Where will conservatives go if they leave the UMC in a few years?

[Albion]

I have already moved to Nazarene rather than United Methodist.

That makes two of us! Welcome to the club!

Hello, Folks. Did either of you seriously consider other choices of denomination?. Were there any such available to you in your areas? Also, is there anything about the UMC that you miss now that you have joined the Church of the Nazarene?

 

[Gregorikos]

I pray that the new global Methodist church thrives. I wonder what many in my area will do. I can't imagine many of them are open to affirming homosexual relationships.

 

[Gundy22]

Albion, I considered Assembly of God. There is an Assembly of God church very near the Nazarene Church that I picked. I miss the hymns from the UMC.

 

[Albion]

Albion, I considered Assembly of God. There is an Assembly of God church very near the Nazarene Church that I picked. I miss the hymns from the UMC.

Thanks. I can appreciate that. The Nazarenes would be closer to Methodism in my understanding.

And I realize that there aren't a lot of good choices for anyone in your position, which is why I was interested in how people here settled on an alternate church.

 

[actionsub]

Hello, Folks. Did either of you seriously consider other choices of denomination?. Were there any such available to you in your areas? Also, is there anything about the UMC that you miss now that you have joined the Church of the Nazarene?

We had quite a bit to choose from here, actually: everything from non-denom to Episcopalian, just not other Wesleyan alternatives like Free Methodist or Church of God (Anderson). (Let it be noted here that I direct an interdenominational ministry here in the area and I'm moderately familiar with about 75% of the local churches.) The non-denom we originally were checking out went full-on Joel Osteen clone after THEY left the UMC. TBH, when we left the UMC, Nazarene was fairly low on the list.

My wife and I were strongly considering a Baptist church or Church of Christ. The Southern Baptists wouldn't have her without getting re-baptized since the "Christian Church" did her immersion. Had a General Baptist church existed around here (the only one in the area is another megachurch with ultra-loud music), that is where we would have gone. Despite the fact we were very familiar with the local Church of Christ (wife's cousin is the preaching minister), we thought the acapella music might get old really fast.

That said, had we not gone Nazarene, the Church of Christ probably would have been our choice. It was actually a chance meeting with a Nazarene pastor who wanted to know about the ministry I run, as she had recently taken the pastorate and it was one of our supporting churches. In the course of the conversation, I asked her about the Nazarenes' position on certain issues important to me. I was pleasantly surprised at the answers I received and decided to do a bit more research. That's what tipped the scales: it seemed a good mix of the Baptist way of doing things and the Wesleyan doctrine we'd come to believe.

I can't really say I miss much of anything about the UMC as the issues that influenced my decision were not doctrinal or based in the rising acceptance of LGBT... acceptance, but instead it was their very rigid way of doing things that wearied me.

 

[Albion]

Many thanks, actionsub. Strictly as an outside observer, I had doubts about the Ch of the Nazarene when I asked the question, but both your answers and that of Gundy were quite helpful.

I had expected that the lack of ceremony and perhaps a too strong emphasis upon certain Wesleyan specifics might have made that church "iffy," but apparently that wasn't the case. And the Nazarenes seem to me to be one of the less well known denominations in any community, although Methodist emigres would, I don't doubt, have it on their list of possibles.

 

[Gundy22]

Location and distance played a part in my decision - I had moved a long way from the UMC I used to go to. They had a female pastor married to a retired UMC Pastor - she was very knowledable in Hebrew. The Nazarene Church has a band rather than a choir (drums, keyboards, guitars and bass) - the Nazarene pastor plays bass at times.

 

[actionsub]

Many thanks, actionsub. Strictly as an outside observer, I had doubts about the Ch of the Nazarene when I asked the question, but both your answers and that of Gundy were quite helpful.

I had expected that the lack of ceremony and perhaps a too strong emphasis upon certain Wesleyan specifics might have made that church "iffy," but apparently that wasn't the case. And the Nazarenes seem to me to be one of the less well known denominations in any community, although Methodist emigres would, I don't doubt, have it on their list of possibles.

Not gonna lie, the lack of ceremony was a big plus! Had it been 15 years ago, it would have been Church of God (Anderson), but the one here in town had merged with a black congregation from East St. Louis and the merger didn't go well, with a big chunk of the whites departing to form a new congregation, albeit in a town 25 minutes away which was a bit far to drive. (That said, had COVID mitigations not made it far more difficult to get into the nursing home to see my mother, it would have been perfect, as the nursing home and the church start in question were separated by a few blocks...) For us, there were a LOT of moving parts to our decision, location being one of the primary ones especially with gas prices rising to $3.50 a gallon locally and my driving a gas hog van.

 

[actionsub]

Location and distance played a part in my decision - I had moved a long way from the UMC I used to go to. They had a female pastor married to a retired UMC Pastor - she was very knowledable in Hebrew. The Nazarene Church has a band rather than a choir (drums, keyboards, guitars and bass) - the Nazarene pastor plays bass at times.

Ours has a female pastor, married to a man in the ordination pipeline, along with a praise band in which pastor's husband plays the drums!

 

[Methodized]

I pray that the new global Methodist church thrives. I wonder what many in my area will do. I can't imagine many of them are open to affirming homosexual relationships.

I have my doubts that they will thrive. The problem with the GMC's view of homosexuality is that straight people won't stop having gay children. In less than a generation they'll have a blow up all over again about the pastor not being able to perform the weddings of their own children and grandchildren.

 

[actionsub]

I have my doubts that they will thrive. The problem with the GMC's view of homosexuality is that straight people won't stop having gay children. In less than a generation they'll have a blow up all over again about the pastor not being able to perform the weddings of their own children and grandchildren.

Or, like the SBC after the liberals split off to form the CBF, it'll be some other issue (ex. CRT) that they'll start fighting as a distraction from having to fight about THAT...

 

[Methodized]

Or, like the SBC after the liberals split off to form the CBF, it'll be some other issue (ex. CRT) that they'll start fighting as a distraction from having to fight about THAT...

Honestly, most the folks in the CBF wouldn't be considered a liberal anywhere other than in the SBC. But yes, if your main purpose for existence is to be against something, you won't do well as a denomination, organization, whatever. Because once you are no longer there to argue with whom you are against you'll lose your focus.

If the GMC can do more than just be the anti-LGBTQ Methodists, they may grow and succeed. But if that remains their main focus, they will eventually flounder.

 

[actionsub]

Honestly, most the folks in the CBF wouldn't be considered a liberal anywhere other than in the SBC. But yes, if your main purpose for existence is to be against something, you won't do well as a denomination, organization, whatever. Because once you are no longer there to argue with whom you are against you'll lose your focus.

If the GMC can do more than just be the anti-LGBTQ Methodists, they may grow and succeed. But if that remains their main focus, they will eventually flounder.

Overall, I agree. The CBF'ers I knew at Eden Seminary were probably more centrist doctrinally, definitely pro-LGBT is the most "liberal" thing that could be said about them. (One ended up in the UCC.) Having lived through that split as a Southern Baptist, when the schism talk really started ramping up in the UMC, I bailed out pronto. There is no way I want to go through that again.

With that in mind, though, if the GMC is to succeed, they need to articulate their vision in positive terms (ex. we are "evangelical" Methodists) rather than negative (ex. we stand for "Biblical marriage" and against the "gay agenda").

 

[Gregorikos]

I have my doubts that they will thrive. The problem with the GMC's view of homosexuality is that straight people won't stop having gay children. In less than a generation they'll have a blow up all over again about the pastor not being able to perform the weddings of their own children and grandchildren.

Straight people have always had gay children. That's where gay children come from. That doesn't necessarily prevent people from adhering to a solid view of the Scriptures.

 

[Methodized]

Straight people have always had gay children. That's where gay children come from. That doesn't necessarily prevent people from adhering to a solid view of the Scriptures.

It also doesn't prevent people from thinking there is only one interpretation of scripture. Scripture does not answer questions about human sexuality clearly. If it did, we'd not have every mainline denomination (or nearly so) splitting or fighting over which interpretation is the best interpretation.

 

[actionsub]

It also doesn't prevent people from thinking there is only one interpretation of scripture. Scripture does not answer questions about human sexuality clearly. If it did, we'd not have every mainline denomination (or nearly so) splitting or fighting over which interpretation is the best interpretation.

Uh, that ship has pretty much sailed already. The UMC is the last of the "mainline" Protestant churches that hasn't split already.
UCC was probably the first, though most of their dissenting churches went independent or with an existing Congregationalist denomination. There is a small group based in St Louis called simply the "Evangelical Association" for those UCC's of the German E&R roots.

The ELCA has about 3-4 splinter groups that have formed over this issue.

The Disciples of Christ have lost a number of congregations to the Independent Christian Churches, which itself formed from a split in the Disciples over liberal theology. There was an attempt early on at a conservative flank movement in the Disciples in the 80s but it fizzled out.

The American Baptists are having division over this as well, but their polity allows for dissenters to join LGBT-friendly associations that are extra-local (as opposed to the standard regional associations).

The Presbyterian Church-USA spun off the PCA over this very thing, as well as the Evangelical Presbyterian Church and a new movement called ECO: Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians.

The Episcopal Church has seen a number of splinter groups as well, the largest being the ACNA. Some of these schismatic groups have been aided and abetted by conservative-friendly bishops in Africa.

 

[Gregorikos]

Some of these schismatic groups have been aided and abetted by conservative-friendly bishops in Africa.

The gay-normalizers are by far the minority in the worldwide church. Seems to me they are the schismatic groups.

 

[Albion]

The gay-normalizers are by far the minority in the worldwide church. Seems to me they are the schismatic groups.

Yours is a good point. Is it the principles and beliefs that are left behind when there is a schism, or it is just the organizational framework?

If it's just the institution, the allegedly schismatic group is actually not moving anywhere, nor is it assaulting the other side in any important way, but instead it's the people who have altered the faith within the institution who are the true schismatics.

Of course, it is also possible to have some dissidents who want to innovate and then are prompted to start their own institution in order to have a free hand at implementing their revisions.

If that is the case, then they would be schismatics in fact. In the current turmoil that's affecting most of the major branches of Christianity, however, this pattern is much less common than the one described above.

 

[actionsub]

Yours is a good point. Is it the principles and beliefs that are left behind when there is a schism, or it is just the organizational framework?

For the purposes of the discussion, I used "schismatic" in reference to the organizational body, not the orthodox faith.

 

[Albion]

For the purposes of the discussion, I used "schismatic" in reference to the organizational body, not the orthodox faith.

I understand, but it's also the case that the word "schismatic" or "schism" is normally seen as a negative, as a criticism. They're the bad folks.

It's worth considering, therefore, that it isn't always clear cut as to which group is actually in rebellion.