Out the Door

Another Reason Why It's a Good Thing that the World Wide Church Amendments Are Going Down in Flames

As Annual Conferences continue to meet, it's becoming more and more apparent that United Methodists around the world have seen the folly of the World Wide Church Amendments approved by the 2008 General Conference.  Of the 27 AC's which have reported their voting, 24 have rejected the Amendments.  By voting no, UM's are insuring that the UMC doesn't end up like the Anglican Communion in America which is turning in on itself.

The Anglican Church of North America will be formed next week.  This mass exodus of more than 10% of all Episcopalian attendees in the US & Canada comes as a result of the increasing liberal actions of the Episcopalian leaders.  (Washington Times article)

I firmly believe if the World Wide Church Amendments would have somehow passed, that the UMC would be following suit in a few short years.  The Amendments would have established the US as a "regional" body.  This would have made it much easier for the liberal elements of the UMC in the US to push through their agendas.  And like the Episcopalians, conservative American United Methodists would feel a closer ties to their African sisters and brothers and would move to align with them, perhaps going as far as forming a new Methodist denomination in America.

Can you imagine what it would mean if suddenly 10% of all American UM's left the denomination?  Since conservative Christians are generally more generous than those who are left-leaning.  The financial earthquake would leave the GC and AC's reeling.

But thanks be to God, it appears as if the door is quickly closing on those possibilities.  Any AC which might yet pass the Amendments is too small to have a major impact on the outcome.  And I think that the trend of 8 to 1 against will for the most part continue. 

Ordering Pizza in 2010

  This has probably been around for a while, but I've only recently seen it.  I don't know if I should laugh, run for cover or just go ahead and order a pizza.

Ordering Pizza in 2010

Does Jesus accept everyone?

Several times during the debate over Amendment 1, I heard proponents say in one form or another, "Jesus accepted all persons, so we should too."  When I heard them say that, I wondered if they read the same scriptures I do.  Jesus wasn't a nicety-nice fellow who "just loved everybody," in a Mr. Rogers or Barney the Dinosaur sort of way.  Read the first 36 verses of Matthew 23, where Jesus condemns the Pharisees.  How anyone could read those words and then turn around and say, "Jesus accepts everyone," is beyond me.  That's just one such example.  The parable of the sheep and the goats is another.  When the king says to the goats (the ones on his left), "Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels," (Matthew 25:41) it doesn't sound like words of acceptance to me.

I believe that God's grace through Jesus Christ is available to all.  However, I don't believe that's the same thing as "Jesus accepts all persons."  God's grace is not as Calvin taught, irresistable.   It is one thing for Christ to offer love, forgiveness, and acceptance.  It's quite another for human beings to receive these offered gifts.

When an individual receives the gift of grace it changes how that person lives.  There is evidence of that change.  This message was proclaimed by John the Baptist.  "Produce fruit in keeping with repentance."  (Matthew 3:8)  Jesus taught that those who do not produce this fruit will not find acceptance, see John 15.

Those who follow Jesus Christ have the joy of proclaiming that all may receive God's grace.  With that also comes the responsibility to proclaim that those who desire God's grace must claim it for themselves and show in their actions that they have.

Iowa Annual Conference Constitutional Votes

After nearly hour and a half of debate and questions on Saturday morning, Amendment 1 was soundly defeated.  This followed Friday's vote that proclaimed we desire to be a global church and not a bunch of regional churhes by rejecting the amendments related to the change in our structure.  These votes give me more hope for the future of the United Methodist Church than I have had for many months.  If a liberal Conference like Iowa can see the foolishness of these amendments then there's a good chance others will too.

Since only 2 hours was allotted in the working agenda for the debate and vote on the amendments, a number of them were postpone well beyond their scheduled time.  Because of this I was not present for a few of the votes and therefore do not have the results as of yet.  When I get them I will update the results page.

There was a motion from the floor prior to voting on the United Methodist constitutional amendments which would have required the office of communication to publicize the results of the votes on the Conference website.  That motion was defeated.  However, that does not exclude me from sharing with you the unofficial results. 

Disclaimer:  While I tried to carefully record all the votes, these remain unofficial and no figures or other statements herewithin are endorsed by the Iowa Annual Conference.

Vote Results (PDF)

UPDATE:  For reason I cannot explain, the official results of the votes have been posted to the Conference website.  Here's a link to them.  It's a PDF file.  Results are found about 3/4 the way down on page 2.