Ask a Methodist!

Great Debates
21

Another bad joke:

Is it true that Methodists do not copulate in a vertical position because they are afraid someone will see them and think they are dancing?

On a serious note:

Do not confuse Baptists with Southern Baptists. As noted above the Baptist Church is an off shoot of the Congregationalist movement and has little in common with the dominant protestant denomination in the Deep South—in terms of theology or social agenda. The northern denomination might as well be Presbyterians without a bureaucracy.

22

Well, of course the Southern Baptist Convention is a sub-section of the Baptists generally (which in turn began as an offshoot of the Congregationalists in England, who in turn were a branch of the Puritan movement, which originally arose as a movement to reform the Church of England, which in turn broke away from the Roman Catholic Church).

I mean, however wide a gulf has grown up between the SBC and other Baptist groups (or within the SBC in many cases), the Southern Baptists were not coughed up from the pits of Hell. They are a particular development of the Baptist churches in America.

23

Speaking of baptists…

You know the difference between baptists and methodists?

…

Methodists say hello to each other in the liquor store.

24

That’s one of my favorites, Tinker! Ironic, since Methodists were a major force behind Prohibition in this country. If you get married in a UMC church, and the reception is in the church ferllowship hall (or anywhere on church grounds) you still can’t serve champagne there!

Here’s another one: A Baptist preacher and a Methodist preacher are having lunch together discussing the morals of society. The Baptist preacher declares, “I’m proud to say that I never had sex with my wife berfore we were married! What about you?” The Methodist preacher replies, “I’m not sure. Do you have a picture of her?”

Hope that doesn’t give anyone the wrong idea! :eek:

Glad to see you here Poly. I’d be glad to.

Itinerancy is one of the most unique elements of Methodist polity, though I dare say the details will be boring to most people. United Methodist elders (fully ordained pastors–“elder” has a different meaning in other denominations) are assigned to one or more churches (a “charge”) by a bishop and the bishop’s cabinet, made up of District Superintendants (regional administrators appointed by and under the supervision of the bishop in a given area). Moves are generally made at the same time each year, and generally not without consultation with everyone involved (the pastors being moved and the churches involved). Churches and pastors can request or be offered a change, but the decision is always up to the bishop and his or her cabinet.

In Wesley’s days, if a preacher was assigned to the same charge two years in a row, it meant he hadn’t done his job well enough the first time. (Wesley also said that he moved his preachers annually, because most of them only had a year’s worth of sermons in them.) Today, most elders stay in one charge for about 5-8 years, with an official concensus that longer terms are encouraged. (Bishops, for the record, also itinerate, but the’re assigned for terms of 4 years, and usually stay two terms in a given area, so they don’t actually move many times, unless they’re elected young.)

I’m a big fan of itinerancy, myself. Any system has it’s flaws, and I’ve certainly seen things go wrong, but I think it avoids more problems than it causes. Ideally, it makes the church more self-sufficient, since lay leadership provides more continuity. Generally speaking, Methodists are less likely to leave or move churches over a controversial or unpopular preacher, and no one in the congregation gets blamed for hiring someone a certain person doen’t like. Preachers are pretty much free to speak their mind from the pulpit, without fearing that if they offend 51% of the membership, they’re out of a job. Methodist congregations almost never split. (They’d need permission from the Annual Conference to, anyway.) And even when things go really wrong, there is someone in authority to guide the situation, or at least get the blame. Finally, preachers are virtually guaranteed a job, and churches are pretty much guaranteed a pastor. No “interim pastor” except in emergencies (a pastor dies or leaves suddenly due to health problems, etc.) So even when things go REALLY REALLY wrong, the church gets a new pastor who can start the healling process right away. Of course, all this depends heavilly on the people in authority, trusting to do their jobs responsably and with compassion. We place a great deal of trust in our elected and appointed supervisors. Most of the time, they seem to deserve it. If their is any widespread criticism or disatisfaction, it is probably that too often the system is used to “reward” good (or politically astute) pastors with high-paying charges, rather than to match gifts with needs for the good of the whole church.

25

BTW, most American Methodist churches use a similar system, AFAIK. The British Methodist don’t have bishops, and I have no idea if they itinerate. Anyone?

26

Fun thread Alan. Fellow Methodist here.

We have had some great pastors who we were very sorry to see move on, and others we couldn’t get rid of fast enough! The joys of an itinerate ministry.

Methodists also utilize the parsonage system, where the residence of the preacher is owned by each church. A good friend of ours who just retired had a good laugh about trying to buy his first house, because he and his wife had been in the parsonage system for their entire adult lives!

Of course, I can’t let a Methodist thread go any further without my favorite quote of all time-

“I want you to round up ever vicious criminal and gun slinger in the west. Take this down. [Taggart looks for a pen and paper while Hedley talks] I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists!”

We also kid my Jewish friend that she is so Reform, she’s a Methodist!

27

Q. What’s the difference between Methodists and Baptist?

A. Methodists can sing.

har

:smiley:

28

I’m also enjoying this thread immensely, and, for those of you who don’t know, Wesley wrote some great hymns, and the Episcopalians still use them!

I’d like to learn more about the Methodist position on alcohol. At the risk of sounding appallingly ignorant, I understand that some churches have such an absolute prohibition against alcohol that they don’t use grape juice during the Eucharist. Is this true? If so, how did it come about?

I like the idea of itinerancy myself, but part of that’s because I recently left my church because of a rather bruising bout between priest and congregation.

CJ

29

This cannot be emphasized enough. I grew up American Baptist, we didn’t really consider ourselves similiar to the Southern Baptists at all. In fact, my parents took us all out of that church when it began to look like they might be slouching towards conservative envangelical. My parents wanted nothing to do with that. American Baptists, from my experience there anyways, were about as liberal (in the religious sense) as the Presbyterians I knew.

(Of course, in retrospect, I’m glad that church I attended started to skew conservative, because it prompted my parents to withdraw us from it, and freed me forever from church :slight_smile: )

30

Is it a good or a bad thing that Sprague’s new book is up to 89,000 and change on Amazon’s popularity list?

31

What constitutes heresy in the Methodist church and how could one be brought up on such charges? What is the penalty?

32

Great posts, guys! Keep 'em coming, and I’ll get to them by the weekend. (Sorry–last final exam is tomorrow.) I’ll start with Puddleglum’s. (Did you think I was ignoring you?) The short answer, of course, is yes, you are correct. But there are lots of interesting reasons and details, and I don’t want to risk going purely from memory.

33

OK, here goes:

How does Methodism view other Christian sects and their differences? Are they ‘all believers with unimportant technical differences’, outright wrong but OK, or something else? Include Mormons and Catholics, since they tend to be the odd ones on the block.

Why did you choose Methodism over another branch of Christianity and, if appropriate considering the answer to the previous question, how does one determine which branch if Christianity is actually right or wrong?

How do you reconcile the vast differences between the practical teachings (X is a sin, X is bad but not a sin, X is OK) of your church in the past with what they teach now? How can you say that something is right or wrong based on your religion if the inspired word of God himself changes over time?

How do you reconcile the complete lack of action from a divine being today with the fact that, according to the Bible, God used to come down and provide guidance and direction (very directly in the OT, through a son in NT)?

34

Mind if I jump in?

A “herald angel” is an angel who brings a message. A herald is a messenger.

I am United Methodist by birth, so I didn’t choose it as such, but I am very happy with it. If I were to change religions, I am intrigued by both Buddhism and Judaism (although I’m a big shellfish eater, so…).

My church does not have any stance on which Protestants are the “real” Protestants, or Christians, or whatever! We aren’t a right and wrong kind of congregation. I assume that is pretty standard. We also don’t judge other religions as right or wrong. How people view God is their own business.

I am not well-versed enough in the history of my religion to answer the question about a vast difference between historical teachings and current teachings. Our congregation also doesn’t dwell on sin; in fact, I usually only hear about it when partaking of the Sacraments. We deal with the ten commandments, but whatever you’ve done, if you are truly repentant you will be forgiven.

United Methodists have a great interest in mission work. UMCOR, the United Methodist Committee on Relief, is often the first on-scene during a crisis or tragedy. Our United Methodist Women group also has a primary goal of mission. Basically, we focus on the life lived rather than the life contemplated. What are you out there doing?

And who says God isn’t around and about? :wink:

35

Which, in turn, brings up the question of the sacraments. As you probably know, catholic theology makes a big issue of the sacraments (small “c” to include Anglicans and Orthodox); Protestantism generally doesn’t focus on them, and many of the more Zwinglian groups reject the idea of “sacrament” entirely.

What’s present Methodist thought on them?

36

Some Methodist ministers (like my own) are “Sacramentalists.” They put more of an emphasis on communion, baptism, etc, than others.

Our last pastor only gave communion about once per calendar quarter. Our current pastor gives communion every Sunday at our early service, and once a month at our “main” service.

I prefer the increased emphasis on the sacraments myself.

I believe Methodism is supposed to include the sacraments as pretty important, but I don’t have a copy of the Book of Discipline that I can reference right now.

37

Alan – thanks for the thread! I’m feeling vicarious stress for you at exam time. I was a UM minister for 11 years before moving on to a different denomination, so I might be able to offer a thought or two on the itineracy from one who lived within the system. In general, I think it works as Wesley imagined it would, but the stress on my two-career family made it difficult for us. My wife owned a buisiness all during my time with the UMC and there were a few years when her commute in from our parsonage to her office was very difficult. I didn’t leave the UMC because of that, but it was a major factor and challenge in our marriage in those years. The system wasn’t really established with the idea of a spouse’s career in mind.

You also raise a valid point in the matter of “reward” appointments. As clergy we shouldn’t make compensation our primary goal, but it’s hard not to want to increase one’s paycheck and quite often the only real possibility of receiving a raise was to ask for a move. The same flexibility that allows a congregation to avoid splitting over a controversial pastor by trading him or her in on a new one can also give that congregation an excuse to ignore basic problems that a tenured pastor might force them to address.

Now to address the REALLY important question: Grape juice. I have no idea of the story is true or not, but I’ve been told that the reason that we have grape juice in the first place is that the original Mr. Welch of grape juice fame was an anti-alchohol Methodist who wanted his church to be able to celebrate communion without indulging in the use of an alchoholic beverage, so he developed the process that kept grape juice form fermenting. I have no cite, but if that story isn’t true it should be.

Polycarp – there are United Methodists who hold rather high Eucharistic theologies and the liturgies printed in the UM Book of Worship use language that is almost identical to the Episcopal Prayer Book. Even so, I’d have to say that the normative understanding of the eucharist is primarily as a memorial. This may vary from one geographic region to another, but it was certainly the case in the Conference to which I belonged.

38

OK, I heard the grape juice and Mr. Welch story as well, but the way I heard it was he developed the way to keep grape juice from fermenting then used his status as an elder to get Methodist churches to use grape juice, not wine, but that strikes me as a rather biased account.

Also, because I was raised and still am Episcopalian, it’s sometimes hard for me to remember that in other denominations, Eucharist isn’t part of the standard or most commonly used service.

CJ

39

Those sneaky Capitalists!

Which brings me to my next question…

Wesley died well before Marx came along. Looking at the 39 Articles, I see this is probably the Anglican refutation of Anabaptist beliefs on property reworded. Wesley obviously thought this article was important, though, as it made it into his reduced 25 articles. What specific ideologies or movements was he trying to couteract?

Do Methodists read this as a condemnation of communal holdings, or only of mandatory communality? In the event of revolution, should I expect Methodist proletariats to side with the bourgeoisie? :wink:

And what on earth is “Article 23. - Of the Rulers of the United States of America” doing in the Articles of Religion? Do Methodists really consider this a valid article, or is it just looked at in a historic sense? (It’s a very interesting interpretation of scripture!)
Lastly, what does “Putz!” in that smiley face mean?

40

At a church potluck, mayonnaise or Miracle Whip in the Jello-O salad?