Is There Hope for a united Methodist Church?

by | May 10, 2017 | 12 comments

News flash!   The orthodox wing of the United Methodist Church is not going away.  In fact, it’ll likely get stronger.  Likewise, the progressive wing of the United Methodist Church is not going away.  It too will get stronger.
That leaves us with a dilemma: How to go forward when we have two very strong, and somewhat opposing points of view?  Especially when it comes to human sexuality and biblical hermeneutics.
Here’s what else is not going away:  a fair number of United Methodist people who identify as LGBTQ, and their supporters.
What’s a denomination to do?  If we want schism we’re set up perfectly for it.  After all, we seem to have irreconcilable differences.  If we want unity, not so much.  Neither side is going away and neither side is backing down.  All of us want to be heard and respected.  Now what?
May I suggest a really good fight?  Before you hit “delete”, allow me a moment to elaborate.
Patrick Lencioni in his bestseller, 5 Dysfunctions of a Team, lays out the pitfalls of not engaging in constructive conflict:  meetings are unproductive, a team doesn’t commit to the decisions it makes, no one holds each other accountable, and desired results do not materialize.
For 45 years, United Methodist General Conferences have been unproductive in resolving our differences of opinion on human sexuality.  About 40% have favored full LGBT inclusion in the life and leadership of the church; 60% have been against.  Even though we make doctrinal decisions on human sexuality via the Book of Discipline, we lack commitment to carry them out.  Once back home, people perceive the movement of the Holy Spirit in very different ways.  And act accordingly. Many conferences ordain gay people. The Western Jurisdiction was swayed by the Holy Spirit in the election of Bishop Karen Oliveto.  The truth is we have varying commitments.  We can’t hold one another accountable to a vision we don’t share.
Even so, we’ve tried to enforce accountability through the Book of Discipline.  We’ve tried it through church trials.  These have only increased the rift, and the resolve.
In the midst of if all is this persistent fact: we don’t have the real results we desire – an overall increase in the number of disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.  Even with all the resources at our disposal, our numbers show that we’re not gaining ground.   US churches have been shrinking for decades.  If it wasn’t for our expansion into Asia and Africa, our denomination would be significantly smaller.
The history of how we got here is long and arduous.  But here’s where we’re at: the Judicial Council both ruled that the consecration of the first openly gay, partnered bishop stands, and that in the future, more attention must be paid to the sexual orientation and practice of would-be clergy. At the same time, the Bishops of the UMC have commissioned a Way Forward for the entire denomination.
After 45 years, a lot of folks would be okay with schism. But here’s the thing. It would be like most other church splits: two very different stories of what happened, lingering hurt, blame and resentment.  Yes, there would be freedom; there would also be regret.
That’s why I’m suggesting a really good fight.  The Commission on the Way Forward could accomplish this.  I’m talking robust conflict, vigorous debate.  Mind you, not the kind of fight we have at General Conference every four years.  Keep the legislators away.  No secretive filings with the Judicial Council allowed.   Instead, let’s have an old fashioned, no holds barred sharing of ideas, concerns, fears and worries of all sides.  This needs to include orthodox and progressive, gay and straight, perhaps even Christian and non-Christian folks.   Include biblical scholars who deeply understand the text and context of our sacred texts, and the times we live in.  Let’s get all the consequences and implications laid out on the table. People won’t buy in if they don’t get to weigh in. But if they do feel heard, they’ll be much more likely to commit to future decisions even if their ideas didn’t win out.
Here’s what constructive conflict could do for us:

  • Air the real fears people have.
  • Surface all the consequences and implications of our potential decisions.
  • Cause us to feel and think outside the box.
  • Co-create something no one has thought of yet.

But before we have a fight like this, here are the ground rules I suggest:

  • Establish trust by sharing stories.
  • No personal attacks.
  • No assuming the worst about each other.
  • Be vulnerable with one another.

Patrick Lencioni says “vulnerability based trust” (not predictive trust) is the foundation for cohesiveness. It’s the willingness to say I’m sorry, I don’t know, I was wrong, I’m in over my head or I’m not sure.  It comes from knowing each other at a deep level.  From sharing and listening deeply, without fear of censure or retribution.  It requires real courage.
One ground rule for the rest of us: give them latitude and freedom to come up with solutions that are very different than what we might have imagined.
Is there a future for a united Methodist Church?  Only if we remember that we’re not stuck. Jesus gave us permission to decide how things will be:  whatever we bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever we loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.  In other words, we get to decide how to interpret and apply scripture.  As long as we’re aligned with each other, Heaven will align with us.
Trust is essential to conflict.  Good constructive conflict is essential to commitment.  Commitment is essential to holding one another accountable to shared decisions.  And accountability is the only way that people will strive together for the results they profess.  You want results?  It all starts with conflict grounded in trust.

Online Course Johnson Box
Sign Up for Creating a Culture of renewal


  1. Sure States

    Hi Rebekah, Yes! A good constructive fight! I for one don’t want to see this church, the Methodist church split over this issue. Instead let’s fight, engage each other in dialogue:constructive,destructive,let me hear from you-structive. Let’s get together and RUMBLE! There is so much to loose if we continue to put our heads in the sands that are continually shifting.

    • Rebekah Simon-Peter

      Rumble sounds like West Side Story! I like “let me hear from you-structive.”

  2. Cynthia Astle

    Your post was recommended by a Facebook friend. May I have your permission to republish it on United Methodist Insight? Please reply by email. Thank you.

    • Rebekah Simon-Peter

      Thanks Cynthia. I sent the email.

  3. rtcdmc

    My wife is a member of a Methodist congregation, and I have been following this debate with some interest and curiosity.
    There was one clause in this piece which I do not understand.
    Since this is a debate within a Christian church, how is it helpful to have the viewpoints of non-Christians?
    By definition there is no shared belief; therefore, trust will not be enhanced.

    • Rebekah Simon-Peter

      Good question. Sometimes being in conversation with people who are very different than we are helps us see ourselves anew. It’s like traveling to a foreign country and learning more about your own country in the process.

  4. Karen Gibson

    I really appreciated your blog Rebekah. Dr. Hal Knight suggested in his book, The Conversation Matters, referring to the conversation as Holy Conversation. I see what you are describing with constructive conflict as the subject matter within the Holy Conversation. Thank you.

    • Rebekah Simon-Peter

      It would be a Holy Conversation to have constructive conflict rather than retribution.

  5. a l e

    my thought—go ahead an split—UMC is an earthly denomination—established by humans—a split occurred over slavery in the 19th century….and mid-20th century returned together….
    I fully believe that after the younger generations become the age of the baby boomers…and after the baby boomers have affectively disappeared….that these younger generation Christians will look at the issues of today and say….what was the big deal….and the issues of gay marriage…acceptance…will have merged into the fabric of all life and culture….
    the hopefully by that time…the splits of the current UMC…will be led once again by that amazing Holy Spirit to consider Merger II…

    • Rebekah Simon-Peter

      We have definitely split and come together in the past. It just might be the best thing. On the other hand, wouldn’t it be great if we got creative enough to craft solutions that worked for everyone? That would be an awesome witness to the world. Especially in this age of no-compromise, no-way, no-how.

  6. Lisa Panico

    My experience with the Methodist church has taken many turns. When I first joined 20 yrs ago I was happy to be going to church but hesitant to call my self a Methodist. After a few years I finally decided I was all in, a Methodist! I was so happy to be a part of such a progressive (I thought) and giving church filled with lovely people. As I learned more about the structure and BOD and political ‘stuff’ going on outside of our local church I became less excited and more disappointed and let down. With all of this coming to light I am now embarrassed by the church that I was once so proud of. I have now come full circle, right back where I started. I am happy to be part of my local church which is still filled with lovely people who are real servers. But I am hesitant to say I am a Methodist. As a wise friend of mine said, “I don’t see God through the eyes of my church, but see the church through the eyes of God. My faith will not be challenged by people who much like the Pharisees, let rules get in the way of love. My focus will be on the love and not the institution.

  7. B St Clair

    The difficulty in addressing the conflict is identifying both the surface issue (human sexuality) as well as the underlying issues. The present conflict is probably like an iceberg – we see only 5-10% of the friction. The underlying issues are theological (i.e., primacy of scripture) and financial. Maybe the adage, “It’s about the money.”, should be brought to the surface. Without any empirical information, it may be reasonable to hypothesize that traditionalists who want to maintain the status quo (homosexuality incompatible with Christian teaching) are in the Southeastern and Southwestern jurisdictions, which are also the jurisdictions with strongest metrics of membership and resources. Could it be that these strong jurisdictions would like to prune their church by separating from those jurisdictions which are dwindling and becoming a financial burden? It may be considered bad form (greedy) to talk about the financial picture publicly, so some use another issue – human sexuality – to achieve a trimming of what they consider the dead wood. In short, this present conflict is an opportunity to have a catharsis, to bring out all the issues that have been shoved into closets and swept under rugs. Considering this conflict solely within the frame of human sexuality may be missing the bigger picture and inadvertently kicking the conflict down the road where it will rise up under another guise.



  1. TVESDAY ANGLICAN ORDINARIATE EDITION | Big Pulpit - […] is Pentecost called Whitsunday? – Philip Kosloski, Aleteia Is There Hope for a United Methodist Church? – Rebekah Simon-Peter…

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published.