The tombstone of the Rev. John Wesley Hughes, founder of Asbury. (Photo Courtesy of Mary John Dye)
UPDATED: This corrected version has been substituted for a previous post at the author's request.
Special to United Methodist Insight | July 8, 2026
“Tell the Asbury preachers to preach the whole truth and be true to the Gospel”. Those words were the last request of Asbury College founder John Wesley Hughes. They are on his tombstone and a picture of these words have been my computer for decades. These words respresent the legacy I cherish.
It’s been two weeks since the University Senate released the approved list for non-Methodist seminaries. For two weeks, I’ve been reading a flood of social media posts which, with little variation, have claimed that Asbury was dropped from the UM approved list because Asbury would not compromise its biblical values and affirmation of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Each of these social media post also had a string of comments – most of them with disdainful, sometimes quite hateful, comments about the UMC. I am writing to live into my heritage.
I write as a lifelong Asburian. My family’s connections with Asbury go back (literally) to the founding of ATS. All the best core principles of my life had their beginning and nurturing with Asbury. These shaping principles have served me well. And now, in the fourth quarter of my life, I have no intention of changing of abandoning this blessed Wesleyan faith. These will be my lifelines as long as I have breath.
The family and faith family that raised and shaped me in Wesleyan faith believed in telling the truth. They were, in fact, sticklers for the truth (which made a lasting impression on me for the good). Honesty was essential to integrity. When I see people at Asbury misrepresent or shade the truth, that cuts to the heart of the precious inheritance that guides my life.
The United Methodist Church is designed as an ever-reflecting, self-correcting church. That’s how we move on to perfection. We do not move on to perfection if we don’t move. We take steps imperfectly and depend on the foundational grace of our heritage.
Thanks (I guess) to algorthims, dozens of posts popped up in my facebook feed. They had different site names, but the headlines were almost identical. Drawing on the statement of Dr. David Watson, ATS President, the headlines blared that Asbury was “de-listed” because Asbury stood firm on biblical principles and their affirmation of traditional marriage. For anyone that has known Asbury through the years, those are familiar chords that will naturally resonate.
But for any Asbury nurtured sticklers- for -truth who have close ties to both Asbury and the UMC, those headlines are like scraping fingernails on a blackboard. (I know, old time analogy. But I am old.)
Asbury was not de-listed by the University Senate because they took a strong stand for traditional marriage. That’s just not true. The sacred covenant of marriage between a man and a woman is, in fact, something both Asbury and the UMC agree on. The UMC has always affirmed, blessed and supported marriage as a sacred covenant between a man and a woman. The UMC STILL supports marriage between one man and one woman. That is common ground between us.
ATS was not de-listed because they held firm on “biblical values”. The UMC has a very high priority on “biblical values”. Biblical values guide everything we cherish and hold dear.
The difference that has such an impact on Asbury is not about the sacred union between a man and a woman. The divide is the newly passed permissive legislation to allow UM clergy the pastoral discretion to decide to marry same-sex couples. There is also offense and objection to the new addition that gay persons who feel called to ministry will not be automatically disqualified for the process. That’s what is unacceptable to Asbury. That difference of opinion did not need to be a relationship rift. I understand the recent additions are offensive to many longtime conservatives. Not just at Asbury. Within the UMC, there are many who do not agree with the changes. In my entire 76 years, I have never known a time in the Methodist family where everyone agreed on everything in the Discipline. There has never been a time when conservatives aligned with the UMC because they agreed with everything in the Discipline. (Some conservatives still do not agree that women can be preachers. Can you imagine that? As a DS, they said so to my face.)
The United Methodist Church is designed as an ever-reflecting, self-correcting church. That’s how we move on to perfection. We do not move on to perfection if we don’t move. We take steps imperfectly and depend on the foundational grace of our heritage. Because of my conservative background, I have watched carefully and can verify that the UMC has gone out of its way to be gracious and kind and considerate to those in our denomination who disagree with the new additions. We follow a Wesleyan path—a path of charity and mutual respect. A Golden Rule path. The UMC DOES ask that people who disagree follow the General Rules of Methodism with which we are all in covenant. Those general rules apply to people on “the right” and people on “the left”. They are our plumb line and for the good of all. They keep the good will that characterizes Wesleyan faith strong.
The University Senate has 22 non-UMC seminaries on its approved list. All the approved seminaries do not approve of the changes to our Social Principles. Fuller Seminary, for example, has a very conservative position on behalf of traditional one-man-one-woman only marriage. Just like Asbury’s. They were not “de-listed”. The UMC practices what it preaches (imperfectly, to be sure). Differences of opinion are not disqualifying. I am deeply grieved that ATS would misrepresent this in the family of faith.
At issue is not agreement with everything. Asbury and the UMC agree on a vast amount of what we cherish. Misrepresenting others in the Christian family – that is a rightful factor of disqualification.
Fuller holds strong traditional views on marriage. But Fuller did not actively lead sabatoge of the United Methodist Church. Fuller (and other approved seminaries) do not participate in actively criticizing and personally attacking those in the UMC with whom they disagree. This general collegiality and good will that has to be present for non-Methodist seminaries who train UM students for ministry has not ever been-- a matter of “conservative” or “liberal”. This common courtesy atmosphere is straight from the teaching of Jesus: we treat others the way we would like to be treated.” (Matthew 7:12 is one among many references)
The common respect shown to others in the family of faith is really, in my opinion, the only true way to honor the life and faith of John Wesley. I learned that from my Asbury heritage and UMC heritage. All of us in Methodism have the legacy of being a church that broke away from a “mother” church, the Church of England. Yes, there were differences. In addition, we know there were times that the Church of England wronged John Wesley. Banning him from their pulpits is one example. But Wesley did not organize a campaign of criticism against the Church of England. He did not highlight their shortcomings and failures in public ways. He certainly did not spread false accusations and misinformation about the church. He just formed a better church. No bitter divisions. No recruiting Church of England people to become part of the forming Methodist societies. No trying to take property from the Church of England for the new Methodist denomination. Wesley gave quite a clear example of the Christian charity he taught. Wesley himself died as a priest in the Church of England, not as a Methodist.
Wesley showed the same good will toward people he disagreed with vehemently. George Whitefield is a prime example. Their theological differences were profound. The differences were matters of ultimate eternal consequence. They debated. They made the case for their beliefs with each other strongly – but respectfully. They stayed dear friends. No personal attacks. No discrediting of the other person because of the differences. No pitting people against each other. John Wesley preached George Whitfield’s funeral.
This collegiality is the heart and soul of Wesleyan faith. Differences? Yes! Lifted up in Christian spirit, differences bless us. Demonizing and discrediting or undermining others? Absolutely not! That would have compromised Wesley’s witness.
For 90 years, Asbury Theological Seminary was a shining example of this Wesleyan faith. Since its beginning in 1923, ATS has never been a United Methodist seminary. It always provided theological training across a wide spectrum of denominations in the Wesleyan family. All denominations were treated with respect. Differences were treated with clarity but always in the context of Wesley’s admonitions on Christian charity.
I don’t know exactly when that changed for ATS. From things I know about personally and first hand, it was at least 12 years ago that ATS, a bright light of Christian collegiality, did change. The idea of embracing LGBTQ persons was so offensive and consuming that ATS presidents made a shift. For the first time in its history, Asbury took sides and actively attacked one of the denominations in the Wesleyan family. Ironically, the denomination ATS leaders actively undermined was the one that had the largest representation in their student body. And even more ironic, they turned against the denomination that, through the years, has given the most support to Asbury.
The shift was not a subtle. From only my first- hand knowledge, that includes spreading misinformation, outright lies, and personal attacks toward brothers and sisters in the UMC. Good will shifted to active undermining-- reaching out to ATS alums with gatherings and appeals for alums to lead their churches out of the UMC. I have known many ATS students across the years from many different denominations. Not once did I know one who felt like Asbury was antagonistic to their denomination. When ATS leaders aligned with a disaffiliation movement that actively undermined the UMC, that changed. Students felt the change – which is partly manifested in number of UM students plummeting from the more typical 50% of the student body to its current 9%. The comments in most of the social media posts verify how deep shift away from Wesleyan collegiality was. The constantly vilifying comments were hard to read. Even current faculty, Dr. Timothy Tennent used the de-listing to make further false accusations about the UMC in his recent blog claiming (falsely) that the de-listing decision was proof that the UMC had no room for conservative members. That's been a common accusation from disaffiliation leaders and GMC recruiters. It is not true. Planting doubt, stoking grievances are not consistent with Wesleyan faith. Dr. Tennent’s blog just verified the antagonism against the UMC that UM students would have to contend with.
Asbury was not “de-listed” because it took a stand for biblical values and traditional marriage. It was “de-listed” because it is no longer a reliable, respectful place for United Methodist students to get solid theological training for UMC ministry.
The Board of Higher Education and Ministry has had a requirement for decades that non-UMC seminaries provide UM faculty to teach the courses required for UM ordination: UM history, doctrine and polity. ATS no longer provides that. ATS disqualified itself. UM courses were being taught by an elder from the Global Methodist Church. Since the GMC is the direct product/beneficiary of anti-UM sentiment, having a GMC elder teach UM courses is its own clear indicator that ATS did not participate in good faith with the University Senate process. Violating the long-held, baseline requirement for UM faculty to teach UM students their required courses made it impossible for the University Senate to approve them. It was Asbury’s choice to not meet the requirement. Of course, none of the Asbury-congratulating/UMC bashing posts mention this.
John Wesley fostered a constant awareness that even the best people get off the track. His daily questions for the Holy Club and his class meetings spoke to the crucial vigilance necessary for those of us who are serious about walking the path to sanctification. We Wesley followers have treasured the remedies at hand when we make shifts away from our Christian principles. We have always been big advocates of repentance – the redemptive and transformative power than is available to those who, with humility and charity toward our neighbors, turn toward God in honest penitence. People of Wesleyan heritage taught me there is no holiness without honesty. That Wesley heritage is still rich. Still true. Still powerful. When we get off the right path, we can get back on. That’s my prayer for Asbury Seminary.
We in the UMC have been going through a real “come to Jesus time”. That’s a phrase I heard often in the Wesleyan/Asbury tradition. We knew that “Come to Jesus time” meant serious, honest time with God. Life-changing time. And, for us, the “Come to Jesus” time was focused whether or not our practice lived up to what we professed. Thoroughly Wesleyan. It is sad – and incredulous to me—that, in doing so, the UMC became designated by conservatives as an enemy of Wesleyan faith. I saw for myself how deeply the UMC put a high priority on the from-the-beginning Wesley focus to welcome all to the saving love of God in Christ.
Contrary to the public false allegations and gaslighting that was spread by disaffiliators, the imperfect (to be sure) people and process was centered on the question: did “all” really mean “all” ? Or did we mean “all” just in theory? As we prayed, studied Scripture deep and wide, heard the stories of our churches and sought the Holy Spirit for guidance, our shortcomings became clear. We saw that, in practice, “all” did not, in reality, mean all were welcome. The turning point behind the 2024 General Conference was a turn toward the very sanctification that Asbury has so magnificently called Christians to prioritize. Sanctification is thoroughly, heart-and-soul Wesleyan.
For those in or beyond the UMC who do not agree with gay inclusion, bedrock Wesleyan charity and good will is still our baseline. We are heart-and-soul advocates of Wesleyan collegiality and Golden Rule living. Of course we are not perfect. But we are actively striving to live together in a love and the charity that would make Mr. Wesley (and Jesus) proud. We have many traditional United Methodist who do not embrace gay inclusion. Those members are cherished and welcomed and respected. Inclusion is a priority for us because the life of Christ is the guide. And John Wesley modeled bringing the Gospel to everyone.
When people stop the high emotionality long enough to think it through, the UMC priority value on inclusion should bring great comfort to our conservative brothers and sisters who do not agree with gay inclusion. Our commitment to extending Christ to everyone guarantees that we include and value diverse points of view.
We also have core Wesleyan values about humility and honesty and a constant goal of holiness. So, while we are not all in agreement about the changes of the 2024 General Conference, the UMC is squarely in the Wesleyan family of faith. We are not “evil” or “apostate” or “no longer Christian” as the false allegations repeat. The disagreement on gay inclusion cannot rightly give a green light for personal attacks, undermining other denominations, cultivating grievances, blaming or actively promoting division. That’s the way of the world. These things are not the way of Wesleyan faith.
I will never stop praying that Asbury finds its way back from its recent shift. Although I may not live to see restoration of the longstanding relationship between ATS and the UMC, the change back that I pray for is for the sake of the integrity of the Asbury/Wesleyan tradition.
The signs of the restoration and homecoming will be the same things Wesleyans have cherished and advocated all along: accepting responsibility, expressions of regret for harm, showing humility and active signs to be willing to repair missteps (whether they are from mistakes or intentional damage). ATS will be on the way back to Wesleyan faith when it shows a bedrock commitment that does not allow misleading statements of any kind. Wesleyan faith will be apparent in public expressions that encourage students, faculty and alums to turn away from the divisive, negative, judgmental statements about others in the Wesley tradition. The Wesleyan tradition will flourish when respecting differences leads to actively resisting the harmful need to discredit or demonize others in the family of faith. Right now, as the responses are freshly (and falsely) demonizing the UMC, a welcome first step could be a statement from the Seminary acknowledging that, under the circumstances, the University Senate made a responsible decision for UM students. Or, in commitment to faithful, trustworthy communication, correcting the misleading idea that ATS was de-listed for standing up for traditional marriage and biblical values. Or encouraging everyone in the ATS family to go the second mile to cultivate charitable attitudes toward UMC brothers and sisters in Christ. Or encouraging prayer and Wesleyan good will for others in the UMC.
Managing differences of opinions has always been a special challenge for Christians. Differences are the devil's playground. The Acts of the Apostles and the epistles all tell us that conflict took its toll on the witness of the early church. Wesleyan faith gave a bright light for the beloved community that lives out Romans 12 and I Corinthians 12 and 13. Wesley lived and taught that differences held in the cradle of Christlike good will and love do not have to be destructive. In the super-charged, contentious days we are living in now, people have a crucial need to see how to live out Wesleyan faith. When the world sees the same dishonesty and smearing and undermining in the church that is inundating the world, critically needed Christian witness is lost. As well as the integrity of Christians themselves.. I am praying for us all to live into the full integrity of Wesleyan faith.
"Tell the Asbury preachers to preach the whole truth and be true to the Bible." Message received, Rev. Wesley. And cherished.
Rev. Dr. Mary John Dye
The Rev. Dr. Mary John Dye is a retired clergy member of the Western North Carolina Annual Conference of The United Methodist Church. This post is republished with permission from her Facebook page.