|
Historical Homosexual Highlights
For many years, Concerned Methodists has been disturbed by the trend
toward advocating the practice of homosexuality within our United
Methodist Church; more recently, we are disturbed by a lack of
truthfulness and deceit by some members of the clergy. We offer to you
our analysis of this issue that is contained here in these historical
occurrences that.would point toward efforts to legitimize this activity.
In an interview for an article our local paper on Concerned Methodists,
I stated that "If it were possible to quantify all of the sexual sin in
the world, by far the greatest would be heterosexual simply because
there are so many more among the population, who are engaging in sex
outside of marriage, adultery, etc." We need to keep in mind and to
make clear that we are all sinners attempting to minister to other
sinners. If it were possible to view with God and see that, for example,
76 % of the sum total of sexual sins committed were heterosexual, this
presents the problem in the "all of us" rather than just the "them"
light. The problem comes in that only between .8 % and 2.4 % of the
population are homosexual. So you have a maximum of 2.4 % of the
population committing 24 % (as an example) of the sexual sin, which is
far disproportionately larger than the population as a whole.
Some of this information was published previously in a position paper.
Some "tall steeple" r~urches have cut off their apportionments: FUMC in
Joplin, FUMC in Marietta, GA; St. Mark's UMC in Findlay, OH; to name a
few. We believe that we are entering a period of crisis when lay people
can no lonoer fail to act, but must make a decision. What or Whom will
we serve?
In light of the recent outcomes of same-sex ceremonies performed by UM
pastors, it is helpful take a look at different homosexual milestones
affecting our denomination:
- 1972 General Conference. The following statement was added to the
"Social Principles" document (after a 4 year study of homosexuality):
"Homosexuals no less than heterosexuals are persons of sacred worth, who
need the ministry and guidance of the church in their struggles for
human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care....
Further we insist that all persons are entitled to have their human and
civil rights ensured, although we do not condone the practice of
homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian
teaching." In 1992, it was passed again with a vote of 75% in
favor.
- United Methodist News Service (UMNS)
- 1976 General Conference. Adopted reports which stopped any funding of
gay/lesbian support groups with church money.
-UMNS
- 1980 General Conference. No significant action passed.
- UMNS
- 1982. Bishop Melvin E. wheatley appointed Julian Rush, a self-avowed
homosexual, as associate pastor of St. Paul's UM Church in Denver.
Wheatley said, "Homosexuality is a mysterious gift of God's grace," and
"I clearly do not believe homosexuality is a sin." Charges that
wheatley's stance had undermined "the authority of Holy Scripture" were
filed by three Georgia churches. An investigative committee said in its
final report that it found no "reasonable grounds" for accusing the
bishop. Phyllis Jean Athey and Mary Jo Osterman were united in a
covenanting service at the Wheadon UMC in the Northern Illinois Conf.
- 1983 - 1984. Roy Howard Beck of the United Methodist Reporter wrote on
homosexual activities discovered at the general board level, including
that by a bishop. He was told by Rev. Troy D. Perry, founder of the
Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, that a substantial
percentage of mainline Protestant agency leaders were homosexual." This
was subsequently described in his book On Thin Ice. Phyllis Jean Athey
and Mary Jo Osterman co-authored The Lesbian Relationship Handbook,
published by Kinheart, an organization partially funded by the Northern
Illinois Conference. A 3,500-member church in Colorado Springs
"publicly censured" its bishop, Melvin E. Wheatley, for his active
support of homosexual persons as UM ministers (Good News).
- 1984 General Conference. Passed a "fidelity in marriage and celibacy
in singleness" statement, which was included in Paragraph 402.2.(UMNS)
- 1987. UM Bishop Finis A. Crutchfield died at age 70 of AIDS.
- 1988. Phyllis Jean Athey, candidate for deacon in the UMC, shot and
killed herself. Bishop J. R. Dewitt was critical of those who opposed
her ordination on Biblical grounds for "causing this tragic act";
investigation pointed to the breakup with her lesbian "partner" Mary Jo
Osterman. Opposition was surfaced to the partial funding, by the
Northern Illinois Conference, of Kinheart Women's Center in Evanston,
Illinois, believed to be a center for advocacy of homosexuality.
Raleigh Religious Network for Gay and Lesbian Equality
25O1 Clark Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
(919) 832-3316
Dear Colleague,
June 6, 1988
Looking at this letterhead you are probably wondering, What
Now!, What can I do?. Could I support this group? We have
wondered the same and have conic together over the past year with
common pastoral concerns. You know full well how these times have
stretched all of us in the ministry to look at issues that face
our congregations, among them being human rights for all people.
This issue of homouexuslity has knocked at the doors of all
religious people.
The Raleigh Religious Network for Gay and Lesbian Equality is
a group of concerned lai~' and clergy who desire to:
- create a climate of support for basic human and civil rights for
gays and lesbians:
- develop an understanding of religious traditions. beliefs and values
that shape attitudes toward homosexuality;
- explore vays to provide pastoral care for lesbians, gay men and
their families; and
- establish a network of resources provide interaction and
on-going support for those involved in this special ministry.
We invite you to join our efforts. We forrned this network as a
result of the Raleigh City Council hearings on sexual discrimination
last summer and to further the understanding of the passing of the
anti-discrimination ordinnce last November. To this end we
sponsored a conference in March of this year and anticipate another in
1989. We do this in hopes of futhering understanding of this issue
within a religious context.
Since the early 1970's, tlie gay and lesbian community has observed
events to celebrate Lesbian and Gay Pride. The event this year is a
march planned for Saturday, June 25 in Raleigh. Among the events
surrounding the march is a call to the North Carolina Legislature to:
- adopt a statewide anti-discrimination ordinance regarding sexual
orientation;
- repeal the Crimes Against Nature Law (CAN);
- protect persons with AIDS (PWA's) and HIV antibody positive
individuals through legislation:
- provide funds for:AIDS education;.
- enact a "hate crimes" statistics law to include sexual
orientation;
- legalize and recognize lesbian and gay relationships:
- preserve parental and adoptive rights of lesbians and gays: and
- recognize the inherent worth and dignity of all people.
While we have particular ecclesial and theological stances upon
which we concern ourselves. nonetheless these often invisible if not
absent members of our congregation: ask for our support for these
civil rights.
Please be as positive and supportive as you are able. With
all the publicity surrounding the June 25 march in Raleigh, please
keep in mind the sons and daughter: of your congregation who might
be there, actually or in spirit. Your response to the media and
to your members can keep this particular concern in a pastoral
light, exhibiting the compassion that all sons and daughters of God
deserve.
We will keep you informed of our efforts from time to time.
Should you care to join us for our meeting or care to comment on our
work, please ccntact us at the above address.
Peace,
[Signed]
Jimmy Creech, chairperson
Raleigh Religious Network
for Gay and Lesbian Equality
|
- 1988 General Conference. Voted to prohibit ordination of homosexuals
by a vote of 676 to 293, or 69.76%. Yet, a measure was pushed through
allocating $200,000 for a "Committee to Study Homosexuality," weighted
with pro-gays./ The General Council on Ministries (GCOM) conducted "An
Analysis of Major Issues Addressed by the 1988 General Conference and a
Comparison with Beliefs and Attitudes of Local Church Members." 50.87%
of those surveyed agreed with the statement that "homosexuality is
incompatible with Christian teaching."
- 1989. Bishop C. P. Minnick of the North Carolina Conference sent a
letter to pastors endorsing a two day conference sponsored by the
Raleigh Religious Network for Gay and Lesbian Equality (RRNGLE); RRNGLE
was chaired by Rev. Jimmy Creech, pastor of Fairmount UMC.
January 18, 1989
TO: UNITED METHODIST PASTORS
FROM: BISHOP C. P. MINNICK, JR.
My dear Sisters and Brothers:
On March 10-11 the Raleigh Religious Network for Gay and Lesbian
Equality will sponsor a conference in Raleigh at Pullen Memorial Baptist
Church. This conference is designed to equip us as pastors to minister
wore effectively and more meaningfully to gay men and lesbians and their
families in our congregations and in the larger community. The topic
for this conference will be "Homophobia in the Religious Community."
This letter is my endorsement of this event and my encouragement to you
to avail yourselves of this opportunity to enhance your understanding of
the fears, the hate and the hostility toward homosexual persons and
their families. These emotions are expressed in so many painful and
destructive ways in our churches and society. Homophobia is an urgent
pastoral care issue which we need to address. You will be receiving
more data and information about this conference from the Network in the
near future.
May God continue to bless and use you as you seek to be in a ministry of
caring concern to all persons in the name and spirit of Jesus Christ.
CPMJr/vm
|
- 1990. Theologian Richard John Neuhaus reported on a pro-homosexual
campaign to change church teaching through the premise that Christian
doctrine and morality are "fundamentally in error."/ The UM Commission
on Christian unity and Interreligious Concerns voted to include
homosexuals./ Dumbarton UMC of Washington, DC, decided against allowing
a lesbian couple to wed after bowing to intense pressure.
- 1992. A letter signed by 100 clergy and laity in Michigan supported
homosexual and lesbian "holy union" services./ Saralyn Chesnut has been
named to head the new office of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Student Life
at (UM) Emory University./ UM Bishop M. G. Talbert, joined others in
calling on President-elect Bill Clinton to lift the military ban on
homosexuals.
- 1992 General Conference. Rejected the both the majority report of the
"Committee to Study Homosexuality" and the accompanying "augmentation
Paragraph" of the "Social Principles" affirming "same-sex
relationships"; a minority report of the "Committee to Study
Homosexuality" reaffirmed the traditional church
position.- UMNS
- 1993. UM money went through the organization IMPACT to help support
the Gay March on Washington./ In November, the "Re-Imagining"
Conference was conducted which affirmed lesbians, bisexuals, and
"trans-gendered" people, supported in part by UM money.
- 1996 General Conference. Voted 577 - 378 (60.4%) to approve the
church's current stance in paragraph 71F that homosexuality is
incompatible with Christian teaching" and 553 - 321 to add to the Book
of Discipline's "Social Principles" a statement prohibiting ceremonies
that celebrate homosexual unions. 15 bishops issued a statement
expressing "pain" over the UMC's stance on homosexuality.
- 1997. Rev. Jimmy Creech conducted a service of union for two women,
who attended his church, FUMC in Omaha, on Sunday, Sept 14 at 2 P.M.
Area Bishop Joel N. Martinez said he counseled Creech that "To proceed
with the ceremony would place him in noncompliance with the UM
Discipline and in conflict with previous church rulings." (UMNS)
In 1997, Emory's board of trustees, which includes five United
Methodist bishops [one of whom is Lindsay Davis of the North Georgia
Conference], voted unanimously to allow same-sex ceremonies in the
university chapel if the couple's faith permits it, and if the ceremony
is conducted by a clergy person of that faith who has a direct tie to
the university.(Alice Smith, Ex. Dir. of the Georgia UM Communications
Council)
- 1998.
- - March, 1998. Kearney, Nebraska: In a recent decision, Jimmy Creech,
pastor of FUMC in Omaha, was acquitted of wrongdoing in his performance
of a 1'covenanting ceremony" between two women alleged to be lesbians.
He was found innocent by a church panel Friday, March 13th, of
disobeying rules for performing a lesbian unity ceremony. Had he been
found guilty by the jury of fellow ministers, Creech, a Goldsboro, NC
native, could have lost his position at FUMC, and been forced to
surrender his ministerial credentials. Jury foreman Grant Story ·said
the vqte reflected the difficulty the church has experienced with the
issue. We have struggled, no, agonized together in a spirit of love
and our hope is that united Methodists everywhere will receive our
verdict in that same spirit of love and respect, ' Story said after the
verdict was read. Creech, who was suspended from the leadership of his
congregation on Nov. 10, testified that he was simply serving the
spiritual needs of two women church members. The Rev. Loren Ekdahl of
Lincoln, who argued the church's side, said Creech went wrong by
conducting the ceremony as if it were an official rite, 'We're not
talking about a simple prayer or blessing here.'" (The Fayetteville
Observer-Times, March 14, 1998) In a letter to the bishops dated March
17th, Dr. Maxie Dunmam, president of Asbury Theological Seminary, wrote,
"If the practice of same-sex marriages is allowed to stand.. .our
beloved denomination will be seriously fractured if not completely
divided... if we have to call a special session of the General
Conference to prevent such schismatic action, let's do so. My heart is
heavy. I am grieving for the church."/ Thirty UN clergy have publicly
declared that they will "celebrate rites of union with all couples,
regardless of gender...." The "Proclaiming the Vision Comittee" invited
UN clergy to sign such a statement.
- From the INTERNET and Newscope, March 13, 1998
- - August,1998. The statement (pro-sccirbing same-sex ceremonies) is
contained in the Social Principles section of
the Book of Discipline, whereas the rest of the denomination's binding
rules are contained in the main section of the book.
However, the United Methodist Judicial Council, the denomination's
supreme court, ruled...that the statement is enforceable.
(10-21-28-71BP{291} By United Methodist News Service)
- 1999:
- - January 16, 1999. 69 United Methodist pastors of the
California-Nevada Annual Conference co-officiated in a holy union
service for two women Ellie Charlton and Jeanne Barnett, two members of
Sacramento St. Mark's United Methodist Church, where the Rev. Donald
Fado is pastor. Ellie is a member of the Conference Board of Trustees.
Jeanne is conference lay leader.
LIST OF PERSONS ACCUSED: John J. Auer, III, Brandon Austin, Donald L.
Baldwin, Claire Beals-Nesmith, Robert W. Blaney, Diana Marie Bohn,
Richard E. Bruner, Carol M. Carter, George Carter, Jerry Carter, John
Chamberlin,
Thomas Clark, Rolfe Conrad, Clifford Crummey, Donna Morrow DeCamp,
Sharon Delgado, Nadine DeWittm,
Steven Eatough-Smith, Janet S. Everhart, Renae Extrum-Fernandez, Donald
Fado, David Franks, Glenn Fuller,
Nobuaki Hanaoka, J. Richard Hart, Robert J. Hawthorne, Douglas Hayward,
Thomas Hicks, Bruce Hilton, Virginia Hilton, Elbert Hoffman, Hubert L.
Ivery, Alan H. Jones, Linda Kelly, Phillip Lawson, Stephen Lee, Charles
Lerrigo,
James Lockwood-Stewart, David MacMurdo, Theresa Mason, Victor W. McLane,
Maggie McNaught, Douglas Monroe,
Bob Moon, Mike Morizono, Mary Parker-Eves, Larry Patten, Ted Pecot,
Cheri Pierre, Jay Pierce, Kathleen Ralston,
Robert Rankin, Lynn Rhodes, Byron Roberts, Ellen Rowan, Robert Sanford,
Doug Smith, Marlene Spilman, Judith Stone, Frank H. Stone, Gerald
Summers, Paul Sweet, Margo Tenold, Harold A. Tillinghast, Richard
Whitmore, Cecil Williams, Lee Williamson, Andrea Meek Winchester,
Sargent Wright.(UMNS#157)
- - March 23, 1999. Bishop Talbert announces complaint against 69
pastors. Bishop Melvin G. Talbert announced today that he is referring
to church counsel a complaint against 69 United Methodist pastors of the
California-Nevada Annual Conference for their role in a Jan. 16 holy
union service for two women. The church counsel, in this case the Rev.
Paul Wiberg of Orinda, Calif., has the responsibility of signing the
complaint and sending it to the Conference Committee on Investigation.
That panel will decide whether to turn the complaint into charges, an
action that could result in a church trial. The complaint was signed by
two members of the bishop's cabinet. Talbert made the announcement at a
noon (Pacific time) press conference in West Sacramento, Calif.
What follows is the full text of Talbert's announcement...[Commentary:
it is interesting that a leader of our denomination would make a public
statement in sympathy with the defendants and in opposition not only to
the UMC itself along with the Book of Discipline, but more importantly
against the Bible and statistics supportive of a healthy lifestyle -
that of sexuality within a marriage between husband and wife. Allen O.
Morris, Executive Director, Concerned Methodists]
PRESS RELEASE:
Office of the Bishop, San Francisco Area
The United Methodist Church
at United Methodist Center
West Sacramento, California
March 23, 1999 - 12:00 noon
STATEMENT
On Jan. 16, 1999, a number of clergy participated in a holy union
celebration at the Sacramento Convention Center. These clergy celebrated
a covenant between Ellie Charlton and Jeanne Barnett, two well-known and
respected members of Sacramento St. Mark's United Methodist Church,
where the Rev. Donald Fado is pastor. Ellie and Jeanne are leaders
beyond their local congregation. Ellie is a member of the Conference
Board of Trustees. Jeanne is conference lay leader, one of the most
influential offices held by a lay person in our denomination. Jeanne was
also elected a delegate to our General Conference, the highest
legislative body of our denomination. Ellie and Jeanne are honorable,
loyal and dedicated followers of Jesus Christ. Like other Christians,
they are living out their faith in the name and spirit of Jesus Christ.
With such affirmation of these two persons, why are we here today? We
are here because Ellie and Jeanne are homosexuals. They have chosen to
be public in their commitment to each other. They sought and received
the blessing of their church by the action of their pastor, and others, who chose to officiate at their public celebration. For a variety of reasons,
homosexuality has been and continues to be a very controversial subject
in society and in churches, especially in our denomination. Some would
draw the circle of full membership to include homosexuals without
judgment. Others would limit their church participation and prohibit
their full involvement. Thus, we have the continuing debate,
especially around the issue of holy unions. The celebration of holy
unions is not new in our denomination. This has been going on for decades. What makes this different is the action taken at our General Conference in 1996, which states: "Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches." (Paragraph 65.C, 1996 Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church) This language is very clear. However, a problem was created by the placement of that language in the Book of Discipline. It was placed in the section called "The Social Principles." As stated in the preface, "The Social Principles are a prayerful and thoughtful effort on the part of the
General Conference to speak to the human issues in the contemporary
world from a sound biblical and theological foundation as historically
demonstrated in United Methodist traditions. They are intended to be
instructive and persuasive in the best of the prophetic spirit. The Social Principles are a call to all members of the United Methodist Church to a prayerful, studied dialogue of faith and practice."
In short, the Social Principles are not law. They have not been treated
as such since the beginning of our denomination more than 200 years ago.
And when asked to interpret this action of General Conference, I did so
in the best tradition of our church. I indicated that such action was not law, and to violate that action would not constitute grounds for a chargeable
offense. That interpretation set off a storm of controversy in this
conference and in our denomination. Some went so far as to demand that I
resign from my office as bishop. Of course, I did not resign. As a
result of the Jimmy Creech case in Nebraska (he was acquitted after
being tried for celebrating a holy union), my bishop colleagues in the
South Central Jurisdiction appealed to the Judicial Council, the highest
court in our denomination. Those bishops, and others, presented the
argument that the intention of the General Conference was to enact a law
to prohibit the celebration of homosexual unions. In August 1998, the
Judicial Council ruled in favor of those who argued that the intent of
General Conference was to enact a law.
So the Judicial Council ruling states: "The prohibitive statement in
Paragraph 65.C of the 1996 Book of Discipline: 'Ceremonies that
celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and
shall not be conducted in our churches,' has the effect of church law,
notwithstanding its placement in Paragraph 65.C and, therefore,
governs the conduct of the ministerial office. Conduct in violation of
this prohibition renders a pastor liable to a charge of disobedience to
the order and discipline of the United Methodist Church under Paragraph
2624 of the Discipline."
When this ruling was released, I expressed my sorrow and disappointment
with it. However, as a bishop of the church, I stated that I would abide
by the decision and uphold it, even though I disagreed with it. Now, I
could have run for cover by using the law as a basis for remaining
silent on this issue. In a sense the matter of law is settled. But my
conscience wouldn't allow me to take the easy way out. I had to speak
out against this act of injustice. So I will uphold the law, but I will
not be silenced. I will continue speaking out against the law and will
continue working to change the position of our church to be more in
keeping with the teachings and compassion of Jesus. That is the position
I stated in my Jan. 6 pastoral letter to clergy and lay members of the
California-Nevada Conference. I further stated my personal belief that
the position taken by our church on this issue is wrong, because such
action infringes on the sacred pastoral role of one as priest and servant. I reaffirm that position today. I agree with those pastors who contend that such action is an intrusion into their priestly role as clergy to all their people.
Clergy are called on to do many things. They baptize children and
adults. They bless homes, instruments, cars, parks, fowls, animals,
buildings and various type events. In all such occasions, clergy persons
are free to choose whether they will or will not perform such services.
Yet when it comes to this one event of a holy union, it is prohibited.
This is unconscionable! I contend that all clergy must be free to choose the
appropriate pastoral responses they should make in the priestly roles.
This must never become a political action. Today, it is homosexuality.
What will the next issue be? Do you remember when the issue was race?
Thus, the debate continues in society and in our churches. There are
honorable people on both sides of this issue, which could split our
church. In the face of such controversy, there is need for tolerance. I
believe this is such a time when honorable Christians can agree to
disagree, without allowing such an issue to separate us from God's
table. The gospel of Jesus Christ reminds me that all sinners are
invited to God's table. That being true, who, other than God, can decide to exclude some? Therefore, I refuse to treat as enemies those who chose to violate this church law, as an act of conscience. They are not our enemies. They are our sisters and brothers in Christ, in the same way that those are who hold opposing views. Biblical and theological debates are appropriate. But there comes a time when God's call to love must take precedence over any
political or theological action or decision. I believe that is the case
now with this issue. I will continue proclaiming that we all belong to
God, and that we will have a space at
God's table. Praise God!
However, it is my responsibility to announce that on this day, March
23, 1999, a complaint, signed by the Rev. Ardith Allread, dean of the
cabinet, and by the Rev. David Bennett, superintendent for the district
where the Jan. 16th event was held, has been presented to me listing the names of 69 persons. The complaint states, "These clergy persons, who claimed
their participation was an act of conscience and pastoral ministry,
acted in violation of the Judicial Council ruling with regard to
Paragraph 65.C of the 1996 Book of Discipline. According to the ruling,
these clergy persons failed to uphold the order and discipline of the
United Methodist Church." The complaint further states: "The bishop and
the cabinet, through the supervisory process as outlined in Paragraph
358.1 of the 1996 Book of Discipline, have attempted to reach resolution
in the matter. Each district superintendent met with those persons who
officiated at the service of holy union. Some plans for possible ways to
achieve resolution were lifted up. None of the plans were acceptable
to the persons listed in this complaint. Therefore, resolution was not
achieved." These two district superintendents conclude the complaint,
stating, " . . . despite our theological and pastoral disagreement with
this area of church law, a complaint of disobedience to the order and
discipline of the United Methodist Church (Paragraph 2624.1(e) of the
1996 Book of Discipline) is filed against the following clergy . . . "
(See list at entry for January 16, 1999).
As a bishop of the church, I have accepted this complaint from my
colleagues. I join them in stating I personally disagree with this area
of church law. Nevertheless, it is my intention to refer to this
complaint as a judicial complaint to the counsel for the church pursuant
to Paragraph 358.1 of the 1996 Book of Discipline. The person I have
appointed as counsel for the church is the Rev. Paul Wiberg, pastor, St.
Mark's United Methodist Church, Orinda, Calif. It will be his
responsibility to sign the complaint and forward the same to the
Conference Committee on Investigation. If that committee sees fit to do
so, it may turn the complaint into charges which may result in a trial.
And if or when that happens, I shall be prepared to convene a pool of 35
or more elders appointed by the district superintendents, from which a
jury will be selected. And, I will place the charges in the hands of a
colleague bishop of my choosing who will preside
over the trial.
This is a very painful day for me. The persons on both sides of this
issue are my sisters and brothers. They are faithful followers of Jesus
Christ. Yet, there are honest differences in opinions regarding this
controversial issue in our church. Those colleagues named in this
complaint have chosen to challenge this unjust law. I understand their
wishes. I am a disciple of the civil rights protests. From my own
experiences, I can appreciate acts of conscience and acts of civil
disobedience. Therefore, my referring this complaint is without
prejudice to enable these colleagues to have their day
in a court of peers. My prayer is that in the due process to follow,
clergy peers will seek to do justice, and to act in a way that is
consistent with the teachings and compassion of Jesus. I trust they will
hold before them the vision for our church that is inclusive, with
diversity and acceptance as its hallmarks. May God bless all of us as we
seize this moment as an opportunity to model how Christians should deal with controversy in our lives and in our churches.
Presented by: Melvin G. Talbert, Resident Bishop
- [(615)742-5470*Nashville,Tenn. 10-21-28-71BP{157} By United
Methodist News Service]
March 26, 1999. Dell convicted in same-sex ceremony. Following the
ruling [by the United Methodist Judicial Council], the Rev. Greg Dell of
Chicago performed a (same-sex) ceremony and was found guilty in a church
trial. The penalty was handed down late on March 26, after two long
days of testimony and deliberation in the sanctuary of First United
Methodist Church. Dell, who is pastor of Broadway United Methodist
Church in Chicago, was convicted of a single charge of "disobedience to
the Order and Discipline of the United Methodist Church." He is
appealing that verdict and the penalty - a suspension that goes into
effect July 5. Despite impending suspension, the Rev. Greg Dell has
declared that signing a pledge to no longer perform same-sex union
ceremonies would be a "violation" of his ministry. The United Methodist
pastor's comment came after a 13-member jury of his peers found him
guilty of conducting such a ceremony last September and decided that he
should be suspended on July 1 until he signed a pledge or until the
church no longer prohibited the action. Retired Bishop Jack Tuell, who
presided over the trial, later amended the date to July 5 to allow Dell
to perform a July 3 wedding ceremony. Despite the verdict, the bishop
declared that he continues to consider Dell "an exemplary pastor whose
record of faithfulness is, in my opinion, beyond reproach." (Bishop
Joe) Sprague, who filed the charge, said he had hoped to frame it in a
way to provide a "teachable moment" for the church. While he believes
that occurred, he added that the trial also has shown the world "the box
we have put ourselves into in this denomination". During the trial,
(counsel for the church) The Reverend Stephen Williams based his case
along legal grounds, saying that Dell had explicitly violated Paragraph
65c in the United Methodist Book of Discipline which states: "Ceremonies
that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers
and shall not be conducted in our churches." Williams charged, and Dell
agreed, that despite the ruling a month earlier, the pastor had
performed the Sept. 19 union ceremony between Keith Eccarius and Karl
Reinhardt at Broadway United Methodist Church. Along with disregarding
the authority of the United Methodist General Conference, the
denomination's highest legislative body, Dell ignored the decision of
its highest court, the church counsel said. Williams also accused the
pastor of failing the order of elders and pointed to Paragraph 311 in
the Discipline, which calls the order a "covenant community within the
church to mutually support, care for and hold accountable its members
for the sake of the life and mission of the church." The prosecution
called three witnesses in presenting its case: Bishop George Bashore,
president of the United Methodist Council of Bishops, Dell himself, and
Bishop C. Joseph Sprague of the Chicago Area. Williams made his case by
stressing the Judicial Council's ruling last August and by emphasizing
"the plain meaning of the Discipline."...Dell said he would conduct no
liturgical acts as a political witness during that period. However,
under cross-examination by Williams, Dell said he would not promise to
refrain from performing same-sex union ceremonies during that period.
He has conducted 33 such ceremonies in the past 18 years. (UMNS#168,
March 29, 1999; New York; 10-21-71BP{168})
{The following commentary was offered by a pastor who had observed the
proceedings: "The counsel for the church, allowed without objection,
three homosexuals to share the validity of their lifestyle. One came
from a reformed church where theology was done by using "scripture,
scripture, scripture, and scripture." The other was the son of a
Missouri Synod pastor who has come to accept his son's lifestyle. All
of this presentation of a testimony of the validity of the homosexual
lifestyle was presented without objection by the counsel of the
church.
E-mail dated Sun, 28 Mar 1999}
April 15, 1999. Georgia church withholds funds amid talk of split.
ATLANTA (UMNS) -- The board of stewards of Marietta First United
Methodist Church has voted to withhold all of the financial support that
it typically provides at the conference and denominational levels, as
some members talk openly about leaving the church and forming a new
congregation. The 108-56 vote took place April 11 and applies to all of
the "apportionment" dollars that have been requested of Marietta First
by the larger church. With 5,302 members, the church has the
fourth-largest United Methodist congregation in Georgia. Earlier this
year, Bishop Lindsey Davis announced that the Rev. Charles Sineath, 60,
would not be reappointed to Marietta First after 22 years. Since then
Sineath has announced his plans to retire in June from the United
Methodist ministry.
The decision to withhold all apportionments, except the pastor's
pension, was an expansion of an earlier decision by the board of
stewards not to pay several "general church" funds that support the work
of the church on the denominational level....The church's total apportionment.
|
The Officers and Directors of Concerned Methodists, Inc.
P. O. Box 2864 Fayetteville, NC 28302-2864
Phone: 910/488-4379 FAX: 910/488-5090
E-mail: concmths@infionline.net
Website maintained by Rev. John Warrener at Servantweb.com
|