UMC and Free Methodists, what's the difference?

[GraceSeeker]

I've had this question asked of me recently. I would be curious how some other folks here would answer it:

United Methodists and Free Methodists. What is the difference in how each one lives out their faith on a daily basis?

[cristianna]

I really don't know, so I'm subscribing to this thread. :thumbsup:

[Redheadedstepchild]

The closest FMC is 90 miles from here, so I don't know anything about them. I would like to though.

[mouse1203]

I think a lot of it is in their history. DH's grandfather was a Free Methodist minister, so I will ask him about it tomorrow.

[mouse1203]

Yep, I was right. Their doctrines are very close. The difference is in their history. If you have any other questions, please feel free:-)

[GraceSeeker]

I think the most obvious place to go to learn about the various Methodist churches are their respective denominational websites:
For the United Methodist Church check out:
http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.1353935/k.69CC/The_mission_of_The_United_Methodist_Church_is_to_make_disciples_of_Jesus_Christ.htm and http://unitedmethodist.org/

For the Free Methodist Church check out
http://www.freemethodistchurch.org/Sections/About%20Us/Basic%20Info/FAQs/What%27s%20A%20Free%20Methodist.htm


I think most people are aware that because of the breadth of diversity of demographics and theological views held in the United Methodist Church, that sometimes the name seems to be a bit of irony. And many Free Methodists come from a rather socially conservative background (meaning no drinking, smoking, playing card, going to movies or dancing). So the running joke at the seminary I attended, which was about half United and half Free, was that the Free Methodists were about as free as the United Methodists were united.

[StacieA]

So the running joke at the seminary I attended, which was about half United and half Free, was that the Free Methodists were about as free as the United Methodists were united.

Ohmygosh, that cracked me up! ^_^

I attended a Free Methodist church last Sunday, and when I asked about the difference between Free and United, I was told that United Methodists are more "strict" in their Sunday services, but that Free and United are basically the same doctrine-wise. I don't know if this is true or not, as this past Sunday was my first experience with a Methodist church.

[GraceSeeker]

Methodism took root in the colonies as a result of Methodist class members immigrating to America in the 1700s. Following the American revolution, the idea of the Church of England continuing to be home no longer held any interest for American Methodists, and the Methodist Episcopal Church was born. Of course it had its own growing pains right along with the new country.

In my Methodist history textbook, The Story of American Methodism by Frederick Norwood, Norwood identified four major factors that played a part in the development of sectarian movements in Methodism during the nineteenth century. They were:

ecclesiological concerns such as the representation of the laity in church government and the role of women in the pulpit;
the social and moral issues associated with the institution of slavery;
theological emphasis on what Wesley liked to call perfect love--sanctification and holiness; and
the influence of powerful and charismatic personalities.In 1860 it was the combined issues of Christian perfectionism and antislavery morality accompanied by what was seen as a form of ecclesiastical tyranny by a church leadership derisively called the "Buffalo Regency" in the Genesee Conferece (western upstate New York) of the Methodist Episcopal Church that eventually brought about the birth of the Free Methodist Church.


The four major roots of sectarian movements were all present in the controversies which led to the organization of the Free Methodist Church. Institutional criticism, the Wesleyan doctrine of perfect love, the issue of slavery on the eve of war, and the charismatic presence of Benjamin Titus Roberts all conspired to raise a conflict within one annual conference into a major split which affected many parts of the church. Curiously, trouble started, not only in a local situation, but also over a relatively minor issue. However, minor issues in the Genesee Conference always had a way of exploding. This was the region of upstate New York that had spawned Joseph Smith (founder of Mormonism) less than a generation before and that had received the nickname the “Burned-Over District” because of the repeated fiery revivals that frequented the region.

The issue among Genesee Methodists was their opposition to secret societies, especially the Masonic Order. The conflict quickly brought in other, more basic problems, such as forms of worship, episcopal authority, doctrinal emphasis and the rest.

On the one hand were [a group known as] the “Nazarites,” a term originally used in derision by their opponents. [Nazarites] demanded reform and opposed innovations in worship and church life, secret societies and rented pews, moral compromise on slavery, and tyranny by bishops. Wesleyan perfection was their goal.

On the other side was the “Regency,” so-called by opponents [who saw them] as a sort of citadel of the status quo, the establishment.

Behind these differences lay a deep sociological chasm between the relatively plain rural people who liked the old ways and the sophisticated city people who believed in progress. The Regency was strong in Buffalo, and the Nazarites found much of their support in the country.



Among the Nazarites was Benjamin Roberts…already strongly antislavery from his New England associations. Appointed to the Niagara Street Church in Buffalo, he worked hard to revive its “dead” members and tried unsuccessfully to abolish its pew-rental system. [In Europe it was common for governments to support churches. That was even continued in some of the colonies, but the new U.S. Constitution made that impossible. As few churches in an agricultural society could depend on anything of substance in the weekly offering, they found that pew subscriptions worked better as a means of providing annual support to the church, usually in harmony with the annual harvest.] One of the original meanings of the “Free” Methodist Church was freedom from private pews. There were social undertones to this issue, since private pews favored the prosperous middle class and discouraged the poor and farm folks short on cash. By 1855 the conflict had become wildly polemic [and the Nazarites published] “Documents of the Nazarite Union” which stated that Regency supporters were:clerical professors in Odd-Fellow regalia, “shawled to the nose and bearded to the eyes,” reading foolscrap sermons one day, and praying to open secret Lodges the next;--pipelaying and managing in he Conference to oust out some, and hoist in others—and its lay professors rigged out in brass and feathers, and imitation posies, together with all its artifices to entice the world to love and support the Church; such as its sham donations, post-offices, lotteries, grab-bags, and oyster suppers for God…. They have other Masonic duties than building the walls of Jerusalem; other tents to pitch than the goodly tents of Jacob.The Regency [attacked] this document…as propaganda. Roberts defended the Nazarite movement in an article [entitled “New School Methodism”] which thrust him forward as leader [of the Nazarite movement].

Roberts attacked the “New School” as … liberals, equating Christianity with “beneficence.” By this he meant works-righteousness and the merging of justification and sanctification. People who believe this, he added, join lodges.

The fight came into the open at the Annual Conference of 1857, as Roberts lost election as secretary to his Regency opponent by just five votes. Roberts was [then] subjected to censure…[as] rumor and slander exacerbated feelings. The next year he was brought to trial before the annual conference, convicted of contumacy (i.e., contempt of authority), and expelled by a vote of 54‑34 with many abstentions. He promptly appealed to the general conference which was scheduled to meet in Buffalo in 1860.

In 1858 and 1859 “Laymen’s Conventions” were held to protest the censures and expulsions. The result was more censures and expulsions. Out of the laymen’s movement came “bands” which gave support to Roberts and other expelled leaders. Two “Free” Methodist churches were organized in Buffalo. When the General Conference did meet, Roberts and his cause were caught in a situation in which far larger concerns entered. His appeal from the first censure resulted in a tie vote, which in effect let the action of the annual conference stand.

As a result, almost immediately after the [close of] General Conference, a [new] convention was held in Pekin, New York, called on the basis of adherence to Wesleyan doctrine, equality of ministers and lay persons, and opposition to slavery and secret societies. [From this convention] a new church was formed, the Free Methodist Church.

In 1910 the Genesee Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church that had expelled Benjamin Titus Roberts 50 years before…reversed its action and validated and returned the canceled credentials of all those who had been expelled.

(Norwood, pages 294-297, and page 375)

[Concetta]

*Giggles @ the free vs. united joke