November 26, 2024
By Rev. Dr. Scott Field
Don’t overlook what is going on while preparing the turkey and pumpkin pie.
I’m a softie when it comes to traditional holidays. Consequently, I’m uneasy about something that might unsettle your preparations to celebrate God’s ongoing faithfulness at Thanksgiving as well as your generous thoughts, prayers, and actions on behalf of others. But still, the start of the “holiday season” should not divert our attention from what is happening to our sisters and brothers feeling “stuck” in the United Methodist Church.
If you are still a United Methodist, you might hope, understandably, that the Thanksgiving/Advent/Christmas season will bring a respite from the UMC’s protracted denominational fragmentation. But you might reconsider your association with the UMC in light of recent double-dealing by some bishops. I call it “pulling a Lucy.” It helps explain the vibe shift in emerging Methodism where, up to this point, one in four UMC congregations in the USA already have left the denomination in the past couple of years. It also explains why more congregations and individual United Methodists are likely to do the same in 2025 and beyond.
What’s “Pulling a Lucy?”
“Pulling a Lucy” refers to a recurring theme in the venerable Peanuts Comic Strip: Lucy yanks the football away from Charlie Brown while he’s in the process of kicking it. Beforehand, of course, Lucy assures him that he can trust her; she’ll hold the ball steady until he kicks it, she says. Despite some uncertainty, Charlie Brown takes her assurance, gets in place, and makes his run to kick the ball. Ah, but we know what’s coming, don’t we? This cartoon perfectly captures the uneasiness, the apprehension, the uncertainty between trust and betrayal. Lucy pulls the ball away just as Charlie Brown makes the kick. Instead of the ball sailing through the air, Charlie Brown ends up flat on his back. Lucy holds the ball …and smiles.
The recent betrayal by some United Methodist bishops, terminating the “fair process for separation” earlier promised to local churches in their annual conferences, is, sadly, another instance of trust and betrayal. But this is not a cartoon. These bishops have “pulled a Lucy”: promising one thing and then breaking the promise with, of course, institutionally appropriate rationale. Again, we should have known what was coming. Current and former United Methodists are coming to the conclusion: their trust in many UMC leaders was and is misplaced.
Vibe # 2: Misplaced Trust
Last week I pointed out the Vibe Shift underway in the emerging Methodist renewal. A “Vibe Shift” is the broad, intuitive “tipping point” in cultural, organizational, or political dynamics. It is an abbreviated way to name the situation when “what was” declines rapidly and “what is becoming” increases rapidly. A “vibe shift” helps explain large “people movements” away from something and toward an alternative.
Three “vibes”, three intuitive but widely-shared shared experiences/perceptions, have developed among United Methodists that help explain the accelerating fragmentation of the UMC and the simultaneous rapid growth of the Global Methodist Church.
- African Leadership
- Misplaced Trust
- Laity Empowerment
I outlined the institutional suppression of African leadership openly on display at the recent UMC General Conference in last week’s WCA Outlook.
This week I’ll attempt to summarize what has become a deeply disillusioning and heart-breaking experience for many United Methodists: the duplicity of their bishop, their District Superintendent, and sometimes their pastor as well.
United Methodists and former United Methodists who took the lead to guide their congregations through the paragraph 2553 disaffiliation process, or attempted to do so, are now familiar with the onerous, sometimes arbitrary, one-sided procedures in many annual conferences. Restrictive requirements on who could present what information to the congregation, questionable calculations of “unfunded pension liabilities”, fees ranging from 10%-50% of “appraised value” of the church property, Boy Scout Settlement Fees, and surcharges to help the UMC start another congregation in the same town/city/county let the congregation know that their bishop, the Annual conference Board of Trustees, and sometimes their pastor, too, were actually adversaries.
After decades of paying their apportionments, maintaining the church property, and supporting the special offerings and financial requirements of the Annual Conference, the disaffiliation process for many churches brought them to the distressing conclusion that the Annual Conference did not exist to support the ministry of the local church at all. It was, in fact, the other way around: the local church exists to support the Annual Conference and denominational bureaucracy. No wonder, then, that the representatives of the Annual Conference treated disaffiliating congregations, in so many cases, like a group of peasants with pitchforks. Traitors. Pirates.
In a few Annual Conferences, though, the bishop assured local church leaders that they needn’t rush a decision about disaffiliation. Yes, the disaffiliation option terminated at the end of 2023, but the outcome of the UMC General Conference in spring, 2024 was not yet known. And if, as a result of decisions by the General Conference, the local church decided that indeed they wanted to separate from the UMC, well, then, the Annual Conference would make a way for them to do so. It seemed like a fair and realistic approach that respected the integrity of the local church as well as the decision-making structures of the UMC.
Ah, but not so fast. The matter of local church separation through an alternatoption (paragraph 2549 allowing for church closure) was presented to the United Methodist Judicial Council for a decision as to whether or not it could be used as a means for a local church to exit. Last month (October 26) the Judicial Council issued its decision: “Connectionalism is a bedrock principle of United Methodist constitutional polity, and the Trust Clause is its foundational element. Disaffiliation is a radical departure from connectionalism”. Hence, local churches cannot take the initiative to leave the denomination and there are not, cannot be, and will not be any exit pathways for local churches (Judicial Council Decision 1512).
Pointing to the Judicial Council’s decision, then, bishops in some of the Annual Conferences that had initiated a process for congregational departure after the recent UMC General Conference, have now shut and locked the door. In so doing they have broken their promise and betrayed the trust of the congregations involved. Hiding behind a Judicial Council decision does not conceal the obvious: these bishops “pulled a Lucy” on the congregations under their “care”. Examples of this betrayal by some bishops include Alabama West Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Illinois Great Rivers.
I would be remiss to overlook the few bishops and Annual Conferences who are, despite the Judicial Council’s recent ruling, keeping their promise to allow dissenting congregations a pathway to exit the UMC. They are navigating the boundary between the rules of the denomination overall and the needs of congregations in their care. I will not include their names or Annual Conferences here since, as one bishop inferred, at this point a great deal of pressure is put on any bishop who allows a congregation to separate from the UMC. Regardless, our gratitude this year includes thankfulness for UMC bishops and other denominational leaders willing to do what is right and fair for the congregations under their care.
But the scarcity of these leaders within the denomination raises a direct question for those congregations and individual church members who remain in the United Methodist Church: Why are you still United Methodist?
I understand that the majority of United Methodists, despite the disaffiliation of more than a quarter of US congregations and the current roiling conflict within African UM annual conferences, have remained United Methodist. Some, of course, are fully supportive and excited about the recent General Conference decisions untethering the UMC from orthodox/evangelical/Wesleyan commitments, not to mention the disconnecting from global Christianity overall. These are the United Methodists who fully embrace the narrower subset of Progressive Christianity. The UMC remains shoulder-to-shoulder with other USA-based “mainline” Protestant denominations who, righteous though their cause may seem to them, are all declining rapidly in number. The primary agenda for all – including the UMC – has become organizational adaptation to a shrinking membership, financial resource base, and influence.
It is probably true that many others in the UMC remain due to tradition, institutional inertia, family/relational ties, or habits. They, too, will likely be left behind in the current cultural transition within which the Vibe Shift of emerging Methodism is underway.
But why?
There is widespread recognition among people who pay attention to churches that the United Methodist Church is going through a split. That’s the headline for broad public consumption. But the large-scale conflict often connects “on the ground” in small and mid-sized towns and city neighborhoods through the local United Methodist congregation. And this denominational conflict is, at least from my anecdotal encounters, generally spoken about locally in one of two predictable ways:
By those in the community who are not members of the local UMC, it goes like this:
“Their bishop is beating up on the folks at the Methodist Church on the corner of Main and Elm. What kind of church beats up on its members and extorts money from them like that? They need a new bishop or a new church.”
From those in the local church attempting to rationalize being part of a denomination with a bad reputation: “Let’s rename ourselves as a ‘Community Church’. Get “United Methodist” off our website and Facebook Page. Technically we are United Methodist, but let’s try to keep our distance.”
You may think I’m overstating the situation here, but if so, check out the various groups on social media related to Methodism. The UMC seems to be for progressive elites or for beating up on conservative local churches. United Methodism, as a hierarchical, bureaucratic, and, recently, punitive denomination, is clearly out of sync with the vibe shift underway in the larger culture and the subculture of emerging Methodism.
Clearly, I have no place making any recommendations to United Methodism. The General Conference has chosen its trajectory. Besides, I am an Elder in the Global Methodist Church.
However, I still wonder why local church members remain United Methodist after the merciless experiences of disaffiliation, the suppression of African United Methodist voices and votes, and the recent betrayal of some of the UM Bishops toward those who had been promised a way to exit. Sometimes the members of an abusive organization need to work for reform and renewal. In United Methodism, the season of reform and renewal has come to an end. The Lord may raise up again some who will take that path in the future. For most people, though, the best response to an abusive organization is to leave.
It’s worth considering, even in this Thanksgiving/Advent/Christmas season: Is this the kind of church I want to be associated with? If not, perhaps it’s time for you to join the many who have already concluded it is better to seek a community of believers who worship passionately, love extravagantly, and witness boldly. That’s the Vibe Shift underway.
__________
By the way, friends, we still have AfricaNOW promises to fulfill for awareness meetings and networking of Africans seeking to depart from the UMC. These opportunities are now stretching into the new year. Your help is still needed, if you have capacity to do so.
Use the DONATE option to send your support for AfricaNOW.
Many, many thanks.