Trying to Make Sense from a Disgraceful Ruling in Wisconsin

2 Timothy 4:1-5

1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: 2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage — with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5 But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.

Paul was writing to a young pastor – Timothy.  Paul was encouraging him to be prepared to preach the Word – the Gospel truth – at all times – no matter what others were doing around him.  He was warning him that there will be those – even in the church – who would turn away from the truth and turn aside to their own thoughts of what is right and wrong.  He said it this way; For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

This week – in Wisconsin – this passage came to fruition before us.  I’m sure it has in the past and it will in the future as well.  A group of clergy in the Wisconsin regional conference – turned away from the truth of the Bible (the Word) and from the covenant in our denomination – the Book of Discipline.  They acquitted a clergy of one charge and slapped her on the wrist for another – both charges were breaches in the covenant of the church and should have resulted in the pastor being defrocked.  Rather than stand for the truth of the Bible and with the covenant of the denomination – they voted with their own desires, they gathered around them a great number of people to say what their itching ears wanted to hear. They turned their ears away from the truth and turned aside to myths.

So where does that leave us?  Today – I’m not sure what I will do in response to this sinful behavior and action within the church I love.  I know that the General Conference is the only body that can speak for our denomination – but right now that is little solace.  I also know that if the GC establishes Biblical principles yet the church cannot or will not enforce them – there will be no trust in our denomination – much like the Episcopal, Lutheran & Presbyterian churches that are being torn a part by those turning away from truth.

I want more for the United Methodist Church.  I’m not sure it will happen.  I will remain until we see what the Judicial branch of the church does with this disgrace and I will wait to see what the General Conference says in 2012.  After that – I have no idea how God will lead me.  I pray it is to be faithful to God in all I do – stay or leave.

Just something to think about today as you go on your way.

Tweet this Blog Post

I Pray the UMC Will Hold To Biblical Principles

Last weekend we (the Baltimore-Washington Annual Conference) met.  Our AC is a meeting of clergy and lay people from the BWCUMC.  This conference is made up of UM Churches from most of Maryland (western shore of Maryland), all of D.C., and a small segment of West Virginia.  AC is made up of around 1,000 people – clergy and laity from churches in our area.  Our Bishop is John Schol.

You may be reading or hearing that the United Methodist Church (UMC) in our area passed resolutions on same-sex marriage and behavior.  Although this is sadly true – the resolutions they passed – by narrow margins – carry no real punch because a conference cannot speak for the church (denomination) – only the General Conference (GC) can do so.  The GC meets every four years – 2012 is their next meeting year.  The hope is that our GC will continue its Biblical stance dealing with the issues at hand and others.  The GC has become stronger over the decades on these issue – yet some continue to raise them year after year.  My fear is that a split in the church is at hand.  Those of us who believe that the Bible calls certain choices sin will not remain if the church calls sin acceptable.

A pastor friend of mine summarized the two resolutions in question this year.  Here is what he wrote.

A Resolution Allowing a Pastoral Response to Requests for Same-Gender Marriages and Civil Unions

This resolution petitions the General Conference, which will meet next year, to change church policy to allow clergy and churches who reside in jurisdictions with legalized same-sex marriage to conduct same-sex wedding ceremonies. Currently, our Book of Discipline explicitly forbids clergy to marry same-sex couples or for churches to host such ceremonies. Both are chargeable offenses. The rationale behind this petition is that current church law makes it too difficult for pastors and clergy who affirm same-sex relationships in places like Washington, D.C. where same-sex marriage is legal, to be fully, pastorally involved in the marriage process of their same-sex congregants.

Petition to General Conference to Amend Paragraph 161F in the Book of Discipline (remove condemnatory language on homosexuality)

This resolution petitions General Conference to strike any language in the Social Principles section of The Book of Discipline, specifically from paragraph 161F, that would declare homosexuality to be sinful. Specifically, it asks to strike the word “heterosexual” from the statement that sexual relations are only affirmed within monogamous marriage. It also asks to strike the statement, “The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching.” That would effectively render our Discipline neutral on homosexuality, saying nothing one way or the other on whether homosexual relationships are sinful or acceptable to God.

These two petitions are among thousands of others General Conference will consider when they meet next year. They were narrowly passed by our Conference after considerable debate. Granted, these will carry more weight since they come from an entire Annual Conference, but there is no guarantee of their passage or that they will pass exactly as they are worded now.

You can read the full resolutions here if you would like, along with other information.  These resolutions will not change anything nor will clergy be allowed to change the rules of the church unless the GC says so.

We have seen other denominations strike their Biblical stance on human sexuality and we have seen those denominations shrink and split and become a shadow of themselves.  Recently an article in the Christian Post reported that a long time clergy in the Church of Scotland – a segment of the Presbyterian Church – resigned because their church General Assembly voted to pave the way for active homosexuals to serve as clergy.  I believe many clergy in the UMC would follow suit if these types of resolutions pass GC.

The Presbyterian Church has faced such fallout from their decisions.  The Christian Post reports – A majority of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s district governing bodies voted in favor of deleting a requirement from the church constitution that requires clergy to live “in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness.”  The full article from the Christian Post can be found here.  I believe that if the UMC ever does change their Biblical stance in this area there will be a mass exodus from the church.  There are some pastors reporting people leaving now because our Conference passed these resolutions.  As a Biblically based pastor I have spent numerous hours with people over the years trying to convince them that the UMC is staying true to the Bible.  These resolutions suggest otherwise.

DO NOT be discouraged.  These resolutions will not change the truth of God’s word and at Mt. Oak we will continue to uphold Biblical truths.  As complex as human sexuality is – the Bible is clear that sexuality is to be expressed between a husband and a wife only – a man and a woman. The denomination’s stance is our stance – that the United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching.

Join me in prayer for those who would lead our church astray – following lies that can only lead us to destruction.

Gay Marriage – Should the Christian Church Take a Stand – On Either Side?

Recently I mentioned in a sermon that marriage was under attack.  The very definition of marriage is under public and church world scrutiny.  Is marriage to be defined as as the union of one man and one woman as the United Methodist Church defines it?  Or is our society and the church willing to define it in some other way?  Or will the church and society differ in their definitions?

The issue of gay marriage or same-sex marriage is one that captures the hearts and minds of many these days – both those who are for it and those who are against it.  Today I ask – Should the Christian Church Take a Stand – On Either Side of this issue?

A recent news report shares that Proposition 8 – which legally defined marriage as between one man and one woman – voted on by California voters in November 2008 (it passed with a 52 percent vote) – has been overturned by a Federal Judge.  An article on this can be found here.  This decision will be appealed.  The debate rages on.

The denomination I attend says the following about marriage.  We affirm the sanctity of the marriage covenant that is expressed in love, mutual support, personal commitment, and shared fidelity between a man and a woman. We believe that God’s blessing rests upon such marriage, whether or not there are children of the union.  We reject social norms that assume different standards for women than for men in marriage.  We support laws in civil society that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The Book of Discipline 2008 – page 102 – paragraph 161.b

Not every United Methodist Church or church member agrees with church law on this subject.  There are churches like Foundry UMC in Washington DC – a jurisdiction that allows Gay Marriage – that are wrestling with what they believe about marriage in light of church law and civil law.  They are among a group of churches and members who are working to change the denomination’s stand on marriage.  On their website I found this statement. Foundry’s congregation and its leadership are in a discernment process to determine our pastoral response to the legalization of same gender marriages within the District of Columbia. We are conscious of positions that The United Methodist Church has taken that are opposed to same-gender marriage, but those aspects of church discipline are in conflict with the deeper emphasis of the church’s Book of Discipline upon the gospel of grace and pastoral care for all of God’s children. While we are in this process of discernment, Foundry will continue its policy of providing services that will honor the committed relationships of our gay and lesbian members, constituents and friends. At these services, the vows and / or other statement of commitment previously made by the couple will be shared with and reported to the gathered congregation.

So a denomination of people – by a majority of their leadership – votes to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Within that same denomination a church (not the only one by the way) – and presumably by a majority of its members or leadership – decides to actively work in the opposite direction on the issue of defining marriage. This dichotomy exists in other denominations as well.

So I ask – should the Christian Church take a stand – on either side of this issue?  Or is it a secular issue best left up to the courts and voters?  Or is it a place where the church should be heard?

Readers – what are your thoughts?

Just something to think about today as you go on your way.

Tweet this Blog Post

Will We Ever Just Get Along?

I have written two articles recently, one concerning homosexuality and another concerning same-sex marriages.  They have been viewed often and several comments have been left for others to read.  They are hot topics because 1) the District of Columbia recently approved same-sex marriage and began to take applications on Wednesday past (150 applied the first day – 10 is normal), 2) the denomination’s long standing (1972) position that homosexuality is not compatible with Christian teaching, and 3) a local United Methodist church and pastor pledging to celebrate same-sex weddings (which the denomination forbids) (see a news article here or here).

The debate has raged since 1972 when the Book of Discipline addressed the issue – nearly 40 years.  Will we ever just get along?  I pray  that we can get along – but I have my doubts as to whether we will ever find common theological ground.  I acknowledge that what I am describing below are the extremes of the  positions held left and right.  My purpose in writing is to generate discussion around some middle ground where we can meet to hold our denomination together.  Is the United Methodist Church large enough to include such diverse beliefs on this and other subjects?

One side of the issue believes that homosexuality is a natural and normal expression of sexuality, given by God and therefore approved of by God when used within the bounds of a committed, consensual, monogamous relationship.

The other side believes that homosexuality is not a normal or natural expression of sexuality and is therefore a deviation from God’s plan and not within God’s will for individuals. To live out this lifestyle is a sinful misuse of the gift of sexuality given to humanity intended to be shared between a man and a woman for both procreation and intimacy through the bonds of marriage. Sexual relations with same sex partners are similar to sex outside of the bounds of marriage, neither honors the bounds of sexuality laid out by God.

One side believes that ministry to the homosexual community is focused on extending God’s grace to all and helping the gay and lesbian community to leave their sinful lifestyle while finding hope and wholeness in the body of Christ.

The other side believes that ministry to the homosexual community includes helping society accept and appreciate the homosexual community as another normal part of human diversity and offering opportunities in which homosexual people can use their gifts and callings for the building of the kingdom.

One side sees the church’s stance on homosexuality as comparable to the stance society and the church once held toward women and people of color.

The other side believes that homosexuality is a chosen expression of sexuality that is sinful.  As such, to compare women and people of color with the gay and lesbian community is not a fair comparison.

One side sees homosexuality as primarily a learned behavior – with many studies showing common childhood circumstances among those who become practicing homosexuals in later life. And, IF biological proof were found that related to sexual choice – this side sees that all things biological are not necessarily normal and natural (see drug addictions in babies and the propensity to alcoholism in children of alcoholics) nor in accordance with God’s desire. Just because a child is born with a tendency towards addiction does not mean that God intends for that child to become a practicing alcoholic.

The other side sees homosexuality as biological, natural, and a God given part of an individual which should not inhibit their full inclusion and development in church and society. And IF homosexuality is found not to be biological it is still a viable expression of sexuality when shared within the parameters of mutual love, affection, commitment, and sacrifice.

I could go on and on.

Something I did not mention that could be very revealing in this discussion is how each side views Scripture.  Is it God-breathed and useful in all circumstances of life, the primary source on God’s revelation, or is it a good guide, to be interpreted according to each person’s life experience?

There is one thing both sides might agree upon – all of God’s people are people of sacred worth.  I include a section of The Book of Discipline, parts of which we can all agree upon and parts we may differ in our opinion, yet it is the church’s position.  2008 Book of Discipline, ¶161F (pp 103-104), on Human Sexuality.  It reads, in part:

… We affirm that all persons are individuals of sacred worth, created in the image of God.  All persons need the ministry of the Church in their struggles for human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care of a fellowship that enables reconciling relationships with God, with others, and with self.  The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching.  We affirm that God’s grace is available to all.  We will seek to live together in Christian community, welcoming, forgiving, and loving one another, as Christ has loved and accepted us.  We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends.  We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons.

I believe, of course, that the extreme positions may never agree.  But is there a place where we can find some common ground?  If neither side yields, the debate will rage on, and we will continue to lose members from either extreme and in the middle as people tire of the debate.  I wonder what Jesus would do?  I’m sure one side would say one thing, while the other would say something different.  Pity that the church has to be so divided.  And this hasn’t even touched on the issue of transgendered or bi-sexual individuals.

Your thoughts are welcome!

Same-Sex Marriage – Church Law vs. State Law

In a recent news article about same sex marriages – found in The Christian Post – (read the full article here) – I read the following (a few sections):

Chief Justice John Roberts on Tuesday denied a last-minute request by traditional marriage supporters to stop Washington, D.C.’s same-sex marriage law from taking effect.

Ministers throughout the district and other traditional marriage supporters have, for the past several months, adamantly argued for the people’s right to vote on the issue of marriage. Same-sex marriage was legalized by Washington lawmakers.

Clergy at Dumbarton United Methodist Church in Georgetown said they will conduct same-sex weddings despite the denomination’s ban against the practice.

“As a pastor, I am called to extend care and grace to all people even as Jesus did,” said Rev. Mary Kay Totty, pastor of Dumbarton, in a statement Wednesday. “We celebrate love and loyalty wherever it is found.”

Dumbarton’s Church Council had voted last month to “honor and celebrate the wedding of any couple, licensed in the District of Columbia, who seek to commit their lives to one another in marriage.”

No other Methodist congregation in Washington is sanctioning gay and lesbian weddings, according to Dumbarton.

In a letter to clergy – our Bishop, John Schol, recently wrote this concerning church law (only one paragraph of his letter):

In the midst of differences, United Methodists are guided by the Book of Discipline. Our book of Discipline is clear that we “do not condone the practice of homosexuality (Book of Discipline paragraph 161F) and it is a chargeable offense for a clergyperson to conduct a holy union or marriage for homosexuals (Book of Discipline paragraph 2702.1.b). We also “implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons” (Book of Discipline paragraph 161F).

When church law and state law differ where will we side?  I believe the Biblical answer is found in the Old Testament story of Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.  The four young lads were captured by a foreign country and taken captive.  They were trained in the ways of their captures and excelled in the land of their captivity.  Yet they remained faithful to their God in all they did.

One story, found in Daniel 3, found three of the lads in opposition to the King of the captive land.  They wouldn’t worship the image of gold that the King had created, because they would bow only to God.  I pick up the story…

Daniel 3:13-18 – ¹³ Furious with rage, Nebuchadnezzar summoned Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. So these men were brought before the king, ¹⁴ and Nebuchadnezzar said to them, “Is it true, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, that you do not serve my gods or worship the image of gold I have set up? ¹⁵ Now when you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipes and all kinds of music, if you are ready to fall down and worship the image I made, very good. But if you do not worship it, you will be thrown immediately into a blazing furnace. Then what god will be able to rescue you from my hand?” ¹⁶ Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to the king, “O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. ¹⁷ If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king. ¹⁸ But even if he does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.”

We all know the story – the boys were taken to the furnace and God saved them.  They remained faithful to God and didn’t side with the law of the land. Although they were ready to face their death to be faithful to God.

We are called in Romans 13 to obey the laws of the land we live in, unless they oppose the laws of God.  I believe that the law of God is far superior to the law of the state.  Some clergy are willing to challenge church law, and face the consequences.  Are we willing to face state law and stand by the laws of God?  In this case – we might say yes.  But I believe we will face other cases in the near future.  As society continues its slide down perdition’s path, the body of Christ will come under heavy persecution.  It will not be one denomination here (Episcopal), and another there (United Methodist).  Those who call themselves after Christ will face persecution from within and from outside the church.  We will be held in contempt in the courts of the land for standing up for Jesus and Biblical truth.

I pray that we will stand strong – even in the face of pending death, like Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.  Whether we face a lion’s den or a fiery furnace, or the loss of our tax exemption, or the loss of our lands, I pray that the body of Christ will remain strong and serve the Lord with gladness.  I pray I will.