Methodists reinstate Gay Minister's Credentials

[RevCheesehead]

This is an amazing and unexpected development. Beth Stroud had her ministerial credentials revoked for being "a self-avowed, practicing homosexual." An appeals court has reversed the decision.

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=291x1561

(thank you, polmaven, for posting this story!)

[dsc]

1. This is terrific news

Thanks for the repost.

[RevCheesehead]

2. Link to news story

http://www.news.umc.org/site/c.gjJTJbMUIuE/b.617879/k.DED2/Appeals_committee_reverses_church_trial_verdict_in_Stroud_case.htm

<snip>
The appeals committee’s ruling reinstates her clergy standing. However, Stroud said in a press conference after the ruling that she would not exercise the ministry of an ordained person until the "whole process is concluded."

The appeal committee’s written ruling was that "the verdict and the penalty are reversed and set aside." However, it said that "the evidence in support of the charge was overwhelming and would be sustained in the absence of legal error."

The committee noted two legal errors.
In the first, it cited an earlier ruling by the United Methodist Church’s supreme court, the Judicial Council, regarding the rights of ordained elders—"members in full connection"—to an appointment or ministry in the church.

"It is the judgment of the committee that Judicial Council Decision No. 702, which binds this committee, makes it legal error to try, convict and deprive a member in full connection of her right to an appointment pursuant to Paragraphs 304.3 and 2702.1(b) of the Book of Discipline, when, as in this case, neither the General Conference nor the pertinent annual conference has defined the words, ‘practicing homosexual’ and ‘status.’"

The General Conference is the church’s top legislative assembly.

Second, the committee wrote that "legal error was committed by trying and convicting (Stroud) on the basis of Paragraph 304.3 because that provision constitutes a ‘new standard or rule of doctrine’ which has not been declared by the General Conference to be ‘not contrary’ to the present standards, in violation of the First Restrictive Rule and paragraph 102 of the Discipline."

The First Restrictive Rule, found in the church’s constitution, states that the General Conference shall not establish any new standards or rules of doctrine contrary to the church’s existing standards of doctrine.

more....

[ktowntennesseedem]

3. Yeah, I was shocked when I heard that one.

Very pleased, but shocked just the same.

[RevCheesehead]

4. At this point, I will take ANY victory, no matter how small.

I'm sure the Methodist fundies will be up in arms tomorrow. But this is HUGE. Primarily, their case rests in saying the Discipline of the Church is in violation of the General Rules of the church, in refusing gay persons ordination.

This will, no doubt, be appealed to the Judicial Council (which usually meets in May) - but I don't know if they can act this quickly.

Only time will tell.

WE'RE TRYING, FOLKS!! REALLY, WE WANT TO WIN THIS ONE!!!

[DanCa]

7. Good luck too you

I know how vile and vindictive the fristians can be . I had to leave my family's church because it was too conservative. Personally I would have no problem taking communion from a gay priest it would mean that the pastor/vicar/rev/minister would have to have over come so much adverseray to do pursue his or her calling and that calling was genuine.
My heart goes out to Bishop Gene Robbinson and this minister, forgive me, I forget her name. They truly must be special people to put up with so much intolerance too pursue thier life's ambition.
I do not know what god the Fristians worship but I do know that my god wouldn't want me to descriminate based on orination party affilation and stance on reproductive issues.

[Jon_da_brockman]

5. good to hear

Good to see that there are some who put their pride and ego aside and do the right thing.

[RevCheesehead]

6. Thanks, Jon -

- and welcome to DU! :hi:

[Nothing Without Hope]

9. Yes, a very warm welcome to DU, Jon!

I look forward to seeing you around the forums!

:hi:

[Nothing Without Hope]

8. This is very good news - tolerance is on the march.

If you haven't already posted a headsup in the GLBT forum, I'll go do it. So much of the news there is disheartening, I know they would appreciate this.

Thank you, Cheese! The downside of Groups is that their posts are never visible on the main pages unless they are brought to our attention the way you did.

Edited to add: I've posted a headsup in the GLBT forum here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x10892

And I also recommended this current thread. (I just didn't mention that before!)
:hi:

[RevCheesehead]

10. I can't "recommend" my own topic....

if you would, please consider doing so. This story is important, and needs to be seen! Thanks. :)

[Nothing Without Hope]

12. see my edit - I did recommend it and I also posted a headsup in GLBT

This is very good news indeed - and you know, the first time I saw it was your post in the "Hopeful Thread" in the KOEB Group!

Which - for anyone interested - is here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=315x1796

[RevCheesehead]

14. Thanks, Hope.

Glad you posted it in GLBT.

With all the negative stuff about Christians, I had hoped this news would be rather welcome by DUers.

Oh well, it's Friday.

[Nothing Without Hope]

15. Happy weekend, Cheese! I'll help you keep this kicked - I hope it makes

it to the Greatest page where it will be seen by more people. Good news like this is to be passed around like cold lemonade on a hot, thirsty day.
:hi:

[kineneb]

11. I heard it on NPR on my way home. Good.

As a former Methodist, I am pleased to see them actually using the minds they were given. And as many posters to DU have mentioned, there isn't anything in the NT, much less the Synoptic Gospels, that say anything about sexual orientation. Lots on being good to the poor and not being a hypocrite. But nothing about homosexuality.

[Nothing Without Hope]

13. kick! This is important not only as news but as encouragement n/t

[paineinthearse]

16. 3rd nomination - touchdown!

We need some good news.

Now if only Rep. Sam Johnson's minister would return my email.

[RevCheesehead]

17. Thank you for that!!!

Come on people! This is GREAT NEWS!!!

[Melissa G]

19. kick

[Nothing Without Hope]

18. Kick! And a pleasure it is for such good news. n/t

[RevCheesehead]

20. kick

[tammywammy]

21. This is great news.

I'm Methodist, and I disagreed with their original decision, and I'm very happy with this reversal. The church I grew up in was never homophobic, and always taught to love everyone, and this helps reaffirm that.

[libnnc]

22. this makes me so happy I can't hardly stand myself!!

Wow. Just. Wow. Guess I'll be going back to church sooner than I thought! :bounce:

What will this do to the conservatives? Will there still be talk of splitting the church?

Rev. Cheesehead, your thoughts?

edit to add: does this verdict affect the other recent case (Karen Dammann)?

[RevCheesehead]

23. Oh, this is by no means the final word.

What happened is the appeals court decided a)That Beth was removed without being given to present full evidence (that is, the ruling in the Discipline is "unconstitutional" - or "unChristian" and b) The rule on Gay Clergy is in conflict with the Church's General Rules.

The central issue, for Beth, is that she was (and is, to me) a clergyperson "in good standing." That means, there were NO complaints about her ministry. As such, she is deserving of an appointment to a local church. However, she has chosen to NOT seek an appointment - at least, not until the Judicial Council has a chance to review and issue a ruling on the case.

I suspect her reasons in not seeking an appointment NOW are pastoral. She does not want to "get in the way of" her ministry. To me, this makes her case even stronger - because the issue isn't really about HER - it's about MINISTRY.

There is nothing in the Discipline which forbids homosexuals from any other ministry. This rule applies only to Clergy. I suppose the bigger question is "do we hold Clergy to different standards than the rest of the Church?"

That's a very good question, indeed. :)
(on edit: I still question the "celibacy in singleness" thing, myself. I mean, really - how are we single people supposed to "date," anyways??)

[libnnc]

24. so, since this was decided on a technicality

do you think this was a way for the church to reverse its decision without looking too "activist" and directly ticking off the conservatives? Do you think there will ever be a time when that particular passage (re: clergy being "practicing homosexuals") in the Discipline is changed?

[RevCheesehead]

26. That's a very good question.

It would be great if they engaged in deep theological thought and discussion, but I'm not holding my breath. One important thing to remember is that all committees, etc., of the UMC consist of both Clergy and Laity. My experience has been that the Clergy are more inclined to be open-minded, but the Laity can often be homophobic and legalistic.

Let's hope there's room for the Spirit to work here. O8)

[DTinAZ]

28. Comments from IRD's Mark Tooley on the decision...

From an email sent out to supporters of the Institute on Religion and Democracy by Mark Tooley, Director of their ultra-conservative "UMAction" division:

"Do not be alarmed! Yes, the liberal-dominated Northeast Jurisdictional Appeals Committee of the United Methodist Church, as expected, overturned the conviction of lesbian United Methodist minister Beth Stroud. And yes, their strained rationales for doing so were absurd. But the United Methodist Church's Judicial Council will almost certainly overturn this irresponsible ruling. When it meets this Fall, the Judicial Council will assuredly issue a ruling that will strongly reaffirm our church's teachings about marriage and sex. And the ruling will have church-wide application, setting back the pro-homosexuality forces even further. Meanwhile, Stroud has said she will not resume her ordained status until the judicial process is completed. Please read our news release (http://www.ird-renew.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=391221&ct=785187) about this. And please be in prayer for our Judicial Council, for Beth Stroud, and for the poor, confused members of the NEJ Appeals Committee!

Mark Tooley
Director, UMAction"

David T.
http://umaction.org
(not to be confused with the IRD's UMAction)

[polmaven]

29. Disgusting...

"The liberal-dominated Northeast Jusridictional Appeals Committee...."

Pardon me, Mr. Tooley, but hasn't "liberal Northeast" been just a little overdone? I don't believe it was the Northeast Jurisdiction who acquitted Karen Dammann in March 2004...that was the Western Jurisdiction, sir.

I'm quite sure when this guy asks for prayers for Beth Stroud, it is only meant to pray the homosexuality notions out of her head, and let her come to her senses and drop this lesbian agenda problem.

Like I said.....Disgusting!!!!!!

[RevCheesehead]

30. Mark Tooley

should drop the "ey" from his last name, for he is, indeed, a tool.

I have precious little respect for the UM Action folks, or the Good News folks, or the "Confessing Movement" folks. Their rhetoric is shrill and their hatred is strong... and there is little evidence of "love" in what they do. Their idea of "love" is "self-interest," and is more dangerous than I can describe.

Thanks for posting his response. (I'm sure his newsletters are being printed right now :eyes:)

[polmaven]

25. Rev.Dammann was acquitted in her original trial.

I really think that the pastor who had prosecuted and the Bishop who had originally brought the charges were just as pleased as she and many other progressive UMs at that acquittal.

I don't remember that it was appealed. This makes 2 in just over 14 months.

I am sure the UM fundies will NOT be happy, but they weren't happy last year at General Conference AFTER THEY GOT THEIR WAY about the marriage issue!!! Evidently, the mere fact that they were challenged was enough to make them propose schism.

[polmaven]

27. Another quote from Reverend Stroud:

"The church is not free to disregard the standards of justice and inclusiveness that are preached by Jesus Christ ... and are a part of church law," Stroud said after church authorities read their decision at a hotel.

"The ruling gives us hope that the United Methodist Church has the resources to do justice," she said.

How right she is! She should be admired for her remarkable courage in standing tall to right a grevious situation.

[RevCheesehead]

31. Kick - in case you haven't seen this yet.