The (New) Global Methodist Church - Page 13

YouBet

7:58p, 5/24/23

MooreTrucker said:
UTExan said:
I wish y'all well on the property issue. The general rule in the UMC is that any UMC church property is the actual property of the local (annual) conference, even though local members have the responsibility for upkeep, utilities and operating costs. Add to that a bishop's prerogative on reassignment of clergy (also members of the annual conference, not the local church) and you have an awful system in which nobody has the highest incentive to build up a local church since clergy are transient. It's not just about the sexuality issue but church (mis)governance itself driving the split.
Exactly right. It's the sexuality issues that gets people fired up to stay or not, but the governance (and ignoring established discipline) that are the actual issues.

Our church had no mention of UMC in the deed and we were told that because of that, and something called the trust clause, we could leave with our building, etc. intact. Our sr pastor manipulated enough people that we voted to stay, and you can already see the negative results from that decision.

Does the general population of Methodists know this or think this though (misgovernance vs gay stuff)? I've never heard anyone in our church mention the former being an issue for them. May just be a function of our situation. Dunno.

The Chicken Ranch

8:05p, 5/24/23

First Presbyterian in Houston tested the trust clause in the courts about ten years ago against their presbytery in PCUSA. They won. From what I understand, the trust clause in Texas isn't that strong. So your nuclear option is to simply change your by-laws, send the denomination a letter telling them bye, re-affiliate with who you choose (or not), and make them sue you. I assume the Methodists can do the same.

Therefore, the "bribe" that you have to pay to leave is totally out of goodwill.

Perhaps someone of the legal community can shed some light on it.

OnlyForNow

4:14a, 5/25/23

In reply to YouBet

No. They think that new families will continue to fill in the gaps and giving. HAHAHAHA.

They refuse to look at the actual metrics of who is giving now, new membership data, and see the future of it. But they are carrying that banner of "this is the right choice and it proves we don't hate anyone" and they'll ride that barrel over the waterfall.

In the end, for MANY UMC lay members (that felt the call to split) it came down to simple issues
1) follow the rules that the governing body voted for (sorry if you don't like them they are the freaking working standards)
2) governance from afar is not how things should be run; people out of touch with a local churches needs should not be involved in their day to day management
3) smaller bureaucracy at the overall admin level

While the ones who wanted to stay UMC…

1) we have to accept gays in all positions otherwise we're bigots.

That's pretty much it, in a nutshell.

HumpitPuryear

7:59a, 5/25/23

In reply to OnlyForNow

OnlyForNow said:
No. They think that new families will continue to fill in the gaps and giving. HAHAHAHA.

They refuse to look at the actual metrics of who is giving now, new membership data, and see the future of it. But they are carrying that banner of "this is the right choice and it proves we don't hate anyone" and they'll ride that barrel over the waterfall.

In the end, for MANY UMC lay members (that felt the call to split) it came down to simple issues
1) follow the rules that the governing body voted for (sorry if you don't like them they are the freaking working standards)
2) governance from afar is not how things should be run; people out of touch with a local churches needs should not be involved in their day to day management
3) smaller bureaucracy at the overall admin level

While the ones who wanted to stay UMC…

1) we have to accept gays in all positions otherwise we're bigots.

That's pretty much it, in a nutshell.

Good summary. I would add that the progressives constantly and consistently steer the discussion back to the gay question because then they can deploy the time-honored tradition of calling opponents "bigots" (see also racists, misogynists, Fascists, etc). None of them want to talk about the rogue pastors that leadership won't reprimand or what the next progressive cause will be - (hint - consider the letters LGBQT)

The fact of the matter is that for years progressive leadership have thumbed their noses at the discipline that they took an oath to honor. Rather than do the honorable thing and leave the UMC they became a cancer that destroyed the UMC. The way I see it, if the progressive causes are so popular they could have left and started their own thriving denomination. It isn't and they didn't. They are liars and thieves and should be treated as such.

MooreTrucker

8:37a, 5/25/23

In reply to YouBet

YouBet said:
MooreTrucker said:
UTExan said:
I wish y'all well on the property issue. The general rule in the UMC is that any UMC church property is the actual property of the local (annual) conference, even though local members have the responsibility for upkeep, utilities and operating costs. Add to that a bishop's prerogative on reassignment of clergy (also members of the annual conference, not the local church) and you have an awful system in which nobody has the highest incentive to build up a local church since clergy are transient. It's not just about the sexuality issue but church (mis)governance itself driving the split.
Exactly right. It's the sexuality issues that gets people fired up to stay or not, but the governance (and ignoring established discipline) that are the actual issues.

Our church had no mention of UMC in the deed and we were told that because of that, and something called the trust clause, we could leave with our building, etc. intact. Our sr pastor manipulated enough people that we voted to stay, and you can already see the negative results from that decision.

Does the general population of Methodists know this or think this though (misgovernance vs gay stuff)? I've never heard anyone in our church mention the former being an issue for them. May just be a function of our situation. Dunno.

The general population pretty much knows only what they're told because to find out the other stuff takes some research. But the information is out there.

SW AG80

9:40a, 5/25/23

Only for Now and HumpIt both hit the nail on the head.

YouBet

9:52a, 5/25/23

In reply to HumpitPuryear

HumpitPuryear said:
OnlyForNow said:
No. They think that new families will continue to fill in the gaps and giving. HAHAHAHA.

They refuse to look at the actual metrics of who is giving now, new membership data, and see the future of it. But they are carrying that banner of "this is the right choice and it proves we don't hate anyone" and they'll ride that barrel over the waterfall.

In the end, for MANY UMC lay members (that felt the call to split) it came down to simple issues
1) follow the rules that the governing body voted for (sorry if you don't like them they are the freaking working standards)
2) governance from afar is not how things should be run; people out of touch with a local churches needs should not be involved in their day to day management
3) smaller bureaucracy at the overall admin level

While the ones who wanted to stay UMC…

1) we have to accept gays in all positions otherwise we're bigots.

That's pretty much it, in a nutshell.
Good summary. I would add that the progressives constantly and consistently steer the discussion back to the gay question because then they can deploy the time-honored tradition of calling opponents "bigots" (see also racists, misogynists, Fascists, etc). None of them want to talk about the rogue pastors that leadership won't reprimand or what the next progressive cause will be - (hint - consider the letters LGBQT)

The fact of the matter is that for years progressive leadership have thumbed their noses at the discipline that they took an oath to honor. Rather than do the honorable thing and leave the UMC they became a cancer that destroyed the UMC. The way I see it, if the progressive causes are so popular they could have left and started their own thriving denomination. It isn't and they didn't. They are liars and thieves and should be treated as such.

Well, that's SOP for leftists though. Destroy from within. If it was simply just let a gay person be a pastor that's one thing to argue about, but once you allow that then you have simply opened the door to a litany of Marxist political crap.

Therefore, you simply can't trust a gay pastor will operate in a vacuum without letting other social justice crap creep in. Especially since the trans movement has hijacked the gay movement.

SW AG80

10:44p, 5/30/23

In reply to OldSchoolRdAg

OldSchoolRdAg said:
SW AG80 said:
Coker Methodist. And that was percentages
I thought that it might be Coker. Attended about 20 years ago. I am kind of surprised by the margin to disaffiliate. Must have a solid membership. Good for you.

Coker is now voting whether or not to join the Global Methodist Church. I expect the majority to go Global.

southcsag

9:02p, 6/1/23

In reply to 85aggie777

I am not sure why they did not have the opportunity to vote. They are now voting with their pocketbook. They are just in a daze over what is happening to their church. My belief is that the Methodist Bishop probably outlined which would be allowed to go and which would stay. That church has been up there for over 100 years and things change.

The Chicken Ranch

9:05p, 6/1/23

In reply to southcsag

Or their pastor is ultra liberal and kept them from voting via pressure, disinformation and threats.

SW AG80

5:47p, 6/4/23

Coker in San Antonio voted to go Global.
97%.

Fishing Fools

5:52p, 6/4/23

In reply to SW AG80

RockOn!

AgLiving06

10:44a, 6/6/23

Is this going how the UMC expected or better/worse for them?

OnlyForNow

10:45a, 6/6/23

In reply to AgLiving06

This is NOT going how the UMC thought it would go, because they are/were delusional.

HumpitPuryear

1:56p, 6/6/23

In reply to OnlyForNow

OnlyForNow said:
This is NOT going how the UMC thought it would go, because they are/were delusional.

Leftists have caused division and wreckage within another Christian denomination. It's going exactly how they want it to go. You're up next Catholics.

MooreTrucker

3:39p, 6/6/23

In reply to HumpitPuryear

HumpitPuryear said:
OnlyForNow said:
This is NOT going how the UMC thought it would go, because they are/were delusional.
Leftists have caused division and wreckage within another Christian denomination. It's going exactly how they want it to go. You're up next Catholics.

Not how the general UMC member or clergy thought it would go, but yeah all part of the bigger plan

The Chicken Ranch

7:28p, 7/5/23

Is there any update on additional Rio Texas churches leaving for the GMC?

aggieband 83

2:38p, 7/9/23

In reply to The Chicken Ranch

Rio Texas had their annual conference at Corpus last month. A vote was taken to allow 33 churches to leave as long as they paid their exit fees. The vote passed and those 34 churches have left. These are the churches listed on the Rio Texas website:

Barnhart UMC
Big Lake: First UMC
Blanco UMC
CC: St Luke's UMC
Cotulla: First UMC
Dilley UMC
Driftwood UMC
El Campo: First UMC
Flatonia UMC
Freyburg UMC
Goldthwaite UMC
Jourdanton UMC
Kingsbury UMC
Lytton Springs UMC
Martindale UMC
Medina UMC
Miles UMC
Montell UMC
New Fountain UMC
Pawnee UMC
Pearsall UMC
Robert Lee UMC
Sabinal: First UMC
SAnt: Northwest Hills UMC
SAnt: St Andrew's UMC
Schulenburg UMC
Smiley UMC
Sterling City: First UMC
Stockdale: Christ UMC
Three Rivers UMC
Uvalde: First UMC
*Utopia UMC
Victoria: John Wesley UMC

On 4/12/2023, I posted on page 11 about being represented by Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee Law Firm in Austin, Texas. There are now 39 churches being represented. The purpose of representation was for negotiating a release without paying the exit fees. All churches being represented did not want to file a law suit against Rio. We wanted to negotiate only. Rio Texas has not and does not want to negotiate. Rio has started preliminary paperwork for litigation against these churches. There is no court date yet. Time will tell what eventually happens. The following is the paperwork from Rio Texas:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54b8639ee4b076c29fb6eae7/t/6463ee52292c436b126e2778/1684270676012/Plaintiff+Original+Petition.pdf

The Chicken Ranch

6:23a, 7/10/23

It is truly sad that their departure has to be a fight. They are doing the right thing, however. I'm actually surprised that there aren't more churches on that list. I know leaving can be hard.

UTExan

12:59p, 7/10/23

In reply to The Chicken Ranch

The Chicken Ranch said:
Is there any update on additional Rio Texas churches leaving for the GMC?

Read a recent article where about 6,000 churches have left/are leaving the UMC. The conditions set forth for leaving are pretty onerous and designed to do only one thing: shore up the clergy pension and insurance schemes. Walking away and finding other spaces to meet, or alternatively, just buying the church property would be a reasonable solution if parties cannot agree.
The UMC is torn between the demands of its radicals and the moderates who want to find a rapid solution. At one major fracture point is the Nicene Creed. Who is Jesus, is His blood sacrifice necessary to atone for our sins, what is the Trinity? The UMC declines orthodoxy in this matter while the Global Methodists embrace it.

It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”

The Shank Ag

2:44p, 7/10/23

Haven't made it to this thread in a while.

Since the beginning of the year, for a brief recap in as close to chronological order as possible

-My church, FUMC Cleburne, decided to go through discernment
-After a quick survey, I knew where the vote would lie and my family visited three different churches
-A vote was had, failing by 1/3 to 2/3 margin
-I left the church I grew up in, baptized my children, and still have family at
-We found a church we loved that encompassed what i loved about my old church (Familiar faces and great worship), but had even more (vibrant children's community, a preacher that's now a close friend, etc).
-My former church's somewhat new pastor (1 year) retired early. The female associate pastor has now assumed his position. Lovely person that I care for, but definitely leaning the way of the greater UMC.
-I was baptized (dunked) and joined First Baptist Church of Cleburne.

In my 36 years of life, I had never known life outside of the Methodist Church. My wife, who primarily grew up baptist, had. While I had been our home's leader in determining our church membership since we had been married, I told her when I realized FUMC Cleburne wasn't going the direction I hoped, that she could take the reins.

While certain things are still foreign to me (No monthly communion, no recited creeds, no infant baptisms) I'm not sure I have found worship on this level at any of the three methodist churchs I have been an active member in. I love that the bible is leaned on in everything. Each sermon is very much a bible study, going line by line through the topic passages and discussing the historical, contemporary, and personal meanings behind them. There is passion and direction with the children in the church like I've never seen. There are things talked about and discussed from a biblical standpoint the UMC churches I have been a member of would not touch, or would espouse views that argue against the bible.

I say all this to really say, I loved my time the Methodist Church. I have memories that I will take with me the rest of my life. Friends I will take with me forever as well. That said, my trepidation about leaving was unfounded. The rumors/stereotypes I was given by other methodists about the baptist faith were vastly untrue. I really, really hope those that split from the UMC to independent or Global churches both make it and thrive. I hope the UMC realized the bed they have made for themselves.

AgLiving06

2:44p, 7/10/23

I'm curious.

I was looking at the old Methodist Church I somewhat attended during my childhood.

They are now part of the Global Methodist Church.

What I found interesting is when I was looking at their staff, they have a woman as an Associate Pastor.

I found that interesting because I thought female Pastors was a dividing point between the UMC and GMC?

The Shank Ag

2:47p, 7/10/23

In reply to AgLiving06

AgLiving06 said:
I'm curious.

I was looking at the old Methodist Church I somewhat attended during my childhood.

They are now part of the Global Methodist Church.

What I found interesting is when I was looking at their staff, they have a woman as an Associate Pastor.

I found that interesting because I thought female Pastors was a dividing point between the UMC and GMC?

I personally know two GMC pastors. Both are female.

The dividing point was, from everything I can tell, a UMC scare tactic.

AgLiving06

3:14p, 7/10/23

Gotcha. So whether you go GMC or UMC, female pastors are an accepted part of either group?

Are there any pastoral differences between the two groups?

85aggie777

5:36p, 7/10/23

In reply to The Shank Ag

The Shank Ag said:
In my 36 years of life, I had never known life outside of the Methodist Church. My wife, who primarily grew up baptist, had. While I had been our home's leader in determining our church membership since we had been married, I told her when I realized FUMC Cleburne wasn't going the direction I hoped, that she could take the reins.

While certain things are still foreign to me (No monthly communion, no recited creeds, no infant baptisms) I'm not sure I have found worship on this level at any of the three methodist churchs I have been an active member in. I love that the bible is leaned on in everything. Each sermon is very much a bible study, going line by line through the topic passages and discussing the historical, contemporary, and personal meanings behind them. There is passion and direction with the children in the church like I've never seen. There are things talked about and discussed from a biblical standpoint the UMC churches I have been a member of would not touch, or would espouse views that argue against the bible.

I say all this to really say, I loved my time the Methodist Church. I have memories that I will take with me the rest of my life. Friends I will take with me forever as well. That said, my trepidation about leaving was unfounded. The rumors/stereotypes I was given by other methodists about the baptist faith were vastly untrue. I really, really hope those that split from the UMC to independent or Global churches both make it and thrive. I hope the UMC realized the bed they have made for themselves.

Thank you for that very thoughtful and apt statement! It mirrors how sad many fellow lifelong Methodists feel about the denomination going so astray from Biblical principles. Like you, I have found a new church home that is true to God's Word and leaves politics and the latest social fads to the world outside its doors. I wish everyone well in their new journeys of faith.

The Chicken Ranch

6:26p, 7/10/23

Finding the new church was paramount for us when it became obvious that our PCUSA church wasn't going to budge. Finding an ECO Presbyterian church was one of the best things that happened to us for our faith. I've never been so happy at a church.

Martin Cash

5:53p, 7/11/23

In reply to The Shank Ag

The Shank Ag said:
Haven't made it to this thread in a while.

Since the beginning of the year, for a brief recap in as close to chronological order as possible

-My church, FUMC Cleburne, decided to go through discernment
-After a quick survey, I knew where the vote would lie and my family visited three different churches
-A vote was had, failing by 1/3 to 2/3 margin
-I left the church I grew up in, baptized my children, and still have family at
-We found a church we loved that encompassed what i loved about my old church (Familiar faces and great worship), but had even more (vibrant children's community, a preacher that's now a close friend, etc).
-My former church's somewhat new pastor (1 year) retired early. The female associate pastor has now assumed his position. Lovely person that I care for, but definitely leaning the way of the greater UMC.
-I was baptized (dunked) and joined First Baptist Church of Cleburne.

In my 36 years of life, I had never known life outside of the Methodist Church. My wife, who primarily grew up baptist, had. While I had been our home's leader in determining our church membership since we had been married, I told her when I realized FUMC Cleburne wasn't going the direction I hoped, that she could take the reins.

While certain things are still foreign to me (No monthly communion, no recited creeds, no infant baptisms) I'm not sure I have found worship on this level at any of the three methodist churchs I have been an active member in. I love that the bible is leaned on in everything. Each sermon is very much a bible study, going line by line through the topic passages and discussing the historical, contemporary, and personal meanings behind them. There is passion and direction with the children in the church like I've never seen. There are things talked about and discussed from a biblical standpoint the UMC churches I have been a member of would not touch, or would espouse views that argue against the bible.

I say all this to really say, I loved my time the Methodist Church. I have memories that I will take with me the rest of my life. Friends I will take with me forever as well. That said, my trepidation about leaving was unfounded. The rumors/stereotypes I was given by other methodists about the baptist faith were vastly untrue. I really, really hope those that split from the UMC to independent or Global churches both make it and thrive. I hope the UMC realized the bed they have made for themselves.

Our congregation hasn't voted yet. If we vote to stay, I don't know what I will do. My problem with the Baptist Church is that I like to sing the middle verses of hymns,

goatchze

7:51p, 7/12/23

In reply to AgLiving06

AgLiving06 said:
Gotcha. So whether you go GMC or UMC, female pastors are an accepted part of either group?

Are there any pastoral differences between the two groups?

Both allow female clergy.

The GMC does not allow clergy to be practicing homosexuals.

TRD-Ferguson

1:32p, 7/13/23

Had lunch today with two friends from FUMC Georgetown. It's my understanding they will not be part of the GMC. However, this was decided by the pastor (an Aggie) not the congregation. No vote was taken.

Sounds like St John's which is across the street will join GMC.

I think Wellspring which is west of I35 will remain UMC as they have taken a more liberal approach since their inception.

aggieband 83

8:57p, 7/13/23

In reply to TRD-Ferguson

The administrative council decides the path of the local church. The pastor gives recommendations or advice. The council makes the decisions. I am interested in how a pastor made the decision to not join GMC with no vote being taken. Joining a different conference should be voted on by the entire membership. At least that is what happened at my local church and many other churches in my area.

AgLiving06

9:18p, 7/13/23

In reply to goatchze

goatchze said:
AgLiving06 said:
Gotcha. So whether you go GMC or UMC, female pastors are an accepted part of either group?

Are there any pastoral differences between the two groups?

Both allow female clergy.

The GMC does not allow clergy to be practicing homosexuals.

Thanks! I didn't know that.

goatchze

8:33a, 7/14/23

In reply to aggieband 83

aggieband 83 said:
The administrative council decides the path of the local church. The pastor gives recommendations or advice. The council makes the decisions. I am interested in how a pastor made the decision to not join GMC with no vote being taken. Joining a different conference should be voted on by the entire membership. At least that is what happened at my local church and many other churches in my area.

While Church Council is the one who makes the decision, the Pastor has a literal "bully pulpit". The churches I know that chose not to even enter the discernment process did so with strong willed pastors and weak willed council leadership. In an analogue to business, the Senior Pastor is the "CEO", and the Council/committees are like the "Board of Directors". Even in business, a strong CEO can bulldoze a weak BoD.

Even if you do not think your congregation should leave, it's dereliction to not even go through the process. That is my opinion based on my experience serving as a Council chair in the past.

Martin Cash

3:21p, 7/14/23

In reply to goatchze

goatchze said:

The GMC does not allow clergy to be practicing homosexuals.

NM, read this wrong.

HumpitPuryear

12:10p, 9/1/23

So our discernment committee has announced that they have scheduled a church "vote to vote(or not)". We will have the option of ending discernment without a disaffiliation vote or request the DS schedule a charge conference to conduct a disaffiliation vote.

We are in the Rio conference. Has anyone heard of such a thing? I suspect it's a stall tactic by the left-leaning members of our discernment committee and/or pandering to members that just simply want it to go away.

OnlyForNow

4:54p, 9/2/23

In reply to HumpitPuryear

At the end of the period you either vote to disaffiliate or vote not to.

There isn't a vote then another vote, for the disaffiliation. It could be another vote to decide if you want to be GMC or not though.