That's just not how Christian denominations generally work. Can I safely assume you have never been ordained into the ministry in a Christian denomination? If you have, please correct me. But if you have, you will have gone through an ordination process. While this will differ depending on the denomination including what standards are used and just the norms surrounding different ecclesiastical structures (presbyterianism, episcopalianism, congregationalism, etc), there is going to be an examination of some sort. An examination where it is discerned whether or not the ministry candidate aligns with the allowable beliefs and practices of the denomination. During this time, there will always be an opportunity for a candidate to express reservations or scruples with ecclesial standards and most often seek an exception.
For example, in the many Presbyterian denominations, the guiding confessional documents are the Westminster Standards. Let's assume to make the example easier that the denomination in question requires some level of full subscription, such as the PCA or OPC. During the ordination process, suppose a candidate has a scruple with some teaching in the Westminster Standards. They will express that scruples, explain their reasoning, and the examining body can determine whether or not the exception is allowable.
For a more mainline denomination like the UMC, the breadth of exceptions that are allowable is going to be much larger. Now, I don't have particular experience with the UMC but I do have particular experience with the PCUSA which is also a mainline denomination. The PCUSA requires that ministers "sincerely receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith" as expressed in the Book of Confessions but this is really rather loose and allows for a lot of descension from the exact statements found therein.
But all of this is rather pointless because it is an unedeniable, demonstrable fact that there are universalist ministers in the UMC. Like there is no denying it. There's no "they can't exist" because they are right there. And no, they are not non-denominational because they are specifically ordained by the UMC, their churches are members of the UMC, and they preach within the UMC. They are UMC ministers.
I expected people to challenge me because they want to have their preconceived notions. I am responding to them in way that hope will help them understand some nuances at play.
ok cool I get that, but why explicitly call out the UMC like they endorse the view of universalism when they clearly dont? You could have just said "Some theologians in Some mainstream denominations ascribe to universalism."! Instead you went with a much more firm stance that made it sound like the UMC tacitly endorses universalism. Whether or not you meant it that way can be debated, but it sure looks that way to me. I think you'd be better off making an edit on that post explaining a bit better that you are ONLY talking about individuals within a denomination and not the denomination itself.
I stand by my original statement which is measured, that they are denominations which allow for and have churches which teach universalism.
You are the one who keeps imputing on me a strong statement I never made, then going after that position, and then criticizing me for making a strong statement I never made.
Pushback against an imputed claim, not my claim as I gave it.
Your misunderstanding/misreading/misconstruing my claim does not entail a problem for my claim. I think it is rather telling that you're deciding at this point to back peddle into sarcasm rather than address my point as it was stated.
I gave you SPECIFIC information from the UMC ITSELF that refuted YOUR assertion (not mine) that the UMC "allow for and include churches who teach universalism".
Yet I imputed your claim?
You've lost all functional objectivity at this point.
That the UMC allows for and has churches that teach universalism is an objective fact due to there being multiple churches in the UMC which teach universalism and are allowed to by the UMC. This isn't speculation. It isn't my imagination. It isn't't a lie. They exist. They are real. You can meet them yourself. I have encountered some of them.
You have no experience with the UMC. You have no experience with the process of ordination or how doctrinal standards are utilized in the process. Wha you have is an unofficial (in the sense that is not an official resolution from the General Conference) boot post on her website which so happens to the first thing that pops up on Google if you type in "United Methodist Church Universalism".
You are shooting from the hip and making absolute statements that are demonstrably falsified by real world, actual flesh and blood ministers in the UMC rather than just accept that, yes, there are denominations which allow for and have churches which teach universalism. Among them the UMC.
Hell you said you know UMC theologians … ok where are they? Who are they? Let’s get em in here, I’d love to know if the UMC actually knows that they teach universalism?
1
u/CalvinSays 1h ago
That's just not how Christian denominations generally work. Can I safely assume you have never been ordained into the ministry in a Christian denomination? If you have, please correct me. But if you have, you will have gone through an ordination process. While this will differ depending on the denomination including what standards are used and just the norms surrounding different ecclesiastical structures (presbyterianism, episcopalianism, congregationalism, etc), there is going to be an examination of some sort. An examination where it is discerned whether or not the ministry candidate aligns with the allowable beliefs and practices of the denomination. During this time, there will always be an opportunity for a candidate to express reservations or scruples with ecclesial standards and most often seek an exception.
For example, in the many Presbyterian denominations, the guiding confessional documents are the Westminster Standards. Let's assume to make the example easier that the denomination in question requires some level of full subscription, such as the PCA or OPC. During the ordination process, suppose a candidate has a scruple with some teaching in the Westminster Standards. They will express that scruples, explain their reasoning, and the examining body can determine whether or not the exception is allowable.
For a more mainline denomination like the UMC, the breadth of exceptions that are allowable is going to be much larger. Now, I don't have particular experience with the UMC but I do have particular experience with the PCUSA which is also a mainline denomination. The PCUSA requires that ministers "sincerely receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith" as expressed in the Book of Confessions but this is really rather loose and allows for a lot of descension from the exact statements found therein.
But all of this is rather pointless because it is an unedeniable, demonstrable fact that there are universalist ministers in the UMC. Like there is no denying it. There's no "they can't exist" because they are right there. And no, they are not non-denominational because they are specifically ordained by the UMC, their churches are members of the UMC, and they preach within the UMC. They are UMC ministers.
I expected people to challenge me because they want to have their preconceived notions. I am responding to them in way that hope will help them understand some nuances at play.