United Methodist Church 2008 Anti-Gun Resolution

[mec]

Last I heard, the Methodists were kind of conservative in a couple of areas. By and large, most of the local congregations and ministers still believe that there really is a God. This is not true across the board of course. I remember a college sociology proff who said the he and the other campus chaplins used to make fun of the students for believing in God. he was a methodist as were most of the others.

Also, the Methodists have their dagger drawn on drinking alcoholic beverages. Back in the sixties, this was the major block to a merger of the Methodists, Christian Church and Presbyterians under "The United Christian Fellowship". The last two liked to drink, the Methodists didn't.

Seems like just this year, the Methodists again refused to ordane gay ministers

It could be that the Methodists are operating under the overriding principal, " Thou Shall Not Have Fun."
That would explain the anti=gun and anti booze platforms, anyway.
.

 

[berettaprofessor]

BTG3, great funny story! Also, like other's I'm a former Methodist...is it a pattern or were many of us raised there? I'lve always said being raised a Methodist I was poorly educated on why I was a Methodist vs. a Lutheran or UCC or whatever, so maybe that's why so many others are formers as well. I didn't leave because of politics (left because of mixed-marriage...she's UCC), but won't go back because of politics and the liberalizing of the church...I'm in the group that says many churches should lose their tax exempt status if they don't stay out of politics.

 

[ylapirrynag]

This is why I am non-denominational(sp?). It really helps to just avoid the garbage altogether.

 

[Cougfan2]

Stuff like this is one of several reasons I'm a former United Methodist.

+1

 

[SSN Vet]

disclaimer....

I'm not a UMC member, but I bear no ill will towards those who are. I have had many friends in the UMC and have on occasion attended services at UMC churches when visiting those friends.

Observations....

Like many of the other "mainstream" protestant denominations with "top down" or "pyramid" management structures, the UMC was taken over by liberals a long time ago.

Such Liberal views as this PA gun control bill, were certainly in the minority (at first), but the centers of influence within the denomination (mainly being the seminaries...who train new pastors... and the national and state denomination leadership) pretty much got hijacked. As long as the local congregations didn't see any changes in their situation the've been reticent to sacrifice their property over principles....especially when those principles don't appear to have changed locally.

People not familiar with the main line denominations may not realize that often the property is not owned by the local congreation and the local congregation may not even get to pick their pastor (you get the person the synod/session/state committee sends to you).

As a case study, consider New Hampshire's homosexual bishop Gene Robinson (now in re-hab.), who's ordination pushed the Episcaple church over the edge. Now, a long and drawn out battle over who get's to keep the property has local congregations severing ties with their national leadership in the U.S. and joining with conservative dioscese in Africa (were such non-sense liberal notions have life and death consequences and thus fail to gain traction). Who wins the "battle for the building" is going to vary, state by state.

One large parish in Rochester, NH had the lay leader's stand up, speak their mind on the issue, drop their keys to the building into the offering plate and walk out the door with 75% of the members following behind them. Six months later, that group has a thriving church and is building a new facility. The group that was left behind dwindled down to such a small number that they couldn't even raise the funds to pay their insurance and electric bill. When they finally shuttered the building, they had Gene and his cronies carpool accross the state for the commemorative service, because they couldn't muster more than a dozen souls locally to attend.

The point in typing all of this?

The UCC and the UMC are heading in the same direction and each brain dead decree from the liberal elite in the hall of power, is another nail in the denominations coffin.

 

[zxcvbob]

I don't like badmouthing other denominations, but I gotta wonder where the Methodists lost their way. It's not just on gun control, they are pro-abortion too! (I think UCC is also) I have no idea how they square either of these positions with the teachings of Jesus *or* the Old Testament.

There's a cautionary tale in there somewhere about mixing politics and religion.

 

[zxcvbob]

SSN Vet, we were thinking the same thing at the same time (you posted while I was still typing). You said it better.

 

[Thin Black Line]

LOL, the former methodists chiming in on this thread are kind of making my
point on being that lone voice left in the UMC.

So where have most of you gone? Small independent churches or no where
now?

Between the GOP and the Church falling off the cliff where do conservatives
expect to find group momentum?

 

[SSN Vet]

Lest my main point be lost in the "conservative/liberal debate"....

what I'm really attempting to highlight is that a vocal minority can lay siege to the halls of power and wind up hijacking a large and prosperous organization.

The only denomination I'm aware of that has a top down leadership/management structure, and hasn't seen this happen is the Southern Baptist Convention.

It is an interesting point, that the Southern Baptist were the only large protestant denomination that did not "re-unite" with their northern brother's after the civil war (hence the absence of the words "united").

Those un-reunited northern baptist bretheren were the American Baptist Church....which coincidently, went liberal back in the 60's, and spawned several break away babtist denominations and many more independant baptist churches.

If you pull the string, I think you will find that most break away groups do not form strong centrally controlled denominations with top down management structures.

Why didn't the Southern Baptist Convention fall to the trend?

They've certainly had their battles and power struggles...

maybe it's a Suthun' thing

 

[enfield]

Crap like this is (and worse) why I left the Presbyterian Church and also why I haven't joined another denomination.

 

[zxcvbob]

Why didn't the Southern Baptist Convention fall to the trend?

They've certainly had their battles and power struggles...

maybe it's a Suthun' thing

I might can answer that. The small independent church I go to just went Southern Baptist a year ago. I was very careful about this "who owns the property" thing (and other related issues) before I voted for joining SBC.

Southern Baptists are not a top-down organization, they are bottom up. The individual churches are autonomous. Maybe that's why the liberal elite have not targeted SBC's national leadership -- because it wouldn't do any good.

(it probably is a Southern thang, mostly)

 

[Ash]

The Southern Baptist Convention is, again, not top down. Indeed, the SBC is far more like the United Nations. They might pass resolutions, but said resolutions have no legal weight in various Baptist churches.

enfield, PCUSA stinks, but check out PCA or the Orthodox Presbyterian or even Evangelical Presbyterian Church.

The PCA is bottom-up and top-down. The US Government is based on the Presbyterian structure (Presbyterian merely refers to our government, not to our belief). Each Church sends Elders to Presbytery (elders and deacons are voted on to run the church, elders rule the church, deacons take care of the grounds and the physical needs of the members) (pastors and ruling Elders, who are selected by the congregation, like Senators). These then also attend General Assembly on the national level. While General Assembly is like Congress (or, more correctly, the other way around) and its rules apply to all congregations, the congregations select their Elders and they do the voting. The top organization does not therefore dictate to the lower body, the churches send their elected elders (teaching elder is our pastor, ruling elders are voted by the members) to vote. Elders (and Deacons) serve 3 year terms for the most part and as said before, run the church. This is done because it is ordained in the Bible and the PCA is run specifically according to what is established in the Bible as far as church offices go. There is actually no "minister" or "pastor" job in the Bible, and the priesthood was no more with Christ's death on the cross, and was made moot with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and cannot exist today because there are no recorded descendents of Aaron alive today, and only they can be priests. So, in the PCA (and technically all Presbyterian Churches, but PCUSA has done a good job of ignoring this) there are but Elders and Deacons. The pastor is a Teaching Elder.

In other words, for us, if it isn't in the Bible, it is not ordained by God.

That is why the PCA specifically does not involve itself in political matters.

Ash

 

[Neckshot5seven]

old testament stuff is often mis-used. I stick to New stuff usually after the book of Matthew. I recall somebody saying " and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: `And he was numbered with the transgressors' ; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment." The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied. (Luke 22:35-38, NIV) " If you follow this then anybody who has more than 2 guns are in the red. SO whats your point??? If this passes then The amount of stolen guns will go up. That means more home invasions to get them. All you would be doing is hurting the good people who want to legally buy more than 1 handgun at a time. No more his and her pistols??? Blastphamy!!!!!!!!

 

[zxcvbob]

"See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied. (Luke 22:35-38, NIV) "

So two was enough for that particular situation. A few things you can draw from this:

1. He was literally talking about swords and not some kind of metaphor or parable.
   
2. Not everybody in the group needs to carry.
   
3. He didn't say who was to carry and who wasn't.
   
4. He wisely avoided the whole controversy of concealed carry vs. open-carry.

 

[Sulaco]

I think the problem is when man tries to usurp God's sovereignty.

The Bible is the only law we need when it comes to the House of God, the church. There's no place in it for the laws of man.

 

[SSN Vet]

The Bible is the only law we need when it comes to the House of God, the church.

I certainly agree whole heartedly with this statement.....

but who get's to be the one(s) who tell everyone else what the Bible means.

Hence, the protestant reformation.....

and hence, the liberal takeover of seminaries....

The liberals and liberation theology bunch have been picking and choosing from scripture to suite their purposes for years.

So no wonder, that, in this present day and age, the flock is cluesless about even the most basic questions of right and wrong.

easilly fleeced by the likes of the Baker bunch...

easilly led astray...

and now, in many cases, at the vanguard of just about every wrong cause and social movement.

 

[Ash]

The Reformation was because of many reasons, including who got to read the Bible. The Reformers believed the Bible should be translated into every language on the earth, whereas the governing church ordained that it was to be in Latin only (and indeed, some early translators were burned at the stake). Making it in a language that most people did not know gave enormous power to a single body.

Making it available to all people in all tongues was one of the goals of the Reformation, which took the power away from the organized rulers of the Roman church and gave it to the people to study themselves, and determine the meanings of the the scripture.

All believers should study the Bible so that they may have a firm foundation and not, as Paul warned, be blown about in the wind. But, alas, that is getting too close to religious discussion. Leave it as a reply as to one of the causes of the Reformation which followed Luther (who did not intend to leave the Church but rather cause reform within it).

Ash

 

[patentmike]

Here is a timely and interesting article on this phenomenon:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13299

"At its major conference in May, a major American organization voted to approve resolutions that: call convicted Puerto Rican terrorists "political prisoners" and demand their release from prison; support activist efforts to offer "sanctuary" to illegal immigrants; accuse the U.S. of "pursu[ing] a global economic agenda that is of, by, and for transnational corporations"; "support progressive income taxes"; demand an end to U.S. military aid to Israel.

This was not a gathering of MoveOn.org or the Young Democratic Socialists of America. Rather, these were just some of the political resolutions adopted at the United Methodist Church's April 23-May 2 General Conference, the denomination's top governing body."

The article goes on to say that the membership is generally conservative, but the folks who take the time to go hang around for a few weeks at the conferences that set policy tend to be liberals. (Go figure.)

 

[SSN Vet]

the folks who take the time to go hang around for a few weeks at the conferences that set policy tend to be liberals

which they can only do because they don't have REAL JOBS!!!

 

[Blackcloud6]

Brought up as a UM but because of stuff like this I voted with my feet.

 

[JohnBT]

"but I gotta wonder where the Methodists lost their way"

In the '60s or early '70s I think, but it's been a long time since I left and I don't think about them much anymore. My parents continued attending Methodist churches up until last year when health problems set in, and I know my father and the other hunters and shooters were offended by the proclamations, but so was the minister, so life went on and they ignored the nonsense from the mother church.

I know in the '50s the Methodists were so strict (at least our church was ) and allowed so little fun that I often wished we could loosen up and be Amish, Mennonite or Brethren. Or Unitarian. I had a girlfriend in high school who was Unitarian, no wait, she was Catholic, we just partied at the Unitarian Church. Oh well.

I was married in an Episcopal church in '86. Boy, do they have good happy hours/socials and parties.

John

 

[JohnBT]

Okay, I date the downfall from 4/13/68 when the UMC was formed.

"On April 23, 1968, The United Methodist Church was created when Bishop Reuben H. Mueller, representing The Evangelical United Brethren Church, and Bishop Lloyd C. Wicke of The Methodist Church joined hands at the constituting General Conference in Dallas, Texas. With the words, "Lord of the Church, we are united in Thee, in Thy Church and now in The United Methodist Church," the new denomination was given birth by two churches that had distinguished histories and influential ministries in various parts of the world."


Next, we have the UMC being one of, or maybe the majority, funding source for the CSGV - The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. It was founded in 1975.

Hey, I'm all for peace, love and understanding. And self-defense.

John

 

[preachnhunt]

I am a PC(USA)pastor. Almost everything being said is true. Mainline protestantism has lost its' way in many regards and has been hijacked by the extreme left, particularly in the higher judicatories. The "official" stance of my denomination is anti. I have stood alone before the entire Presbytery and synod and championed the cause even when the vote was obviously lost.
At the risk of being burned at the Stake (since this is a religious discussion) let me ask if all those who have simply left have done anyone but themselves a service. We could use some people of passion on the ideological battlefield.
They can't have my church any more than they can have my gun. NO SURRENDER!

 

[Ash]

You have to know that many were actively driven from PCUS in the 1960's. The idea had never been to form a new denomination.

Ash

 

[preachnhunt]

ASH,Yes,and I am not questioning anyone's right to switch for any reason which seems appropriate to them, but I think there is also much to be said for standing and fighting. Having said that I admit that at times the cause seems lost.