What is the Book of Discipline?

Thursday, September 6th, 2012

One of the beautiful and cherished features of the Methodist tradition is the way in which the pastors are brought into a shared covenant with one another. The whole appointment system under an episcopal form of government (bishops and district superintendents) is made possible because of a shared covenant. We pledge to stand together. We all live as those under authority. If, in the wisdom of the bishop’s council, our services and ministry is needed in another location, we pledge to go – and do it with joy – because we believe in the shared covenant which undergirds the wonderful biblical principle that ministry is not about “us.” It is about building the church of Jesus Christ. A covenant, both in the biblical tradition, as well as in modern day United Methodism is not some vague notion, but it is rooted in specific agreements which, in our case, is outlined in the Book of Discipline. The Book of Discipline is what binds us together and provides the “grammar” of that covenant. This has served us well since 1784.

It is, therefore, with dismay that Bishop Mel Talbert has called upon United Methodist pastors to defy the Book of Discipline regarding homosexual practice as being “incompatible with Christian teaching” and, instead, begin to marry homosexual couples. Yet, to do this defies the very covenant we have all agreed to follow. For a bishop to openly declare his defiance against the Book of Discipline and to receive no rebuke from the Council of Bishops is truly startling.

I am not writing this to focus on the homosexual issue per se, though that is the presenting issue which Bishop Talbert has thrust upon us. It applies to pastors who raise doubts about the bodily resurrection of Christ, or the efficacy of the cross, or a whole host of other examples which also break with the Book of Discipline. Bishop Talbert’s open defiance of the Book of Discipline is particularly worth noting because he is a bishop of the church. If a bishop is allowed to openly defy our discipline, then our covenant is broken and no minister can be held accountable. When a bishop is consecrated they take a vow before God to “uphold the discipline and the order of the church.” If this covenant is broken, then the Methodist church becomes a sea of independent churches with no shared faith or doctrine or experience. I applaud the Asbury Seminary graduates who pastor some of the largest churches in the country who initiated the open letter to the bishops asking why Bishop Talbert has not been held accountable (see www.faithfulumc.com). We eagerly await a response from the Council of Bishops. I was not a part of the letter which these pastors wrote, but they must have felt almost ashamed to write it. It is like people from a small town gathering together and pleading with the duly elected sheriff of the town to please uphold the law.

What many in the church long for is a church which is faithful to historic Christianity. What we long for are pastors and episcopal leaders who once again share in a common covenant. What we long for is a growing confidence in the Word of God, the supremacy of Christ and the power of the preached gospel in our ranks. What we long for is a faithful church, even as we recall the words of John Wesley when he said, “I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case unless they hold fast both the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out.”

How long, O Lord, must we wait? Have mercy upon us and deliver us in this hour of need.


  • Bob Kaylor says:

    Dr. Tennent has laid out a key problem in the UMC–a lack of integrity. Every bishop and clergy person is asked by a bishop in front of the annual conference those historic questions: Questions like, “After full examination do you believe that our doctrines are in harmony with the hold scriptures? Will you preach and maintain them? Have you studied our form of church discipline and polity? Do you approve our church government and polity? Will you support and maintain them?” Those who stand before a body and answer these questions in the affirmative, knowing full well that they do not believe them and, indeed, will work against both our doctrine and polity, demonstrate an appalling lack of integrity. I have entered into three covenants in my life: I vowed to support and defend the Constitution of the United States agains all enemies foreign and domestic as an officer in the U.S. Army. At our wedding, I vowed to love, honor, and cherish my wife through all circumstances until we are parted by death, and I stood in front of a body of clergy and laity and proclaimed my affirmative to the above questions. In none of these cases did I assume that I was taking these vows so that I could change the organization or the other person to suit my own vision of what I think they should be. I took the vow because I believed and was willing to dedicate my life.

    Here in the Rocky Mountain Conference, on the other hand, I have heard stories of clergy who, at their ordination, said they “crossed their fingers behind their backs” when asked some of these questions. Our bishops took similar vows (twice, actually) and when they violate them it really smacks of duplicity.

    The UMC is a voluntary participation organization. I don’t get why those who don’t believe our doctrine or polity have chosen to hang around. If the decisions from GC were reversed, the orthodox clergy would have left and started a new denomination by the time the gavel dropped because it would violate their integrity to stay.

    Sorry for the rant, but your post touched a nerve in me that’s been pulsing for sometime! Thank you for your wisdom, as always! (Bob Kaylor, M.Div. ’95, D.Min. ’12)

  • […] read the rest of Dr. Timothy Tennent’s blog, click HERE. AKPC_IDS += "3394,";Popularity: unranked [?] Front Page […]

  • Scott Kiddle says:

    Amen, gentlemen. When we abandon the authority of the Scriptures in our hearts, we break covenant with God. Then all of life is one broken covenant after another.

  • Gary Bebop says:

    I would like to know if the key premise is valid: “If a bishop is allowed to openly defy our discipline, then our covenant is broken and no minister can be held accountable.” How might this be tested?

  • Dr. Tennent, I want to thank you for bringing our attention to this issue, and for supplying the link to the Open Letter to the Bishops. Also for the Clergy who penned this letter , the statement of the laity,and the confessiong movement involment. It takes courage to make a stand for the doctrinal foundation of the UMC. May God ‘s will be done.
    Lilda Burnham

  • I give rise to look on behalf of such a article on behalf of a sustained era, credit a percentage.