeal to church tradition. It doesn’t even reference reason or experience. It offers no new insights, no appeal to our best thinking, no insightful exegetical work. It is solely an empty pronouncement. You would hope that those who have been entrusted with the highest office in the church would respect the minds and the theological integrity of those they are trying to change.
Expectations. As the president of the Council of Bishops, Bishop Larry Goodpaster issued a statement to assure United Methodists that the council was “committed to living within the covenant defined by our Book of Discipline” and he also called for “thoughtful, prayerful dialogue about sensitive and challenging issues….We call this holy conferencing.”
Bishop Goodpaster’s assurance that the Council of Bishops is committed to living within the covenant defined by our Book of Discipline is comforting. However, what the people in the pews want to know is not that our Episcopal leaders will live with our present statement; we want to know that they believe in our position, will defend it and promote it for what it is—a balanced, biblical and gracious offer of sexual wholeness to a broken world.
Every single General Conference debates and discusses the issue. And every single General Conference arrives at the same conclusion. It is the consensus of the United Methodist Church, representing the outgrowth of prayer and holy conferencing.
It is perplexing that there has never been a concerted effort by any group of bishops to defend and promote our well-thought out and scriptural view on the most controversial issue before the church. The only organized episcopal voices we ever hear come from those bishops who would overturn the church’s position—bishops who themselves once would have agreed to live “within the covenant defined by our Book of Discipline.”
The United Methodist Church is crying out for spiritual leaders who will defend the church’s traditional beliefs. And if those who would change our positions do so in an organized way, it is time for our episcopal leaders who believe in the historic position of the Church and the current position of the United Methodist Church to do the same.
Rob Renfroe is the President and Publisher of Good News.
