Statement by the United Methodist Church

[KublaiKen]

27 minutes ago, PACAN said:

Thanks KublaiKen but how is a unit rechartering as before?   Not an option as we read it.

I am not a member of the UMC, so am not too familiar with their governance, so take this with a grain of salt, but as I understand it each UMC can ignore the advice of the governing body if they choose. Each congregation is autonomous, or semi-autonomous? In any event, it seems risky to recharter knowing the bodies above you might not have your back if something goes wrong.

[KublaiKen]

17 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

My friends' units, a pack and 2 troops, that are chartered by an UMC church started their own Optimist Club with the sole purpose of chartering units.  They will have a FUA with the UMC church.

We looked at a similar option as well, but found the insurance costs to likely be prohibitive. Since we found a choice of COs, we didn't explore it too deeply.

[yknot]

1 hour ago, PACAN said:

Thanks KublaiKen but how is a unit rechartering as before?   Not an option as we read it.

There have been a few random reports of other UMCs going "rogue" in conferences that will allow it and trying this as well. I don't think we'll know if it's really a possible option until after the dust settles on the current recharter session. One of the issues is that BSA has an agreement with UMC not to charter any UMC units past Dec. 31 at this point. The agreement clearly states that only the FUA or the Affiliation scenarios will be allowed.  It's not really clear what really happens if the units are rechartered anyway and UMC finds out. BSA would effectively be breaking their word to them. We know BSA does that all the time and they may not be that concerned about it, but it's unknown how UMC will view that or what the ultimate outcome will be. 

1 hour ago, PACAN said:

Thanks KublaiKen but how is a unit rechartering as before?   Not an option as we read it.

There have been a few random reports of other UMCs going "rogue" in conferences that will allow it and trying this as well. I don't think we'll know if it's really a possible option until after the dust settles on the current recharter session. One of the issues is that BSA has an agreement with UMC not to charter any UMC units past Dec. 31 at this point. The agreement clearly states that only the FUA or the Affiliation scenarios will be allowed.  It's not really clear what really happens if the units are rechartered anyway and UMC finds out. BSA would effectively be breaking their word to them. We know BSA does that all the time and they may not be that concerned about it, but it's unknown how UMC will view that or what the ultimate outcome will be. 

[PACAN]

I would be surprised if the local council would buy into a UMC church maintaining the status quo given all the press this situation has received.

[skeptic]

1 hour ago, PACAN said:

I would be surprised if the local council would buy into a UMC church maintaining the status quo given all the press this situation has received.

Our local council would much prefer the status quo, as the option worked out makes them the actual CO in order to remove the legal onus from the Church.  Our local church never wanted us to leave, and they would have loved to not have to do the option forced upon them.  We now have a facility agreement, so we still are where we have been since the thirties, but it is a forced setup.  The local Church legal people have yet to decide of our option to be sponsored by the local Masonic group, but have a facility agreement, is viable.  They so far have not made that decision.  The good thing is that the local Masonic group has made it clear they have no issue with a facility agreement, and they are in the wings should the CO issue become a problem.  

I hope that the ridiculous barriers caused by the greedy and unconcerned lawyers  and the less than helpful insurance people will find a solution that is more realistic and not so threatening to sponsors and the program.  

Meanwhile we are apparently going to make into our 102nd year if all stays on track.A

Edited November 17, 2022 by skeptic
Add to.

[5thGenTexan]

We are a UMC sponsored Unit(s).  We have made the decision and are moving forward with paperwork to be chartered by the local American Legion Post, and using a facilities use agreement with church.  The packet I was sent in email from our DE still has the option to continue being chartered by the UMC.  However, the situation within the UMC is one thing that causes us concern.  Many churches are already decided to leave the UNC and be independent or whatever they are calling it.  We have decided while the option exists, its better for us to go ahead and make the change now than wait and have to figure out what to do when they finalize thier split.

[yknot]

57 minutes ago, 5thGenTexan said:

We are a UMC sponsored Unit(s).  We have made the decision and are moving forward with paperwork to be chartered by the local American Legion Post, and using a facilities use agreement with church.  The packet I was sent in email from our DE still has the option to continue being chartered by the UMC.  However, the situation within the UMC is one thing that causes us concern.  Many churches are already decided to leave the UNC and be independent or whatever they are calling it.  We have decided while the option exists, its better for us to go ahead and make the change now than wait and have to figure out what to do when they finalize thier split.

Based on everything I am seeing, I think that's smart. Lots of turmoil brewing in Methodist Land. 

[5thGenTexan]

I guess this will make any facilities use agreements null?  Affiliation agreements as well.  Will whatever new group these churches fall under decide to charter Units?  So many questions that come up daily.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/hundreds-of-texas-churches-seek-approval-to-leave-the-united-methodist-church-saturday/ar-AA14P6If

[PACAN]

@5thGenTexan  Not sure.  Pardon me if this is too much of a generalization but the Churches wanting to leave the big UMC want to because of their stance on LGBTQ .    These churches may have the same opinion of the BSA because of their policy on the same issue and probably not sponsor anyway.   The others who don't separate have their guidance from the church and it is not likely to change.

 

JMHO.

[yknot]

19 minutes ago, PACAN said:

@5thGenTexan  Not sure.  Pardon me if this is too much of a generalization but the Churches wanting to leave the big UMC want to because of their stance on LGBTQ .    These churches may have the same opinion of the BSA because of their policy on the same issue and probably not sponsor anyway.   The others who don't separate have their guidance from the church and it is not likely to change.

 

JMHO.

I think you're right about the GMC churches. It's not just LGBTQ issues, there's a basket of issues including the UMC's support of BLM type initiatives and the proper role of women. It hasn't been articulated in some of the more public statements but some of these breakaway churches also don't want women pastors and some other things that align with more conservative views, and that makes scouting even less  of a fit for them. The UMC churches, on the other hand, have been struggling with membership erosion/aging and financial woes. UMC is working with consultants like Steeple.com to help local churches attract extra revenue by hosting telecom towers, EV charging stations, etc., and renting out any space they can, which means scout groups may have to be prepared to rental or usage fees. A couple of non UMC churches near me have recently started charging community groups that they have historically supported for room usage and storage. I can't imagine UMCs will be far behind.  

 

[5thGenTexan]

My thinking was...  anything document or agreement that is with the UMC automatically becomes null and void if a particular church leaves the UMC.  What one groups believes or not doesnt come into. 

If a Unit has a facility use agreement or affiliation agreement with a UMC affiliated church, those agreements become meaningless the moment that church is no longer a UMC church.    

[PACAN]

@5thGenTexan  Probably right.   My thought is that a church that leaves the UMC probably would not have entered any agreement option.

 

Wonder how this is all playing out with the units since it all has to be done by 12/31. 

 How many have the FUA and new chartered partners

will have FUA and the councils sponsor 

just totally get away from any relationship from the UMC and get sponsored by a completely different organization

or fold as it's all too hard.

[carter93230]

Our Troop has been chartered by the same United Methodist Church since 1957.

We are moving charters to a local Lutheran Church and will be using their facilities as well. While we looked at chartering with a local group where we would keep a FUA in place with he current church we felt there was too much uncertainty with the Methodists going forward. Our local council had no desire to charter units unless it was an emergency bridge to another charter.

With the division and splits on the horizon for the Methodist Church our current congregation will be aligned with the existing church. While the local congregation wanted us to stay it was becoming more and more apparent that the National and Local Methodist conferences want to distance themselves from scouting and we were nervous that even a facility use agreement could be short term.

Making a clean break from the UMC was difficult but definitely the best way forward for our Troop.

[RememberSchiff]

@carter93230 welcome to scouter.com

[Cburkhardt]

Displeased with Former COs who are "Iffy" about our Units 

Carter:

I formed two new units over the last four years -- a new Scouts BSA Troop for Girls and a new Sea Scout Ship.  We interviewed many potential chartered organizations and chose two outstanding entities that we knew to be examples of strong organizations that believed strongly in our Scouting missions.  Our chartered organizations are deeply involved in what we do and provide oversight and other assistance.  We are the principal youth program for both COs and they receive significant benefit through their association with us.  I say this to everyone out there:  there are many very fine potential COs out there who really want to have an affiliation with a fine Scouting unit, so there is no need to lower the dignity of your Scouting unit by agreeing to something "half way".  There is not much reason to become a "renter" if there is a strong organization that wants to be a full-on Chartered Organization.

Our units would never be associated with an organization that was "iffy" about our organization or mission.  We have nothing to be ashamed of and should rightly look elsewhere if a CO is questioning our worth, purpose or organizational quality.  We would never choose an organization that has internal political/organizational/financial problems -- because those problems would become your problems.  Why be associated with an entity that wants to put distance between them and your very fine Troop?  Congratulations on using sound judgement and leaving behind the difficulties of your previous CO.  Thank them for the assistance in the past, but do not look back or regret the change.