During my early years as a Christian, I attended an Evangelical church that knew little and cared less about denominational distinctions. When I started to get more serious about theology, and first became acquainted with the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, I learned a little about the history of Presbyterians in America. It’s not a thrilling story.
The Presbyterian church split north – south over slavery. Years later, during the fundamentalist / modernist controversy, both the northern and southern churches split conservative / liberal. The two liberal branches then reunited, while the two conservative branches remained apart.
This is, of course, a simplification of the history of the “split Ps” in America. Presbyterians have divided into lots of different denominations. There’s even a funny song about it, which I wasn’t able to find on YouTube.
I was reminded of all that when William sent me this article. United Methodist Church Announces Proposal to Split Over Gay Marriage.
The “United” Methodists are going to split into conservative and liberal branches.
We’re often told that there was a time in America when mainline, Protestant Christianity informed the moral conscience of the nation. Whether that was ever true or not, it seems there’s another side to the story. The moral conscience of the nation likes to rip up and reorganize churches.
Today it seems the moral suasion is going mostly from the culture to the church, rather than the reverse.
Haven’t you heard the news? God is dead.
Jesus said Christians are to be salt and light in the world. If not, then they have lost their purpose, good for nothing and should be cast out. (Matthew 5:13-16). Unfortunately, this is somewhat happening within the contemporary church. It’s become ineffective in influencing the culture in a significant way. Not to be too harsh, there are still pockets of influence. Yet, not as sweeping as scripture seems to portray its potential.
There’s a number of reasons why this condition exists. I suspect a key reason is the church is not willing to consistently speak truth and stand for morality according to biblical principles. It no longer practices being “distinct” from the culture but has merged many aspects of the culture into its practices (even some that seem to militate against biblical principles). For instance, once it was a standard that divorce wasn’t condoned except for what some would consider biblical grounds. Now, divorce is as common in the church as it is within the secular culture and it’s accepted as a norm. Pastors and church leaders once resigned if they divorced. Now, multiple marriages, isn’t even a consideration for leadership roles (in some churches). When the culture observes this type of behavior, they view it as hypocritical and the church has no credibility to speak with an authoritarian voice. After all, if the church is no different or better than general culture, why listen to them?
That said, I’m not surprised the “United” Methodist Church is going through this impending split. One side wants scriptural principle to govern and the other side desires the cultural norms to govern. Jesus’ ministry was disruptive to some aspects of the culture and challenged people to change. But, it seems today’s church disregards that example. They want everyone feel “comfortable”, irregardless of scriptural principles. There’s little challenge for people to change and live according to moral standards. It’s about tolerance according to contemporary culture.
So, someday if there is significant reform in the church, we might find it having a sweeping influencing on the culture. Until such a time, I suspect churches will be religious social clubs where people pat themselves on the back for being good doobies in the community…but lacking the power to reach and change the culture in Christ’s name.
I totally love conventional responses to conventional questions!
“One side wants scriptural principle to govern and the other side desires the cultural norms to govern.”
Yes, I think that’s it in a nut shell.
The debates and divisions that have been making their way through all denominations in the past 20-30 years also bring up the fundamental question of church authority — who gets to decide what on the questions plaguing the church? I think you’re pointing out an important point that neither liberals nor conservatives in the church want to admit — they both are reflections of the contemporary society in which they live. In truth, the church has acted more like a chameleon for most of its history than like the Body of Christ.