UMC stance on wedding controversy

[FireDragon76]

Does the UMC have a definitive stance on the ethics of catering gay weddings and serving gay couples?

I grew up in the UMC but I am Lutheran today. Our denomination officially says that discrimination against gays and lesbians in public services is not countenanced, and I have it on good authority from my pastor that applies to Christians catering gay weddings. I told my pastor that I could not, in good conscience, fellowship with other Christians that saw it otherwise, because just as Paul rebuked Peter for refusing to fellowship with Gentiles, I think this strikes at the heart of the Gospel, that it frees us to serve our neighbor.

What do Methodists have to say on this? I know that the Book of Discipline says that, if I remember correctly, homosexuality is incompatible with Christianity, but I would like clarification beyond this. I know that our churches have limited recognition of shared ministry, so it is a concern I have.

I could not in good conscience be a Methodist as a result of the Book of Discipline's stance on this issue, but I would not automatically reject a Methodist as a brother in Christ with a shared ministry. So I'd like clarification on the United Methodist's stance on this issue. I've seen Methodists on this forum say different things on this issue. I would like to hear from a pastor.

 

[Rawtheran]

Officially The United Methodist Church's stance is that it's Licensed Local Pastors, Elders, and Deacons are prohibited from officiating at gay weddings and services.

¶ 341.6: Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches(BOD,2016).

Unofficially, it depends on how conservative or liberal the Annual Conference is and if they are willing to do anything about it. Some pastors have gotten away with officiating or catering gay weddings, and others have had their license taken away or their ordination rites stripped.

 

[FireDragon76]

I know the Methodist stance on pastors participating in weddings, my question is what about laity catering to gay weddings? My pastor says our church is clear, that we do not countenance discrimination against gays in public services. That includes wedding services. It is part of our constitution.

A Lutheran pastor is free to refuse to marry two people for any good reason, including his or her personal conscience being opposed. We do not consider the marriage rite a public service per se.

 

[compassion 4 humanity]

Does the UMC have a definitive stance on the ethics of catering gay weddings and serving gay couples?

I grew up in the UMC but I am Lutheran today. Our denomination officially says that discrimination against gays and lesbians in public services is not countenanced, and I have it on good authority from my pastor that applies to Christians catering gay weddings. I told my pastor that I could not, in good conscience, fellowship with other Christians that saw it otherwise, because just as Paul rebuked Peter for refusing to fellowship with Gentiles, I think this strikes at the heart of the Gospel, that it frees us to serve our neighbor.

What do Methodists have to say on this? I know that the Book of Discipline says that, if I remember correctly, homosexuality is incompatible with Christianity, but I would like clarification beyond this. I know that our churches have limited recognition of shared ministry, so it is a concern I have.

I could not in good conscience be a Methodist as a result of the Book of Discipline's stance on this issue, but I would not automatically reject a Methodist as a brother in Christ with a shared ministry. So I'd like clarification on the United Methodist's stance on this issue. I've seen Methodists on this forum say different things on this issue. I would like to hear from a pastor.

The Bible clearly describes homosexuality as a despicable practice that must be condemned. Leviticus 18:22 says, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is an abomination."

Any Christian who would cater to sodomite weddings is committing a grave sin. God will judge him for his abomination.

 

[FireDragon76]

The Bible clearly describes homosexuality as a despicable practice that must be condemned. Leviticus 18:22 says, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is an abomination."

Any Christian who would cater to sodomite weddings is committing a grave sin. God will judge him for his abomination.

This is the UMC position? I want to hear from a pastor, if possible. If necessary, PM me.

My church (ELCA) and the Episcopal church submitted Amicus briefs to the US Supreme Court affirming the dignity of all persons and the need to uphold laws that protect that dignity.

We are in limited fellowship with the Methodists, so I was wondering about this.

 

[compassion 4 humanity]

This is the UMC position? I want to hear from a pastor, if possible. If necessary, PM me.

My church (ELCA) and the Episcopal church submitted Amicus briefs to the US Supreme Court affirming the dignity of all persons and the need to uphold laws that protect that dignity.

We are in limited fellowship with the Methodists, so I was wondering about this.

It's my position. I base my views on the word of God. Anyone who says that affirm the dignity of sodomites and welcome them as equals in Christ doesn't have the word of God on their side.

 

[hedrick]

The UMC has a commitment "not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends." But it also says that "The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching." In my opinion providing support services for a gay marriage could reasonably be understood as falling into either category. I.e you should do it to avoid discrimination, or you should not do it to avoid the appearance of promoting gay marriage. I don't think you're going to find a clear official statement, because the Church is divided on the topic. Hence as noted above individual pastors, congregations, and other jurisdictions don't hold consistent views.

 

[Rawtheran]

It's my position. I base my views on the word of God. Anyone who says that affirm the dignity of sodomites and welcome them as equals in Christ doesn't have the word of God on their side.

I agree with this post! We are called to love the gay community and to help the Holy Spirit bring them to repentance. I also agree that the word of God is our final authority and that God will most certainly hold us accountable if we disobey him

 

[compassion 4 humanity]

I agree with this post! We are called to love the gay community and to help the Holy Spirit bring them to repentance. I also agree that the word of God is our final authority and that God will most certainly hold us accountable if we disobey him

I admit my earlier post may have come across as a bit harsh. To be more tactful, I should have added that active homosexuals are always welcome to repent, meaning they have to quit engaging in sexually deviant conduct and receive forgiveness from God. Sodomy is still an abomination, as is the case with all sin. But at the end of the day, we’re all sinners who need God’s mercy. There isn’t any reason why LGBT people can’t turn from their ways and embrace a holy life. It's no different for any other type of sinner.

 

[FireDragon76]

The UMC has a commitment "not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends." But it also says that "The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching." In my opinion providing support services for a gay marriage could reasonably be understood as falling into either category. I.e you should do it to avoid discrimination, or you should not do it to avoid the appearance of promoting gay marriage. I don't think you're going to find a clear official statement, because the Church is divided on the topic. Hence as noted above individual pastors, congregations, and other jurisdictions don't hold consistent views.

That could be an issue in our ecumenical relations, especially because our church has made it an important part of our Christian witness, at least officially.

But I don't pretend to understand our churches attitude towards ecumenism, except to a small degree.

 

[circuitrider]

FrireDragon76,

I'm a UMC pastor. (an Elder in Full Connection) The UMC has no official position on the wedding cake issue. However, as said above, while we cannot at this time perform same sex marriages, we are not supposed to reject persons who are LGBTQ.

Also while I may not perform a same sex wedding or do anything that makes me look like the officient, it is my understanding that I could attend such a wedding, pray at the wedding, read a scripture, say a prayer, etc. But I could take no part in what is considered the clergy part of the wedding.

My personal opinion is that when you go into business with the public you are agreeing to sell your products equally to all members in the public. You don't get to decide you aren't going to serve someone because you don't like their race, their religion, their looks, their personal morals, their choice of spouse, etc. If you can't do that you probably shouldn't be running a public business.

 

[FireDragon76]

Thanks for that perspective.

 

[circuitrider]

Thanks for that perspective.

Thanks. We are in tough times for United Methodists right now. After years of discernment and study of all the theology surrounding marriage and sexuality, it would be my personal preference to perform same sex marriages. My hope is that the UMC will come to some kind of middle way that allows local churches/conference, etc. and individual clergy to differ on this issue and follow their own conscience.

 

[FireDragon76]

That seems to be a common perspective in your church though my understanding is the issue that Methodists around the world are one body and American United Methodist churches are not autonomous like the Episcopalian church or the Evangelical Lutheran church.

 

[circuitrider]

That seems to be a common perspective in your church though my understanding is the issue that Methodists around the world are one body and American United Methodist churches are not autonomous like the Episcopalian church or the Evangelical Lutheran church.

That is at least part of the issue. Part of the issue too is that United Methodists in the US are also deeply divided on the issue. In the NE, North Central and West the UMC leans pro-LGBTQ. in the SE and South Central those jurisdictions are more conservative. But also there are progressives and conservatives in all parts of the US.

So when the denomination decides what to do, it will be a big deal where the decisions are made. If a compromise is decided, who gets to decide what churches, conferences, etc. will do? Will Jurisdictions vote? Will Annual Conferences vote? Will it be local church decisions? No one knows at this time and no one knows what the General Conference will pass when it votes on proposals in 2019.

 

[FireDragon76]

Do you believe the UMC is, on the whole, more conservative on social issues than the ELCA or TEC? What accounts for this?

I grew up in relatively moderate and liberal, liturgical, mostly northern UMC churches. In fact we struggled to find churches down here in the south in which we could identify with the culture.

 

[hedrick]

No one knows at this time and no one knows what the General Conference will pass when it votes on proposals in 2019.

When other mainline denominations changed, there was a pretty obvious trend leading in that direction. But the last vote I'm aware of in the UMC, in 2012, was 61 to 39%. And non-US representation is growing. Any favorable resolution is going to require at least some kind of distinction between the UMC in the US and outside. I wonder whether those from outside the US will allow this, knowing the likely outcome.

 

[hedrick]

Do you believe the UMC is, on the whole, more conservative on social issues than the ELCA or TEC? What accounts for this?

The US UMC is similar to the ELCA. The difference is that at the last General Conference, only 58% were from the US, and the non-US fraction is growing. Fairly shortly the US will be a minority. The last GC reduced the total number of delegates. One of the goals was to allow a GC to be held outside the US. In some ways it's a good thing to have an international church. But it affects policy.

I claim that the Catholic Church has the same issue. If US Catholics were separated, it would be a mainline body, with theology and practice compatible with other mainline denominations.

 

[circuitrider]

Do you believe the UMC is, on the whole, more conservative on social issues than the ELCA or TEC? What accounts for this?

I grew up in relatively moderate and liberal, liturgical, mostly northern UMC churches. In fact we struggled to find churches down here in the south in which we could identify with the culture.

I think there theologically the UMC is just very broad. So we have persons who are just as progressive as anyone in the ELCA or TEC and others that are much more conservative.

It is our polity that makes this the most difficult. We have tended to organize so that all Methodists have all the same rules in all places and all conferences. But the day may be coming when that really doesn’t work as well as it used to and we need to think about allowing for some national and cultural differences.

Things are in such flux now, only time will tell what happens in the next couple of years.

 

[circuitrider]

The US UMC is similar to the ELCA. The difference is that at the last General Conference, only 58% were from the US, and the non-US fraction is growing. Fairly shortly the US will be a minority. The last GC reduced the total number of delegates. One of the goals was to allow a GC to be held outside the US. In some ways it's a good thing to have an international church. But it affects policy.

I claim that the Catholic Church has the same issue. If US Catholics were separated, it would be a mainline body, with theology and practice compatible with other mainline denominations.

Yes, this is one of the areas where the Roman Catholic Church and the UMC have some simiarlaries. Also the appointing of clergy is similar.

No one envisioned when we created an international Church that at some point down the future conferences outside the US could dominate the conversation.