Wesley Covenant Association Proceeds with Plans for New Denomination

For the few who may not know, the Institute on Democracy and Religion (IRD) recently formed the Wesleyan Convenent Association (WCA). It was obvious at the time, and now clear that was the precursor to forming a new denomination as it appears more and more likely the United Methodist Church (UMC) will endorse a plan at a special called General Conference in 2019 to remove exclusionary language from the Church’s Book of Discipline (BoD) against homosexuality.

I need to provide some background on the IRD. The majority of IRD’s funding comes from the Smith Richardson Foundation. Donors include the Scaife Foundations, Scaife Family Charitable Trusts/Scaife Foundations, Roberta Ahmanson’s Fieldstead & Company, the Adolph Coors Foundation, and The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation. The IRD was created and is sustained by money from right-wing foundations and has spent millions of dollars over 20 years attacking mainline denominations. The IRD’s conservative social-policy goals include increasing military spending and foreign interventions, opposing environmental protection efforts, and eliminating social welfare programs.

What it comes down to is that these wealthy individuals fund the organization for the sole purpose of dividing, and hence weakening the influence, of any mainline denominations which have a social justice mission of protecting workers rights, supporting the poor, etc. Frankly, Mark Tooley, the Executive Director, could give a damn about gay marriage and abortion…those are just the “tools” he uses to drive wedges through mainline denominations he’s been told to dismantle. Unfortunately, gullible people don’t do their research and fall prey to his “culture war” created from whole cloth.

At the previous General Conference of the UMC in 2017, it was determined that the exclusion of LGBT people was causing a severe distraction and conflict within the Church. The decision was made to form a commission that would propose a plan to deal with the issue, and submit it as a single issue to a special called General Conference in 2019. The Commission, called A Way Forward, came up with a very typical Methodist plan (The One Church Plan) which basically said each church could decide whether or not to allow same-sex marriages, and each Conference (the regional organization structure of the Church) could decide whether or not to ordain LGBT people.

This of course wasn’t good enough for the Weslyan Convenant Association (formed about two years back by the IRD). I suspect this was a “holding pattern” for the IRD, as I think they expected nothing reasonable would be found, and a schism (the ultimate goal of the IRD) would happen. Once it became clear this would be seen as fairly reasonable by most U.S. Methodists and nearly all European Methodists, the IRD got scared an having been mightily trying to get their own “traditionalist” plan on the agenda as well. A recent ruling by the Church’s Judicial Council (our Supreme Court) said their plan was not constitutional, so I think they are going ahead with the more direct plan.

In other words, Tooley thought he’d created a self-destruct situation which wasn’t panning out, so he had to push the self-destruct button.

According to a plan launched this past week and reported by UM News:

The Wesleyan Covenant Association began working on a contingency plan for a Methodist movement within or outside of The United Methodist Church — a plan that depends on the decisions coming from the 2019 General Conference.

The group held its first global legislative assembly on Nov. 2 and passed four resolutions, including one that said adoption of the One Church Plan would be “untenable and would force us to leave.” The One Church Plan is one of several proposals that will be considered by the General Conference when it meets in February.

That part about the One Church Plan being untenable was a shot across the bow. It is basically an attempt at blackmail. In short, keep excluding LGBT people or we’re picking up our ball and going home.

The concern I have is that the UMC does not have courageous leaders in our Council of Bishops. I’ve written before about how they took 50 years to condemn the use of Japanese Comfort Women during WWII. So they might cave and try to find some accommodation. The problem with that is that the other side will trickle away…those who believe the table is set for all. So in the end, the UMC could remain a church of exclusion and will still be split. Mark Tooley gets his wish, and the church will whimper away from any future Social Justice actions. (Precisely what Tooley is paid to deliver.)

The UM News article goes on to note:

The delegates endorsed a modified Traditional Plan and voted on Empowering Preparations for Next Steps, doctrinal standards, features and principles of a new denomination, and a statement offering radical hospitality and genuine community to all persons.

Ethan Oltremari, a delegate from Mississippi, introduced the radical hospitality statement that says in part, “We long for and are working for a church that offers radical hospitality and genuine community to all persons.” Oltremari told United Methodist News Service the Mississippi delegation wanted to let people who are struggling with their sexual identity know that the church still wants them. “Even though we do not affirm their lifestyle, we still want them to know they are welcome to worship with us,” he said.

Because nothing says you’re welcome here like,  “we don’t affirm who you are, but you can come if you sit quietly in the back row of the balcony and use the side door.” As I posted about Oltremari’s statement in one Facebook comment, “I’m sorry he’s ‘struggling’ with his sexual identity, as a gay man, I’m perfectly comfortable with mine.”

David Richards from the Memphis Conference said the day was uplifting. “It is uplifting to know there are still clergy and laity that stand for the truth of Christ and are not going to be compromised by what the world says. But in the same light, they do it in a way that is graceful and loving and not judgmental.” To be frank, my response to him would be fuck you you backward assed ignorant poser. What was uplifting for you was that you found a bunch of people who hate the same people you do, and use their religion to make them feel OK about it.

The saddest part is that take up the name of Wesley to support their schism when John Wesley made very clear his opinion on schism:

“[Schism] is evil in itself. To separate ourselves from a body of living Christians, with whom we were before united, is a grievous breach of the law of love. . . . It is only when our love grows cold, that we can think of separating from our brethren. . . . The pretenses for separation may be innumerable, but want of love is always the real cause; otherwise they would still hold the unity of the Spirit in the bound of peace. . . . And as such a separation is evil in itself, being a breach of brotherly love, so it brings forth evil fruit; it is naturally productive of the most mischievous consequences. It opens a door to all unkind tempers, both in ourselves and others. It leads directly to a whole train of evil surmising, to severe and uncharitable judging of each other. It gives occasion to offense, to anger and resentment, perhaps in ourselves as well as in our brethren; which, if not presently stopped, may issue in bitterness, malice, and settled hatred; creating a present hell wherever they are found, as a prelude to hell eternal.”¹

As Susan B. Anthony once said, “I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.”

1. John Wesley, Sermon 75, “On Schism,” [II]:11-12, in Sermons III, ed. Albert C. Outler, vol. 3 of The Bicentennial Edition of the Works of John Wesley (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1976-), 64–65. Note that the damage in schism is not to a structure, but to the character of holiness in those who participate in it.