Church retains homosexual stance

On Tuesday, May 6, General Conference delegates walked past several hundred pro-gay sympathizers kneeling and standing in prayer as they entered the convention center. "I am here this morning trusting in God's spirit to work. Prayer is the way to tune into the spirit," said Bishop Susan Morrison of the Albany (N.Y.) Area. "How could I be anywhere else?"

Morrison and the others were representing organizations that want the United Methodist Church to change its stance on homosexuality such as the Methodist Federation for Social Action, Reconciling Ministries Network, the Parents Reconciling Network, and Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns.

That morning, General Conference delegates voted to retain the denomination's statement that homosexual practice is incompatible with Christian teaching and to slightly alter the current language in the Social Principles. They deleted the words "although we do not" from a sentence in Paragraph 161G that goes on to say "condone the practice of homosexuality.." The delegates approved a more direct and declarative revision to the language, which now says, "The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching." They also added a clause that United Methodists "will seek to live together in Christian community."

An original motion from the Church and Society Committee stated, "We recognize that Christians disagree on the compatibility of homosexual practice with Christian teaching." However, delegates approved a minority report led by the Rev. Eddie Fox of Nashville, Tennessee, that did not include that phrase. All legislation brought to General Conference is processed through committees such as Church and Society.

Fox said in a press conference after the 579-376 vote that if the church had not retained the language of Paragraph 161G of the Social Principles, "serious consequences could have happened (and) a possible hemorrhage could have occurred." He said the church was in "desperate" need of a clear, authoritative, declaratory statement made with compassion. He spoke in the assembly in favor of the change.

Numerous delegates from Africa spoke against homosexuality and requested that the church move forward in proclaiming the gospel. One said that in African culture, it is "taboo" to speak about sexuality. "We do not want to be drawn into the issue," said Kasap 'Owan Tshibang of the church's North Katanga Area in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Muland Aying Kambol, a delegate from the southern Congo, asked if it is "permissible to spend so much time speaking about sin." If that is the vision of the church, he said, then "our church will surely die."

Samuel Quire of Liberia stated that the church "cannot license people to go to hell."

When asked if the approved statement was a response to the recent acquittal of Karen Dammann, a lesbian pastor, Fox replied that the delegate's decision "is a response to all that has happened in society, in all churches, including that trial." He spoke of the importance of a clear statement from the United Methodist Church because it is being watched by other denominations.

The Rev. James Preston of Rockford, Illinois, said the adopted statement was not a message of compassion but one that "clearly said that gays and lesbians are not welcome in the church."

"Hemorrhaging has already occurred, and I assure you that following this General Conference, quietly and with tears, we will splinter in many divisions," he said. The church did not speak the truth about itself and had a "healing option," but chose not to use it, he stated.

The Rev. Margaret Mallory of Perrysburg, Ohio, reminded delegates that the church is of two minds on the issue. "We do not become 'less than' because we admit that we disagree. In fact, we become 'more than' because we tell the truth and we live the truth."

Fox said the decision is a statement that is "important to the ministry we do and focuses on the call to spread the gospel."

Qualifications
Within the qualifications for ordaining ministers in the United Methodist Church is a statement that says, "Since the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching, self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be accepted as ministers or appointed" in the church.

The delegates removed the word "since" and made a declaratory statement that says, "The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching." After the word "teaching," delegates added the word "therefore" and made a second sentence. The adopted language now reads: "The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Therefore, self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be accepted as candidates, ordained as ministers or appointed to serve in the United Methodist Church."

Following much debate, the delegates defeated a minority report that would have given each annual conference or central conference the responsibility of determining how it will approach homosexuality as it relates to a person's fitness for ministry.

Speaking against the minority report was the Rev. Wiley Stephens, a delegate from the North Georgia Annual Conference. He said the report "strikes at our unity as a denomination" and urged the delegates to stay united as they move forward.

Another delegate, the Rev. Tim McClendon of South Carolina, expressed concern about the report because of the connectional nature of the denomination.

The delegates, in a vote of 674-262, reaffirmed the language in the Book of Discipline regarding the character and commitment of those seeking ordination and affirmed the church's standards. [That is, the prohibitive statement, ".self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be accepted as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve." (Para. 304.3) was strongly retained with 72 percent support, and the language was strengthened.]

Chargeable offenses
Unfaithfulness in marriage and not being celibate in singleness can be considered chargeable offenses for United Methodist clergy. General Conference delegates expanded Paragraph 2702, which contains items for which clergy may be charged. Delegates added "being a self-avowed practicing homosexual, conducting ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions, and performing same-sex wedding ceremonies" to the list of offenses that might evoke a trial.

"The language speaks to the needs of our church at this time," said Jon Gray, a delegate from Kansas City, Missouri, and newly elected member of the denomination's Judicial Council.

In a vote of 455-445, the delegates changed Paragraph 2702 to state: "A bishop, clergy member of an annual conference, local pastor, clergy on honorable or administrative location, or diaconal minister may choose a trial when charged (subject to the statute of limitations in 2702.4) with one or more of the following offenses: a) immorality, including but not limited to, not being celibate in singleness or not being faithful in a heterosexual marriage; b) practices declared by the United Methodist Church to be incompatible with Christian teaching, including but not limited to: being a self-avowed practicing homosexual; or conducting ceremonies which celebrate homosexual unions; or performing same-sex wedding ceremonies."

Civil rights
Attempts to expand language related to the civil rights of gays and lesbians were soundly defeated by delegates of the General Conference. Both pieces of legislation attempted to bring new language for Paragraph 162H, "Equal Rights Regardless of Sexual Orientation," in the denomination's Social Principles, part of the Book of Discipline.

The current language in the paragraph supports "certain basic human rights and civil liberties" for homosexuals and supports efforts to stop violence and other forms of coercion against gays and lesbians.

One petition, "Affirming Civil Liberties for All Persons," would have added a new sentence to the Discipline's existing paragraph and would have read: "We support the right of same-gender couples to receive the same protections and benefits provided by state and national governments that come through civil marriages between men and women."

Tom Junk, a lay delegate from Oklahoma, told delegates that the Church and Society Committee recommended this sentence not be approved because the denomination does not support same-sex marriages or civil unions. Delegates had voted 756-159 (83 percent) to not allow homosexual unions or marriages.

Vicki Woods, a clergy delegate from New England, argued that the new language was appropriate because the Social Principles supports civil rights for all persons.

However, delegates voted to support the committee's recommendation not to add the sentence by a 2-1 margin.

Another petition, "Equal Rights Regardless of Sexual Orientation," would have changed the words "homosexual" and "gays and lesbians" to "all persons whatever their sexual orientation or gender identity." It would have added the sentence, "In addition, we oppose heterosexism in all its forms" to Paragraph 162H.

The committee also opposed this legislation. "Our Discipline currently affirms our church's position, which is equal rights for all persons," Junk said.

Tom Wilson, a first-time lay delegate from the Pacific Northwest, called for the new language to be accepted and voiced his concern about the treatment of gays and lesbians by the denomination. "How much longer are we going to slam our church doors on them because of who they love?" asked the married father of three. "We need these people to share their stories in our homes, our churches, and yes, our pulpits."

The committee's recommendation to retain the current language of paragraph 162H was upheld by delegates with another 2-1 margin.

This article is adapted from stories written by Linda Bloom, Kathy Gilbert, and Linda Green, news writers for United Methodist News Service.

Two Methodist Churches
"Undoubtedly, some gay and lesbian Methodists will decide that enough is enough and leave the United Methodist Church for a Christian community that seems to them more gay-friendly," writes Dr. David C. Steinmetz in his analysis of the 2004 General Conference for the Orlando Sentinel. "They will be joined by some straight supporters, who feel the battle is simply unwinnable. Other liberal opponents of the gay ban will be energized to fight all the harder and hope for the victory in 2008 that eluded them in 2004." Steinmetz is a professor of the history of Christianity at the Divinity School of Duke University in Durham, North Carolina.

He writes that after the Judicial Council decision, "No Methodist trial court can now claim that the ban on gay ordination is ambiguous or that there are no penalties for noncompliance. But as politicians know, it is one thing to write a law and quite another to enforce it." 

Steinmetz then asks two essential questions regarding the future of the United Methodist Church: "Will a toughened church law win the hearts and minds of a large and potentially uncooperative liberal minority? Or will the minority subvert church law by small (and possibly larger) acts of civil disobedience?"

In his analysis, Steinmetz concludes, "What the General Conference demonstrated is what the General Conference refused to concede, even as a token gesture-namely, that on the question of gay ordination there are two Methodist Churches rather than one. Whether these two churches can continue to live together as one family will be severely tested in the next four years.

"I would not bet against unity (families have survived worse), but it is not a sure thing."

Click here to send your response plus the title of this article to us at Good News.