Schism in major Christian Church over LGBTQ issues

[BroJones]

As reported in the Blaze:

QUOTE
The United Methodist Church, one of the largest Christian denominations in the U.S., will officially undergo a schism in the coming months, ending a years-long internal disagreement over LGBTQ+ issues.

What are the details?

On Thursday, organizers of the Global Methodist Church — a more conservative Methodist denomination that favors a traditional view of marriage and opposes the ordination of LGBT clergy — announced a formal launch date of May 1, 2022.

The announcement came amid yet another General Conference postponement over COVID-19 pandemic fears and travel obstacles. With the next meeting pushed back until 2024, conservative United Methodists decided they could not wait for the next meeting before launching the new denomination.

"Many United Methodists have grown impatient with a denomination clearly struggling to function effectively at the general church level," said Rev. Keith Boyette, chairman of the Transitional Leadership Council that has been guiding the creation of the new denomination over the past year.

Don't miss out on content from Dave Rubin free of big tech censorship. Listen to The Rubin Report now.
"Theologically conservative local churches and annual conferences want to be free of divisive and destructive debates and to have the freedom to move forward together. We are confident many existing congregations will join the new Global Methodist Church in waves over the next few years, and new church plants will sprout up as faithful members exit the UM Church and coalesce into new congregations," he added.


Delegates were supposed to vote on an agreed-upon separation plan at the General Conference, called the "Protocol of Reconciliation and Grace through Separation."

The plan, often referred to as simply the Protocol, stipulates that the UMC would pay the new denomination $25 million over the next four years to cover start-up costs and that disaffiliating congregations would be allowed to join the GMC "with all of their property and assets intact."

With the conference delayed and the Protocol not yet adopted, those provisions have not been approved.

What's the background?

According to Boyette and his leadership council, the hastened split was necessary in order to provide a place to land for those Methodist congregations or individuals who have already decided to leave the UMC or were planning to in the coming months.

Earlier this week, Frazer United Methodist Church, a Methodist megachurch in Alabama, announced it had voted to leave the UMC.

The mainline denomination's long-anticipated schism was first sparked in 2019 after delegates to the General Conference voted 438-384 to approve the so-called Traditional Plan, which strengthened the church’s bans on the ordination and marriage of LGBTQ United Methodists.

Most U.S.-based delegates opposed that plan in favor of LGBTQ-friendly options, but they were outvoted by U.S. conservatives aligned with delegates from Methodist strongholds in Africa and the Philippines, the Associated Press reported.

After the meeting, moderate and liberal clergy vowed that they would not abide by the bans, kick-starting talks for a formal separation. Though in a somewhat disjointed manner, that plan for separation will be carried through in May.
UNQUOTE

[BroJones]

The UMC is one of the largest denominations in our town, Albany. Their minister is a woman, said to be LGBTQ herself.
It will be interesting to see what this "schism" in May does in our town,,,

[BuriedTartaria]

Faithful LDS members who believe in the 'prophets, seers, and revelators' claims of leadership and Kingdom of God on earth claims of the LDS institution, what will be your thoughts if/when the LDS church states they received revelation that same-sex marriages actually are approved by God? What if they say not only that but allow same-sex marriages to occur in their temples they deem to be houses of the Lord on earth?

I'm going to ask the reverse question for people like me, what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples? I would be very surprised and it would be the outcome I admittedly was not expecting. I would describe that as brave and in that situation I would have to give them credit for sticking to historical doctrine and historically biblical values.

[BroJones]

BT noted, "what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples? I would be very surprised and it would be the outcome I admittedly was not expecting, and in that situation I would have to give them credit for sticking to historical doctrine and historically biblical values"

This is what I think will happen... Note also the strong stance in the Family Proclamation.

[Jason]

It is not the first split to ever happen in a church....and quite positively won't be the last...as people separate...

[BuriedTartaria]

BT noted, "what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples? I would be very surprised and it would be the outcome I admittedly was not expecting, and in that situation I would have to give them credit for sticking to historical doctrine and historically biblical values"

This is what I think will happen... Note also the strong stance in the Family Proclamation.

I will give credit where credit is due if such a thing happens.

[InfoWarrior82]

BT noted, "what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples? I would be very surprised and it would be the outcome I admittedly was not expecting, and in that situation I would have to give them credit for sticking to historical doctrine and historically biblical values"

This is what I think will happen... Note also the strong stance in the Family Proclamation.

Bro. Jones, are you aware that our church leaders signed the church's name on the dotted line to abide by Agenda 2030?


What did Christ say about serving two masters?

[BroJones]

BT noted, "what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples? I would be very surprised and it would be the outcome I admittedly was not expecting, and in that situation I would have to give them credit for sticking to historical doctrine and historically biblical values"

This is what I think will happen... Note also the strong stance in the Family Proclamation.

Bro. Jones, are you aware that our church leaders signed the church's name on the dotted line to abide by Agenda 2030?


What did Christ say about serving two masters?

What does Agneda 2030 say about LGBTQ - and temple marriages? ""what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples?"

[NeveR]

BT noted, "what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples? I would be very surprised and it would be the outcome I admittedly was not expecting, and in that situation I would have to give them credit for sticking to historical doctrine and historically biblical values"

This is what I think will happen... Note also the strong stance in the Family Proclamation.

Bro. Jones, are you aware that our church leaders signed the church's name on the dotted line to abide by Agenda 2030?


What did Christ say about serving two masters?

What does Agneda 2030 say about LGBTQ - and temple marriages? ""what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples?"

I think he's talking about the spirit of what Agenda 2030 stands for and how it's being proposed as a gateway for everything the church is supposed to oppose.

I think he means this is about morality not technicalities of language. If you sign an open-ended deal with the devil does it really matter if he doesn't specifically say anything about temple marriage?

Point is your spirit in the very heart of you is now compromised and corrupted. The decay inevitable whether specified or not.

I think that's what Info means, but he can correct me if I'm wrong

[Jason]

BT noted, "what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples? I would be very surprised and it would be the outcome I admittedly was not expecting, and in that situation I would have to give them credit for sticking to historical doctrine and historically biblical values"

This is what I think will happen... Note also the strong stance in the Family Proclamation.

Bro. Jones, are you aware that our church leaders signed the church's name on the dotted line to abide by Agenda 2030?


What did Christ say about serving two masters?

What does Agneda 2030 say about LGBTQ - and temple marriages? ""what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples?"

I think he's talking about the spirit of what Agenda 2030 stands for and how it's being proposed as a gateway for everything the church is supposed to oppose.

I think he means this is about morality not technicalities of language. If you sign an open-ended deal with the devil does it really matter if he doesn't specifically say anything about temple marriage?

Point is your spirit in the very heart of you is now compromised and corrupted. The decay inevitable whether specified or not.

I think that's what Info means, but he can correct me if I'm wrong

…yeah another one of those splits is in process or coming shortly…

[The Red Pill]

We know there will be a great division among the people...in my opinion we are smack-dab in the middle of it.

I have never, in my lifetime, seen ANYTHING more polarizing or divisive as the deadly-jab.

An extention of that is the idea of mandates, which at it's core is an issue of free agency and freedom. I am appalled at the number of people and organizations that trampled freedom for a artificial claim of safety...including the LDS church.

Much of the pressure was extortion from globalist leaders that have a depopulation schedule to follow...and the rank and file went along for the ride...not wanting to question...for fear of being mocked from the great and spacious building full of "wise and thoughtful leaders".

If it weren't for the bullying, shaming and now universal attacks on anyone critical of the Sodom lifestyle...religious people would be more opposed to it. But we are a nation of cowards and hate being labeled...so we have acceptance via extortion...but acceptance nonetheless. Again, from the pressure exerted from the Great and spacious building.

Do you see a pattern here?

Satan is getting the masses to COMPROMISE via pressure, labeling, mocking, finger pointing, shaming, doxing,, being called a conspiracy theorist and so on.

We are literally selling out our birthright for fear of being mocked.

[InfoWarrior82]

BT noted, "what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples? I would be very surprised and it would be the outcome I admittedly was not expecting, and in that situation I would have to give them credit for sticking to historical doctrine and historically biblical values"

This is what I think will happen... Note also the strong stance in the Family Proclamation.

Bro. Jones, are you aware that our church leaders signed the church's name on the dotted line to abide by Agenda 2030?


What did Christ say about serving two masters?

What does Agneda 2030 say about LGBTQ - and temple marriages? ""what if the LDS church continues to say this is not of God and won't be a type of marriage accepted in their temples?"

Bro. Jones, have you seen this yet?


Here is a link to the official United Nations charter for the "Multi Faith Interagency Task Force on Religion" that we officially joined with in 2018:

https://web.archive.org/web/20200517082 ... sAllowed=y


You will see that the name of our church appears on the list of "religious" organizations that have combined with this.


You will read that this group of religious organizations pledge to uphold and implement Agenda 2030.


Notably, here are some other points that this organization intends to make happen:


ANNEX III – TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR MULTI-FAITH
ADVISORY COUNCIL
The UN Inter-Agency Task Force on Religion
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR MULTI-FAITH/FBO ADVISORY COUNCIL
BACKGROUND
The United Nations Interagency Task Force on Religion and Sustainable Development
(IATF-Religion) was set up in 2010, to provide policy guidance around engaging with faithbased actors, deepen UN system staff capacities on/around intersections of religion with the
UN pillars of development, human rights and peace and security dynamics, as well as
provide strategic policy guidance on the above.
The Advisory Council of Faith-Based Organizations to the UN IATF-Religion is an
informal and voluntary entity, composed of the UN system’s faith-based partners, reflecting
the diversity of religions, regional and national presence, and covering thematic areas which
mirror the UN’s mandate.

THEMATIC AREAS OF FOCUS AGREED SHARED STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
BETWEEN UN AND FBO PARTNERS[1] for THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINING PEACE AGENDA:
 Environment (including forests, climate change and resource efficiency)
 Migration (including children, trafficking, education)
 Gender Justice
 Financing for Development
 Peacemaking and Security (including food security, peace-building and reconciliation, and
humanitarian engagement)

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL
The Advisory Council will provide strategic advise to the UN Interagency Task Force in
order to:
o Support the United Nations system through strengthened human rights’ based policy
advocacy within and outside of the UN system;
o Support in coordinating direct and systematic outreach, interaction and engagement with
faith-based and faith-inspired entities, and between faith-based NGOs and UN entities;
and
o Enhance focus on and knowledge around religious representation and dynamics at and
within the United Nations.


The Advisory Council shall abide by the rules, regulations and principles of the United
Nations, and be composed according to the common guidelines for NGO engagement in the
UN system.

To that end, the DUTIES/ RESPONSIBILTIES of the Advisory Council shall include:
 Taking the lead to co-design and implement (at least) one annual joint UN IATF-R and FBO
Strategic Review of Partnerships, as well as contribute to the Annual Symposia on Religion
and Foreign Affairs.
 Promoting and raising awareness on the work of the United Nations within their respective
networks and constituencies globally through advocacy and outreach initiatives - using both
traditional and new media.
 Serving as, and advising as regards to, speakers at United Nations meetings, workshops and
conferences on the above agreed upon themed areas, as and when required by the UN IATFR members.
 Providing a short Report annually on its activities, assessment of impact, and
recommendations to enhance policy coordination and collaboration, to be included in the
UN IATF-Religion Annual Report, which is shared with the UN System and diverse partner
entities.

MEMBERSHIP and ELIGIBILITY
 The FBO Advisory Council shall be composed of faith-based and/or faith-inspired legally
registered NGOs (at least in one member state) who have partnered (or are partnering) on
advocacy, and/or are implementing partners of/with UN system entity members of the UN
IATF-R, with a preference for those with, or in the process of seeking ECOSOC
accreditation.
 Members will act within the capacity as Advisory Council members, and officially represent
such, as and when requested or approved by the UN IATF-R.

SELECTION of MEMBERS
Advisory Council Members will be selected by UN system members of the UN IATF-R
according to the “Criteria for Religious Engagement” developed by the UN Task Force.
Each UN member of the UN IATF-R will be asked to nominate between 3-5 partner FBOs.
The FBOs nominated by more than one entity will be prioritized for the short list.
In addition to an established track record of acting in conformity with UN values and
principles, and giving preference to those with UN-ECOSOC accreditation, the criteria for
selection of which FBOs serve as Advisory Council members require a balance of the
following:
 Religious organizational representation (i.e. covering diverse
religions/faiths/denominations, ecumenical and interfaith);
 Thematic area(s) of expertise and interventions (development, humanitarian, human rights
and peace and security);
 Gender;
 Youth; and
 Presence (global, regional and local).


STRUCTURE
The Advisory Council should not exceed forty FBO Representatives.
The Members may choose Co-Chairs if deemed helpful to communication among each other.
The Co-Chairs should represent diverse faith-based entities.

TERM
FBOs will be appointed for a one year term, renewable for a total of two additional years.

DECISION-MAKING
If and when necessary, each organizational member of the Council shall have one equal
vote.
Any externally appointed advisors/observers will have observer status and no voting power.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE UN IATF-R TOWARDS THE FAITH-BASED
ADVISORY GROUP
 Make available materials on the work of the United Nations and emerging issues related to
religion, religious engagement, and each UN Task Force relevant report, data or analysis;
 Encourage the inclusion of FBO Advisory Council members in activities and initiatives of
the United Nations’ members of IATF-R;
 Disseminate the relevant publications and programme materials and outcomes of the FBO
Advisory Council Members among the UN entities and operational offices;
 Provide policy, strategic, tactical advise and facilitation/mediation and connectivity with
and within UN entities, to FBO Advisory Council members if/when requested;
 When available, UN Task Force members may provide resources to support the
implementation of Advisory Council Members’ activities based on mutual consent between
the FBO and the UN entity/entities. However, members of the FBO Advisory Council will
not receive any remuneration from the UN IATF-R.

COMMUNICATION with the UN IATF-REL
The Advisory Council members will communicate with all members of the UN IATF-REL,
and can do so either individually (keeping all members copied/informed), or choose to do
so via the IATF-R Convenor/Chair.

TERMINATION of MEMBERSHIP
Members of the Advisory Council will be removed by the UN IATF-REL members, if the
UN entity/entities deem a misuse the UN logo, flag or engagement in activities contrary to
the Organization’s principles.



https://www.peacemakersnetwork.org/mult ... d-nations/


About the Multi-faith Advisory Council

The Multi-faith Advisory Council (MFAC), an informal and voluntary entity that consists of more than 40 religious leaders and heads of faith-based organizations (FBOs), was established in 2018. The composition of the Council reflects the diversity of religions, regional and national presence, and covers different thematic areas that mirror the UN’s mandate. The MFAC, which serves as a unique space for convening faith-based partners as advisors to the United Nations, in their human rights, peace and security, and sustainable development efforts, is committed to uphold multilateralism and international human rights through multi-faith collaboration around/for Agenda 2030.

About Interagency Task Force on Religion and Development (IATF)

Founded in 2010, the UN Interagency Task Force on Religion and Development (IATF) supports the work of the United Nations entities towards the shared objective of learned, strategic and sustained engagement with key partners in the faith-based world, to support respective and collective efforts to realize international development goals. It aims to foster knowledge exchange on the intersections of religion and faith-based actors with the UN system’s mandate in fields that include development, human rights and peace and security. The IATF currently includes more than 20 different UN agencies and gave birth to the Multi-Faith Advisory Council (MFAC).
[/quote]


World Economic Forum and UN Sign Strategic Partnership Framework

https://www.weforum.org/press/2019/06/w ... framework/
https://archive.is/AqmJt


Alignment of Church and U.N. Goals

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/chu ... on%20(NGO).

[BroJones]

I tend to agree with you, RedPill - and more observations coming between now and year's end.
And thanks, InfoWarrior.

[Niemand]

The Methodists have been infiltrated very badly by extreme liberal elements. Probably more so than any other major Protestant group.

The Anglican churches are facing this crisis too.

[Niemand]

We know there will be a great division among the people...in my opinion we are smack-dab in the middle of it.

I have never, in my lifetime, seen ANYTHING more polarizing or divisive as the deadly-jab.

An extention of that is the idea of mandates, which at it's core is an issue of free agency and freedom. I am appalled at the number of people and organizations that trampled freedom for a artificial claim of safety...including the LDS church.

Much of the pressure was extortion from globalist leaders that have a depopulation schedule to follow...and the rank and file went along for the ride...not wanting to question...for fear of being mocked from the great and spacious building full of "wise and thoughtful leaders".

If it weren't for the bullying, shaming and now universal attacks on anyone critical of the Sodom lifestyle...religious people would be more opposed to it. But we are a nation of cowards and hate being labeled...so we have acceptance via extortion...but acceptance nonetheless. Again, from the pressure exerted from the Great and spacious building.

Do you see a pattern here?

Satan is getting the masses to COMPROMISE via pressure, labeling, mocking, finger pointing, shaming, doxing,, being called a conspiracy theorist and so on.

We are literally selling out our birthright for fear of being mocked.

You have to call it as it is.

We should be talking about concentration camps, house arrest, detention without trial and "papers please" - all of these are real phenomena, and shouldn't be dressed up as quarantine, isolation or "safety measures".

[blitzinstripes]

The Methodists have been infiltrated very badly by extreme liberal elements. Probably more so than any other major Protestant group.

The Anglican churches are facing this crisis too.

Agreed. My cousin is a Methodist minister. This schism has been growing the last several years. He aligns on the traditional/ conservative side, but his congregation has been sharply divided on the issue. The schism seems directly relative to the ordination of women LGBT pastors.

The Lutherans are in the same boat, although it appears their boat has already completely sunk into the depths of progressivism. There doesn't appear to be a conservative faction left among their ranks.

Who will be the last remaining line in the sand, in defense of traditional marriage and sexual purity? I no longer believe it will the the LDS. The writing is on the wall for those who can see it. My best guess is the evangelical Christians at this point.

[Niemand]

The Methodists have been infiltrated very badly by extreme liberal elements. Probably more so than any other major Protestant group.

The Anglican churches are facing this crisis too.

Agreed. My cousin is a Methodist minister. This schism has been growing the last several years. He aligns on the traditional/ conservative side, but his congregation has been sharply divided on the issue. The schism seems directly relative to the ordination of women LGBT pastors.

The Lutherans are in the same boat, although it appears their boat has already completely sunk into the depths of progressivism. There doesn't appear to be a conservative faction left among their ranks.

Who will be the last remaining line in the sand, in defense of traditional marriage and sexual purity? I no longer believe it will the the LDS. The writing is on the wall for those who can see it. My best guess is the evangelical Christians at this point.

One of the worst Methodists I ever heard speak was Diana Eck. In fact, after hearing her give a series of lectures over here, I pulled her up in the Q&A for abandoning Christianity for Hinduism... if she ever was in the first place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_L._Eck

[mahalanobis]

At best, our current leaders are unhappy with the branding effects that the Family Proclamation has brought upon the church. At worst, they straight up disagree with it. Either way it explains why they are so quiet, only giving it a slight mention to certain audiences.

Even if the current leaders don't accept corrupt unions as holy, by being so quiet and lukewarm they are setting the stage for the next generation of leaders to do so. Couple this with how we've watered down the definition of revelation and things aren't looking good.

But I agree. If they stand their ground then I give credit where it is due. However, one could easily argue that they haven't held their ground.

[InfoWarrior82]

I tend to agree with you, RedPill - and more observations coming between now and year's end.
And thanks, InfoWarrior.

You're welcome. What are your thoughts after reading this official document?