Steps to Move Forward

By Rob Renfroe

May/June 2024

 

Not long ago The United Methodist News Service published an article reporting that some of us who lead Good News and the Wesleyan Covenant Association intend to be present at the upcoming General Conference in Charlotte. The article was fair and balanced, quoting us and those who disagree with us. Shortly thereafter UMNS published a commentary by a well-known church leader on our being at the General Conference that was quite critical.

Reaction by United Methodist clergy and laity on social media to the two articles was predictable. We were described as hateful and disingenuous, portrayed as “foxes in the hen house,” and blamed for creating all the division within the UM Church. The main message was: Disaffiliation is over and it’s time for Good News, the WCA, and other critics to move on and stop damaging The United Methodist Church.

“Disaffiliation is over.” That’s the claim most centrists and progressives in the U.S. are making and that’s one of the reasons they think we should not be in Charlotte. But how can disaffiliation be over when it was never allowed to begin for the majority of United Methodists? Paragraph 2553 that permitted churches in the United States to leave was ruled by our bishops not to be applicable for congregations outside the U.S. where the majority of United Methodists live. The statement that “disaffiliation is over” evidences a US-centric view of the church that diminishes the importance of and denies the rights of churches in Africa, Europe, Russia, and Asia.

If the General Conference acts as if disaffiliation is over and does not give international churches the same right to determine their future that we in the U.S. were afforded, the message will be clear to members in Africa and the Philippines: United Methodists are willing to extend privileges to primarily white and wealthy congregations in the United States that it will deny to churches in the developing world whose members are predominantly poor and persons of color.

Liberal and “centrist” United Methodists talk often about justice and frequently denounce colonialism. Yet they seem intent on creating a two-tiered denomination where UMs in the U.S. are given more privileges than those outside the States.  We agree it is time for the UM Church to move on. But not before it provides the same rights to those outside the United States that were given to churches here.

Second, some responded to the articles with the understandable sentiment that those no longer in The United Methodist Church should not have a voice at the General Conference. That’s one reason Tom Lambrecht, Good News’ vice president, and I, are still United Methodists. Rev. Lambrecht is an ordained elder in the Wisconsin Annual Conference, under active appointment. I am a retired UM elder in the Texas Annual Conference, properly located at a United Methodist congregation in Houston. I understand many are tired of hearing our voices and disagree with our views, but we are still United Methodists. How long we remain United Methodists will be dependent upon what the General Conference decides. But both of us have been UM elders for over forty years. We have both given our lives to the UM Church. For the past four decades we have cared deeply about its health and its future. We still do. When we leave, we will no longer feel the need or possess the right to attempt to influence the direction of The United Methodist Church. Until that time, we have as much standing as any other UM clergyperson to call upon the UM Church to do the right thing.

Others have charged that we have created division within The United Methodist Church for too long and our work at the General Conference will only continue the dissension we have sowed in the past. The truth is the UM Church was divided long before the Wesleyan Covenant Association came into existence in 2016, many years prior to Rev. Lambrecht’s and my ordination in the 1980’s, and even before Good News was formed in 1967. We did not create the issues that have divided the UM Church and have led to the exit of a quarter of its congregations.

We, like those within the UM Church possessing views different from ours, have expressed our beliefs and encouraged delegates to vote in line with what we believed was best for the church. But we did not create the differences that led to disaffiliation. Nor did we promote disobedience to the Book of Discipline as some charging us with fomenting division have done.

A UMNS reporter asked me, “How do you respond to those who say your work at General Conference is nothing more than your trying to harm The United Methodist Church on your way out?” My response was, “All we’re planning to do is call upon The United Methodist Church to be fair and do justice. If that harms an institution, it must be a very sick institution.”

Lastly, we have heard the objection that those who do not plan on remaining in the UM Church should not try to impact its future. Again, that is a very valid concern. Good News and the WCA have no desire and will not be working in Charlotte to influence the future direction or policies of The United Methodist Church – not its views of marriage, not its standards for ordination, not its policy on abortion, not its Social Principles, not its budget.

Our efforts will be constrained to asking the General Conference to provide justice for two groups. One of those groups being the churches outside the U.S. which have been denied the right to discern if disaffiliation is right for them. The other being the congregations in the United States which were told by their bishop or their district superintendent that they did not have to act before Paragraph 2553 expired – they could wait to see what changes the General Conference made in 2024 and then determine whether to disaffiliate.

It’s possible we will feel compelled to address one other issue in Charlotte. If a just opportunity for disaffiliation is not provided for churches outside the U.S. and if international delegates ask for our help, we will assist them in trying to defeat the regionalization plan. Our friends in Africa with whom we work closely have told us they cannot remain in a church that allows for a contradictory, “contextualized” sexual ethic. If they are given no opportunity to exit, we will stand with our brothers and sisters who have described regionalization as a plan for creating “the separate but equal United Methodist Church.”

The proposed plan for regionalization necessitates constitutional amendments. The passage of such amendments requires a two-thirds vote at the General Conference and then the approval of two-thirds of all the connection’s annual conferences. We believe the amendments can be defeated at the General Conference. We feel certain they can be defeated once the vote goes to the annual conferences. But we have no desire to engage in that struggle, and we will do nothing to thwart its passage if an exit path is offered to churches outside the U.S.

What if the General Conference voted early in its deliberations to fairly extend Paragraph 2553 to churches outside the United States and to those churches that would like to enter discernment in this country? Honestly, I think Good News and the WCA would say “thank you,” pack our bags and go home early.

The other option is we go at it one more time. We have fights on the conference floor. The focus of the General Conference once again becomes our differences and the UM Church that needs to move forward gets mired in the divisions of the past.

I prefer the former – people of goodwill on all sides voting to let those leave who desire to do so. It’s fair. It’s just. It stops the fighting. It’s a path that will allow The United Methodist Church – and us – to “move on.” 

Rob Renfroe is the president and publisher of Good News.