Comments on: A Reason Not to be Methodist?

By: Leland

Leland — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 03:13:50 +0000

Unfortunately, it seems you have confused your idealogy with your Xnity. I have never viewed RL as a Xn and he does not speak for the church… and never has claimed to as far as I know.

By: Leland

Leland — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 03:02:23 +0000

Yes, they do have it, and look at the financial mess they are experiencing.

By: David

David — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:54:21 +0000

Reg Attender, your "strong feelings" have a hostle flavor. Even though some of the things that you're pointing out are true, they loose their weight in your presentation. For someone that has "strong feelings about the focus of the church (not politics)" I see most of your reply is about politics. We're not going to church, we are called to be the church. That means that what we say and the way we say it should represent Jesus. I dont believe Tim missed that mark if you'll read all that is written here.

By: Barry

Barry — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 00:08:38 +0000

Thanks Tim

By: Dave Michel

Dave Michel — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:35:09 +0000

Again, I wouldn't take the statement of a congressional leader about a Christian body as reflective of what that body actually stands for.
Your statement about our General Board folks is on target: they also get very partisan.

And if we go "ad populism" as an argument: 50% of US citizens are against health care reform (a very small percentage don't think it goes far enough), 46% are for it. And what of UM members voting 26 against, 18 for?

I'm just against partisanship: identifying any church as "the Republican Party at prayer" or "the Democratic party at prayer."

But my main point: your tweet "another reason not to be Methodist" wasn't very complete, and in fact misleading re: the content of your blog. And in the end, not edifying or helpful to the body.

By: GCC Regular Attender

GCC Regular Attender — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:19:36 +0000

Thank you Tim, your clarification is helpful. I would point out though that using "hand-outs" as your personal description does reveal a personal political view. The reality is identifying the bill as a hand-out is completely inaccurate and probably demeaning to those people who will benefit from the bill. The inverse of approval rating point is also true, mainly that if she had an 89% approval rating you'd be comfortable with her mentioning the Church's support. In this case, are you comfortable with alienating even 11% of a population that may or may not yet know Christ? Last point is that claiming the church is a substitute provider for the bill's coverage is naive. Even a fiscally strong church like GCC is no match for catastrophic health services over the long term.

I genuinely appreciate your willingness to discuss the matter. You and your team have done an exceptional job creating a church that my family is lucky to call home. I just have strong feelings about the focus of the church (not politics)!

By: Tim Stevens

Tim Stevens — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 02:44:58 +0000

Sorry, I'm not able to reply to every comment. But, I agree with Kathy 100%.

None of my words were a political view about Nancy Pelosi or about health care reform. I apologize if they came across that way. On the day that health care legislation passed–Pelosi's approval rating was 11%. By citing the UMC as one of the supporters–she in essence gave the majority of Americans a reason to be against the UMC (rightly or wrongly, that's not the point). I just think its' unwise for a denomination that is already losing members by the millions–to become known at a national level primarily for a political issue that is unpopular. I'd much rather see the UMC known for changing people's lives, introducing them to Jesus and making disciples.

Hope that makes more sense.

By: GCC Regular Attender

GCC Regular Attender — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 02:20:42 +0000

Thank you for your post, it is spot on. And candidly, it's disappointing that Tim has not replied. The truth is, there are many Christians that may not agree with Tim's political view of Nancy Pelosi. Perhaps more importantly, there may be non-believers looking for Christ that do not agree with his view. This is why politics have no place in the Church, regardless of denomination. The risk that one person attended GCC and was contemplating a step to God and then read this post and felt isolated or unaccepted is frightening to me. Our role is to spread the great story of Jesus and God's love to everyone who will listen. Tim, your comment about Pelosi justified an apology, not a debate. Vote how you want, but please focus on spreading the word of God publicly as you represent all of us who attend the Church and may or may not agree with your political views.

By: Holz

Holz — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:22:29 +0000

I've been a U.M. for 40 + years and I sometimes questions their direction with politics also. I feel if we were about making disciples everything would fall into place with God as our ultimate leader in this world. Wondering your viewpoint on The Clergy letter Project ?

By: Tim Stevens

Tim Stevens — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:08:26 +0000

You make some great points Barry.