United Methodism, Mainline Protestantism, Christian Faith – Is There Hope?

A line from Martin Luther’s A Mighty Fortress keeps running through my mind: “And though this world with devils filled, should threaten to undo us…” I generally have been quite optimistic about my faith, my church (United Methodist), Christianity, and life in general. Some of my premillennial dispensationalist friends argue that the Lord must be coming soon because the world is continually getting worse. I disagree.

And yet…and yet. It must be hard to know as a “Progressive,” if “Progressive” means we are ever advancing onward and upward. Despite advances in science, growth in economic wealth, opportunities for leisure, happiness, travel and gadgets, we seem unsatisfied as a people. We are conflicted, angry, losing confidence in our institutions, and especially in our political system. And, unfortunately, also with our churches.

This article (and a couple more to follow) will concentrate on United Methodism. After the 2024 General Conference, in which institutional progressives ruled the day, numbers of observers rejoiced that now that the disaffiliation fervor seemed over, and rigid, exclusivist evangelicals were no longer around, the future was bright for United Methodism. The conference approved a number of constitutional amendments including the plan for regionalization (United Methodist churches outside the U.S. could develop their own Social Principles, standards for ordination, and on matters such as what constitutes marriage).

This was supposed to bring unity. I love the United Methodist Church but, like others, I have great concern. Unless we take drastic measures as a denomination, we will continue to fade as a strong witness for Jesus Christ.

The statistics do not look good. In 1968 the newly formed UMC claimed 11 million members, almost all of whom were in the United States. Recent membership figures report that from the almost 11 million members in the U.S. in 1968, the membership figure has now dropped to 4,238,000 (after disaffiliation), a 62 percent decrease. Even more discouragingly, the average age of a Methodist is now 58, the oldest of any religious group in America.

What then is the future for United Methodism? Much depends on the leadership we have and how they might direct us. By leadership I refer primarily to bishops, boards and agencies, seminaries and leading pastors. What are these people thinking and projecting for the future?

I suggest several possibilities:

1. Continue the direction of the 2024 General Conference, which means move even farther to the theological, social and political left. As one person said, “We have named the harm; now we must create newness.” Another person, a self-described  “(she-they), a white trans fem nonbinary queer ordained elder,” declared, “we must now explore where we are going with intention and authenticity.”

Some, it seems, are ready to do so. The Jurisdictional Conferences of 2023 elected 13 new bishops, every single one of which went on record as wanting to change the church’s (and the Biblical) stand on the family and on homosexual practice and marriage.

There are, of course, serious problems with this direction. For one, it will further alienate most of the overseas UMC, which is already being marginalized by the constitutional amendments (due to be ratified by the 2025 annual conferences) for “regionalization.,” a plan which, while claiming to be sensitive to regional differences, is thinly disguised segregation. But it will also alienate American UMs, that is, the people in the pew, who, despite the loss of more conservative Methodists through disaffiliation (about 27% of the church) still, theologically, socially and politically, are much more traditional than UM seminaries, boards and agencies, and bishops. At the moment there is no major “progressive” church body in America that is thriving. The seven major “mainline” denominations, which once represented more than half of American Protestantism, have declined to the point they now represent, at least according to one study, 17 percent.

Those who march under the banner of diversity and inclusion are seen as monolithic and restrictive in their theological and political outlook. On a couple of occasions (and this is several years ago) I have written to a major church agency, the General Board of Church and Society, and asked whether or not the board was aware of any staff persons who identified politically as Republican. The response was that this was an inappropriate question and that, anyway, this question was not asked of staff persons. Of course. A more forthright response would have been, “We are not aware of any at this time.” We have limited diversity, at least among our leadership.

Push the progressive agenda even farther afield? I fear we would face diminishing returns.

2. Steady the course. Continue as we have been, but do things better and believe that the church’s seemingly increasing irrelevance can be turned around. I would argue that this is basically the position of consulting Lewis Center for Church Leadership. Consultants Doug Rowe and Levett Weems, well-known UMC leaders, have been recording podcasts (I believe 160 of these) offering advice, insights and encouragement to church leaders. In their January 6 podcast they offer their insights and recommendations on the United Methodist future. “Under the title, “Challenges and Opportunities – The Future of the United Methodist Church,” they speak of:  need for structural reform, changes to the ordination process, practicing sustaining, traditional practices with disruptive innovation, connecting with underserved communities, redefining leadership roles, being intentional about being an inclusive church, figuring new ways to used buildings, being nimble, figuring out how to make regionalization work (how to make practical working with nine tables instead of one big table), letting our Wesleyan heritage guide us, and living with the dream of the 2024 General Conference.

Of course it is a bit more complicated. Weems admits that “wanting to get back to normal” will lead only to more decline. He also comments that despite General Conference actions and despite disaffiliation, the UMC still has a conservative constituency, with many small churches concentrated in rural areas.

Despite all the good advice, there is not much that is new or innovative or direction-changing about this understanding of what United Methodism must do to bring vitality into its future. We cannot just keep on doing what we have always done and expect different results.

3. Admit how serious the problem is and take the risk of radical change. I have no illusions that many, or even any, of the following ideas will be taken with any seriousness, but I fear that our present predicament is so serious that unless drastic actions are taken our UMC future is bleak.

A. Sever ties with so-called United Methodist institutions of higher learning.
B. Redo standards for ordination.
C. Close or merge most UM seminaries.
D. Dismantle denominational institutionalism by abolishing most general boards and agencies.
E. Set theological and moral standards for church members and clergy.
F. Reverse our present anti-family and anti-marriage stances.
G. Be intentional about reaching the poor and other underserved groups.

Before discussing any of these areas (in future articles) let us review our heritage. Despite the vision of early Puritans and other Christian groups, Christianity in America by the Revolutionary War was in trouble. Deism was the religion of preference and only 10 percent of the American population were church members. When Methodism organized in 1784, Francis Asbury is said to have proclaimed, “O America, America, God will make it the glory of the world for religion.” The early preachers were challenged, “You have nothing to do but save souls” (which is related if not exactly the same as “making disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world”). 

Methodists introduced revivalism along with the altar call, the camp meeting, the mourner’s bench, the gospel song, the new birth, and so swept the American frontier that by 1850 one of every three Americans was a church member and one-third of that group was Methodist. The words of Peter Cartwright, early frontier preacher, describe Methodism of those earliest days:

We had no Missionary Society; no Sunday-school Society; no Church papers; no Bible or Tract Societies; no colleges, seminaries, academies, or universities; all the efforts to get up colleges under the patronage of the Methodist Episcopal Church in theses United States and Territories, were signal failures. We had no pewed churches, no choirs, no organs…The Methodists in that early day dressed plain; …they wore no jewelry; they wore no ruffles….

No one is suggesting a return to that same strictness but there is a point to be made that for the most part Methodists in that age were counter-cultural. They were reaching all people, including all races and all economic classes. They were not given to fashionable fads.

Can we learn some things by taking a closer look at our heritage?