A prediction about the coming split in the Methodist Church
By: Michael L. Brown
The conservative Methodist church will grow and the liberal one will join mainline Protestants in decline.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The split in the UMC won't be seen so much as a separation between fellow-Christians – instead, it will be seen (as Jesus might put it) as a separation between the wheat and the weeds … or between the sheep and the goats.
If the reports are true, then "a tentative plan" has been put in place "to split the [Methodist] church over differences on same-sex marriage and the inclusion of gay clergy."
In 2019, "The division, which has been brewing for years, came to an impasse last May when delegates in St. Louis voted 438-384 to ban gay marriage and the inclusion of gay clergy.
"A majority of U.S.-based churches opposed the 'Traditional Plan' but were outvoted by conservatives in the U.S., Africa and the Philippines."
The denominational split that everyone knew was coming now is upon the United Methodist Church. The designers of the plan say it's fair and accommodating to both sides, but not everyone agrees. ( Read more ) |
Assuming that this split actually takes place, what will happen to these two branches, one conservative and the other liberal?
The answer is easy, based on history and common spiritual sense.
History says that the conservative branch will grow and the liberal branch will diminish.
This has been the pattern for decades, as I documented in 2015, citing a major study dating back to 1972 written by Dean M. Kelley: Why Conservative Churches are Growing: A Study in Sociology of Religion .
As Kelly wrote almost 50 years ago:
"Amid the current neglect and hostility toward organized religion in general, the conservative churches, holding to seemingly outmoded theology and making strict demands on their members, have equaled or surpassed in growth the early percentage increases of the nation's population."
As for the liberal churches, he noted:
"The mainline denominations [which were becoming increasingly liberal] will continue to exist on a diminishing scale for decades, perhaps for centuries, and will continue to supply some people with a diluted and undemanding form of meaning, which may be all they want."
For a host of reasons, this pattern will continue with the two Methodist branches.
The conservative branch – preaching the Scriptures without apology, adhering to timeless moral values, and offering adherents a true encounter with the risen Lord – will gain members.
The liberal branch – reinterpreting the Scriptures and apologizing for the Bible and redefining morality – will lose members.
As I pointed out in my 2015 article:
"Writing in the Federalist in August, 2014, Alexander Griswold noted that, 'Every major American church that has taken steps towards liberalization on sexual issues has seen a steep decline in membership.'" (His article was titled, "How to Shrink Your Church in One Easy Step.")
More broadly, this is confirmed by data just released by the Center for the Study of Global Christianity.
Roughly 120 years ago, the Center claims that there were about 80 million Evangelicals and less than 1 million Pentecostals/Charismatics worldwide. (These terms might be anachronistic for the year 1900, but they are being used to trace particular groups over the last 120 years. And, of course, there is overlap between the two groups, which are both very conservative theologically.)
Today, those numbers, globally, are put at 354 million Evangelicals and 694 million Pentecostals/Charismatics. Projection for 2050 puts these groups at 581 million and 1 billion, 89 million respectively.
This is the growth-curve of Bible-based Christianity, especially one that emphasizes the ongoing ministry of the Spirit.
The Center's data does not isolate liberal denominations, so their decline cannot be pointed to in the chart linked here . But further confirmation comes from a January 4, 2017 article in the Washington Post , which noted that, "Liberal churches are dying. But conservative churches are thriving. A Canadian study found that conservative churches are still growing, while less orthodox congregations dwindle away."
No surprise in the least.
To be sure, if the conservative congregations are hypocritical, dead, and legalistic, they too will dwindle away. But if they preach Jesus, welcome the Spirit, exalt the Word, and reach out to their community, they will thrive.
And this leads us to the subject of spiritual common sense.
The liberal branch will become more liberal.
Specifically, they will question some of the fundamental tenets of the faith (including the inspiration of the Scriptures, the virgin birth and the resurrection, the second coming, and more; much of this is happening already). They will become more universalistic (meaning, salvation is not exclusively through Jesus). And they will move further and further away from biblical morality.
In short, fidelity to LGBT activism will trump fidelity to God's Word.
Watch and see. (For a recent, shocking example from Sweden, see here .)
In contrast, the conservative churches will remain steady, since they are not reacting. They are simply maintaining their historic stance, believing what John Wesley, the founder of the Methodists believed, and affirming what Jesus and Paul taught.
As one African Methodist leader stated in early 2019:
"I'm happy to go back to old ladies and old men in villages who received the Bible from missionaries and let them know that the Bible hasn't changed."
In the end, while it is sad to see division and separation, some of it is necessary and even for the best.
When it comes to the Methodist Church, as the years unfold, it will be not be seen so much as a separation between fellow-Christians.
Instead, it will be seen as a separation between the wheat and the weeds or the sheep and the goats, to use the imagery of Jesus.
Watch and see.
Tags
Who is online
67 visitors
But further confirmation comes from a January 4, 2017 article in the Washington Post , which noted that, "Liberal churches are dying. But conservative churches are thriving. A Canadian study found that conservative churches are still growing, while less orthodox congregations dwindle away."
No surprise in the least.
To be sure, if the conservative congregations are hypocritical, dead, and legalistic, they too will dwindle away. But if they preach Jesus, welcome the Spirit, exalt the Word, and reach out to their community, they will thrive.
And this leads us to the subject of spiritual common sense.
The liberal branch will become more liberal.
Specifically, they will question some of the fundamental tenets of the faith (including the inspiration of the Scriptures, the virgin birth and the resurrection, the second coming, and more; much of this is happening already). They will become more universalistic (meaning, salvation is not exclusively through Jesus). And they will move further and further away from biblical morality.
In short, fidelity to LGBT activism will trump fidelity to God's Word.
Watch and see. (For a recent, shocking example from Sweden, see here .)
In contrast, the conservative churches will remain steady, since they are not reacting. They are simply maintaining their historic stance, believing what John Wesley, the founder of the Methodists believed, and affirming what Jesus and Paul taught.
So. . .what type of church model do the prosperity gospel fall under: Conservative or Liberal? It's an proper question. I am interested in help with this.
Neither. It is it’s own thing and is a false gospel that God never promised or suggested.
"I do not belong to an organized denomination. I am a Methodist" - JBB
The UMC in the USA plainly wants to be affirming but the church in Africa and the Philippines remains adamantly opposed. What is a liberal (in the US) denomination to do?
The UMC is the second largest protestant denomination after the Southern Baptist...in America. The UMC is the second richest protestant denomination after the Episcopalians...in the WORLD. Trust me, The UMC will be fine. The Church is RICH RICH RICH. That is why the evangelical fundies hate the Methodist and covet their good reputation, affluent educated membership and especially their worldwide influence.
The crank author of this badly written opinion piece is not even a United Methodist and certainly does not have the Methodist Churchs' best interests at heart. After all, the UMC is a very liberal denomination...in the US. The author calls American Methodists chaff to be blown away. IOW...Sent To Hell! Judged to be the unwanted black sheep of all Christendom. That is Not very Christian if you ask me...
The UMC may end up being just the plain old Methodist, again, in America. I believe though that The UMC is doing the right thing. If a few backwater congregations choose to leave then that is okay. Jesus had a fondness for black sheep. Us dancing drinking smoking swinging Methodists were always, um, different. "Viva La Differance" - Jesus Christ...
The Denominational Split That Everyone Knew Was Coming Now Is Upon The United Methodist Church. The Designers Of The Plan Say It's Fair And Accommodating To Both Sides, But Not Everyone Agrees. ( Read More )
Assuming that this split actually takes place, what will happen to these two branches, one conservative and the other liberal?
The answer is easy, based on history and common spiritual sense.
History says that the conservative branch will grow and the liberal branch will diminish.
Hi JBB. Two points:
That is, God looks at the intent of man's mind and looks maturely. The Church is not better off when one organization competes against its others. That kind of thing is undeserving of the Spirit of Truth left to dwell in us.
I don't know what the final answer or answers dealing with loving people and living by faith and following dogmas and traditions while ignoring a creeping competitive spirit and namecalling other fellow believers, will be.
However, I can be optimistic and surely trust all I need do is love other people to the best of my ability and trust God to do the rest!
True. From what I have seen, the UMC would already be fully welcoming and affirming but for the African delegation. The sticking point for the conservative churches then becomes whether or not they can leave and keep their property.
Now that they have negotiated a solution that allows them to stay intact, the main body of the church can get on with doing the right thing and let the curmudgeons go their own way.
I went to the funeral of a fine Methodist woman today, 31 grandchildren.
The minister was a Baptist and he did a fine job. Everyone was most appreciative.
The schisms in Christianity are a self destructive and pointless mystery.
Interesting statement. I was just sitting here pondering on how to write about the Christian church schisms. And, you summed it my feelings in a few words. Come to the head of the class!
Jesus is fond of saying words like, "In my father's house, there are many mansions." And, 'On judgement day, many will say Lord didn't I do—to which the Lord will say I never knew you.' And, "Mary, has chosen the better part." And, many such words regarding the indwelling Spirit of God inside.
Those who see themselves as responsible for "increasing the faith" whether than enjoying the possibilities of being planters and waterers should learn the truth of their real value. God gives the increase—not man.
I'm excited for the UMC. This will be good for them. Jesus was welcoming and affirming of all people and we should be, too. What the church has done to the LGBTQ community over the years has been cruel and very unchristian. A new day is dawning. Christians are showing the kind of kindness and love they are called to show. This will heal a lot of people and bring even more into the churches.
Tacos admittedly you are a bit of a mystery to me in that in some ways you support LGBTQ goals and activities and this use of an interesting colorful avatar, but you argue for our mixed-bag president's policies which fly in the face of truth and some LGBTQ interests. No, I am not suggesting anybody has to wear their sexual preference on their sleeve. Turning to the topic now. . . .
In a real sense, the Church has failed its mission to unify the people of world, and within the church. All these religious schisms or "branches" within the same tree is either a good thing because at least the branches exist in good health, or it is a bad thing in that the Church itself dilutes, and causes "shoots" to head in their own direction.
As a human I would like to understand who or what is responsible for all these church dividings - which disturb its one-spiritmindedness for which Jesus Christ prayed we would be in possession of; for surely this crises rest with people, the holy books, or the Spirit.
The Spirit is open to man's stewardship; the holy books are closed for all times; and people are where these dynamics of faith interact together.
Life is often complicated and sometimes, so am I.
Some of our president's policies use to enjoy bipartisan support. However, the details of his policies are rarely the focus of our conversations around here. It's usually more about his manners or whether or not he should be impeached. I wish we talked about policy a lot more.
You're probably never going to see me support something specific that would directly harm the LGBTQ community. Trump himself is bit of a mixed bag in that regard. At times he is supportive, but other times he placates the homophobic base, which I have a feeling is rooted in nothing more than politics. I suspect he is personally indifferent to LGBTQ, but he is definitely not at "ally" status.
I don't mind advertising my advocacy. My avatar is a rainbow taco.
I agree. It's a core failing that has persisted in many denominations - spreading out from Catholicism to Evangelicalism. Barriers are put up to worship. It's self-defeating from an institutional standpoint. One the one hand, they want more people in church, but on the other hand, they set up roadblocks.
The Catholic Church is still full of old-testament style rules about doing (or not doing) this or that. Failing to jump through all the hoops condemns you to Hell. Meanwhile, evangelicals go around telling people how much they offend God. The fire-and-brimstone approach only goes so far and - in my opinion - is contrary to scripture anyway.
We should be spreading the message that we are all children of God and he loves every one of us unconditionally. Also, that he wants us to love each other in the way that he loves us. What message could be more exciting? That's the kind of thing that gets people enthusiastic about worship. I really think if we focused on that, we'd see less schisms and more unity.
The fire and brimstone approach, AKA: "fear" God approach, is and should be a dying message. When I encountered the Spirit of God in my life what I remember clearly as a first impression is:
As I have studied and matured in my faith (across many years) I realize God will wait on others to travel their paths in life in hopes (or plan) of finding God. I advocate for not interfering with another's course, instead to simply—"Let God."
In the interim of other's life my role, if it is to be one, is to keep the peace and respect this world's diversity.
I would say that depends on what you mean by welcoming and affirming. If you are talking of not wholly shunning away, then yes. If you are talking about a wholesale affirmation and acceptance of, then no. Jesus' handling of the adulterous woman in John is a good example. He didn't condemn her, but he did tell her to "go, and sin no more."
I believe that - like so many things - that's more about striving for the ideal than achieving it. That's why we need the sacrifice of Jesus.
But more than that, I don't believe this should be relevant for LGBTQ+ worshipers. So much church persecution has been about warping scripture to justify their discrimination. But that's maybe a different topic.
No you're on topic. People have been 'adulterating' the scriptures and the things left unsaid in the scriptures, and the meaningful context compiled in the scriptures which can help them form better conclusions for themselves. It is time people speak up on this specific thing. Go for it, I say.
I would say clearly, which is why Jesus didn't tell the accusers that they should not stone her, but suggested that the first stone should be thrown by the one free of sin. I had this conversation with a good friend a few months ago. The problem arises when a person no longer strives. As Jesus told the Pharisees, who were chastising him for the company he kept, he didn't come to call the righteous, but the sinners, to repent.
As for the question of who should be allowed to hold an office within the church, I think it falls back to repentance. If the criteria was holy and righteous, there would be no clergy.