The sad reality the matter is that the UMC’s lack of inclusion of the Nicene Creed in its Doctrinal Standards does not mean that the denomination is simply neutral. United Methodism is sometimes openly hostile to the faith of the Nicene Creed. It is simply a fact that in many cases, people who come under the influence of a United Methodist bishop, United Methodist seminary, or United Methodist congregation are wooed by this influence to reject key doctrines of the Nicene Creed! 

One important divergence already seen between the two denominations emerging from the United Methodist split is contrasting approaches to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, popularly known as simply the Nicene Creed. The Global Methodist Church is committed to the historic Christian faith of the Nicene Creed, while the United Methodist Church is not committed to the Nicene Creed.
This reflects deeper differences. Of course, there are finer, less important theological questions on which faithful members of the same church can disagree. But can there be any minimal doctrinal boundaries?
As the Rev. Dr. Chappell Temple, a long-time instructor of United Methodist doctrine, history, and polity and now a Global Methodist elder, has declared, in the GMC, “there is a set of defining core beliefs,” grounded in Scripture, which denominational leaders and congregations are expected to teach.
This is simply not the case in the UMC. In United Methodism, it has become painfully obvious that there are no clear, consistent, and effective doctrinal boundaries.
Let’s be real: if you know that someone is a United Methodist, even a minister or a bishop, that tells you little to nothing about what this person actually believes.
Here is a summary of the history of this great ecumenical creed, which dates from the fourth century A.D., in a Roman Catholic magazine.
A few years ago, some helpfully nuanced analysis of John Wesley’s own relationship with historic creeds in the founding era of Methodism was offered in inter-linked blog posts by several United Methodist scholars: Joel Watts (here and especially here), David Watson, Andrew Thompson, and Kevin Watson. They challenged simplistic arguments and selective citations painting a misleading picture of the Anglican Wesley as anti-creedal.
In any case, the Global Methodist Church includes this Nicene Creed as part of its official doctrine (see ¶105 of the Transitional Book of Doctrines and Discipline). Global Methodism not only affirms distinctive theology of the Wesleyan Methodist tradition, but also stands together with Catholic, historic Protestant, and (for the most part) Eastern Orthodox churches around the world who have also affirmed this core of basic, ecumenical Christian faith for centuries. This is a deeper doctrinal unity than comparing completely separate statements of faith and making extended arguments about how there are substantial overlaps in some areas. Rather, on very core doctrine about the triune God, Global Methodism is unquestionably in alignment with the ecumenical consensus, dating from the fourth century, on the same carefully worded creedal affirmations of belief.
Despite being printed in the United Methodist Hymnal and valued by many who have been United Methodists, the Nicene Creed is actually not part of the United Methodist Doctrinal Standards. The Nicene Creed is not even explicitly mentioned anywhere in the United Methodist Book of Discipline.
UMC Discipline ¶104 lists the historic Methodist “General Rules” alongside the denomination’s official Doctrinal Standards, the latter consisting of four distinct documents:

The Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church (mainly what John Wesley abridged from the Church of England’s articles);
The Confession of Faith of the Evangelical United Brethren Church;
The Standard Sermons of John Wesley; and
John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament.

In 2015, several United Methodists who had disagreed over other denominational matters on social media came together to petition the 2016 General Conference to add the Nicene Creed to this list.
A participant in that effort noted a weakness he saw in official United Methodist doctrine: how overwhelmingly dependent it was on one fallible man alone (as awesome as John Wesley was). Before Methodism’s 1968 merger with the much smaller EUB church, Wesley was basically the main author of all of the clear Doctrinal Standards of the main part of what is now our denomination.
However, this effort went down in flames at the 2016 UMC General Conference. The three petitions to include the Nicene Creed in the United Methodist Doctrinal Standards all died in committee, rejected by super-majorities of 69 to 72 percent (see here, here, and here). Even in a relatively conservative committee in arguably the most conservative (by United Methodist standards) General Conference in history!
So the United Methodist Church’s top governing assembly was explicitly invited to include the Nicene Creed in its Doctrinal Standards, and this proposal was overwhelmingly rejected.
Among other things, this failed United Methodist effort would have countered the widespread idea that “the United Methodist Church is not a creedal church.” That claim has been made widely by United Methodist clergy for many years. It has even been made on the denomination’s official UMC.org website.
It is often unclear what exactly is meant by this statement.
I have most often heard United Methodist ministers (even a relatively conservative pastor) declare “we’re not a creedal church” as a way of shrugging off concerns raised about United Methodist leaders, even at the highest levels of spiritual authority, denying such basic doctrines as the sinlessness or actual, miraculous bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. It appears to mean, “Oh well, it’s not that big a deal for even top leaders of the United Methodist Church to use their offices to teach against core, historic Christian doctrines, and no leader in our denomination can be stopped from doing this—that’s just how things are in the UMC!”
I and others have disputed this claim, pointed out how at least on paper, the UMC has the Doctrinal Standards mentioned above, and per Discipline ¶336, all ordination candidates are supposed to be asked if they will “preach and maintain” these doctrines.
But the de facto reality of United Methodist doctrine and morals has become very different from the dead letter of the words printed in the Discipline. Even in the UMC’s arguably most conservative Midwestern annual conference, Indiana, District Superintendent Saneta Maiko sent an apparent mass email on April 27, 2022, in which among other things he declared, “I am a United Methodist because our doctrines are not mandatory for clergy to preach and maintain. I am not interested in policing doctrines but asking God to redeem people when fallen s[h]ort of God’s glory.” (emphasis added)
We must not under-estimate the profound effects of erasing even minimal doctrinal boundaries, at every level of the UMC, have come from so many ministers for many years being taught and teaching others that the UMC “is not a creedal church.”
Read More
Related Posts:

The very bad news of the gospel regarding the sinner’s hopeless and diabolical situation is more than matched and surpassed by the very good news of the gospel that speaks of the incredible saving power of God. It is the power to transform us into forgiven saints with the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and the power to enable us to live a life that is pleasing to him. All this has nothing to do with self-improvement and everything to do with the matchless grace of God.

Mankind’s greatest and most urgent need is to get right with God. That of course presupposes that we are NOT now right with God. We are sinners who live in alienation from and hostility to God. The whole point of the life and work of Christ was to make a way for lost sinners to be reconciled to a holy and just God.
But we must be clear as to what biblical conversion is all about. And that means being clear about our condition as sinners and our complete inability to save ourselves and turn our lives around. Since I am again reading through Jeremiah, I recently came upon a familiar passage found there. Jer. 13:23 says this: “Can an Ethiopian change his skin or a leopard its spots? Neither can you do good who are accustomed to doing evil.”
Our condition as sinners is one of utter hopelessness and inability. Consider some of the things the New Testament says about who we are as sinners and what we are like as sinners:
-spiritually sick (Luke 5:31-32)-rebellious children (Luke 15:11-32)-lost (Luke 19:10)-enslaved (John 8:34)-in darkness (Acts 26:18)-remain in darkness (John 12:46)-under the power of Satan (Acts 26:18)-God’s enemies (Romans 5:10)-slaves to sin (Romans 6:22)-influenced and led astray to mute idols (1 Corinthians 12:2)-spiritually blind (2 Corinthians 4:4-6)-God’s enemies (2 Corinthians 5:18-19)-slaves to those who by nature are not gods (Galatians 4:8)-dead in your transgressions and sins (Ephesians 2:1)-objects of wrath (Ephesians 2:3)-dead in transgressions (Ephesians 2:5)-darkened in their understanding (Ephesians 4:18)-separated from the life of God (Ephesians 4:18)-darkness (Ephesians 5:8)-in the dominion of darkness (Colossians 1:13)-alienated from God (Colossians 1:21)-his enemies (Colossians 1:21)-idol worshippers (1 Thessalonians 1:9)-held in slavery (Hebrews 2:15)-not a people; who had not received mercy (1 Peter 2:10)-sheep going astray (1 Peter 2:25)
That is quite a list. It is a damning indictment of those who we are without Christ – which is all of us. And that is why Scripture speaks about what it is like to have a real, God-given conversion:
-We are moved from death to life.-We are moved from darkness to light.-We are moved from the kingdom of Satan to the kingdom of God.-We are moved from bondage to liberty.-We are moved from slaves to sons.-We are moved from being enemies of God to friends of God.
So a radical change takes place when the sinner is converted. It has to be radical: we are talking about bringing spiritual life to dead men and women. And that is why the Apostle Paul for example speaks about the power of God when it comes to the conversion of sinners.
As he said in Romans 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” The word for power (dunamis) is used two other times in this chapter: in v. 4 which discusses God’s power in raising Jesus from the dead, and v. 20 which speaks of God’s power in creating the world.
Many Christian commentators could be mentioned here who have spoken to these truths. C. S. Lewis for example said this: “Fallen man is not simply an imperfect creature who needs improvement: he is a rebel who must lay down his arms.” And again: “Conversion requires an alteration of the will which does not occur without the intervention of the supernatural.”
Read More
Related Posts:

None of us, if we are honest, does not experience the critique of the Bible. We are chastened for our greed, our lust, our pride, our envy. If we are sensitive, we ought to feel the prick of our consciences as we consider what the Bible has to say about gossip and injustice, about the way we treat others, about legalism and license. The reason, then, that sexuality has become a litmus test for what “camp” you are in has little to do with political leanings, but rather this question of authority.

What is the Bible to you? A collection of helpful stories? A book of ancient wisdom? Do you think it contains God’s word to us?
If that alone is what the Bible is, it is a book worth reading. But it still places us a position of sifting the Bible for what is useful to us and placing us in the position of determining what is true.
There has never been a generation, never a time or place, where Christians haven’t had to come to grips with whether they will bow the knee to the prevailing norms or whether they will trust and serve God alone. And how do we know what God wants? His Word to us. When push comes to shove, when the Bible calls me to believe something or act a certain way, will I believe? Will I obey?
None of us, if we are honest, does not experience the critique of the Bible. We are chastened for our greed, our lust, our pride, our envy. If we are sensitive, we ought to feel the prick of our consciences as we consider what the Bible has to say about gossip and injustice, about the way we treat others, about legalism and license. The reason, then, that sexuality has become a litmus test for what “camp” you are in has little to do with political leanings, but rather this question of authority.
For a project in seminary I met with elders from two different churches: one a prominent mainline church, and the other an evangelical church, and asked them a set of questions. Most significant among the differences in their answers were their responses on what the Bible was. For the elders at the mainline church, they consistently spoke of the Bible with terms like “inspirational” or “beautiful” or “enriching.” All good words to describe the Bible and all true.
Read More
Related Posts: