POV: Schism in the Methodist Church Explained
Marsh Chapel dean reflects on what’s behind the split and what it means for the denomination’s future
Photo via AP Photo/Jessie Wardarski
POV: Schism in the Methodist Church Explained
Marsh Chapel dean reflects on what’s behind the split and what it means for the denomination’s future
Given the completion of a split within the United Methodist Church last month, people have asked several questions as the divorce is being finalized. Here is an attempt to respond to some of these interests.
Why have a quarter of American Methodist churches left the denomination?
Like other Protestant denominations (Episcopal, Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc.), the United Methodist Church (UMC) has faced decades of conflict, largely over the full humanity of gay people. Like other denominations, after years of national and other meetings (“conferences,” in Methodism), the denomination has at long last come to a conclusive point. As a result, some 20 to 25 percent of churches and members have departed the denomination.
Why now?
The schism, finally and fully ratified in April, has been fully present since at least 1970, and has been debated, avoided, postponed, and dreaded since before I entered the ministry in 1979. The determinations of the General Conference (the governing body of the UMC) have at long last, and with both grace and truth, come to a conclusive point on the gay issue. It has been a long time coming.
How have politics played a role in the schism?
The more than 200-year history of Methodism (as of 1968, United Methodism) in general—and directly with regard to the current split—has most certainly been influenced by “politics,” in the sense that Methodism has always been the most national, most representative Protestant denomination, with at least one local church in every county of the 50 United States.
For instance, even our current Book of Discipline affirms a moderate pro-choice position on abortion, one of the things those leaving the denomination oppose. Methodism has more than a century in advocacy for the rights of women, including the right to ordination, which those leaving the denomination largely oppose. The issue of gay rights and, more broadly, issues related to lifestyle, parenting, schooling, and other topics, have percolated not only through the body politic of the country, but also through the community and communities of faith. There is a direct relation and correlation between the two.
Some of that is simply the presence of John and Mary at the school board on Tuesday evening and then in worship together on Sunday morning. More of it is lodged in different perspectives on local vs. national authority, and state vs. federal authority. Having had the privilege of preaching from 10 different pulpits, it has been quite impressive to me just how localized, how culturally distinctive each congregation becomes, in matters great and not so great.
What about the issue of LGBTQ+ rights and same-sex marriage?
Much of our April division comes in regard to, or directly as a result of, this issue, especially as this issue is biblically understood—or, better, misunderstood. Let me here add the biblical background to this.
There are, in the full stretch of the Bible—in all 66 books, both Hebrew scriptures and New Testament—some 30,000 verses. Exactly 6 of those—6 out of 30,000—arguably have anything directly to say about same-gender relationships. It is not exactly a central theme for the biblical writers. But what makes this matter so vexing for modern Methodism is not the near absence of any biblical material related to this theme that so bedevils the departing segment of our denomination, but rather the very clear, centrally admonished teaching otherwise.
For instance, in Galatians 3:28, Paul (often, ironically, a favorite for conservatives) writes: “In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female.” In this letter—what theologian Martin Luther called “the Magna Carta of Christian faith”—we have the setting aside of religious, economic, and sexual distinctions, on the power of the unity of faith, of baptism, and the Gospel of Christ. “There is no male and female,” but rather the unity of faith, hope, and love in the person of Christ, crucified and risen.
The fundamentalists leaving the denomination, purportedly on biblical grounds, have not read the Bible—or at least have not read it carefully, faithfully, and fully, especially as regards Galatians 3:28 and similar passages, within the full and fully liberating arc of biblical theology.
What does this all mean for the Methodist denomination?
It means hard work. It means the ongoing struggle to support urban ministry with poor and underprivileged people, the struggle to support growing churches in Africa and Asia, the struggle to support summer camping ministries, campus ministries, elder care ministries, and many other forms of service that our connectional system has effectively and efficiently provided over decades—with fewer people, churches, and far less money. We will have to cut in all these areas and others: administrative overstructures, district superintendencies, the number of general superintendents (bishops), and so on. But it also means a new day, a chance for creative repositioning, a moment for younger clergy coming-of-age to find their voice and influence, and the kind of freedom that comes with change.
What does it reflect about American religion? American politics? The intersection of the two?
Politics is downstream from economics, which is downstream from culture, which is downstream from religion (I mean religion very broadly). What happens in religion really matters and reflects the broader American landscape, for good or ill—or very ill.
The Rev. Robert Allan Hill, dean of Marsh Chapel and a professor of New Testament and pastoral theology at the School of Theology, can be reached at rahill@bu.edu. This column is adapted from a recent sermon.
“POV” is an opinion page that provides timely commentaries from students, faculty, and staff on a variety of issues: on-campus, local, state, national, or international. Anyone interested in submitting a piece, which should be about 700 words long, should contact John O’Rourke at orourkej@bu.edu. BU Today reserves the right to reject or edit submissions. The views expressed are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent the views of Boston University.
Comments & Discussion
Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.