Methodist Head of “Human Rights” Mocks Prolife Marchers

firstthings.com ^ | 1 . 23 . 15 | Matthew Schmitz

[Morgana]

The “Director of Civil and Human Rights” for the United Methodist Church, Bill Mefford, posted a picture to Twitter yesterday mocking the pro-life marchers. Mefford, who works for the church’s lobby arm, the General Board of Church and Society, ridiculed the marchers by posting a picture of himself standing before them with a sign saying “I march for sandwiches.”

TWEET ON LINK

Here’s a thought. A great proportion of the pro-life marchers are young people. They are volunteers, unpaid and untrained. Mefford, on the other hand, is a grown man, one whose actual job is to represent Christians in the public square. How is it, then, that if we compare Mefford and the young marchers, the adolescents are the ones who come out looking like adults?

[AnAmericanMother]

This is also true of the Episcopalians.

There is one Episcopal seminary that is still relatively traditional and conservative. Their graduates were black-balled and cannot get a job in ministry.

But I read that they have had several resignations from the board because they invited the presiding bishopess to speak - so they may become like all the rest in the near future.

Reason 2,503 why we swam the Tiber.

[FR_addict]

Isn't George W. Bush supposedly a Methodist? Where does he stand on this mockery of people of faith?

[AnAmericanMother]

My grandfather-in-law was a Methodist minister. He was a circuit rider out west in Arizona Territory (and was a U.S. Marshal at the same time - interesting combination. He used to tell his prisoners that they could come back with him as the marshal or as their preacher . . . )

He came back east and had churches in and around Atlanta for years. He was also director of the Methodist orphanage, and started a summer camp. Great guy. I met him when husband and I were courting. He taught us to keep bees.

He would be horrified to see what has happened to his church.

[Resolute Conservative]

At the behest of the Mrs we did a Methodist experiment for a few years. I liked the local church it was not a younger crowd and pretty conservative. The pastor was good too. I started to research the conventions and where the money went. I realized that the members basically ignored those facts since they were older and were just happy on a local level. The pastor agreed with my findings and said that is why he chooses smaller, rural churches even though he had enough seniority to serve a larger church (more $$$). He said it was not the same UMC he was called to 30 years ago and may end up splitting.

I told the wife the experiment was over and we went back to SBC church.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

ROBERT LUC HONIKER

[AnAmericanMother]

Can’t find a pic of the Reverend on line anywhere . . . .

[AnAmericanMother]

But they may have known each other. The Reverend was born in 1890 and died in 1982 . . .

[SWAMPSNIPER]

Lots of family in Decatur too, but they’re all gone now.

[Maudeen]

I’m with you on the SBC . . . .if they cave on the social issues I’m for our church not associating with the convention and if our church doesn’t stand up for righteousness, I’ll be looking elsewhere. This go along to get along stuff has to stop. . . .as in the “lukewarm church”.

[chajin]

I am told the preachers who graduate from there can’t get a job at Methodists churches because they are so conservative and so in line to the original Methodist teachings.

The UMC is still "episcopal" in the sense that if you are ordained, you join an "annual conference" which is actually a geographic region run by a bishop, such as in my area the Florida AC, whose offices are in nearby Lakeland. It then becomes the bishop's duty to find a church for you, and every few years he plays musical pulpits and switches around all the ordained ministers to new churches, so that no one can become too attached to his own congregation. It's a good system for the ministers, not so much for the congregations--it used to be that all the ministers pretty much believed the same doctrines, but now a conservative church can get stuck with a liberal minister, and that's when the iliatic residue meets the propeller.

[chajin]

Isn't George W. Bush supposedly a Methodist?

Bush, fellow Methodists don't all see eye to eye

Now if you want to meet a real Methodist...read here

(Hint: she's the one thinking about running for President in 2016, so that, among other reasons, her husband could be back in the Oval Office too)

[kaehurowing]

The “mainline” Protestant denominations are a waste of time. All corrupted and controlled by Satan.

[txrefugee]

At the rate they are going. the Mrthodists are following the Episcopalians into the secular swamp.

[NYer]

The “Director of Civil and Human Rights” for the United Methodist Church, Bill Mefford, posted a picture to Twitter yesterday mocking the pro-life marchers. Mefford, who works for the church’s lobby arm, the General Board of Church and Society, ridiculed the marchers by posting a picture of himself standing before them with a sign saying “I march for sandwiches.”

Here’s a thought. A great proportion of the pro-life marchers are young people. They are volunteers, unpaid and untrained. Mefford, on the other hand, is a grown man, one whose actual job is to represent Christians in the public square. How is it, then, that if we compare Mefford and the young marchers, the adolescents are the ones who come out looking like adults?

 Why isn’t Mefford marching for the unborn if he stands for human rights? If he doesn’t think those rights extend to all humans, why doesn’t he request a change in his job title? Something like “Director of Civil and of Select Human Rights” is concise and has a satisfying ring of exclusivity. It would almost sound like a promotion.

I am not sure what the sign is supposed to mean, but Mefford’s blithe comparison of the moral weight of fetuses and sandwiches reflects the abortion lobby’s deep unwillingness to face facts. Time and again, they tell us not to take any of this too seriously (What about pocketbook issues?) to direct our gaze elsewhere (It’s about a woman’s right to choose) above all, to avoid considering the life that is lost. It claims the mantle of sensitivity, but the pro-choice viewpoint still leans heavily on human callousness. 

As for Mefford, I cannot see how he has any business representing either human rights or a Christian church unless his intent is to drag both into disrepute. People will call for him to be reprimanded. I wonder if it not likelier that he will be commended. 

Update: Mefford apologizes. Some lingering questions:

Apologies cannot overcome the underling disagreement: What is human life, what do we owe it? I have a fair bit of hope that one day the United Methodist Church will overcome its moral aphasia on the issue of life. I invite Bill Mefford to help those working to hasten it.

[MaxMax]

Those in his congregation need to leave and then question the Church's beliefs.
It certainly isn't a biblical belief.

[DaveMSmith]

Duplicate http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3249869/posts

[RichInOC]

My first observation is that the reverend gentleman might have been better advised to march off sandwiches rather than for them.

My second observation is that the debate on abortion is about a civil and human rights issue, and a Christian clergyman should have a more cogent and helpful response than “Trololo”.

[AnAmericanMother]

After deleting dozens of comments asking for his personal position on abortion (and blathering a lot but never answering the question), he has now taken his blog private.

He is feeling the heat.

Probably wishes he had never written that stupid sign.

[StoneWall Brigade]

So are the Catholics

[StoneWall Brigade]

I noticed a lot of attacks against the protestant churches on this thread but keep in mind as long as people like Nancy Pelosi gets Communion the Catholic Church has no room to talk.