Tuesday, February 15, 2011

UM Bishops React to Retired Bishops

While I'm quite happy to move on from this issue, I think it only appropriate to make note that some current United Methodist bishops have reacted to the statement made by the 33 retired bishops.  Except on one point, they seem to be all over the map.  That one point is the claim that they are all committed to respect the statement of the Discipline. 

The report of the United Methodist News Service can be read, here.

(For those who may be interested, the article did not indicate any response from my bishop.)

6 comments:

Jason Woolever said...

My Bishop, Gregory Palmer, didn't respond either. However, in the IGRC (igrc.org) we are in close reliationship with Bishop Innis of Liberia and I'm happy to read his statement.

Eric + said...

I was just happy to see he was dressed like a bishop ;)

Daniel McLain Hixon said...

I was at a Jurisdictional college ministry event this week and we had two bishops speak to our students. During a Q&A time, both bishops Hayes and Scott Jones indicated that their call as bishop was to set personal opinions aside and to uphold the doctrine of the Church.

Hayes also said that his own beliefs lined up pretty well with the UMC's positions and Scott Jones noted that he only had quibbles on "minor issues" in the Discipline but not on "doctrinal standards."

Jason Woolever said...

That's good to hear Daniel...

Dr.D said...

There seemed to be great concern for what the Book of Discipline says, but I saw pitiful little discussion regarding what the Bible says. Do Methodist consider that anymore? (I was reared in the Methodist Church, long ago, before it was United. I am now an Anglican priest.)

It sounds like the tendency to wander is coming from the same group of people who wanted to lead the Church into all manner of heresies in the 1960s, '70s, and '80s. Even though they are now retired, they cannot stops meddling. Satan is alive and active, walking around seeking whom he may devour.

Todd Stepp said...

Dr. D,

I've said the same thing in conversations. The government and the denomination is so big that they have "had to" lean so heavily upon the Book of Discipline. That means that if the BoD doesn't address it, that is all that matters (in terms of denominational action, not in terms of many/most of the people).

Therefore, you have situations where an elder who has had a sex-change op. is still in "good standing," when if they had simply announced that they were in a gay relationship, they would have lost their "good standing" status, because the Discipline addresses gay relationships but not sex-changes.

Todd+