Why do people continue to claim that the UMC is liberal?

[GraceSeeker]

I am always hearing the the United Methodist Church is liberal. Seems whether in my local church, in the news media, and certainly when talking to others outside of Methodism (be it on a forum like this or in real life) the perception is that United Methodists are all liberals. A new participant in Wesley's Parish even made that statement. In truth, I find just as many liberal Baptists (once saved always saved, so it doesn't matter how you live your life type folks--the epitome of liberalism, even liberatianism if you as me) as I do Methodists. Yet, over and over again I have to combat the notion that we in the UMC are accepting of homosexuality and straining at the bit to endorse gay lifestyles, conduct homosexual marriages, and ordain gay and lesbian ministers. In case you too have been believing that (disinformation of the devil in my opinion), I offer this as a reality check:

[URL="http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=5259669&ct=7630067"]Judicial Council voids sexuality statement[/URL]

There is an official position in The United Methodist Church on gay and lesbian sexuality, and that states the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.

The Judicial Council, the denomination's highest court, in a ruling released Nov. 2 said that the Baltimore-Washington Annual (regional) Conference went too far in adopting its own statement declaring "a more authentic and truthful representation of The United Methodist Church" is that "we disagree" on gay and lesbian issues.

"The effect of the Baltimore-Washington resolution is to negate the church's clearly stated position as reflected in current disciplinary language," the council wrote. "Moreover, the Baltimore-Washington resolution attempts to articulate a new and different standard of church belief using language that has been specifically rejected by the General Conference."

Delegates to the 2008 General Conference rejected proposed changes to the United Methodist Social Principles that would have acknowledged that church members disagree on homosexuality and instead adopted a report retaining language that describes homosexual practice as "incompatible with Christian teaching."

A California-Nevada resolution directing the conference to distribute a list of retired clergy willing to perform same-sex union ceremonies was considered an endorsement of actions prohibited by the Discipline.

[URL="http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=5069681&content_id={6D65D2CC-A699-48C2-9A1C-F91C334D7384}&notoc=1"]Council rejects resolutions on same-sex marriages[/URL]

United Methodist clergy cannot perform same-sex marriages, even in states where such unions are legal or the ceremonies are endorsed by a regional church group.

The Judicial Council, the denomination's top court, ruled at its spring meeting that it is a chargeable offense for United Methodist clergy to perform ceremonies celebrating same-sex unions.

"An annual conference may not legally negate, ignore or violate provisions of the (Book of) Discipline with which they disagree, even when the disagreements are based on conscientious objections to the provisions," the council ruled.

The council [also] reversed California-Pacific Conference Bishop Mary Ann Swenson's ruling supporting a conference resolution recognizing "the pastoral need and prophetic authority of our clergy and congregations to offer the ministry of marriage ceremonies for same-gender couples."

 

[IowaPastor]

Hi GraceSeeker,

Thanks for your words. I'm guessing that people think the UMC is liberal due to their experiences in it or with people from a UMC. Even though it may mean that they are painting with a very broad brush.

I moved on from my home church earlier this year (I'm still in the candidacy process...lost some where out in no-man's land but no longer offically pastoring) and am now a member in another UMC. The change is unbelieveable!!!!

In short, I went from a liberal UMC--one that really didn't believe in the value of prayer nor did it really want to have the Bible preached. (I know...I know...) Now, I'm a member (driving nearly 30 miles one way) at a different UMC that is a praying church and a church that appears to be hungry for God's presence and for the Word.

Okay, so technically I followed my pastor...but I was also doing what God wanted me to do too. There's no question in my mind that I was to leave the church I left.

In the meantime, I'm praising God for this change! What a wonderful new family in Christ that I now have!!

Be Blessed,

IP

 

[Qyöt27]

My guess would be because the UMC is a rather visible mainline church, and the attacks are coming from Fundamentalist churches that equate mainline with stark liberal. A big part of that may also be that we reject the kind of legalistic views some of them have also (which could be everything from the mundane like dancing or the not-quite-teetotaling-anymore position on alcohol to things like not declaring a specific Origins view beyond stating that God had a hand in it, or performing infant baptism).

 

[broken_one]

I voted for Obama...?


Though certainly I affirm the beliefs of what basically the UMC does (we're not much different ).

 

[St. Paul]

My UMC is definitely on the liberal side. I've only been attending for about 4 months and the 20 people or so that I've talked to are definitely on the liberal side.

I don't consider the claim that the UMC is liberal as an insult.

 

[boswd]

what is everyone defining as Liberal?

Politics?
Gay Clergy and Gay Marriage?

there is a big difference. YOu have to remember before Roe v Wade divided our Political landscape, many of the issues that Democrats champion now are causes that all Christians held to such as welfare for the poor, equal rights etc.

 

[fieryphoenix]

I was raised in the United Methodist Church. After I got into my early 20s, I explored churches in other denominations. Relative to most other churches, the UMC is liberal. Liberalism comes in many forms depending on the issue.

The church extols the values of social justice, compassion and kindness to others. The church also teaches that people should use reason to interpret the Bible. These values are generally not emphasized in the more conservative denominations.

Unlike many fundamentalist Protestant churches, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches or Southern Baptist churches, the UMC allows women to be ministers.


You are mistaken to use the homosexual issue as the benchmark in determining whether a church is liberal. All of the mainline churches--Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Lutherans, United Church of Christ-- are divided on that issue. The Episcopal church is splitting over it.

The UMC's official stance on homosexuality is that homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Some people did try to overturn this teaching, but they were outvoted.

When I was growing up, I never heard any sermons about homosexuality, abortion or any other sexual issue.

There are UM churches which are gay affirming. They are called Reconciling churches.

 

[salida]

The liberal versus conservative definition:
http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

I'm an ultra conservative and the above is accurate.

 

[Holyroller125]

Dear GraceSeeker and the rest of the World Christian Movement:

I'm guessing people call the UMC a liberal denomination because of how we take care of different people. My questions and challenges of the status quo are as follows:

1. Am I and the UMC liberal because the church does not wait for people to validate my opinion and faith statement before providing needs?
2. Am I a liberal because I am pro-actively involved in taking care of my community? Hence, the UMC is not compartmentalized and seperated from the rest of community. Maybe, if more churches were involved in their community, the particular "conservative" church will have the ideal revival that they have been talking about?
3. Am I liberal because I respect others theology (e.g., does not mean I am agreeing with them)? The church is called to love our neighbors? The church is called to love our enemies? The church is called to love God whole heartily?
4. Am I liberal because I believe discipleship is not making *yes men* out of people in the pews, and I actually pro-actively disciple and equip people to perform their ministries?

The gospel of Jesus Christ and the New Testament allows us to be reasonable, use common sense, and be flexible. Any person that is compartmentalized, lives in isolation from world, or is dogmatic is not really living the gospel in a pro-active healthy manner. Hence, Jesus is more concerned about your praxis of the gospel not making *yes men* out of people?

People need to understand the gospel sets us free so that one has liberty in Christ (Rom. 14). Legalism and license are both extremes that is not the gospel. One needs to be careful to not mistaken liberty for license. Liberty in the Biblical sense and ancient meaning is not the same meaning as license. License means one can do what they want, how they want it, and without any accountability. On the other hand, the gospel calls us to be accountable in the faith covenant community. This means one must not be theologically indifferent nor dogmatic towards people. At the same time, whatever happened to: do no harm!!!

And Iowa Pastor,

I was in a "ultra-conservative denomination/organizaiton???" and the members acted like they did not want to become disciples. The members acted like they did not want to grow in theology, grow in discipleship, grow for ministry, and grow for outreach. It appeared to be one big glorified Bible Study, and the attention was not about spiritual growth and discipleship. Their is some "conservative churches???" out their that have members that are very stagnate too. The importance is the desire to be discipled so that the ministry/mission of the church can be expanded in God's Kingdom.

God Bless,

Rev. Greg Norton

 

[cristianna]

I agree with holyroller because like Jesus, the UMC as a whole never turns anyone away who needs ministering to, food, etc. I think many misinterpret the slogan: Open Doors, Open Minds, Open Hearts (which ever is the correct order).

 

[GraceSeeker]

I'm glad that this has stirred debate beyond the issue of homosexuality. I used it, because as a pastor that is the issue about which I get questioned most frequently. And always, in my experience, from people who fear that the UMC is becoming "too liberal" (their words, their definition). And I just wanted to show how the issue that these folks seem to be most upset about really isn't being resolved in the way that they so often fear.


As far as the rest of the discussion of what it means to be liberal, I've always considered it to be a compliment parrallel to being open-minded and having a wide range of areas in which one is informed and involved.

However, when I look at the link provided above that suggests a way to identify conservative vs. liberal beliefs, I find that I am all over the map. Liberal on one issue and conservative on another. I think it is worth noting that these are all in a category that I would call "political/social" issues. And on this I think it is probably fair to say that overall the United Methodist Church leans more toward the liberal agenda -- it seeks to respond to human need itself and encourages the government to do so as well. But just as I personally am all over the map varying from issue to issue, so too one should not look at any single issue and say that the UM Church is liberal, conservative or something else. And particularly, I would suggest, if one looks at the issue of homosexuality, the United Methodist Church in its official actions (regardless the loudness of certain squeeky wheels within it) has consistently given a response more in concert with the political viewpoint of the more conservative elements of our society than the liberal ones on that one particular issue.

So, that's poltics and social agendas. How about in the theological world? I've got some ideas in this regard, but before sharing them I would like to hear what some of the rest of you have to say.

 

[Speculative]

People claim that the UMC is liberal for the same reason that they claim water is wet.

-Conservative denominations don't have "Loud squeaky wheels" arguing for gay rights. This would be unheard of in the PCA, SBC and AoG (denominations with which I've had a fair amount of personal experience).

-Conservative churches don't usually have female pastors, and certainly not female senior pastors.

-Conservative churches don't practice open communion.

-Conservative churches hold to sola scriptura, and some doctrine of Biblical inerrancy or infallibility.

-Conservative churches are stridently and actively pro-life

-Conservative churches praise conservative politicians and lampoon liberal and moderate politicians (in my experience).

-The conservative churches I've been to reject the use of a liturgical calendar.

Those are just a few of the things I can think of off the top of my head. However, I think if you list the denominations there are out there, pretty much anyone would tend to put the UMC towards the liberal end for many of the reasons I've mentioned above.

 

[GraceSeeker]

By that standard I'm not a conservative and will gladly accept the label of liberal.

I don't mind squeaky wheels. I don't always agree with the agenda, but I certainly support their right to make their voice heard.

I figure if Paul could praise women for service in the church: equipping Apollos, mentoring Timothy, being a prophet and serving as a deacon, I'm not going to go against that type of authority and tell women they can't be a shepherd.

The whole the idea that one could stand in the pulpit and pronounce the cup to be the cup of the new covenant given to forgive sins and then not offer it to all who desire it is repugnant to me.

Sola scriptura meaning to interpret through scripture alone and not bring one's reason or experience to bear on the passage under consideration is just foolishness. A literal interpretation of scripture would have God with wings and Jesus literally sitting on top of the Father's right hand. No one I know believes such nonsesne, so whether they admit it or not they are not truly sola scriptura.

Conservative church are the only ones capable of taking a moral stand against abortion. Muslims do as well.

Lampooning anyone doesn't seem to be reflective of a Christian character.


I agree that people put United Methodists toward that liberal end, I'm arguing that in reality we are that far left of the middle of left of it at all. Perhaps in comparison to some that have gone far right we look liberal, but I tend to think that we are a lot more centrist than popular opinion projects.

 

[Qyöt27]

Theologically or politically-socially, I think it's just a matter that the eclecticness means we can't necessarily be pigeon-holed. Protestant but generally not in line with Reformed churches, evangelical as an adjective but not really the social grouping (which tends to be seen as Fundamentalism-lite), in some cases strongly traditional without being dogmatic and/or able to make intellectual distinctions (or hey, the very fact that intellectualism isn't scorned in the first place - I distinctly remember my parents telling me once that they were afraid I would become an atheist because intellectuals had a tendency for it*, and I was in advanced programs from elementary thru high school; to be fair, while we were raised in the UMC, my dad often listened to AM Radio preachers and was rather indiscriminate of who to listen to in regard to things like end times doctrine - and even today still goes into full-blown dispensationalist conspiracy theory when the news reports things that set off those tendencies), the list goes on.

*really, don't get me started on how wrong this assertion is.

Wild cards very often get seen as 'liberal' the same way they are often seen as being wishy-washy. Heck, they may just use 'liberal' as a synonym for that, if they don't use the word 'moderate' that way (the latter of which makes my blood slightly boil).

 

[Zoness]

Theologically or politically-socially, I think it's just a matter that the eclecticness means we can't necessarily be pigeon-holed.

Right there, the conservative weapon has been disbanded and therefore we are marked as nasty liberals. Although I wear the title liberal quite proudly.

 

[Speculative]

By that standard I'm not a conservative and will gladly accept the label of liberal.

I don't mind squeaky wheels. I don't always agree with the agenda, but I certainly support their right to make their voice heard.

I figure if Paul could praise women for service in the church: equipping Apollos, mentoring Timothy, being a prophet and serving as a deacon, I'm not going to go against that type of authority and tell women they can't be a shepherd.

The whole the idea that one could stand in the pulpit and pronounce the cup to be the cup of the new covenant given to forgive sins and then not offer it to all who desire it is repugnant to me.

Sola scriptura meaning to interpret through scripture alone and not bring one's reason or experience to bear on the passage under consideration is just foolishness. A literal interpretation of scripture would have God with wings and Jesus literally sitting on top of the Father's right hand. No one I know believes such nonsesne, so whether they admit it or not they are not truly sola scriptura.

Conservative church are the only ones capable of taking a moral stand against abortion. Muslims do as well.

Lampooning anyone doesn't seem to be reflective of a Christian character.


I agree that people put United Methodists toward that liberal end, I'm arguing that in reality we are that far left of the middle of left of it at all. Perhaps in comparison to some that have gone far right we look liberal, but I tend to think that we are a lot more centrist than popular opinion projects.

Well, see there you go. Many of these beliefs (particularly the ones about women pastors, communion, sola scriptura and tolerance of views contrary to the official views of the denomination) would be considered heretical by most of the people in the churches I mentioned before.

I'll be honest with you, when I was going to the more conservative churches, I believed the UMC church to be apostate for those very views. Of course, I've sinced learned that you are right and I was wrong .

I have a problem with the liberal wing of the church as well, but my beef goes more along with the lines of what IowaPastor was posting than the whole gay thing, or women pastors, etc. Around here, I think our churches don't devote enough energy to the disciplines of Bible Study and prayer. I'm sure it is different in other places, but around here, the conservatives really have us beaten when it comes to Bible study memorization, etc. and I think prayer is becoming a lost art in many churches in the U.S. (not just the Methodist). Sorry for venting here a little bit, but I'd like to see us in our church address these issues a little bit better.

 

[cristianna]

People claim that the UMC is liberal for the same reason that they claim water is wet.

-Conservative denominations don't have "Loud squeaky wheels" arguing for gay rights. This would be unheard of in the PCA, SBC and AoG (denominations with which I've had a fair amount of personal experience).

-Conservative churches don't usually have female pastors, and certainly not female senior pastors.

-Conservative churches don't practice open communion.

-Conservative churches hold to sola scriptura, and some doctrine of Biblical inerrancy or infallibility.

-Conservative churches are stridently and actively pro-life

-Conservative churches praise conservative politicians and lampoon liberal and moderate politicians (in my experience).

-The conservative churches I've been to reject the use of a liturgical calendar.

Those are just a few of the things I can think of off the top of my head. However, I think if you list the denominations there are out there, pretty much anyone would tend to put the UMC towards the liberal end for many of the reasons I've mentioned above.

Looking at that list, I'd have to agree with the general view of liberalism. Funny, I've never viewed it that way before.

 

[revanneosl]

Another possible reason that people view the UMC as liberal may be because we used to be a liberal denomination. However, the General Conference has been moving us farther and farther to the right since the early 80s. It's a trend that I dislike immensely. Every four years I start thinking about jumping ship to the Episcopalians.

They have better liturgy too.

Sigh.

 

[Holyroller125]

Another possible reason that people view the UMC as liberal may be because we used to be a liberal denomination. However, the General Conference has been moving us farther and farther to the right since the early 80s. It's a trend that I dislike immensely. Every four years I start thinking about jumping ship to the Episcopalians.

They have better liturgy too.

Sigh.

Any church or pastor that does not believe in the resurrection of the Lord, the virgin birth, the atonement of Christ, loving neighbor as yourself, the trinity, God manifest in the flesh, Jesus is the Son of God, the baptism in the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts for mission, and answering the call to global Christian mission is not a real church/christian/pastor at all.

All The Best,

Rev. Greg Norton

 

[revanneosl]

Any church or pastor that does not believe in the resurrection of the Lord, the virgin birth, the atonement of Christ, loving neighbor as yourself, the trinity, God manifest in the flesh, Jesus is the Son of God, the baptism in the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts for mission, and answering the call to global Christian mission is not a real church/christian/pastor at all.

All The Best,

Rev. Greg Norton

I'm confused by your response to my statement. Do you mean to imply that either the UMC or the Episcopalian church does not subscribe to these doctrinal norms?