Speaking of homosexuality, is the UMC really close to closing the deal on ordaining homosexual clergy?
The answer you will get to this question will vary widely depending on who you ask.
This is a decision that can only be made by our General Conference. It meets every 4 years, next in 2016. In 1972 when the newly formed denomination (established in 1968 with the union of the Methodist Episcopal Church and the Evangelical United Brethren Church) finished hammering out its Social Principals, the now famous line about the practice of homosexuality not being compatible with Christian teaching was added to a line about seeing all persons as being of sacred worth. The final approval of that language was nearly 2-to-1. And though it has been debated for decades now, the results have remained remarkably the same (between 60-67% in favor of the existing language).
On the other hand, looking around the UMC in the United States, the numbers have probably moved dramatically to be to remove this language. Now there are significant blocks that not only hold to the existing language and would even probably leave the UMC if the language was ever changed. Many have left just at the hint of other views when some media source quotes a leader in the church with different views. (Be advised, these leaders represent only themselves, or perhaps a committee.) But, only General Conference can speak for the denomination as a whole.
This is significant, because GC is a representative body with delegates being elected on a proportional basis from United Methodist conferences around the world, and around the world the UMC is considerably more conservative than it is in the USA. Whether that will always be the case I don't know. But with the UMC growing overseas, I personally don't see any change likely to occur. On the other hand, with the writing on the wall, I do expect to see a concerted effort by those in the USA who object to the present language to see some sort of change in 2016. This has been pressed for in past meetings of the GC, with each of the last several meetings getting more and more about this item and little more. I suspect 2016 will be the worst yet for with regard to that discussion. But, I think there is a better chance of some sort of change allowing for local option on the matter than of a major denomination-wide change.
Or even allowing them to be members?
We have always allowed homosexuals to be members of the UMC, just like we allow robbers, murderers, rapists, and adulterers. In fact, we have sinners of all sorts a part of not just the members of the UMC, but even among the clergy. I'm sorry, but if you are looking for a body in which we already are completely sanctified, rather than striving to go on to perfection, you would be better off looking elsewhere than the UMC. Maybe give another look to the Nazarenes?
What we ask of our members is that they reject the devil and all his promises, and seek to conform to living a godly life as found taught in the texts of the Old and New Testaments.
In addition we ask our pastors to practice celibacy in singleness and fidelity in marriage. But we don't reject a pastor (or a lay person) simply based on one's sexual orientation.
