On Tue, 31 May 2011 19:21:44 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 5/31/2011 6:54 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2011 18:35:40 -0500, wrote:
...

... one of the features of the Methodist organization is that there
isn't a great deal of requirement for strict conformance to some set of
initiatives.

They don't in the East. It's their way or the highway. She chose the latter,
as did a rather large percentage of the congregation.

AFAIK, the official doctrine hasn't actually been changed much (altho I
don't go and read it regularly).

It is a regional thing, sure, but the central church allows it. She went from
there to a rather large congregational church (held five services on Sunday,
two in a movie theater, complete with popcorn and coffee , then to S.
Babtist (where she was brought up) after we moved to the South.

Well, I can't imagine a serious S Baptist _ever_ agreeing w/ Methodist
doctrine to begin with, but... (I certainly don't much cotton to
some of their precepts from the other direction so it's pretty much a
dead heat )

She was a SB when she was a kid, living in Texas, then again after forty
years, after moving back South. No, the Methodist church she was a member of
did a hard left turn, after most of the congregation made it perfectly clear
they wanted to go "straight".

That description sounds like a particular congregational thing as much
or more the entire denomination's change in actual doctrine. Since
pastors are assigned by Conference; all it takes is a new man in charge
and a congregation can have a different flavor the next week after the
previous has left. That has the potential to upset the traditional in
both directions.

Yes, the congregation had *no* choice. She, and many in the congregation
showed them that, yes, they did have a choice.

As noted previously, I don't believe there's much change in actual
theology as stated in the official doctrine since the time of the Wesleys.

Theology without practice isn't worth much. She didn't join a Unitarian
Universalists church (which, we got married in, BTW) but she might just as
well have, after the shift.

The rest is simply trappings around the basic beliefs; there were
probably other UMC congregations in the area that were much more
traditional at the time if it was a sizable metro area.

Nope. She *was* at one of the more conservative of the churches but it was
under new management. Since there is no input from the congregation, she and
a *bunch* of others left.

But, need to retire from this; this is just _way_ too far off topic,
even for a reasoned-tone discussion....

You've *got* to be kidding. ;-)