Methodists oppose gay marriage ban in Texas

[BigEdMustapha]

I was pleasantly suprised to find this in my e-mail this morning:

The following is a statement by the Texas Conference Board of Church & Society. Statement in Opposition to Proposition 2 to Amend the Texas Constitution

First, do no harm.... (John Wesley: 2004 United Methodist Book of Discipline, ¶101: Doctrine and Discipline in the Christian Life, p. 48)

In November the people of Texas will be asked to vote on an amendment to our Bill of Rights of the State Constitution "providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage."

While we acknowledge the theological disagreement within The United Methodist Church on the subject of homosexuality in general, our United Methodist Discipline unambiguously commits The United Methodist Church to the support of the civil rights of homosexual persons.

"Certain basic human rights and civil liberties are due all persons. We are committed to supporting these rights and liberties for homosexual persons. We see a clear issue of simple justice in protecting their rightful claims where they have shared material resources, pensions, guardian relationships, mutual powers of attorney, and other such lawful claims typically attendant to contractual responsibilities and equal protection before the law." (¶162H, 2004 United Methodist Book of Discipline)

Proposition 2 denies the very civil rights we as a church support. If passed, it would have harmful consequences extending far beyond a definition of marriage. As United Methodists in Texas, we believe it is important to defeat this proposed amendment and urge all United Methodists to prayerfully support the position of our church, defending the civil rights of many of our families, friends and neighbors, by voting against Proposition 2.

[soleft]

1. wow. embers of hope

[libnnc]

2. so "we want you in our congregations..."

"...We want you in the pews but not behind the pulpit."

Born and raised Methodist here who's fed up.

This schizophrenia has got to stop.

[BigEdMustapha]

3. It's a sign of hope at least...

I know the Methodist church has handed down some bad decisions lately (specifically defrocking the gay pastor as well as defending a pastor in North Carolina who refused membership to a gay man) but we have to at least acknowledge the correct decisions and let them know this is the direction we want the church to move in.

[Critters2]

4. The UMC

is as homophobic as any fundies! Some of us are tired of its claims that its a progressive church, when everytime it has the chance it reaffirms the idea that "homosexuality is incompatible with the Christian faith". I'm tired of UMs trying to convince me that they belong to a liberal church. Tell it to all the former UM glbt folks who've left because of the UMC's discrimination against them. There's not an iota's worth of difference between the UMC and any fundie church on this issue, except the UMC is somehow embarassed by its position--but not enough to change it.

Open hearts, open minds, open doors--unless you're gay!!

[RayOfHope]

7. I happen to know

a UMC pastor who has performed marriages/committment ceremonies for gay couples. This pastor was also *adored* by the heavily gay congregation. I also know another UMC pastor who is very much in favor of gay rights in and out of the church.

Yes, there is plenty that needs to be fixed withi the church, but please don't paint with such a broad brush.

[Critters2]

9. The official position of the UMC

on glbt issues is precisely the same as that of the Southern Baptist Convention--you can't be gay and Christian. It's UMC canon law--look it up! Your friend doing gay marriages is in violation of church law. Why not join a church where gay people really are welcome--rather than pretend they are, when the official policy says differently.

On this issue, the UMC is just a bunch of fundies.

[BigEdMustapha]

10. Wrong

The "official" position of the UMC says this:

Church to Be in Ministry to Persons of All Sexual Orientations

Also - this statement:

"All people may attend its worship services, participate in its programs, receive the sacraments and become members in any local church in the connection" Link here

These are taken from the UMC website and/or the UMC Book of Disclipine

Note - I'm fully aware of the fact that the UMC will not allow "practicing" homosexuals to be ordained as well as the other shortcomings of the UMc when it comes to homosexuals.

[Critters2]

11. Same as the SBC

The Southern Baptist Convention's policy is that gay people are to be welcome in churches, and ministered to, but since "homosexuality is contrary to scripture", they can be neither married nor ordained. How is that different from the UMC's statement that "homosexuality is incompatible with the Christian faith".

Why don't progressive UMs just join churches that are honest about this issue?

[BigEdMustapha]

12. I'm sorry you are choosing to interpret it that way

I see a huge difference in the way the UMC states their position on homosexuality and the way the SBC does. The links and statements I have provided prove that. The SBC's website is filled with words like "abomination" and "depraved nature" to describe homosexuality, where the UMC website uses phrases like "all persons are of sacred worth".

Additionally - let me point out the difference in the UMC and SBC on gay marriage -

UMC supports equal rights regardless of sexual orientation
http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=1&mid=1753

SBC "we continue to oppose steadfastly all efforts by any court or state legislature to validate or legalize same-sex marriage or other equivalent unions"
http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=1128

[Critters2]

13. I'm guessing

you're not a gay Methodist--or former Methodist. "We don't love you" sounds the same no matter what theological language you couch it in.

[RevCheesehead]

14. The biggest difference between Methodists and Baptists:

United Methodist clergy are BOUND to the Book of Discipline. It is our rulebook on how the church conducts its business. The reason Beth Stroud was "defrocked" was NOT because she was gay - it was because she was in a gay relationship (Pastors are forbidden by the Discipline to be "self-avowed, practicing homosexuals").

The SBC gathers together, but in no way is a Baptist congregation bound by their rules or laws. Many churches have chosen to go their own way - and some have been expelled from the convention - but the congregations remained exactly the same. That's because Baptists have a congregational form of government. (UMC has an episcopal form of government)

There ARE liberal and conservative Methodists, AND there are also liberal and conservative Baptists. I have several friends who are gay clergy. Some chose to be closeted, some were open, some left the church, others were embraced by their congregations.

In many conferences of the UMC, the policy is "don't ask - don't tell." If Beth Stroud chose to remain silent, she would probably still be under appointment. But she chose to speak out. Even more power to her for that courageous decision.

[Critters2]

15. Isn't "don't ask, don't tell"

a violation of the Book of Discipline? At the very least, it's senaky and dishonest. Do you consider that an honorable way to behave? And, again, the national policy is quite clear--homosexuality is INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CHRISTIAN FAITH. That seems pretty clear to me. It also seems pretty hateful.

[RevCheesehead]

17. Nope. Civil disobedience, perhaps.

The phrase in the Discipline says "self-avowed."

The judicial council ruled that the phrase "Self-avowed practicing homosexual is understood to mean that a person openly ackowledges to a bishop, district superintendent, district committee of ordained ministry, board of ordained ministry, or clergy session that the person is a practicing homosexual."

Some conferences choose not to ask. Each conference has the right to choose how to interview candidates for ministry.

Dishonest? Sneaky? Was it dishonest or sneaky of Rosa Parks to refuse to give up her seat to a white man?

Sometimes changes have to come thru civil disobedience. At this point, it's the best we have. I choose to see it as a very small victory. Of course, I'd love to see the thing disappear altogether. However, remember that we're talking about CLERGY here. In the church at large, homosexuals are considered to be persons "of sacred worth."

[libnnc]

5. I know this is blasphemy coming from a UMCer but

I wish the church would split already. If sane and reasonable bishops and leaders can't win the church back from the conservatives (who IMO aren't real Methodists anyway) we will continue this passive/aggressive back and forth. Agreeing to prayerfully disagree while at the same time spiritually terrorizing our lesbian and gay clergy isn't good enough.

Let the conservatives have their narrow, bigoted body and give me back my church--a church that dared to speak out against all hatered and injustice; a church that really walked the walk.

[BigEdMustapha]

6. I'm with you

and I don't think it's blasphemy...

You and I want the same thing - a Methodist church that walks the walk that Jesus did and does not cave in to bigotry and hatred. Hopefully, we can either run off the conservatives or split like you suggested. And I have a feeling that statements from the church like the one in the original post will hurry this process along.

[RayOfHope]

8. I agree, too. n/t

[seabeyond]

16. i am hitting my two methodist churches in the panhandle of texas

and ask them if they support htis. i am telling htem i pulled my kids from religion because of what has been happening in our christian community. if i can find a church that wont honor discriminating against i group, i will put my kids in that church. i cant do church or groups, but i do want my likd to have it in their lives. but, they arent particpating in a religion of hate, that lives in old testament, and doesnt walk in christs words. thanks for this information