Frequently Asked Questions

How did the idea of Faithful and Welcoming Churches originate?

For more than twenty years, the United Church of Christ on a national Church level has encouraged its churches to become identified as "Open and Affirming" (ONA) churches in support of the UCC's non-critical acceptance of homosexual practice. Currently about ten percent of the UCC's 5700 congregations have declared themselves ONA. In the past, these issues have largely been ignored on the local church level.

Many pastors and churches across the UCC have objected to the national trend, but have been isolated from one another. Since the General Synod's endorsement of same sex marriage in July 4, 2005, many of these clergy and laity have found one another, in part due to the widely publicized Lexington Confession, a response to the General Synod adopted by representatives of Southern Conference churches July 7, 2005. Cries of protest also emerged before and after the synod among congregations in the Calvin Synod, Puerto Rico Conference, and other areas from New England to Illinois to Texas. Many local churches began, intensified, or consummated the process of separation from the UCC.

Concerned pastors and laity from across the denomination first met in Ligonier, PA November 3, 2005 and agreed to urge their congregations to remain in the denomination rather than separating. These delegates were joined by others on January 18-19, 2006, formally incorporating FWC.

What is the purpose of FWC?

Faithful and Welcoming Churches (FWC) incorporated January 19, 2006, with the following purpose:

"To operate, in its capacity as a charitable corporation, as an auxiliary organization among pastors, laity, and congregations of the United Church of Christ, providing for gatherings, communication, and dissemination of resources with the purpose of restoring the founding vision of the United Church of Christ."

In order to accomplish this purpose, we have created several ways for UCC members to identify or connect with FWC.

What is "The Lexington Confession"?

The Lexington Confession was signed by Southern Conference laity and ministers July 7, 2005 to voice dissent to the GS 25 "Marriage Equality" resolution. The purpose of the Lexington Confession was not for unifying the UCC as a whole nor was it intended be a replacement for the actions of GS 25. It was a way of expressing corporately one of the voices co-existing along side of others in the UCC. It was also a way of expressing a corporate conservative/orthodox/evangelical/traditional voice that many have felt had been and is currently being overshadowed and overlooked on the Association, Conference, and national levels in the UCC.

By signing the Lexington Confession are you joining the FWC or is there another process?

Some churches endorsed the Lexington Confession prior to the formation of FWC, and those churches need to take a separate action to declare themselves Faithful and Welcoming.

Once a church takes proper action to become FWC by vote of congregation or church board (according to its local church bylaws), a representative of the church needs to list the church on the FWC web page by clicking the Add Your Church link.

Is FWC still part of the UCC?

One of our stated aims for FWC is to give churches a reason to stay in the UCC. We are not part of formal structure of the United Church of Christ, but our churches and pastors are remaining in the denomination. Our Articles of Incorporation explicitly state that we are "an auxiliary organization among pastors, laity, and congregations of the United Church of Christ."

Does the choice of the name, "Faithful and Welcoming," imply that you believe non-FWC churches are not faithful or welcoming?

No more than the words "Open and Affirming" mean that others are not "open" or "affirming." The choice of our name expresses a positive purpose of how we desire to be known and understood.

Is FWC trying to impose its will on the entire UCC?

FWC is a grassroots response that recognizes the enormous weight of precedence that has emerged in the UCC over the past thirty years on issues ranging from theology to human sexuality. No one in FWC is under the delusion that we can reverse this trend immediately and seize "power." All we are asking for is respect for our views which we sincerely believe are consistent with Scripture and the historic and ecumenical consensus of the church. We ask for greater representation of persons who affirm FWC principles at all levels of influence and decision-making in the UCC. We want to be heard and valued as we allow the Holy Spirit to work among us. We are content to adopt Gamaliel's attitude (Acts 5:38-39) toward those who differ with us and ask them to adopt the same perspective toward us.

A church's decision to declare itself "Faithful and Welcoming" can in no way impose its moral values on others outside of the congregation in the same way that a Church's decision to declare itself "Open and Affirming" means that a local Church can force other congregations to support homosexual behavior. It simply allows a local congregation to identify the core values around which its people agree.

Does FWC regard the issue of divorce and remarriage as seriously as you regard homosexuality?

There have been differences of opinion among Christians committed to orthodoxy and the authority of Scripture on such texts as Mt. 5 and I Corinthians 7 on the subject of divorce and remarriage. The Scripture sanctions divorce and remarriage in some cases. Many of us in the past, while firmly committed to the sanctity of marriage, have been willing to chalk up such differences to interpretive variance among the faithful.

But the discounting of the unified biblical witness on homosexual practice takes the issue to a different level and reveals that the fundamental difference is not over how to read the texts, but whether the Bible itself will be our authority. There may be different opinions in our group over divorce and remarriage, but there is broad consensus that the biblical standard is fidelity within heterosexual marriage or celibacy outside it.

What connection does FWC have to other renewal UCC groups such as the Evangelical Association (EA) and Biblical Witness Fellowship (BWF), or to interchurch organizations such as the Institute for Religion and Democracy (IRD) or the Association for Church Renewal (ACR)?

FWC arose as a completely new grassroots movement without support, endorsement, or funding from any previously existing organization except for informal regional groups such as the Southern Conference Renewal Fellowship. Many of the concerns that we have are parallel to those expressed by pre-existing UCC renewal efforts. We believe that the times call for a fresh, constructive, proactive, loyalist response, and our movement is completely independent. Our funding comes solely from local churches and individuals who wish to donate to us, and our Board of Directors is independent. The ACR formaly incorporated as an entity seperate from the IRD in March 2008. Following that decision, FWC chose to affiliate with the Association for Church renewal in order to network with other mainline renewal efforts. The president of FWC currently serves on the Board of Directors and as Secreary of the ACR.

What do you mean by "Faithful... to the Bible as our ultimate authority for faith and practice?" Is this a literalist approach to the scriptures?

Members of FWC have differing theological backgrounds and would express their understanding of Scripture in various ways. Probably few or none would describe their view as "literalist." As a group, we hold at least to a historic and ecumenical consensus that the Bible is our primary and final authority for Christian understanding and ethics.

Are FWC churches welcoming to gays and lesbians for worship, membership, and leadership?

A key principle of FWC is that 'the practice and proclamation of human sexuality as God's gift for marriage between a man and a woman.' We believe that any other sexual practice, heterosexual or homosexual, is contrary to God's design and therefore sinful. All our congregations strive to be welcoming to all people. Standards for membership, leadership, and discipline vary from congregation to congregation when a person is openly practicing sinful behavior such as adultery or homosexual relationships.

What are the main reasons an evangelical, conservative, orthodox or even moderate church should stay in the UCC when it disagrees strongly with the resolutions promoted image of the UCC?

Bob Thompson, FWC President, wrote an essay immediately following General Synod 25 that was published in several newspapers and widely distributed. Click here for a link to "Why Conservatives Should Remain in Mainline Churches."

How do you verify the accuracy of your "lost churches" list?

FWC is a new and small organization with a limited budget. We list churches as having withdrawn from the UCC when we are notified, usually by e-mail, that the church has withdrawn. We also place on our web site a request for additions and corrections.

We believe there are many lost churches across the UCC of whom we have not heard, and we think we are providing a valuable service by publishing this list to illustrate the seriousness of the UCC's current crisis. If a specific church on the list is in question, please send feedback to our webmaster, and we will follow up to verify either way.

Why is there a difference between the number of "lost churches" on the FWC web site and the number being reported by the UCC?

We are listing lost churches on our web site as they are reported to us. Often a church waits for several weeks or months to make an official report to the conference, which then must report the information to the national office. We believe that our numbers will be validated when 2005 and 2006 reports are finalized. If any member of the national UCC staff will supply us with their list of withdrawn churches, we will be happy to cross check with our list and document or verify any additional churches.

Why you are not listing the churches that have joined, or are in conversations to join the United Church of Christ?

The UCC national and regional offices are talking about these new churches, but more time is needed before we will know how they will affect the UCC long term. Even if the promise of new churches or newly affiliated churches emerges as real, their addition will never compensate for the tragic loss of congregations that have been a part of the UCC family for 50 years, and of their predecessor denominations for a century or two.

The vast majority of the new churches are likely to be Open and Affirming congregations, especially if they emerge from favorable response to the UCC's media campaign. Numerically growing ONA churches tend to be in heavily populated areas -- urban and academic. By contrast, more than two-thirds of the UCC's existing churches are located in rural areas, small towns, and suburbs with a population of fewer than 25,000.

What is FWC's objection to the "extravagant welcome" of the Still Speaking UCC identity and media campaign?

"God is Still Speaking" is built on a theological foundation that reverses the Wesleyan quadrilateral of authority for Christians. Christians have historically recognized the authority of Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience, in that order. All Christians recognize that God still speaks, but the concept of "Still Speaking" prioritizes the subjective (experience and reason) over the objective (tradition and Scripture).

The controversial media campaign, including commercials rejected by the major networks for their advocacy, use powerful visual and dramatic symbols to equate sexual identity and practice with gender and race. This perspective on human sexuality has been affirmed by General Synods in "non-binding" resolutions summarized by the "Open and Affirming" movement. Only ten percent of UCC churches have officially adopted the ONA perspective, but the entire denomination is being marketed as ONA through the Still Speaking campaign.

How is FWC organized?

The Board of Directors of FWC is self-governing and self-perpetuating. Discussions are continuing about the possibility of giving member churches and/or individuals formal voice and vote in the organization.

How is FWC funded?

FWC's funding is solely through contributions from individuals, churches, and chapters, including special offerings at various gatherings. We also accept "user fees" for certain events such as the national gathering. We have not accepted and will not accept funds from outside organizations.

What kind of entity is FWC?

FWC is a non-profit entity incorporated under the laws of North Carolina.

Does FWC advocate withholding funds from OCWM?

Pastors and churches connected with FWC have taken differing positions on that issue, but FWC has not taken a position. When churches are in extreme pain and conflict, or in danger of taking the almost irreversible step of withdrawal from the UCC, we believe that withholding funds may be a necessary compromise in some cases to keep the congregation unified and in the denomination.

Why do you focus on the issue of marriage equality, when the real issue is the authority of Scripture?

We agree about the real issue. General Synod 25's Equal Marriage Rights pronouncement was only the most recent and most egregious of the UCC's departures from its biblical and historical heritage. What is at stake is faithfulness to central themes of the Christian faith, including a commitment to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, to the Bible as our final authority for faith and practice, and to a traditional model of marriage and family as the ideal. One reason the equal marriage rights issue gets attention is because there may be legitimate differences of opinion and interpretation on many issues of faith and ethics, but we believe the only way to argue for same sex marriage is to discount the authority of the Bible and the lordship of Jesus Christ. We advocate a return to a more serious commitment to the basic insights of the Protestant reformers, including sola Scriptura, the Bible alone as our authority for faith and practice.

Are FWClusters designed to disrupt, divide, and meddle in local churches?

FWClusters have quite the opposite purpose. We created the idea of FWClusters as an option for churches where the entire congregation does not choose to vote to join FWChurches. We respect the fact that not every church will join our movement. We are frequently contacted by individuals in churches where the pastor is not supportive of FWC, and perhaps even a majority of the congregation is not supportive. We do not wish to meddle in those churches, so our reply is that local churches and issues should remain local and we should not interfere. We encourage members to stay in their churches, support what they can in the church, and gather with others similarly concerned for Bible study or prayer. We want these groups to contribute to the health and unity of their churches, while encouraging them to do as we are doing in the wider church -- speak out lovingly when they disagree.

Why do we need yet another renewal group in the UCC? Aren't BWF and FWC trying to do the same things?

It is true that both Biblical Witness Fellowship (BWF) and Faithful and Welcoming Churches (FWC) hold to ECOT views and that there is some crossover of membership and values. There are also, however, some basic differences between the two organizations with regards to styles, strategies and goals.

BWF admits that it has deliberately chosen a rather confrontational style and sees its role to challenge the leadership and positions of the United Church of Christ when they depart from ECOT-held convictions. FWC, on the other hand, is attempting to be more conversational in its approach. We are trying hard to win a hearing and to be included in the life of the larger church. We will not backpedal on our viewpoints or values, but we realize that how we say something is just as important as what we have to say. One example of this concern is how FWC has changed and clarified some of the wording in our brochures and on our website when our critics found them unfairly offensive. We try to avoid inflammatory or insensitive language and attitudes. We are trying to engage others in the UCC in dialogue, not argumentation. We are seeking understanding and acceptance even as we seek to influence and shape the future of the UCC.

In terms of strategy, BWF is top down. BWF focuses primarily on national church policies and issues. Although FWC will also participate in the national UCC, we see our primary effort is to support, strengthen and organize the ECOT element at the local level. We see ours as more of a grassroots movement. Hence, the FWC strategy is bottom up. We want to strengthen, support and encourage ECOT vitality within the local churches of the UCC and encourage their involvement in the Associations, Conferences and then the national scene. The FWC strategy can be outlined as prayer, presence, persistence and persuasion.

As for goals, there is also a significant difference here. Whereas BWF aims to defend and represent the Truth and advocate for certain Biblical convictions, FWC is committed to defending and representing ECOT laity, clergy and churches as we advocate for their involvement, inclusion and influence in the UCC. We want, first and foremost, to give ECOT-minded people good reasons to stay in the UCC.

How do I get my question answered?

It's easy... just ask!