Hello. I have been noticing a trend in the United Methodist Church that has been troubling me. I grew up in a Untied Methodist Church and was confirmed when I was in 6th grade. I went to a college affiliated with the UMC, and I received a counseling degree at a UMC seminary. Except for a few years when I attended Vineyard churches, I have regularly attended UMC churches my whole life.
I am personally fairly theologically conservative/traditional, and I knew people in seminary who had quite liberal/progressive views (some even questioned Jesus’ very existence). I know there are those in the denomination who do not believe in what I consider to be historic Christian beliefs (such as Jesus’ bodily resurrection, Jesus dying on the cross for our sins, etc). John Shelby Spong came to speak at my seminary. I know he was not United Methodist, but still had an influence on some seminary professors and students, including the bishop in residence at the time. Anyway, when someone clearly says that they do not believe in the traditional historic beliefs, then at least I know where they stand.
However, there seems to be a current trend where people/leaders do not seem to outright deny historic teachings, but rather they just don’t talk about them. Some of them use traditional terms, but seem to have redefined those terms to fit with their own understanding, or to make them so broad that they have very little meaning. Some of these individuals might still believe in the historic teachings, but are afraid of offending those who do not? And some of them might deny the teachings, but do not want to say they are, or maybe they have convinced themselves that if they change the definitions, they can still adhere to the creeds?
I also am unsure if this is something that the denomination is encouraging, or if it’s just a trend?
For example, the fairly new pastor at my church did not preach what I consider to be the gospel message this Good Friday and Easter. He did not say much about why Jesus died at all. Instead, he talked about death in general, and how the disciples must have felt about experiencing grief.
On Easter, and the weeks following Easter, “resurrection” was defined so broadly by the associate pastor and senior pastor that it really didn’t mean much. Resurrection was defined as like an a-ha moment, and we were left with questions like, “where do you need resurrection in your life.” Not much was said about the meaning of Jesus’ resurrection.
Both the Good Friday and Easter sermons felt so flat to me. They left me feeling empty and really disappointed — as if my pastors had really missed an important opportunity to share the gospel.
Many of the sermons since approximately Advent (and possibly before that) have been heavily focused on relationships. Don’t get me wrong, I think relationships with others and with God are important, but it almost seems as though relationships are the whole focus of my church right now, to the exclusion of the gospel. I really can’t remember the last time the gospel was actually preached at my church. It just seems like important things are missing.
Another recent focus seems to be on certain spiritual practices that I cannot find an example of in my Bible. Lots of be aware of your senses — what do you hear, see, taste, smell, feel, etc. Or Let’s close our eyes and imagine what Jesus is saying to you exercises.
Is this type of thing being pushed in the whole denomination?
I am personally fairly theologically conservative/traditional, and I knew people in seminary who had quite liberal/progressive views (some even questioned Jesus’ very existence). I know there are those in the denomination who do not believe in what I consider to be historic Christian beliefs (such as Jesus’ bodily resurrection, Jesus dying on the cross for our sins, etc). John Shelby Spong came to speak at my seminary. I know he was not United Methodist, but still had an influence on some seminary professors and students, including the bishop in residence at the time. Anyway, when someone clearly says that they do not believe in the traditional historic beliefs, then at least I know where they stand.
However, there seems to be a current trend where people/leaders do not seem to outright deny historic teachings, but rather they just don’t talk about them. Some of them use traditional terms, but seem to have redefined those terms to fit with their own understanding, or to make them so broad that they have very little meaning. Some of these individuals might still believe in the historic teachings, but are afraid of offending those who do not? And some of them might deny the teachings, but do not want to say they are, or maybe they have convinced themselves that if they change the definitions, they can still adhere to the creeds?
I also am unsure if this is something that the denomination is encouraging, or if it’s just a trend?
For example, the fairly new pastor at my church did not preach what I consider to be the gospel message this Good Friday and Easter. He did not say much about why Jesus died at all. Instead, he talked about death in general, and how the disciples must have felt about experiencing grief.
On Easter, and the weeks following Easter, “resurrection” was defined so broadly by the associate pastor and senior pastor that it really didn’t mean much. Resurrection was defined as like an a-ha moment, and we were left with questions like, “where do you need resurrection in your life.” Not much was said about the meaning of Jesus’ resurrection.
Both the Good Friday and Easter sermons felt so flat to me. They left me feeling empty and really disappointed — as if my pastors had really missed an important opportunity to share the gospel.
Many of the sermons since approximately Advent (and possibly before that) have been heavily focused on relationships. Don’t get me wrong, I think relationships with others and with God are important, but it almost seems as though relationships are the whole focus of my church right now, to the exclusion of the gospel. I really can’t remember the last time the gospel was actually preached at my church. It just seems like important things are missing.
Another recent focus seems to be on certain spiritual practices that I cannot find an example of in my Bible. Lots of be aware of your senses — what do you hear, see, taste, smell, feel, etc. Or Let’s close our eyes and imagine what Jesus is saying to you exercises.
Is this type of thing being pushed in the whole denomination?