I believe it is perfectly acceptable maybe even good for a denomination to appoint people to leadership and rule from the authority given to church by God similarly to the Catholic Church. What I can’t abide is to pretend that we are voting/choosing our readership while in reality we are being maneuvered into the denominations will. Let me truly vet these people and vote or just tell me who the next Bishops are and move on.
For an organization to be excellent there needs to be some friction in the system to push people towards excellence. I'm in the weird position of trusting current leadership and agreeing generally with what they are doing, yet I'm also worried that we are being too agreeable and not debating things enough. There needs to be some pushback from somewhere. Voting unanimously on everything makes me nervous. I'm sure the TLG has internal deliberations that we know nothing about, but I do not see many people publicly thinking deeply about what we are doing and why. It seems you are sensing that as well.
I'm sure TLC is well meaning. But the PTSD in the local church has post UMC, is not going away until information starts being disseminated often and in large volume. This goes for AC 's too.
You stated so aptly and spot-on correctly, in my not-at-all-humble opinion, that blame for the failure (at least a great deal of it) of the UMC must be laid at the feet of conservatives who "failed to do holy warfare ably in our previous connexion," and zeroing in on their apparent contentment to "stay contained in their siloed minstry contexts...." while pointing out that "leadership at the local level was conflict avoidant." The way you have described a very real problem (issue, for me) is so much more eloquent than my having said (long before the split), to some of those who are now the powers-that-be in the GMC, "Stay and fight. We're better than this." I was told by more than one of the current movers-and-shakers in the GMC, "No. We tried that, and it didn't work." And now here we are. I'm liking PlainSpoken. God bless you, really. Keep doing what you're doing.
Good afternoon Jeffrey. I agree with you that the past UMC episcopacy and other official positions were very much a wine and dine, good ole boys network and some distasteful back door proceedings. But I’m not really sure there’s a way to prevent that from happening. I know of pastors being wined and dined who pushed back from the system and said No. And I found it to be more about the integrity of the individual perhaps. While I hear your discontent with not having a pathway to interview, as you’ve said you’re not officially representing the GMC. I’m trustful that the GMC will find ways to- new and old- to guide this system well. My prayer is that you can feel healing through their approaches and not believe “this is the way.” We are beyond scripture here and we will need to tread carefully. If I were in a GMC position I would hear your words as a podcaster and social media advocate as being highly critical of what I imagine is hard planning and attempts at new things on a mostly blank canvas. I’m willing to extend grace and hope for new paths. I’m thankful for you, and for the many other people weighing in with their ideas as that will help us find God’s voice together. I still have several friends “waiting to see” before joining.
Great article. I pray it is taken with the right frame of mind as a helpful path forward and not a wedge to drive you and GMC communications further apart.
To me, the hard of communications should be reaching out to media such as yourself as an ally and tool for the dissemination of information, not an obstacle. If the lead felt interviews weren’t the right path why not just reach out to you and discuss it? Why not do an interview herself to explain the GMCs thoughts. But ghosting you, no communications, ignoring you raises all kinds of red flags?!?!
I hope you both can find common ground. I totally get the need for a new denomination to protect “the message” and carefully manage the “crafting” of that message to the masses, especially when the UMC and other detractors are trying to mischaracterize motives and reasons. But all the more reason why the communications lead should be using a set of tools including podcasts, media, thought leaders, and every other avenue to “get the message out” . Seems like they should be doing a different interview and podcast daily. (She may be, I don’t have access to all things Methodist or GMC).
Jeffrey, I love your niche and purpose to provide clarity and information. I just hope the gal here can be bridged and that said bridge hasn’t been burned.
I hope your comments are taken seriously and the GMC can make a course correction. After my local church disaffiliated, one of the driving factors was the secrecy, misinformation, elitism of episcopacy and downright disregard of the local church in decision making. It all felt very orchestrated and high handed. We ended up affiliating with another denomination instead of the GMC because as some members put it, the GMC presentation felt more like a UMC 2.0 than something fresh and new. I share your concern that this direction feels too familiar. Are GMC candidates not to be trusted? What is it they may reveal in an interview that GMC leadership wants to stifle? Praying that the GMC does a better job at listening to their local pastors and parishioners than the UMC.
I hope your concerns are listened to. As you said we need to be mature enough to handle push back. This being said, I also understand the position of leadership. There are no way to make everything fair and right but this is the path they feel is correct. Uncensored interviews have a place but they often leave a false impression of who is competent by the advantage to those who have fluency in the language spoken and personal charisma. There are no easy answers. I came to GMC from another denomination and not the UMC so perhaps I am looking at things differently. What I have seen are people trying to do their best and set up the best system (by the way I appreciate you making clear that you were NOT attacking people). From all that I have seen and heard especially from everyone coming out of the UMC, there was not going to ever be a fortunate way to start the Episcopacy.
On a lighter note, I have enjoyed the podcast when I have caught them. I also debated with myself on wither or not to post my thoughts. I have come away from reading too many comment sections feeling like I'm in a room with FOX, CNN, & MSNBC playing at the same time. I don't want to add to that, but I do want you to know you are being heard but being heard doesn't mean that opinion are changed an I hope we as Christians can be okay with that.
I am glad to know your thoughts, and I appreciate your writing them despite how often comments get toxic. My Substack page generally stays pretty genteel and reasonable. I think I would agree with you that there is not anyone way to perfectly know a person. I do think that there are ways to give decent access to people for whom English is not a first language in this format. I have interviewed a few Africans, and they have performed better than native English speakers. But you and I agree that there is no way for things to be perfectly fair. We just have to do our best. I think my efforts are part of our best. If I am wrong, I hope to see it soon.
The dysfunctional leadership has been evident from the beginning. The way Angela Pleasants was treated was inexcusable. How many Presiding Elders have had background checks or their clergy conduct reviewed? I know PEs that don’t want the position and don’t t have a clue what they are doing. The GMC back door will be larger than their front door. But what’s important is we will have “bishops” holding the doors open. Asbury Theological Seminary must be getting very nervous at this point. Asbury should adapt a new strategy to work directly with local churches and avoid the GMC altogether.
I'm not quite as pessimistic as you. I think that, if we can remedy this situation, then we can fix a lot of this in short order. However, today's statement from the episcopal candidates doesn't bode well...
Excellent commentary PastorJeffrey and with wise words from a personal observation that the GMC best take to heart and resolve in order that it retains the churches currently aligned while providing a requisite incentive for future church additions.
I have read what you’ve written & I am processing it. Going all the way back to the UMC’s Judicial Council’s decisions against Virginia Bishop Kammerer, forcing her to reinstate a Virginia Pastor who had followed the Book of Discipline which were powers reserved in the BoD for local Pastors only; most United Methodists came to understand that UMNews was not always quick and thorough in reporting such matters. Fortunately, Good News Magazine could be expected to publish stories that filled-in any gaps while informing UM people quickly and accurately.
What’s my point? I am waiting for our first GC to produce its Constitution and Discipline and I am hoping to obtain our formal Membership policy so we can make the process known to our attendees.
I haven’t read the agenda for Costa Rica and I will not be there.
After reading your comments, I would hope that you could communicate with Delegates and ask them to produce a Policy that sets forth GMC Communications that avoids the negatives we found in UMNews. Clearly, we know that Good News Magazine is ending its run, with maybe two more issues. Maybe there is already a draft policy for GMC Press Releases and communications.
Through the years, we all read that the UMC’s one voice is the GC. However, we also saw a raft of Bishop requests for the JC to issue declarative decisions which appeared to be a rival voice, sometimes appearing to be in concert with the JC. The appearances I have described should be avoided in the GMC.
I will be asking delegates that I know to hammer-out a Communications Policy and to identify only one body that speaks for the GMC. Avoiding the additional voices should be an objective of the GMC - while transparency is maintained. I know that you have time to make your points to Delegates and I will be watching to read the Communications Policy that emerges from due process at our first GC. Blessings, Phil
I believe it is perfectly acceptable maybe even good for a denomination to appoint people to leadership and rule from the authority given to church by God similarly to the Catholic Church. What I can’t abide is to pretend that we are voting/choosing our readership while in reality we are being maneuvered into the denominations will. Let me truly vet these people and vote or just tell me who the next Bishops are and move on.
For an organization to be excellent there needs to be some friction in the system to push people towards excellence. I'm in the weird position of trusting current leadership and agreeing generally with what they are doing, yet I'm also worried that we are being too agreeable and not debating things enough. There needs to be some pushback from somewhere. Voting unanimously on everything makes me nervous. I'm sure the TLG has internal deliberations that we know nothing about, but I do not see many people publicly thinking deeply about what we are doing and why. It seems you are sensing that as well.
I'm sure TLC is well meaning. But the PTSD in the local church has post UMC, is not going away until information starts being disseminated often and in large volume. This goes for AC 's too.
You stated so aptly and spot-on correctly, in my not-at-all-humble opinion, that blame for the failure (at least a great deal of it) of the UMC must be laid at the feet of conservatives who "failed to do holy warfare ably in our previous connexion," and zeroing in on their apparent contentment to "stay contained in their siloed minstry contexts...." while pointing out that "leadership at the local level was conflict avoidant." The way you have described a very real problem (issue, for me) is so much more eloquent than my having said (long before the split), to some of those who are now the powers-that-be in the GMC, "Stay and fight. We're better than this." I was told by more than one of the current movers-and-shakers in the GMC, "No. We tried that, and it didn't work." And now here we are. I'm liking PlainSpoken. God bless you, really. Keep doing what you're doing.
Good afternoon Jeffrey. I agree with you that the past UMC episcopacy and other official positions were very much a wine and dine, good ole boys network and some distasteful back door proceedings. But I’m not really sure there’s a way to prevent that from happening. I know of pastors being wined and dined who pushed back from the system and said No. And I found it to be more about the integrity of the individual perhaps. While I hear your discontent with not having a pathway to interview, as you’ve said you’re not officially representing the GMC. I’m trustful that the GMC will find ways to- new and old- to guide this system well. My prayer is that you can feel healing through their approaches and not believe “this is the way.” We are beyond scripture here and we will need to tread carefully. If I were in a GMC position I would hear your words as a podcaster and social media advocate as being highly critical of what I imagine is hard planning and attempts at new things on a mostly blank canvas. I’m willing to extend grace and hope for new paths. I’m thankful for you, and for the many other people weighing in with their ideas as that will help us find God’s voice together. I still have several friends “waiting to see” before joining.
Great article. I pray it is taken with the right frame of mind as a helpful path forward and not a wedge to drive you and GMC communications further apart.
To me, the hard of communications should be reaching out to media such as yourself as an ally and tool for the dissemination of information, not an obstacle. If the lead felt interviews weren’t the right path why not just reach out to you and discuss it? Why not do an interview herself to explain the GMCs thoughts. But ghosting you, no communications, ignoring you raises all kinds of red flags?!?!
I hope you both can find common ground. I totally get the need for a new denomination to protect “the message” and carefully manage the “crafting” of that message to the masses, especially when the UMC and other detractors are trying to mischaracterize motives and reasons. But all the more reason why the communications lead should be using a set of tools including podcasts, media, thought leaders, and every other avenue to “get the message out” . Seems like they should be doing a different interview and podcast daily. (She may be, I don’t have access to all things Methodist or GMC).
Jeffrey, I love your niche and purpose to provide clarity and information. I just hope the gal here can be bridged and that said bridge hasn’t been burned.
Peace brother.
Ben
I hope your comments are taken seriously and the GMC can make a course correction. After my local church disaffiliated, one of the driving factors was the secrecy, misinformation, elitism of episcopacy and downright disregard of the local church in decision making. It all felt very orchestrated and high handed. We ended up affiliating with another denomination instead of the GMC because as some members put it, the GMC presentation felt more like a UMC 2.0 than something fresh and new. I share your concern that this direction feels too familiar. Are GMC candidates not to be trusted? What is it they may reveal in an interview that GMC leadership wants to stifle? Praying that the GMC does a better job at listening to their local pastors and parishioners than the UMC.
I hope your concerns are listened to. As you said we need to be mature enough to handle push back. This being said, I also understand the position of leadership. There are no way to make everything fair and right but this is the path they feel is correct. Uncensored interviews have a place but they often leave a false impression of who is competent by the advantage to those who have fluency in the language spoken and personal charisma. There are no easy answers. I came to GMC from another denomination and not the UMC so perhaps I am looking at things differently. What I have seen are people trying to do their best and set up the best system (by the way I appreciate you making clear that you were NOT attacking people). From all that I have seen and heard especially from everyone coming out of the UMC, there was not going to ever be a fortunate way to start the Episcopacy.
On a lighter note, I have enjoyed the podcast when I have caught them. I also debated with myself on wither or not to post my thoughts. I have come away from reading too many comment sections feeling like I'm in a room with FOX, CNN, & MSNBC playing at the same time. I don't want to add to that, but I do want you to know you are being heard but being heard doesn't mean that opinion are changed an I hope we as Christians can be okay with that.
I am glad to know your thoughts, and I appreciate your writing them despite how often comments get toxic. My Substack page generally stays pretty genteel and reasonable. I think I would agree with you that there is not anyone way to perfectly know a person. I do think that there are ways to give decent access to people for whom English is not a first language in this format. I have interviewed a few Africans, and they have performed better than native English speakers. But you and I agree that there is no way for things to be perfectly fair. We just have to do our best. I think my efforts are part of our best. If I am wrong, I hope to see it soon.
The dysfunctional leadership has been evident from the beginning. The way Angela Pleasants was treated was inexcusable. How many Presiding Elders have had background checks or their clergy conduct reviewed? I know PEs that don’t want the position and don’t t have a clue what they are doing. The GMC back door will be larger than their front door. But what’s important is we will have “bishops” holding the doors open. Asbury Theological Seminary must be getting very nervous at this point. Asbury should adapt a new strategy to work directly with local churches and avoid the GMC altogether.
I'm not quite as pessimistic as you. I think that, if we can remedy this situation, then we can fix a lot of this in short order. However, today's statement from the episcopal candidates doesn't bode well...
lol, can’t edit my writing (which I always desperately need) but hard = goal, toward bottom gal=goal
Excellent commentary PastorJeffrey and with wise words from a personal observation that the GMC best take to heart and resolve in order that it retains the churches currently aligned while providing a requisite incentive for future church additions.
Blessings to You and Yours
Praying for you GOD's peace and wisdom as you help us all discern these things.
Jeffrey,
I have read what you’ve written & I am processing it. Going all the way back to the UMC’s Judicial Council’s decisions against Virginia Bishop Kammerer, forcing her to reinstate a Virginia Pastor who had followed the Book of Discipline which were powers reserved in the BoD for local Pastors only; most United Methodists came to understand that UMNews was not always quick and thorough in reporting such matters. Fortunately, Good News Magazine could be expected to publish stories that filled-in any gaps while informing UM people quickly and accurately.
What’s my point? I am waiting for our first GC to produce its Constitution and Discipline and I am hoping to obtain our formal Membership policy so we can make the process known to our attendees.
I haven’t read the agenda for Costa Rica and I will not be there.
After reading your comments, I would hope that you could communicate with Delegates and ask them to produce a Policy that sets forth GMC Communications that avoids the negatives we found in UMNews. Clearly, we know that Good News Magazine is ending its run, with maybe two more issues. Maybe there is already a draft policy for GMC Press Releases and communications.
Through the years, we all read that the UMC’s one voice is the GC. However, we also saw a raft of Bishop requests for the JC to issue declarative decisions which appeared to be a rival voice, sometimes appearing to be in concert with the JC. The appearances I have described should be avoided in the GMC.
I will be asking delegates that I know to hammer-out a Communications Policy and to identify only one body that speaks for the GMC. Avoiding the additional voices should be an objective of the GMC - while transparency is maintained. I know that you have time to make your points to Delegates and I will be watching to read the Communications Policy that emerges from due process at our first GC. Blessings, Phil