The Future of Methodism



Comments (8)

Comment Feed


Repentance is a requirement of forgiveness. Acceptance of a sin in place of repentance is not a substitution for forgiveness. It is for followers of Christ to speak truth in love and to be the salt and light of the earth. Shining light on unrepentant sin is a difficult, and often uncomfortable, responsibility. It is far better to be hated by the world for honesty than to lose our soul in acceptance of sin to appease the world. We can not, we must not be a stumbling block for those seeking salvation. I'm afraid the Methodist church is going down a dark path in a disguise of love. If you love a child, do you allow them to stick a fork in the socket or remove the fork before they hurt themselves? At first they may be mad you took their fork but through growth they'll learn it was because you loved them that you saved them.

William Argenbright more than 2 years ago

You seemed to have missed . . .

That Jesus lived a moral life. To follow Him it is necessary.

Skipper more than 3 years ago

Christ on sexual sin

Rev. Cox, you claim that Christ addressed sexual sin, but you are wrong and you know it. Christ saved the woman about to be stoned, but after her accusers left he told her to "go and sin no more". Sin is sin and those who sin with out seeking forgiveness, repenting, and expressing faith in Christ will never enter the gates of heaven. Your view just condemns people to death without the possibility of heaven. Go back to the lessons you learned as a child and pray on it!

Scott D more than 3 years ago

Love, not heterosexuality, is primary

Wesley taught that Sanctification was perfection in Love. I don't recall Wesley ever stating that Sanctification was perfection in being Hetetosexual.

Daniel Wagle more than 3 years ago

The saddest part of this post...

Is that someone could be a UM pastor for 50 years and yet know and care so little about Methodist and Christian doctrine. The debate over LGBT clergy is not the issue that needs to be addressed. The real issue is that we have nothing in common doctrinally. We radically disagree on who Jesus is, what sin is, what Christianity means, and what God desires for us and requires of us. Let's just be completely honest: I don't want people with your views in leadership positions in my church, and you don't want people with my views in leadership positions in your church. It is long past time to stop the madness, divide the assets, and go our separate ways.

Paul W. more than 3 years ago

A Perfect Response, with Exactly the Point

Paul W., well said. I could not agree more. And, mine becomes the fourth of four comments here in opposition to Rev. Cox's opinion. It is saddening, but not surprising, the liberal evolution of the leadership of our old church. I will never accept the new way and I join others who believe an amicable divorce will serve us all the best.

Reese more than 3 years ago

It would be crazy to divide over sexuality

However, the massive theological divide that underlies the sexuality debate is insurmountable. And your approach to Paul--who John Wesley continually referred to as the Great Apostle--is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what divides us.

betsy more than 3 years ago

You’ve given up

“Holding back the future is like holding back the sunrise. It’s impossible.” You’ve obviously decided the LGBTQI+ agenda of requiring not just tolerance but forced acceptance and affirmation is the future so the Church just might as well assimilate. Are you just a defeatist or a retired clergy member more concerned with your pension. I accept all to worship with me in my church but can’t ignore Holy Scripture and condone the sin. When the inevitable schism occurs, I hope and pray the two Wesleyan denominations which rise from the ashes of the dis-United Methodist Church will honor the pensions of the retired ministers within their conferences. I have no interest in funding the pension of a practicing lesbian from the Western Jurisdiction but understand the people in that Jurisdiction may feel comfortable doing so. I have no interest in funding the pensions of any Bishop or pastor who deny Christ’s divinity and orthodox Christianity in Sprague like fashion. I’m discouraged by how out-of-touch the majority of Bishops are with the majority of the laity in their advocacy of the misnamed “One Church Plan” and their apparent intention to punish Traditionalists who follow their consciences and resign from the denomination should General Conference not maintain our BOD and not require Bishops and pastors to follow it as they all took an oath to do. Best wishes on your faith journey. I’m willing to let you go your own way without losing your church property if your conscience requires you to do so if the Traditionalist plan passes. I just wish those supporting other options would afford congregations whose consciences require them to leave if adifferent plan passes the same loving accommodation.

John more than 3 years ago