After exodus of conservative congregations, United Methodist Church lifts restriction on LGBT clergy

[Skill and Chance]

Once the Global Methodist Church formed and the schism was not quite as disastrous as expected, this action was inevitable. I'm happy for our Methodist brothers and sisters.

I'm personally very interested in seeing the outcome of the proposed full communion between the United Methodists and the Episcopal Church (similar to the current communion between the Lutherans and Episcoplians). I think as the mainline continues to profound shake up (I won't call it a terminal decline just yet), I think the more liturgical churches that are also LGBT affirming need to band together.

Don't disagree per se; but don't Methodists and Episcopalians have.... differing understandings of the Eucharist ?

I believe they both officially teach a vague and somewhat ambiguous notion of the Real Presence. I know some Episcopalians are concerned about apostolic succession, but that was resolved with the Lutherans vía co-consecration of bishops.

Isn't there a wide range within Anglicanism RE: the Lord's Supper, ranging from the Lutheran view (i.e., real, physical presence but without any necessary miracle performed by a Priest) to the Reformed view (i.e., spiritual presence but not physical, real presence)?  I always assumed Methodism just adopted the Anglican point of view(s) on this issue.

Unfortunately, many of the Mainline churches barely care about things like this ... otherwise my denomination (the ELCA) wouldn't think twice about being in full communion with the United Church of Christ, which I can barely consider a real church at this point.  And by the way, I say this as a relatively theologically liberal guy ... I just don't want to see Mainline Protestants consolidate into some vague SJW-first "United Protestant" denomination that really isn't concerned with doctrine in any true way and mostly functions as a political action group with some liturgical traditions attached.  The UCC is already there if you look at their social media, and I do not want to see the others go down that route.

With that said, I am all for them working together and sharing resources.  I just think doctrinal differences are part of our heritages and need to be treated a little more importantly.  The Episcopal Church and the UMC is about the most natural partnership between the Seven Sisters, as far as I can tell.

I feel the most likely and most concerning "fail mode" for Protestantism would be for it to become a "church of generic Anglo-American liberalism" and a "church of generic Anglo-American conservatism" arguing opposite sides of the sexual revolution forever with basically zero regard for any history/traditions predating that.  If it goes significantly down that road, I think I would just become Catholic.

[Skill and Chance]

Once the Global Methodist Church formed and the schism was not quite as disastrous as expected, this action was inevitable. I'm happy for our Methodist brothers and sisters.

I'm personally very interested in seeing the outcome of the proposed full communion between the United Methodists and the Episcopal Church (similar to the current communion between the Lutherans and Episcoplians). I think as the mainline continues to profound shake up (I won't call it a terminal decline just yet), I think the more liturgical churches that are also LGBT affirming need to band together.

Don't disagree per se; but don't Methodists and Episcopalians have.... differing understandings of the Eucharist ?

I believe they both officially teach a vague and somewhat ambiguous notion of the Real Presence. I know some Episcopalians are concerned about apostolic succession, but that was resolved with the Lutherans vía co-consecration of bishops.

Isn't there a wide range within Anglicanism RE: the Lord's Supper, ranging from the Lutheran view (i.e., real, physical presence but without any necessary miracle performed by a Priest) to the Reformed view (i.e., spiritual presence but not physical, real presence)?  I always assumed Methodism just adopted the Anglican point of view(s) on this issue.

Unfortunately, many of the Mainline churches barely care about things like this ... otherwise my denomination (the ELCA) wouldn't think twice about being in full communion with the United Church of Christ, which I can barely consider a real church at this point.  And by the way, I say this as a relatively theologically liberal guy ... I just don't want to see Mainline Protestants consolidate into some vague SJW-first "United Protestant" denomination that really isn't concerned with doctrine in any true way and mostly functions as a political action group with some liturgical traditions attached.  The UCC is already there if you look at their social media, and I do not want to see the others go down that route.

With that said, I am all for them working together and sharing resources.  I just think doctrinal differences are part of our heritages and need to be treated a little more importantly.  The Episcopal Church and the UMC is about the most natural partnership between the Seven Sisters, as far as I can tell.

These debates about "open communion" are interesting from my perspective.  In Baptist and non-denominational churches, the view of Communion is that it is open to any believer in Jesus/Christian, regardless of denomination.  But, we also take a purely symbolic view of Communion.  I think I'd mistakenly assumed that all Protestant denominations had Communion open to all Christians.

It's rare in Protestantism, but it does exist.  Some traditionalist Anglicans, LCMS Lutherans and Appalachian Old Regular Baptists have a members only policy for communion.  But yes, anyone who has been baptized is the norm, including many Protestant churches that affirm real presence.