The Predicament of Methodism

The Methodist Church may no longer be the largest denomination in America. Its rate of growth not compare well with that of Protestantism in general. For the past six years there has been a decided decrease in additions on profession of faith. Methodism needs to examine itself.

The Methodist Church has this poor evangelistic record despite the fact that it has a General Board of Evangelism led by capable, concerned, and dedicated men. Under the leadership of this fine board, the church has an evangelistic program unsurpassed in Protestantism. The board supplies the church with excellent materials, well-trained resource personnel, and proven methods for the evangelistic program. Despite this, the church continues to show a poor evangelistic record.

The National Council of Churches annually releases stewardship figures of forty-six denominations. Last time The Methodist Church was forty-third. Of course, the massive membership of the church must be considered. The larger the membership, the more difficult it is to keep a high per-capita record. However, when it is remembered that The Methodist Church has become a middle-class church, the low per-capita figure indicates lack of commitment on the part of a great portion of her membership.

Poor attendance is another sign of the sickness in Methodism. While the morning worship services continue to be well attended, the Sunday evening service has been abandoned in most areas and is just barely alive in the Bible Belt. The mid-week prayer service is a forgotten experience. Discontinuance of the Sunday evening service and prayer meeting might be accounted for by changing conditions, and some would contend that these needs are being met in other ways. But there seems to be no answer for the decline in Sunday school attendance. At a time when there are more children than ever before, Sunday school enrollment is down in Methodism. Admittedly, this is a national trend. However, many conservative evangelical denominations have growing Sunday schools.

Neglect Of Personal Righteousness

Historically Methodism has been concerned with social righteousness. The church of the Wesleys has always believed in the social application of the Gospel. While The Methodist Church, when at her best, has had a prophetic social voice, she did not neglect in the past personal righteousness. Today we find the situation changing. The church has become so preoccupied with social concerns that she is failing in her quest for personal righteousness. Methodism has been alarmed about the atom bomb but strangely quiet about the moral deterioration of our people. We are rightly concerned about the sex crimes that plague our land but feel that Tennessee Williams is a prophet. We are worried about the direction of our youth but say little about the suggestive and repugnant movies and books that are filling their minds with filth. We are alarmed by the increasing number of illegitimate pregnancies but say nothing about immodest dress and sensual entertainment. We are concerned about war among nations but are doing little about the war in the soul of man. We are rightly concerned about racial injustice but are failing to bring men into the great Christian brotherhood. We are anxious that the alcoholic be accepted as a sick man but are silencing the prophetic voice against the liquor traffic and saying little about total abstinence. We are seeking to reform the world rather than convert the individual. Christianity has become synonymous with our social viewpoint, and personal morality is overlooked or given scant attention.

Methodism has a heritage that is unequaled in American Protestantism. In her founder, John Wesley, she has a noble example to follow. Wesley was an evangelist who did not neglect the social implications of the Gospel. While he believed in depth evangelism, he did not neglect the needy masses. He realized the high value of education but knew men must be born again to enter the kingdom of heaven. Under Wesley’s leadership the mightiest revival since Pentecost took place, and Methodism was born.

The Methodist Church in America was formally organized December 24, 1784, in Baltimore, Maryland. At this Christmas Conference some sixty preachers were reported in the connection, and there were 14,988 Methodists in America. The conference was conducted in Lovely Lane Chapel; although it was the dead of winter they could not afford a stove to warm the building. These preachers, whose annual salary was $64, did not represent wealth or social position.

They considered evangelism their main work. They were “now” preachers, and they preached for decision. Their stated purpose was “to reform the continent and spread scriptural holiness over these lands.” Wherever others went for money these went for love of souls.

This humble group of insignificant, despised Methodists grew to be the largest denomination in America. In 1860 one-third of all U. S. Protestants were Methodist.

With this kind of heritage we are amazed to see the church of the Wesleys on the defensive and in retreat. What is her present predicament? I believe that Methodism has a theological, administrative, and liturgical predicament.

A Theological Calamity

Until World War II classical liberalism dominated the Methodist seminaries and the thinking of the church leadership. Much of the literature was humanistic and naturalistic, rather than theistic and evangelical. The social gospel with its resolve to build the Kingdom through reform was the predominant message. The inevitability of progress was the prevailing philosophy. Sermons were often little more than ethical essays.

Following this a reaction set in against rationalism and humanism. Along with most of the rest of Protestant Christianity, Methodist theologians began to see the weakness of liberalism. In seeking a way out of the theological predicament they were influenced by Barth and Brunner, and this led to a more biblical faith. However, there is much about neoorthodoxy that conflicts with the traditional Methodist message. Barth emphasizes the transcendence of God to the neglect of Christian experience. He stresses the holiness of God but has little to say about holiness of life.

With all of its shortcomings, neoorthodoxy was a healthy reaction. Methodist theologians began to study their Bibles seriously.

However, the reaction went past Barth, and instead of following the path of neo-evangelical Christianity, it followed left-wing existentialism. Now Bultmann is the inspired prophet and Tillich is his echo, and almost all of the Methodist seminaries have disciples of these men on the faculty.

Existentialism with its lack of authority and objectivity has worsened the theological predicament of Methodism.

This left-wing theology is eating the very vitals out of historic New Testament Christianity. One of the exponents of this thought has boldly declared in the national magazine for Methodist ministers that the birth of Jesus is historical but the narrative of the Virgin Birth is not; the Crucifixion is historical but the Resurrection is not. Is this not just an intellectual way of saying, “I do not believe”?

Methodism is in theological crisis, and if she does not return to the faith of Paul and Luther and Wesley and Clarke she shall cease to be a vital influence.

The Organizational Predicament

The organizational predicament of The Methodist Church is not as basic as the theological, but it is one that must be solved.

The episcopal form of church government with its power of appointment and itinerant ministry was ideal for a pioneering frontier church. Undoubtedly the connectional system of The Methodist Church contributed greatly toward her success in the early days of American life. Just as the organizational genius of Wesley conserved and spread revival, so American Methodism with its unique system of church government conquered a frontier for Christ.

Today there is much to be said for the appointive system. A church is never without a pastor, and a pastor is never without a church. The episcopal system offers security for the minister. For older men, conscious of the demand for younger preachers, this is important.

There are also many liabilities. For the most part appointments are made on the basis of salary and seniority. This is frustrating for the vigorous young men of ability and devotion, who must wait for the older men to retire before they can hope to have a church of any size. It also encourages inefficiency. The men know that if they will bide their time, promotion will come. If they have to move they will be taken care of. Seldom is a preacher demoted.

The system also encourages power blocks. While the bishops are sincere and dedicated men, there is nevertheless too great a temptation to succumb to prejudice and show favoritism.

Many ministers who do not have friends in the cabinet have difficulties in moving favorably. Of course the more talented, dedicated men will eventually advance, but slower than necessary. Many men serve churches that they are not qualified to serve and get promotions that they would never have if the congregations were calling their own pastors. There are many instances in which a strong church has requested an able man who was fully qualified. The cabinet and bishop have refused the request and have sent a man who would not be called to a church half that size under a congregational form of government.

The appointive system has another disadvantage: it limits personal freedom. The individual minister cannot decide what God’s will is for him. His whole destiny is in the hands of eight or nine men who, though they are good men, are making a decision that only the individual should make. The system also limits freedom in that the power of appointment stifles free speech. Seldom is a bishop voted down on the conference floor. Many men in The Methodist Church are unhappy with theological trends and social and political statements by various church boards. However, they remain silent; to speak out will brand them, and they won’t get that next promotion.

Stagnation will occur if a way is not found out of the organizational predicament. In my opinion, the way out is not to abandon the episcopal system but to reform it. The churches should be given greater voice in making appointments. The bracket system of salaries and seniority should be greatly relaxed, and ineffective men should be demoted.

The Liturgical Crisis

The last predicament of Methodism that we will consider is the liturgical.

From its inception Methodism was revivalistic in its emphasis and free in its worship. Written prayers and set forms of worship were almost unknown in early American Methodism. The worship consisted of joyful congregational singing and sincere Bible preaching. It was not unusual to hear shouts of joy and praise or sobs of conviction and repentance. Altar calls were the natural sequence to a sermon, and the number of conversions determined the success of the service. Early Methodists knew and experienced vital worship.

With the advent of liberalism, worship lost its glow. The choir sang the proper anthems, and the congregation remained silent during the singing of unknown and often unsingable hymns. The preacher gave a discourse on his current social concern. Worship became dull, and the congregation became spectators. Reform was needed.

Because of the evident need of vital and joyful worship the advocates of formal, ritualistic, liturgical worship sought to reform Methodist worship along their lines of thinking. They have been remarkably successful. The divided chancel, unknown in Methodism a generation ago, is being planned in 90 per cent of the new sanctuaries. Vestments and the clerical collar are quickly becoming accepted. The modern creed, the collect, the confession, the proper responses, the candle lighters, and unsingable hymns are a part of more and more Methodist churches.

And we are losing the common man. These things simply do not speak to the average church member. He is not a seminary or conservatory graduate. Besides, he can see through the pride, pretense, and sham of substituting form for experience.

There are those advocates of worship who want to go back to Wesley. They are thinking of the rigid high-church priest before Aldersgate. Wesley reached the masses not with his high-church prejudices but when he renounced them and went to the people with the Gospel. Where in Christian history has excessive liturgy brought revival? Who has been converted by the proper collect and confession? The characteristics of revival are spirit-filled singing and great gospel preaching.

It is true that we are living in a different culture and are seeking to reach a more sophisticated people. It is also true that we need form and dignity in our worship. But this should be done in simplicity and by means that will bring the congregation to experience God. That which speaks to a seminary worship professor or the more aesthetic member of the ministry may not speak to the majority of the people. We should not confuse aesthetics with spirituality. “Amazing Grace” will lift the masses to spiritual heights as much as the great masters will lift the musician. Our primary concern must be not to do things properly but to do that which will reach people and inspire true worship.

Where the Word of God is central and faithfully proclaimed, true worship will be experienced.

Methodism has a historic and living message to proclaim. May she reclaim that message and go forth to the people in the power of the Spirit, testifying to the redeeming grace that is in Christ.

Edmund W. Robb is minister of St. Paul Methodist Church in Midland, Texas, which in fifteen months has received 275 members into its congregation, now numbering 830. He is a member of the North Texas Conference of The Methodist Church and serves that conference as chairman of its Board of Evangelism.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.