Problems within the Methodist Church

[CryptoKnight]

Keeping in mind that I am willing to examine the Biblical support for homosexuality being a sin (or merely a condition of ritualistic impurity), I find this ruling lacking (though immensely helpful...thanks for the post!)

Even more now that I have read this, I see a case where the jury was looking for an excuse to acquit Dammann.

Not being a lawyer, it's not a good place for me to comment on legal issues, but it seems to me that this is a dangerous precendent. I don't see any "declaration" saying that selling porn is incompatible with Christian teaching. I'm sure similar (and better) examples may be found here.

And, to those of you who are critical readers, you are right. My scenario *is* unlikely. Of course, up until now many would have thought Dammann's acquittal would be equally unlikely.

 

[La Bonita Zorilla]

Indeed, thanks Origen, this is most helpful.

Two names that appeared in the section on the 1972 General Conference were quite familiar: Bishop O. Eugene Slater of San Antonio presided over the ordination of my father-in-law. Don Hand was a Methodist layman who was a conservative Democrat State Representative from San Antonio who was trying to advance to the State Senate and he lost the primary due to his identification with the Sharpstown Bank Scandal. I believe both have gone over to that undiscovered country from whence no one returns, so I will speak no more about them.

 

[Celticflower]

One thing everyone needs to remember is --this decision was NOT handed down by the UMC at large. It was the decision of one small conference in the Pacific Northwest. It by no means reflects the views of the rest of the church or invalidates the Discipline. Bishop Irons wisely released a statement to the south Central PA conference to reassure parrishoners that his conference will uphold the Discipline as it is currently worded.
I too pray for the leadership of the UMC. I pray that they will stay true to their stance on homosexuality and not bend to the whims of society. I believe that homosexuals belong in the church--in the pews with the rest of us sinners, but NOT in the pulpit.

 

[ufonium2]

My dad, a former UMC layleader and judge, believes this case was brought forth intentionally to set a precedent before the next general conference. I'm inclined to agree. Thoughts?

 

[Origen]

My dad, a former UMC layleader and judge, believes this case was brought forth intentionally to set a precedent before the next general conference. I'm inclined to agree. Thoughts?

I'm inclined to respectfully disagree for two reasons:

1. The case began two or three years ago and has taken many unexpected and unpredictable twists and turns. There was no way, even last fall, of knowing at what stage the matter would be the month before General Conference.
2. The deadline for submitting petitions to General Conference was late last year; that is, it is months too late for either side to add new items to the General Conference agenda. Supporters may find already-submitted petitions to rally behind, but otherwise expect much rhetoric.

 

[linda4jesus]

Hi Cryptokight

IMHO, we are witnessing the 'great falling away' scripture tells us will happen in the end times. I keep looking up expecting Jesus to come any minute!

The Episcopalians have elected an openly gay bishop and now we have the Methodists who have pardoned an openly gay female minister!

How many more churches are going to allow immoral pastors to lead their flock. Don't they realize God isn't going to sit back and allow this to happen without some kind of consequence. We are now seeing where 'evil is considered good' and 'good is considered evil'. People seem to forget that God is the same 'yesterday, today and tomorrow'....He does not change; why do they think He should?

Homosexuality is wrong in the eyes of our Father and Paul is quite clear how we are to handle immoral behavior in the church; in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13 he tells us to expel the immoral if they do not repent

1 Corinthians 5:1-13 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father's wife. And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present.

When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.

Your boasting is not good. Don't you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast--as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.

I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people-- not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."

YSIC,

Linda

 

[wvmtnkid]

Thanks Origen, for posting those articles. It does give some clearer view on the decision made by the jury.

Respectively, even though I may not be as learned as some of the people on the jury were, I still disagree with the decision. I think that even if the Discipline is "soft" on it's lanugage, the Bible is not. I guess I am having trouble understanding the incongruity of not ordaining a self avowed practicing homosexual, but allowing a self avowed practicing homosexual to continue to minister if they have already been ordained. That just doesn't make sense to me. I feel as if the jury and those involved were looking for a technicality. And in my eyes, it appears they found one. I am all for inclusiveness. But I don't think inclusiveness means allowing any one and every one to take a leadership role or a ministry postion in the church.

ufonium2, I'll have to admit those thoughts have crossed my mind. The timing seems very incredible. I do agree with Origen's assessment. However, I also know how political things can get and how things go on "behind the scenes". Did it happen in this case? I don't know and couldn't say with any proof. But, I still retain some skepticism about the timing.

 

[countrymousenc]

One thing everyone needs to remember is --this decision was NOT handed down by the UMC at large. It was the decision of one small conference in the Pacific Northwest. It by no means reflects the views of the rest of the church or invalidates the Discipline. Bishop Irons wisely released a statement to the south Central PA conference to reassure parrishoners that his conference will uphold the Discipline as it is currently worded.
I too pray for the leadership of the UMC. I pray that they will stay true to their stance on homosexuality and not bend to the whims of society. I believe that homosexuals belong in the church--in the pews with the rest of us sinners, but NOT in the pulpit.

(emphasis mine) Hi, I'm a recently-former United Methodist. The problem is that the wording created the loophole that allowed this decision. Now that it has been decided, there is no way to overturn it, and there is no way to keep it from happening again without revising the Book of Discipline. I really do hope that the UMC will be able and willing to stem this tide.

 

[bigbadbill411]

My home church is going through some hard times. I see that the time is coming for a split in the UMC. The split has already occured, it just has yet to be acknowleged.

If you are getting caught up in the mess, be cautious. Is the enemy fooling you to substitute your worship with bad thoughts? Dont ever let Satan steal God's Gifts.

If you are in the situation, be mindfull if its a battle that God actually wants you to fight. If He tells you so, then do it with all your might. If he doesnt, have the wisdom to walk away. Go to a place where you can meet Him.

I'm hurting a little.
But God is in control.
and if your wondering, Im a 27 year old christian husband, who's views 100 years ago would have been a radical, now I'm a conservative.

 

[breezynosacek]

I don't feel one bit betrayed by my church, and I am no apostate. When people say the our church has gone against its discipline, they don't quote everything our discipline says on the subject.
Those of you who are United Methodist and feel so betrayed had your chance to vote, as did we all.
The General Conference is meeting late next month, and this subject is on the agenda. Any United Methodists who fervently disgaree with what they decide have numerous Methodist denominations to choose from; no one is forced to belong to a particular denomination.

When it comes to homosexuality, denomination doesn't have a thing to do with it. The Bible does have something to do with it and I think a lot of people either need to state that they believe the whole thing or deny it completely instead of straddling the fence.