Is it accurate to recognize the UMC is pretty liberal these days?

[AGTG]

Considering the writings and historical teachings of John Wesley?

 

[AGTG]

And if so, are there many here who are lamenting/fighting this liberal slide?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

liberal how?

 

[GraceSeeker]

Is it accurate to recognize the UMC as pretty liberal these days?

Yes. No. Maybe so.

The answer really depends on how one defines liberal and what region of the country/UMC you happen to be asking the question in.

And if so, are there many here who are lamenting/fighting this liberal slide?

Actually, I'm much more concerned with why so many people are more concerned about a liberal/conservative divide than about the difference between faithful and unfaithful living as disciples of Christ.

 

[AGTG]

Is it accurate to recognize the UMC as pretty liberal these days?

Yes. No. Maybe so.

The answer really depends on how one defines liberal and what region of the country/UMC you happen to be asking the question in.




Actually, I'm much more concerned with why so many people are more concerned about a liberal/conservative divide than about the difference between faithful and unfaithful living as disciples of Christ.

Is a faithful disciple concerned with sin? Does a faithful disciple compromise the teachings of Jesus for the sake of man?

 

[BryanW92]

Is it accurate to recognize the UMC is pretty liberal these days?

Yes and no. Understanding the politics of the UMC is like the story of the blind men and the elephant.

 

[GraceSeeker]

Is a faithful disciple concerned with sin? Does a faithful disciple compromise the teachings of Jesus for the sake of man?

My point exactly. A faithful disciple is concerned with sin and a faithful disciples does not compromise the teachings of Jesus for the sake of man. The problem with the liberal vs conservative divide in the church is the failure on the part of both sides to recognize that those whose positions they are opposed to are using the same approach of opposing sin and holding to the teachings of Jesus, they just have different understandings of what that looks like, but they are very much employing the same process even as they arrive at different conclusions.


For instance, I believe that the NT reveals woman have always served in leadership positions in the church, that women are called to teach the word. Now, some people who think differently on that subject call me a liberal for such beliefs. But I reach those conclusions by strictly adhering to the teachings of the scriptures. I contend that it was only by giving into the patriarchy of the non-Christian culture of the 2nd and 3rd centuries that the church drifted from this very inclusive biblical model to one that excluded women from serving as shepherds in the church. Thus, from my point of view, it is the church that allows women in the pulpit which is conserving the teaching of the scriptures and the church that does not that has adopted the ways of the world.

So, which is truly the liberal and which is the conservative position? Debating that question seems pointless to me. More important is for us to agree that we all want to be faithful to the teachings of the church, and then respect that others are doing that to the best of their ability even if they have arrived at a different position as to what that is than I have. An unwillingness to do this, and to seek to have everyone be in agreement with me is to make MY understanding of scripture Lord rather than the Lord himself.

 

[AGTG]

An unwillingness to do this, and to seek to have everyone be in agreement with me is to make MY understanding of scripture Lord rather than the Lord himself.

There are debatable points and points which are foundational and non-negotiable if one is to be in alignment with God's Word.

For example: If a denomination decides it's alright to ordain actively homosexual ministers, they have compromised a fundamental belief of the faith. If they suggest one does not need repentance for salvation, they have compromised a fundamental belief.

If a denomination believes staunchly in an eschatalogical view that differs from others, they have not "swerved from the faith," as that is a debatable point that doesn't compromise fundamental beliefs which are plain in the scripture.

 

[circuitrider]

Yes and no. Understanding the politics of the UMC is like the story of the blind men and the elephant.

The real answer is actually that the UMC is the most middle of the road of the mainline denominations. We have members that are more conservative and more liberal. But the denomination in general is pretty middle of the road.

The American Baptists are the only other mainline denomination that is actually more conservative than the UMC. Just for reference the seven mainline denominations are:

The Episcopal Church, The Evangelical Lutheran Church, The United Methodist Church, the American Baptist Churches USA, the Presbyterian Church USA, The United Church of Christ, and the Disciples of Christ.

Now of course a lot depends on what you call, "liberal." So can you give me a few examples of what you think of as liberal and then I can tell you where the UMC is on whatever you are thinking of.

 

[GraceSeeker]

There are debatable points and points which are foundational and non-negotiable if one is to be in alignment with God's Word.

The interesting thing to me is that one man's debatable points are another's foundational and non-negotiable. Who gets to decide which is which?

 

[BryanW92]

The real answer is actually that the UMC is the most middle of the road of the mainline denominations. We have members that are more conservative and more liberal. But the denomination in general is pretty middle of the road.

The American Baptists are the only other mainline denomination that is actually more conservative than the UMC. Just for reference the seven mainline denominations are:

The Episcopal Church, The Evangelical Lutheran Church, The United Methodist Church, the American Baptist Churches USA, the Presbyterian Church USA, The United Church of Christ, and the Disciples of Christ.

Now of course a lot depends on what you call, "liberal." So can you give me a few examples of what you think of as liberal and then I can tell you where the UMC is on whatever you are thinking of.

You prove my point. Liberals think that the UMC is right of center. Conservatives think that the UMC is left of center. The "blind men and the elephant" analogy applies.

Why isn't the LCMS, Wesleyan Church, or CotN on your list of mainlines? Why is the ABC on that list but not the SBC?

 

[GraceSeeker]

You prove my point. Liberals think that the UMC is right of center. Conservatives think that the UMC is left of center. The "blind men and the elephant" analogy applies.

I see it differently, Bryan. I think your response shows us just how few are left in the middle. We've reach a point of time in our society when to the average conservative, the values of George W. Bush are seen as left of center. And to the average liberal in our culture, the values of Barak Obama as drifting right.

When Paul Rand and Barney Frank define the moderate voices of our country's two poltical parties, I suspect that everything from poltics to religion is going to be out of center. Holding the true middle ground that Methodists have been known for in the past may be the most untenable position of all because everyone is taking potshots at you. (See the continued accusations that repeatedly occur in the WP over the liberal/conservative nature of the UMC for examples.)

 

[BryanW92]

I see it differently, Bryan. I think your response shows us just how few are left in the middle. We've reach a point of time in our society when to the average conservative, the values of George W. Bush are seen as left of center. And to the average liberal in our culture, the values of Barak Obama as drifting right.

When Paul Rand and Barney Frank define the moderate voices of our country's two poltical parties, I suspect that everything from poltics to religion is going to be out of center. Holding the true middle ground that Methodists have been known for in the past may be the most untenable position of all because everyone is taking potshots at you. (See the continued accusations that repeatedly occur in the WP over the liberal/conservative nature of the UMC for examples.)

I agree with you completely. Our partisanship has blinded us all (which takes me back to the elephant). The people are genuinely scared of the future of America, and our "leaders" betray us every day. Every compromise or concession becomes a victory for the side that didn't give up as much, and then that ground becomes the new middle and spawns new calls for compromise or concession. How long can a nation or a church exist in peace with that reality?

 

[Maid Marie]

Why isn't the LCMS, Wesleyan Church, or CotN on your list of mainlines? Why is the ABC on that list but not the SBC?

I wouldn't consider CotN to be mainline at all.

 

[circuitrider]

You prove my point. Liberals think that the UMC is right of center. Conservatives think that the UMC is left of center. The "blind men and the elephant" analogy applies.

Why isn't the LCMS, Wesleyan Church, or CotN on your list of mainlines? Why is the ABC on that list but not the SBC?

It all depends on where you stand Bryan. My basic analysis is that you are either a fundamentalist or nearly so. Well when you are that far to the right everything looks liberal, even folks only a little less conservative than you.

Bryan, I didn't make up this list. It is a list of the known mainline churches. Do a search for the "seven sisters of the mainline" and you'll find a list of those seven churches.

The LCMS and the SBC aren't on the list because they are fundamentalist churches and not mainline. All of the mainline churches believe in ecumenism, that is one of the things that defines "mainline." The LCMS and SBC refuse to have ecumenical relationships.

I don't know as much about the Wesleyan Church's theology but I'd say it is closer to the SBC than the mainline from what I understand.

What it amounts to is that religion in the US has taken a huge rightward shift in the last 30 years so what used to be called middle is not called "left" or "liberal" by the right wing religious and political establishment.

If you look at theology the UMC is middle of the road theologically. We aren't conservatives (most of us) and we aren't liberals (most of us) but there are some of both.

 

[circuitrider]

I wouldn't consider CotN to be mainline at all.

And the CotN probably doesn't want to be, that would be my guess.

 

[Maid Marie]

And the CotN probably doesn't want to be, that would be my guess.

That would be correct.

 

[BryanW92]

All of the mainline churches believe in ecumenism, that is one of the things that defines "mainline."

I didn't know that. Thanks. I always wondered about that, but never bothered to look it up.

To you, I am probably a fundamentalist. I admit that I did look into the LCMS a while back, but it was their position on ecumenism that made me take them off my list. The SBC has always been off my list for the same reason and for their strict inerrancy doctrine, along with their KJV-only stance and the flawed reasoning behind it. I believe that a church that isn't heavily involved in local mission work is dead. I also participate in Halloween festivities. And, even though I argue against people who say that creationism is an absolute myth, I do hold the Old Earth and ID as my personal belief.

So, while I am a fundie to you, I am a liberal to them. Maybe I'm more middle of the road than you give me credit for.

 

[circuitrider]

You may be more middle of the road than I relized Bryan.

But one of the big issues is who gets to define what a liberal, conservative, or fundamentalist is? If you talk to the hard core fundies anyone who disagrees with them is a liberal even folks that you and I might see as conservative.

The terms are so relative as to be difficult to define. Also people can be both liberal and conservative at the same time. I'm fairly liberal on social issues but I'm doctrinally quite orthodox.

 

[Maid Marie]

So, while I am a fundie to you, I am a liberal to them. Maybe I'm more middle of the road than you give me credit for.

You may be more middle of the road than I relized Bryan.

But one of the big issues is who gets to define what a liberal, conservative, or fundamentalist is? If you talk to the hard core fundies anyone who disagrees with them is a liberal even folks that you and I might see as conservative.

The terms are so relative as to be difficult to define. Also people can be both liberal and conservative at the same time. I'm fairly liberal on social issues but I'm doctrinally quite orthodox.

I am in the same boat. To some, I am liberal while to others I am conservative. Like you said, it can also depend on what the subject is. I consider myself middle of the road in general.