A call for a moratorium on LGBTQ-related offenses in The UMC will lead to healing and hope for our divided Church.
Did we or Didn’t we?
One of the primary questions coming out of May’s General Conference of The United Methodist Church is: “Did we pass a moratorium on prosecution of those who practice LGBTQ Inclusion in the Church?” You can read how we got to this question here.
The Confessing Movement, a group opposed to LGBTQ Inclusion in The UMC, was first out of the gate days after GC ended when it wrote an e-blast entitled “No Moratorium on Accountability“:
There has been much said about what happened at General Conference regarding human sexuality, charges and trials. The fact is the official position of the UMC has not been altered. We continue to stand firm on the authority of Scripture and the official position of the church as stated in the Discipline.
Chiming in soon after were two bishops. Bishop Lowry in the Central Texas Conference (link):
Should you choose to violate the Disciplinary provisions on same gender weddings, a complaint will be brought against you and if necessary charges will be filed. Church law in The Discipline of the United Methodist Church has not been suspended. I will seek to live in grace pursuing meaningful just resolutions, but such just resolutions will be significant and have consequences. I will up hold The Discipline of the United Methodist Church.
Bishop Scott Jones in the Great Plains Conference (link):
The bishops will uphold the Discipline of the Church while these conversations continue. All provisions of the Book of Discipline 2012 on matters of human sexuality will remain in force until a General Conference changes them.
Of note, the above two bishops have admitted they were two of an alleged seven bishops who would not support the Bishops’ Commission in the first place. Little wonder they do not approve of the language of the Commission since they did not vote for it when originally proposed.
What we actually did
The actual language passed by General Conference was this line in the Bishops’ Special Commission:
We will continue to explore options to help the church live in grace with one another – including ways to avoid further complaints, trials and harm while we uphold the Discipline. We will continue our conversation on this matter and report our progress to you and to the whole church. (source)
Honestly, I am most offended by the lack of use of the Oxford Comma. 🙂
The Bishops had three days after the Bishops’ Commission was approved, and one full day of meeting as a Council after, in order to clarify this statement. They chose not to. So we are left with an ambiguous statement that could support either a moratorium or continued prosecution, depending on the temperment of the region’s Bishop.
A More Common Response
While the dissenters to “A Way Forward” claim a moratorium was not issued, clergy and laity have responded in meaningful ways that affirm the opposite:
- Almost 6,000 people have signed a petition calling for the cessation of trials.
- The Great Plains Annual Conference passed a resolution calling for Bishop Jones to “put on the brakes” on prosecution of the Meyer case. As a pastor in GP stated:
The Rev. David Livingston, pastor of St. Paul’s UMC in Lenexa, Kansas, and an advocate of Meyer, said he was pleased with the results of the vote. “It affirms the idea from the Council of Bishops that we can uphold the spirit with the space for grace and conversation.”
- Other conferences passed other resolutions as detailed in this UMNS article.
Chaos or Community?
In the midst of these competing narratives, how do people of faith respond with integrity in The United Methodist Church?
There’s two decisions that can be made by each conference:
- First, our bishops can choose how to act. Bishops can interpret AWF to either call for continued prosecution or to call for a moratorium. They can choose to heal the body by waiting on General Conference to act, or they can keep the wound open by whipping it through continued prosecutions. The choice is theirs.
- Second, our Boards of Ordained Ministry can choose to not consider orientation as a barrier to ministry, as has New York, Baltimore-Washington, Pacific Northwest and Northern Illinois Conferences. Since General Conference is in the midst of finding a way forward on orientation, BOOMs can choose with integrity to not consider it for a time.
By implementing both of these practices, we get to glimpse what a slightly more just United Methodist Church looks like. And this helps The UMC. Why? The Bishops’ Commission is making this decision on human sexuality without a model of what LGBTQ Inclusion looks like in the Wesleyan tradition. By modeling this reality–in an albeit patchwork fashion–across all five jurisdictions (and the Central Conferences, if desired), we provide The UMC with data and lived experience to show that inclusion of sexual minorities is not a barrier to a thriving Wesleyan denomination.
You see that Bishops and Boards of Ordained Ministries can choose to assist the Bishops’ Commission without even being at the table, but rather making sure the table is extended to all who want to serve God in ordained ministry and marriage.
Call For A Moratorium
I would interpret the Bishops’ Commission proposal to be calling for precisely such a moratorium so that these two years may be filled with healing and hope:
- Healing by stopping the harm in the Body of Christ. In particular, ceasing prosecution of those 110 clergy and clergy candidates who chose authenticity and outed themselves in the days before GC and several in the days after will go a long way towards showing the world that a global church can lead with grace instead of a prosecution complex.
- Hope by embodying what a more inclusive church looks like so that people can see that LGBTQ Inclusion is not the poison pill to discipleship, growth, and holiness that it is painted to be.
Thoughts? Thanks for your shares on social media, and sharing this document with Bishops and members of the Boards of Ordained Ministry that you are connected with.
What paragraph in the Discipline grants the Bishops authority to temporarily nullify a part of parts of the Discipline?
It says it in the quoted lines above that avoiding trials and harm is part of their charge. Passed by GC.
“we provide the UMC with data and lived experience to show that exclusion of sexual minorities is not a barrier to a thriving Wesleyan denomination.” Is this what you meant to say? Confused.
Goodness, whoops! What a typo. Fixed. Thanks Sheila!
Yours is a horrible exegesis on the statement. The key phrase you selectively decided to ignore is “while we uphold the discipline.” This statement explicitly makes it clear that homosexual weddings (etc., etc.) will not be allowed as the discipline will be upheld. Charges can and will continue and be enforced. Bishop Jones’ statement “All provisions of the Book of Discipline 2012 on matters of human sexuality will remain in force until a General Conference changes them” is a clear and accurate exegesis of the statement approved at General Conference. Again, yours is a horrible exegesis on the statement that lacks integrity (you selectively chose portions to exegete) and mature exegesis skills (you are doing eisegesis- getting out of the statement what you are hoping for.) Your title says it all “Hoping For A Moratorium…”
Hi John, thanks for reading. By the Commission’s charge, the 2012 Discipline as-is is not doing it. It is causing harm. That was passed by GC. So to continue to enforce the sections that cause harm is to deny the will of GC. I believe their interpretation is technically correct but not in the Spirit of the Commission–which they voted against anyway and it shows.
Jeremy, since the statement by GC includes the language of upholding the discipline as well as concerns about harm, it is self evident that the statement indicates that the harm is by those who violate the discipline. Otherwise your exegesis has the statement saying “Let’s stop by harm by continuing to continuing to do harm” which would be nonsensical. That is what the evangelical/conservative/orthodox see this as a clear victory for our traditional methodist stance and voted for it. It would NOT have been passed by evangelicals otherwise (who indeed held the votes to pass or deny it). That is why the first motion by Adam Hamilton was turned back. Again, your poor exegesis has the statement being self contradictory “Let’s stop harm by continuing to do harm (e.g. uphold the discipline.)” It is clear the statement indicates the harm is by those who violate the discipline. The harm referred to is progressives continuing to violate the BoD. The harm referred to is the deception by progressives in not taking their ordination vows in good faith.
Good essay. I concur 100%. Too much harm has already been done. Orlando!
Jeremy, I have to respectfully disagree.
I know where you are coming from. Those who are the target of charges, trials, and other actions will have a little breathing room. There will be room for (limited) healing and a shred of hope. But the measure of those will not provide room for transformation, I fear.
Your lead line is that the moratorium will “lead to healing and hope for the divided church.” I believe that the exact opposite will be true. There will be no healing the destroyed relationships of those who feel the UMC has abdicated the Discipline. There will be no hope for reconciliation on the part of those who would see this as a further abandoning of the covenant relationship.
I am only basing this on the voices of complaint and dissent that have already been uttered. These are not my sentiments. They are observations. My fear is that healing and hope for a unified church will not be found in these actions. But my fears are based in looking down the road to see that we have gone too far at this point to preserve a unified church.
My hope is that some future day (sadly long from now) we will find a way to be unified. It would be something of a joy that it would happen in my lifetime. But my hope is that my children will see a re-united church.
How about a moratorium on complaints, trials, AND disobeying the Discipline? That would open a path to healing. The escalation since General Conference, and it is all coming from progressives, is eliminating the possibility of unity.
In Christ,
The enemy hates clarity
There is no moratorium. There never was. The acts of disobedience will continue. Tensions will increase. Divisions will get deeper and wider. I have seen nothing about our bishops even scheduling a meeting to start putting a plan together.
We UMist need to be an INCLUSIVE church…realizing the multi- religious faith paths in a World where the GREAT MYSTERY- SPIRIT is moving in all of us to be GRACE FILLED as is the Source of LIFE. IF God accepts us …each one of us..even before we realize it we need to marvel over the Uniqueness of each person and celebrate the marvelous DIFFERENCES of the Creation. Bishops and People of faith ….Let’s be ….BE open to ALL people and use our spirit -filledness to incite us to BE INCLUSIVE……. We are M & F ,\\\ and so is the ELOHIM image … But that means This ONE of many names is ALSO BEYOND…. and so can we BE,,,,,TO be as we accept others and INCLUDE them in the Journey of LIFE that all each one of is Blessed with. Let us stop the negativity that EXCLUDES….. Let us let GRACISM win….. SHALOM, Rev Henry Schwarzmann BWC
I find it hypocritical to ask for healing while at the same time push through with one-sided and defiant actions, as per the recent New York Conference and its decision to disobey the BoD on this matter. How is that respectful of the Church at large?
Logically, there are only two things that can happen to our church now.
1. A miracle from God changes our hearts and minds and we will unite as one around a strong message and vision from God himsel.
2. We stop pretending to be a united church and split in some way or fashion so that churches and conferences and jurisdictions can do as they see fit regarding human sexuality…and of course whatever else comes up in the future. Make no mistake, once we open the gate to the “local option” there will be more issues in the future that will make use of the “local option”.
Healing as you put it is a pipe dream and this nonsense of our bishops being vague enough to please everybody is an affront. How is it possible to say that both x and y are valid with a straight face?
Let’s look forward to a new day and a new church. We need to start now.
There’s a real simple way to avoid chaos, charges and trials …STOP TGE REBELLION! Just stop already with the blatant disregard of the covenant, and voila, no charges. In stead we have crap like this going on.
https://ellensburgumc.org
Do you really think this helps?
The Book of Discipline is not God. It has been amended many times. There are so many rules in it that I expect each of us is violating something. As for me and my house, we will follow the Lord and welcome all equally. I expect my conference will hang with the Book of Discipline, although some local churches may vary. I will continue to advocate for LGBT inclusion, and I will applaud those ministers, churches, conferences and jurisdictions that have the courage to follow their hearts and welcome all into full fellowship including marriage and ordination.