The possibility of dividing the United Methodist Church as a way out of persistent conflicts over homosexuality has been raised enough times in recent years to warrant serious reflection on what it would entail. The fact that Episcopalians, Presbyterians and Lutherans have all seen either formal divisions or significant withdrawals of congregations from their denominations over these issues does not bode well for the UMC.
But as tempting as the idea might be as a way out of our conflicts, we would have to think about realities like the following….
Interesting that enforcement of historic Christian sexual ethos and the underlying Christian anthropology don’t seem to be on the table. It’s not realistic to believe that gay advocates will tolerate a neutral stance, or that international Methodism will tolerate same-sex marriage or ordination of practicing gays.
Interesting that his first two questions are about Church pension control and properties.
The train must be coming down the tracks: I hear the bells ringing and the crossing gate is lowering.
As Charles52 notes, there is no wish to stand firm on anything here. The stated desire to make it 1972 again is really just a call to become a laissez-faire church with no doctrine so we can all get along. U-Ues are already an established group; there’s no advantage to the Christ’s Church to change the UMC to compete with them.
And as Archer points out, why this wailing and gnashing of teeth over pensions and properties? Either it’s a “peacefully” negotiated split or it isn’t. If not, well, Jesus warned us that “where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Choose wisely.