A Gospel of Power: Reclaiming Pastoral Identity for Clergy Leaving the UMC

Photo by Jackson Eaves on Unsplash

Scripture presents the church as a unique assembly defined by its unwavering dedication to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the ceaseless pursuit of Christian holiness. In 1 Peter 2:9, we read that the church is “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light” (NASB). This imagery is a fundamental component of Christian tradition, illustrating a congregation set apart from culture, its distinctive identity grounded in steadfast devotion to Christ and His teachings. 

Many of us honed our theological perspectives and ecclesiastical perspectives within the environment of the United Methodist Church (UMC). Some, including myself, left the UMC and found our places dispersed among various religious bodies until the establishment of the Global Methodist Church (GMC). Others, displaying resilience amidst division, facilitated transitions out of the UMC and into other bodies, or to non-denominationalism. 

Whatever the path, pastors who have left the UMC were nonetheless deeply influenced by the denomination’s pragmatic approaches to compromise. Our endeavors doubtlessly produced substantial and valuable work. We savored God’s limitless grace, even during disagreements over biblical authority. Nevertheless, the struggle to adhere faithfully to Scripture was intense, as we were encouraged toward deviations. 

As we navigate new paths forward, it is critically important that we embark on this journey equipped not only with our convictions about biblical teachings, but with a renewed understanding of what it means to serve faithfully under the authority of the Bible. It is also a fitting time to repent of our own lapses where warranted.

The Biblical Vision and UMC Challenges

In Matthew 28:19-20, Jesus portrays the church as a community dedicated to furthering God’s mission, namely to “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to follow all that I commanded you” (NASB).

From the start, the church was commissioned to seek and save the lost while setting itself apart in pursuit of sanctification. The distinct, called-out characteristic of the church reaches its apex in the formation of the New Testament church, as chronicled in Acts. In Acts 2:42, we find a church characterized by unyielding adherence to the apostles’ teachings, fellowship, the sharing of meals, and prayer. The church was a community dedicated to serving Christ and each other, with values, practices, and priorities fundamentally different from those of the world.

A seismic shift occurred in the understanding and role of the church in the world, particularly driven by the emergence of theological progressivism in the late eighteenth century. This movement sought to reconcile the immutable truths of Scripture with insights from the temporal world. Yet this amalgamation of divine and worldly wisdom posed a significant threat to Christianity. Reformed theologian J. Gresham Machen well describes our current condition in his 1923 work, Christianity and Liberalism. He warned that theological liberalism, prioritizing cultural adaptability over the central task of disciple-making, often side-stepped supernatural outpourings in Scripture in favor of modernistic perspectives.

This approach, Machen argued, hollowed out Christianity, allowing culture to dictate priorities while edging out spiritual power. Liberal Christians leaned more toward humanistic sensibilities, fostering a belief system recently described as “moralistic therapeutic deism”—a fundamentally human-centered and works-based faith lacking room for spiritual transformation. 

He further cautioned that this version of Christianity, hindered by skepticism, prevented a posture of spiritual dependence on God, constraining genuine growth in Christ. As such, he asserted, Christian progressivism differed so fundamentally from true Christianity that it warranted a distinct classification.

A seemingly less divisive approach was adopted within the UMC, often perceived as a theological haven for conservatives, liberals, and centrists alike. Rather than pure liberalism, pragmatism emerged as an appealing solution, striving to mediate theological disagreements by adopting laissez-faire approaches to doctrine. However, this pragmatic stance, not unlike liberalism, diluted challenging teachings and placed the authority of the interpreter and cultural context above God and His Word.

Pragmatism fails to capture the true essence of Christianity and cannot effectively guide pastors in fulfilling their roles. Organizations that use Christian language but do not encourage their members to strive for Christian sanctification hardly mirror the model of the New Testament. Instead, they echo the serpent’s insidious question in Eden: “Did God really say?” 

In place of a direct undermining, pragmatism proposes a softer, “perhaps what appears clear isn’t so clear.” Rather than directly attacking, it indirectly suggests. This approach, despite seeming more reasonable, results in the same instability as liberalism, ultimately yielding a form of Christianity indistinguishable from worldly endeavors and philosophies.

Conversely, Christian pastors are called upon to trust the promises of Scripture resolutely, believing that the Holy Spirit will guide their congregations as they “work out their salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil 2:12). They commit to the divine objective of salvation and a perfect, holy love that supersedes earthly situations, placing faith in the promised sanctification of a present and future eternal kingdom.

Reflecting upon my own experiences, it’s plausible that many committed pastors did not intentionally seek to challenge the clear meanings of texts during their service in the UMC. Yet, we often found ourselves rewarded for sidestepping challenging texts, especially in more liberal congregations. The issue was not disbelief in the text but rather the choice to ignore it, an act just as detrimental to a congregation as undermining the clear meanings of the text.

This avoidance affects not just interpretation, but also erodes the entire telos, or aim, of faith in Christ. Consequently, those of us who have stumbled in this task must repent of our pastoral shortcomings. A faithful pastor must confront the powerful truth of the biblical text, even when it is challenging or contrary to popular opinion.

The Flinch Test

Throughout our pastoral journey, we invariably encounter passages in Scripture that challenge us. Maybe these are the verses that elicit a twinge of cognitive dissonance, particularly when our church environments complicate our efforts to wrestle with the texts. These are the forceful Scriptures that challenge societal norms and call believers to such a high spiritual standard that we wish to blunt the force of the passage. This is our “flinch test.”

This test functions as a measure of our commitment to God’s Word and serves as an indicator of our resolve to maintain faithfulness amidst internal spiritual challenges. Recognizing and addressing these moments of discomfort is the first step toward overcoming them. It is a mirror, pinpointing areas where we need to strengthen our trust in God’s Word. 

When we work out our challenges in prayer we tread the elevated path of holiness in Jesus Christ, which makes the seemingly impossible ethical demands of Scripture possible. In a Wesleyan framework, this is the process of preparing to preach and teach in ways that make disciples. Like Jacob, we wrestle with God, sometimes in our own dark night of the soul. As the dawn breaks, we come out with a fresh understanding of God’s holiness as He blesses us with greater clarity. 

The Pastoral Way Forward

Perhaps addressing the difficult passages may seem inconsistent with the pastoral task. After all, if our aim is to make disciples, it would seem counterproductive intentionally to alienate those who already identify as disciples. 

This is where we must challenge one of the foundational assumptions of UMC pragmatism—that all who claim the title of “disciple” are indeed true disciples. As Jesus reminds us in Matthew 7:21, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of My Father who is in heaven.”

God, however, is not a pragmatist. He chose a seemingly inefficient method for disseminating the message of salvation—the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The nascent church dogmatically proclaimed the most audacious of all claims: that Jesus was crucified and resurrected. Early Christians frequently accepted persecution and even death with unwavering devotion to this fundamental tenet of Christianity, resisting the temptation to make faith appear more palatable or relevant to a sinful world.

In John 6, Jesus demonstrated a willingness to let people walk away when some found his teachings about eating his flesh and drinking his blood distasteful and impossible. Did Jesus chase after them, trying to offer a pragmatic compromise? No, he simply let them go, confident that those with “ears to hear” would understand his message. 

Throughout his ministry, we witness in Jesus a robustness of conviction, character, and purpose. He loves without wavering. He forgives without compromise, and his sheep know his voice. Consider all that Jesus accomplished with those true disciples! When gifted with the Holy Spirit, they changed the world inside three centuries.

As pastoral leaders, it’s crucial for us to understand that our hurdles in the UMC were not simply doctrinal—they were deeply spiritual and philosophical. They robbed us of gospel power and witness, and the lure of pragmatism tempted many of us to avoid conflict. We must recommit to the Wesleyan way by embracing the high authority and power of a sinless savior, who sends to us the Holy Spirit to overcome seemingly impossible spiritual challenges. 

We must teach the hard things of Scripture because it is in the hard things that sinners are invited to overcome through the power of the Holy Spirit. The overcoming of those hard things in the lives of believers serves as witness to a wicked generation. 

Our commitment to Jesus’ approach reflects an orthodox Wesleyan spirit that’s vibrant and unwavering. It embodies a steadfast commitment to high biblical standards, harmoniously integrating God’s love with His immutable nature. Instead of ignoring difficult doctrines, it provides firm answers that form the bedrock of an individual’s spiritual posture in Jesus. We are not a people who are “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Titus 3:7). We are a people who have the truth, and we are unashamed because we trust and experience a present deliverance from sin.

As former UMC clergy, it is critical for us to reclaim the Christ-assured, authoritative voice that stems from an unwavering commitment to Jesus and His Gospel. In taking these steps, we can rekindle the spiritual life that should be the hallmark of our ministries, reconstituting the church as a distinct, hallowed community that makes spiritually invigorated disciples.

Conclusion

Perhaps the greatest challenge that pastors leaving the UMC face is our own pastoral sins. The societal drift towards theological liberalism and cultural integration was often normalized in the UMC, and we must not assume we were unaffected. Yet we remain faithful, and we ask God to return us to faithfulness where we failed.

As we ponder the call to shepherd our communities, it’s vital to bear in mind that this is a journey of immeasurable joy. This joy doesn’t stem from worldly delights or approval but from a profound, transformative trust that the same Jesus who saved us will deliver us from indwelling sin. Christian holiness, far from being a burden, is the path to life and everlasting pleasure.

We bring this joy to a world that is gradually self-destructing, a world engulfed in despair, division, and degradation. Against this gloom, our uniqueness as a holy community, dedicated to the Word of God and the pursuit of Christian sanctification, stands as a beacon of hope. 

Friends, our unique Wesleyan way is a gift to the world, not a burden to overthrow. May we go forth as beacons of hope and as a testament to God’s transformative love.

Adam Roe is an Elder in the Great Lakes Conference of the Global Methodist Church. He currently serves as the Installation Chaplain at Clear Space Force Station, Alaska, and is stationed in Phoenix, Arizona.