An Overlooked Factor

In previous blogs, I have identified issues that underlie the LGBTQ+ issue that is dividing The UMC. The LGBTQ+ issue and the resulting disaffiliation movement are but the presenting issues in the conflict. The deeper, underlying issues include …

(1) how we view, interpret, and use the Bible,

(2) our understanding of the nature of the Christian life (a good Christian is defined by beliefs, morals, and church involvement OR by love),

(3) our understanding of the role of the church (a moral policeman and religious authority OR a community of Christ-followers who are learning and living God’s ways of grace, i.e., the kingdom),

(4) merit-based thinking and functioning rather than grace-based thinking and functioning,

(5) our understanding of the character of God (creating God in our image rather than being recreated in the image of Christ).

These issues are all theological issues (what and how we think) that shape what we do and how we live. In this blog, I want to address what I believe is a major contributing factor to the conflict – one that is overlooked.

The United Methodist Church is a religious institution that functions through an organizational structure. The institution — a collection of annual conferences organized into jurisdictions — operates out of a legislative model in which decisions are made by vote with limited, controlled discussion (three statements for, three statements against). All decisions are treated as up-or-down issues that demand for-or-against positions. Various committees bring forward issues for consideration after the same kind of up-or-down vote has been done in the committee. The decision-making process is controlled by Robert’s Rules of Order. Once a decision is made, it becomes institutional law — a top-down directive which all are expected to follow, a position to which all are expected to conform.

This legislative model is a normal part of religious institutions and organizations. It is an attempt to function efficiently within a large institutional-organizational setting. The problem is that efficiency does not always translate into effectiveness.

I believe this legislative model is a contributor to the current controversy and splintering. I identify at least three weaknesses in this way of functioning.

This legislative way of functioning leaves little room for diversity or differences of opinion. As a result, it creates winners and losers. It produces uniformity, not unity or oneness. (Interestingly, John Wesley advocated “in essentials, unity; in nonessentials, liberality; in all things, charity.” His philosophy avoided winners and losers.)

For the past fifty years, those who have advocated for a grace-filled way of viewing and relating to LGBTQ+ persons have worked to change the language in The Book of Discipline. Repeatedly, they have been the losers in the legislative process. Those who believe that homosexuality is incompatible with scriptural teaching (the language of the Book of Discipline) have been the winners. In recent years, more and more conferences and clergy have openly defied the legislation passed by General Conference that forbids the marriage and ordination of homosexual individuals in The UMC.

In 2019, the General Conference passed a temporary provision that provided a graceful exit for those “progressive” churches and conferences — those who came out on the losing side of the vote — to disaffiliate with The UMC. In 2021-22, the “conservative” churches and conferences — those who came out on the winning side of the vote — chose to exercise the option provided by this temporary legislation. They are the ones choosing to disaffiliate.

By their very nature, religious institutions and organizations lose the personal touch. Their focus is on the institution’s functioning, purpose, and survival, not individuals. The legislative way of functioning focuses on issues, not individuals. The impact of a decision on individuals is often not a part of the consideration. The win-lose adversarial nature of the legislative process prevents us from seeing those on the opposing side as individuals created by and loved by God. In contrast, the very nature of a church is personal. It is relational. It is a community rather than an institution or organization. The life of the church is structured to nurture the spiritual life of its members, leading them to love God and neighbor. The loss of the personal dimension is a factor in the splintering of The UMC.

Following the legislative model, religious institutions and organizations allow little room for discernment of the Spirit’s guidance. Time and energy are consumed with arguments for and against a position.

A crisis arose in the early church as opposing sides developed over the issue of Gentiles. A counsel was held in Jerusalem to address the controversy (Acts 15). Both sides argued their positions. One side, appealing to tradition and the teachings of the Hebrew Scriptures, argued that Gentiles had to be circumcised to be saved (Acts 15:1). Taking the opposite position, Peter shared his experience with Cornelius in which the Spirit was poured out on the Gentiles, duplicating the experience of Pentecost (Acts 10:1-11:18). Paul and Barnabas shared their experience with Gentile converts in Antioch (Acts 11:19-30). In both situations, Gentiles responded to the grace of God that was proclaimed to them without having to be circumcised. James, the head of the church in Jerusalem, pointed out how the Hebrew Scriptures pointed to the inclusion of the Gentiles (Acts 15:13-18). Following experience, the teaching of scripture, and reason, James concluded that circumcision was not required of the Gentiles (Acts 15:19-21). The other apostles, elders, and the whole church agreed.

This whole process was an exercise in discernment. In the discernment process, the guidance of the Spirit was sought as all factors are considered. The objective of the discernment process is to discern how the Spirit is guiding, not the right or wrong of a position. The objective is to discern the will of God. It is to discern how to live the grace-based ways of God in a particular situation.

The legislative way of functioning does not allow for diversity. It omits the personal dimension. It does not have room for Spirit-guided discernment.

How we make our decisions is a factor in the splintering of The UMC.