By Peter Demos, Op-ed contributor
When a denomination decides that one of the world’s best-known Wesleyan seminaries is no longer suitable for training Methodist ministers, something extraordinary has happened.
The United Methodist Church has removed Asbury Theological Seminary from its list of approved seminaries because it disagreed with the denomination’s decision to endorse homosexuality and same-sex marriage.
Asbury, based in Wilmore, Kentucky, is one of the most prominent institutions in the Wesleyan tradition. It remained committed to biblical theology, the authority of Scripture and the movement’s traditional understanding of Christian doctrine.
But the United Methodist Church has concluded that Asbury no longer fits within its vision for preparing future ministers.
For years, conservative churches and pastors left the UMC, convinced it had drifted from its biblical and theological foundations. They were often accused of abandoning Methodism.
That raises an important question: who is really leaving Methodism?
John Wesley founded the Methodist movement on the authority of Scripture, the necessity of personal holiness, repentance, evangelism, and the transforming work of the Holy Spirit. Those were not secondary convictions. They were the very reason Methodism existed.
Every organization has the right to determine its own standards. The question is not about whether the United Methodist Church has that authority. The question is about whether those standards still reflect the movement John Wesley started.
Some will argue that Wesley himself evolved, and that faithful tradition must do the same. That is true, but there is a profound difference between development and departure.
Wesley’s ministry developed his understanding and application of biblical truth, but it never abandoned the authority of Scripture that grounded the movement. His changes deepened his founding convictions rather than contradict them.
Development builds upon a foundation; departure replaces it.
When an institution begins revising the very authority that gave it its identity, it is no longer developing a tradition. It is creating a new one.
History teaches that institutions rarely abandon their founding principles all at once. Drift is almost always gradual.
The best example is from the Old Testament in the life of King Solomon. Solomon did not wake up one morning and reject the God who had given him wisdom. His decline came one compromise at a time. One accommodation led to another. Small departures accumulated until the king who dedicated the Temple tolerated practices that would once have been unthinkable.
That is how drift works. It rarely announces itself. It happens slowly enough that each step seems reasonable. Only years later do people look back and realize how far they have traveled.
The same danger confronts every institution, whether it is a church, a university, a business, or even a nation.
Churches deserve the same honest examination.
The irony is striking. A seminary known worldwide for teaching historic Wesleyan theology is now considered unsuitable for preparing Methodist ministers. That fact alone should prompt serious reflection.
This pattern is not unique to Methodism. Throughout history, movements that began with remarkable clarity have often struggled to preserve the convictions that first gave them life.
Universities founded to train ministers gradually became secular institutions. Churches established to proclaim biblical truth slowly shifted their focus to cultural relevance. The transition rarely happens because people consciously reject their heritage.
More often, each generation makes what seems like a small adjustment in response to the pressures of its own time. One compromise appears compassionate. Another seems necessary. Eventually, the cumulative effect is so significant that those who founded the movement would scarcely recognize what it has become.
That is why every generation must distinguish between faithfully applying timeless truth to new circumstances and redefining truth itself. The first preserves a movement’s identity. The second quietly replaces it.
Every church eventually faces the same temptation. Will we allow Scripture to shape our beliefs, or will we reshape our beliefs to fit the spirit of the age?
The answer determines more than a denominational policy. It determines whether we are preserving our inheritance or slowly drifting from it.
Perhaps the real question is no longer why some Methodists left Methodism, but whether Methodism has left Wesley.
Peter Demos is a business leader and host of the ‘Uncommon Sense in Current Times’ podcast and author of Bold Not Belligerent. Once an outspoken critic of Christianity, he now owns a successful restaurant chain where faith actively shapes his leadership, culture and decision-making. Drawing on his own transformation, he equips Christians to engage a broken culture with truth, conviction and grace. Learn more at PeterDemos.org.