2020_010_A
Support the Café
Search our site

UPDATED: Methodists consider separation?

UPDATED: Methodists consider separation?

Update 5/17/2016

In an address before the General Conference earlier today, Bishop Bruce Ough, president of the Council of Bishops (CoB) called for unity and stated the CoB was not afraid of those espousing radical new ideas and that though they are open to new structures they would not be leading a division of the church.

You can watch his address in the video below (go here if you have trouble making it work)

 

More at Religion News Service from various voices.

From Love Your Neighbor Coalition:

… the leaders of the Love Your Neighbor Coalition UMC shared with the team that the Council of Bishops are working on a plan that is expected to come before General Conference delegates. They are proposing a 2018 special session to discuss a means of separation and no processing of LGBTQ related complaints or punishments between now and then. RMN and the rest of the coalition are neither in agreement or disagreement with the proposal at this point. We are looking to the Bishops to lead and carrying on with our plans together in the meantime. #‎ItsTime

 

 

 

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

8 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Marshall Scott

I have wondered that the Methodists have not allowed (encouraged?) the formation of separate national churches, as the Anglicans and others have.

IAIN Baxter

The British Methodist Church has done just that. Why the United Methodist Church has overseas parts I do not know. However, The Episcopal Church also has a similar reach with dioceses outside the US.

Chris Harwood

Don’t TEC and the UM have oversees dioceses for the same reasons, American missionaries started them? And probably haven’t split them off for the same reasons as well? Why doesn’t TEC encourage it’s foreign dioceses to form their own churches instead of being it’s own colonial empire? The difference is their membership abroad is bigger than the US church and their Book of Discipline is explicit and their next two General Conventions are going to be abroad. The American church has to make the decision soon or have it decided next time as a minority on foreign soil.

Personally, I’m hoping for something similar to the Lutheran synod system with its different groupings and allowing parishes to move and to keep their own property rather than them just separating the US from everyone else.

Ann Fontaine

TEC has encouraged and supported our non-US churches to become independent. Mexico, The Philippines, Nicaragua, to name 3. Those who are still within TEC did so by choice.

Lionel Deimel

I cannot see the video above. It informs me that “[t]his video is private.” Is there any way visitors can see it?

Ann Fontaine

The first video was taken down from the internet. The one that is there now is from UMC. More here http://www.umc.org/news-and-media/bishops-head-to-address-rumors-of-split

Thomas Coates

For a little more context– United Methodist bishops preside over, but do not vote at General Conference.
I continue to insist that the majority of US-based, ordained clergy are socially progressive, yet they are assigned (appointed) to more conservative congregations, as the majority of lay members are more rural and often more conservative. There are some questionable deals between conservative conferences in the US and world-wide conferences that largely vote in blocs.
The question is: Who leaves? Will it be generally smaller progressive congregations? Or larger, more conservative, non-connectional congregations who would rather not be a part of any denomination?

Ted Thomas Martin

I understand your point, but ” socially progressive” clergy? I would not think so, not in South Florida at least.

Facebooktwitterrss
Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café