Judicial Council says part of the Traditional Plan is unconstitutional

The United Methodist Judicial Council, the denomination’s high court, looked at the three plans for the denomination’s future to be voted on at the General Conference in February. The Council of Bishops asked the Judicial Council to decide on the constitutionality of the three proposals well before the plans are voted on. This is according to the denomination’s constitution.

The complicated Connectional Conference Plan proposes several changes to the denomination’s constitution. Because of that the Judicial Council ruled it had no authority to scrutinize the plan.

The Council unanimously decided there are a few problems with the One Church Plan, the one to allow each Annual Conference (region) to decide whether to ordain LGBT people or to permit same-sex marriages. The Traditional Plan, the one to tighten restrictions against LGBT people, has several significant problems.

Since I don’t want to wade through the 87 page decision, I turn to Rev. Jeremy Smith and his blog Hacking Christianity. He had a post about the decision ready the day after it was released.

Of the many pieces in the One Church Plan, only three sentences were declared unconstitutional, and in Smith’s opinion are irrelevant to the overall plan of “unity in diversity.”

The Traditionalist Plan is made up of 17 petitions (perhaps described a components). Nine of those were declared unconstitutional. The major points, according to Smith:

* The Council of Bishops was not designed to have its members policing each other for doctrinal purity.

* A Board of Ordained Ministry (the committee in each region that decides who may be a pastor) cannot reduce its decision to one aspect of a candidate (whether they are LGBT) and cannot single out one group of candidates for disqualification.

* The plan allows for Annual Conferences and individual churches to leave the denomination if they don’t like the LGBT restrictions of the Traditional Plan. But the Council says only Annual Conferences can leave, but individual churches cannot.

So some of the worst of the Traditional Plan have been nullified. But that doesn’t mean the plan is dead. It’s still dangerous.

The February General Conference is just a few days. The overall plan will be voted on during the second day with the third day for refining it. That means those who support the Traditional Plan can say all the bad stuff is gone, it isn’t perfect, but we can fix it later. Vote for it! Smith wrote of the plan and its supporters:

Their vision of a church without progressives and moderates is within reach and they won’t let our own court (even their hand-picked one) stand in the way. … All that matters is that the progressives leave, not that the plan is actually legal.

Smith points out another aspect of the Judicial Council decision, the things they did not rule against. This, says Smith, means the JC wrote model legislation for further LGBTQ harm. The regular General Conference in 2020 could quote these Traditional Plan provisions, say they already pass constitutional muster, and should be given preference over other petitions. These provisions include such things as banning the eligibility of LGBTQ people serving as bishops, even if properly elected (overturning the one lesbian bishop we have), and upholding minimum trial penalties for officiating at same-sex weddings.

The first comment to Smith’s post was a declaration that if the Traditional Plan is approved the writer could in good conscience no longer be a member of the United Methodist Church. That is immediately followed by a person declaring she could no longer be a member if they don’t approve it. Another says the denomination is stuck in legalisms. And another laments a denomination that has become lawless.

This is my own opinion of what the denomination should do:

The Traditional Plan is vile, way too punitive for a church that says it is Christian, and should not be considered.

The Connectional Conference Plan is too complicated to be practical.

The One Church Plan is much better than the other two, but I still consider it evil. The reason is that it allows the denomination to continue oppressing LGBTQ people, approves of it, even though the justification of the oppression (the phrase that homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching) is removed. But it gives that approval in a way that isn’t easily changed in a future General Conference.

My preference is for the Simple Plan, which removes the LGBTQ prohibitions and their justification (that incompatibility clause) and does nothing else. I’m aware this proposal is not officially on the agenda in February, though it has been submitted as a petition for legislative action (as it has been for every General Conference in the last 44 years).

Judicial Council rules against lesbian bishop

A few days ago I wrote about the case before the United Methodist Judicial Council about bishop Karen Oliveto, who is in a same-sex marriage. On Friday the JC issued its ruling.

It isn’t good.

The ruling says that consecrating a lesbian bishop violated church law and those who did the consecrating were in violation of their “commitment to abide by and uphold the church’s definition of marriage and stance on homosexuality.”

As part of its ruling the JC rejected arguments made by Richard Marsh, the counsel for Oliveto. He had argued that a marriage license does not imply a “practicing” homosexual, which is defined as genital sex. The JC blasted that argument. A marriage license does indeed mean “practicing.”

For the moment Oliveto remains “in good standing.” The ruling does not automatically remove her as bishop or force her into retirement.

From what I have figured out, this ruling means it is appropriate and legal to have a complaint filed against Oliveto. If nobody in the Western Jurisdiction does, the president or secretary of the WJ college of bishops must. The complaint would be that she violated denomination law, with the possibility of facing a church trial.

But, lately, bishops have been reluctant to hold trials, even reluctant to hand out punishment for violating church laws on homosexuality.

So the WJ faces a dilemma. The JC has clearly said that a lesbian bishop is Not Good. A lesbian bishop is also pretty high profile. It is one thing to get a complaint about a local gay pastor and the local bishop saying, “We’ve analyzed the evidence and concluded there need not be any trial, removal, or punishment.” It is quite another to say that about a lesbian bishop.

Even so, Rob Renfroe, president of Good News, an organization pushing the denomination in a conservative direction, said, “We don’t have any hope — because of its past track record — that the Western Jurisdiction College of Bishops will address this either swiftly or with integrity.”

Both sides agree that the ruling shows the denomination is broken and that the work of the Commission on a Way Forward becomes all the more important. This commission is searching for a way to keep the denomination together. Their eventual plan is to be voted on in February 2019.

Another part of the ruling is that it is appropriate and legal to file a complaint against the bishops who performed the consecration service for Oliveto. Apparently, they should have known better and rejected Oliveto. I think it also means the Jurisdiction delegates who voted for her are not to be charged. But will these bishops be charged? All of them? The jurisdiction president?

I found the full text of the JC ruling here. In it I learned that being in a same-sex marriage while being a bishop is not considered immoral. However, by church law, it is illegal. This strikes down the argument that the immorality makes it illegal. It is illegal because the Book of Discipline says it is illegal.

In other cases heard last week two are important to us. First, regions in New York and Illinois had adopted policies saying they would not ask if a candidate to be a pastor was lesbian or gay and would ignore such declarations from the candidates. The ruling from the JC is that those who evaluate candidates must to a “thorough” job. It seems not discovering if a candidate is lesbian or gay means the evaluation wasn’t thorough.

In the second case the Northeastern Jurisdiction passed a resolution calling for its college of bishops to “Stop the Trials,” to no longer hold church trials for pastors accused of being gay or lesbian or accused of officiating at same-sex weddings. But the JC said a jurisdiction cannot pass a resolutions that “encourage a violation of church law or discourage the enforcement of church law.”

Judicial Council considers challenge to lesbian bishop

Karen Oliveto is a pastor in the United Methodist Church and, in seeming conflict with the denomination’s lawbook the Book of Discipline, is married to a woman. United Methodists in San Francisco and in much of the Western Jurisdiction (WJ, the region essentially Colorado and west) don’t worry about such things. So, last summer Oliveto was elected to be a bishop. She was assigned to be the guiding leadership of the churches in Colorado, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, and a bit of Idaho.

Given that the United Methodist Church could not agree on what to do with LGBT people and disagreed so thoroughly they almost blew up last spring’s legislative General Conference it was expected that Oliveto’s election as bishop would be challenged. And it was, by Dixie Brewster, a delegate to the South Central Jurisdiction (SJC, New Mexico to Arkansas, Nebraska to Texas). The SJC approved Brewster’s petition.

Brewster’s petition is now before the Judicial Council (JC), the equivalent of the denomination’s supreme court. Brewster claims that in making Oliveto a bishop the WJ’s actions “negate, ignore, and violate” provisions of the Book of Discipline.

Oral arguments were heard yesterday. The JC may not issue its ruling until the end of its session at the end of the week.

This isn’t the only LGBT issue before the JC. Two petitions, from New York and northern Illinois, ask whether the boards that approve candidates to be pastors are required to ask those candidates if they are a “self-avowed practicing homosexual,” which would disqualify the candidate from being a pastor in the denomination. Several regions are defying the Book of Discipline and its ban on lesbian and gay pastors by refusing to ask this question.

The rest of this post is about the Oliveto case and is going to get technical, summarizing the arguments of both sides. This may mean little to those outside the denomination. Most members, those sitting in the pews, won’t care either, though many will care whether a lesbian bishop is affirmed or thrown out and what that says about the prospect of the denomination as a whole, whether or not it will be split over the issue. Meaning they won’t care until their local church is affected.

So, if you’re still reading, into the weeds we tread.

The legal brief for Brewster were written by Rev. Keith Boyette, a conservative who has previously called for denomination schism. The WJ brief was presented by Richard Marsh. Links to the original briefs are in a sidebar to a news article from the United Methodist News Service. I read Marsh’s oral arguments on the blog Hacking Christianity.

Boyette says the JC has jurisdiction to hear the case because the Book of Discipline says the JC can rule over any matter within it or on any matter from the General Conference.

Marsh disagrees. He goes back to when the denomination was reformed in 1939 after being split by slavery. The union documents divide up the country into jurisdictions (such as Western, and South Central) and bishops are to be elected by jurisdictions. This prevents delegates from the North from electing all bishops and imposing their views on Southern congregations. That system is still in place. No one, including the General Conference and the JC, can pass laws or challenge who a jurisdiction elects as bishop.

Boyette says that a jurisdiction cannot violate the Book of Discipline and its rules saying a “self-avowed practicing homosexual” cannot be a pastor (only pastors can be promoted to bishop). A marriage certificate is a public record of being both self-avowed and practicing.

Marsh says the Book of Discipline was not violated. Oliveto is a pastor in good standing. The standard for “practicing” is genital sex. Marriage does not equate to genital sex. Marriages can exist without it.

A few years ago a lesbian pastor in Wisconsin was put on trial for being “practicing” as well as officiating at a same-sex wedding. The “practicing” part of the charges had to be dropped because she refused to answer the question of whether she had genital sex with her partner. That’s personal, she said. You don’t ask straight pastors that question.

Boyette does not ask about genital sex, saying that a marriage certificate is proof of it.

Boyette says the Book of Discipline supports heterosexual marriage and thus outlaws same-sex marriage.

Marsh agrees straight marriage is indeed blessed. But the wording is such that same-sex marriage is not outlawed. In addition, the Book of Discipline calls the denomination to support equal rights regardless of sexual orientation and the American legal system has declared that marriage is one of those rights. Furthermore, while officiating at a same-sex wedding is listed as a chargeable offense, being in a same-sex marriage is not.

Finally, all this is playing out while a Commission on a Way Forward tries to figure out whether the denomination can be kept together and how to make that happen. Boyette argues that violations of the Book of Discipline should not be put on hold while we wait for the Commission to do its work. Marsh notes that one solution is for a looser denomination, where each region or perhaps each congregation decides for itself how to treat LGBT people. Marsh says the JC should not make the Commission’s work harder by creating new standards for who can be a bishop or by expanding the definition of “practicing.”

The case is now in the hands of the JC.

Recommending a lesbian for ministry

The Board of Ordained Ministry in each Conference (district) of the United Methodist Church determines whether a candidate is fit for ministry. The BoOM of the Baltimore-Washington Conference has issued a statement that says in part that it would

Move forward with evaluating all candidates solely on the disciplinary requirements and previously adopted requirements of the BWC. Regardless of sexual orientation, married candidates will be expected to affirm fidelity in marriage and single candidates will be expected to affirm celibacy in singleness.

Yes, that means the BWC is saying – contrary to the denomination's Book of Discipline – that they will consider candidates that are in a same sex relationship, though this relationship must be celibate or a marriage.

In addition, this Board of Ordained Ministry has recommended Tara (T.C.) Morrow for provisional membership as a deacon in the conference. Her credentials to becoming a pastor appear to be excellent. And she is married to a woman. All candidates must receive a 3/4 majority vote to be recommended.

Though the statement by the BWC doesn't say so, this is a challenge to the denomination just prior to General Conference to be held this May. The GC is the only body that can revise the Book of Discipline and in the last 44 years has only tightened restrictions on how a congregation can treat its LGBT members and leaders. The BWC is now saying General Conference must either change its rules on LGBT leaders or it must decide how to deal with disobedience. If the rules are not changed there will be disobedience. More accurately, there is disobedience.

As an example of such disobedience...

Last September I wrote about Rev. Mike Tupper, who officiated in a second same-sex marriage in violation of the Book of Discipline. Both times a complaint was filed and the matter was referred to the bishop of Michigan.

The first time Tupper was given a Just Resolution that required him to participate in a Truth and Reconciliation process with Rev. Ed Rowe. Tupper says this is a free pass, because he could have been fired from ministry.

The second time Tupper decided to force the issue. This second wedding was for a gay couple, one of which had just been forced to resign his job as a pastor for being in a same-sex relationship. Tupper gave a statement that he would not accept a Just Resolution and if the case went to trial he would plead guilty and not contest the penalty. He made that statement to the bishop in September.

The counsel for the church, corresponding to the lawyer for the prosecution, is charged with giving evidence, in this case the marriage certificate with Tupper's name on it, to the Committee on Investigation. But that didn't happen. The complaint has a three month time limit (as I understand it) and that time has passed. Tupper says he has received another free pass from the bishop.

Great, yes? Progressive bishops can allow their pastors to officiate at same-sex weddings without consequences. But Tupper says doing so hides the scope of disobedient pastors and silences those trying to witness to the injustices in the Book of Discipline. Tupper got a free pass. The gay pastor did not.

Forcing the issue

A year ago Rev. Mike Tupper of the West Michigan Conference was in the news because he had officiated at his daughter's same-sex wedding in violation of the Book of Discipline. At that time the complaint was resolved with a Just Resolution, requiring Tupper to participate in the Truth and Reconciliation process developed along with Rev. Ed Rowe.

In July of this year Rev. Benjamin Hutchinson was charged with being a practicing homosexual (one with a partner) and forced from his church in Cassopolis. Shortly after that Hutchinson married his partner and Rev. Tupper was the lead officiant – "lead" because nine pastors took part in the service. The names of all nine pastors were turned over to their District Superintendent for disciplinary proceedings.

Now Tupper has issued a statement he will not agree to a just resolution as a way to resolve the complaint. That means the process may now go to a trial. If it does, Tupper said he would plead guilty, not contest any penalty, and would waive his right to appeal.

In a letter to the bishop, Tupper wrote, "God’s called me to highlight the need for a change in our Discipline at General Conference. But God has also made it clear to me that I should be willing to pay the price for my disobedience to the present Book of Discipline."

Part of Tupper's reason for his stance is because Rev. Hutchinson did not have the due-process protections that Tupper has available. In addition, Ginny Mikita, who also participated in Hutchinson's ceremony had her candidacy to become a United Methodist pastor was denied and her membership revoked. She also didn't have the protections available to Tupper.

The status of the complaint against the other pastors has not been disclosed.

After the Reconciling Ministries Network Convo in August it was obvious to me that the United Methodist denomination, if it wants to survive, will have to learn how to live with dissent and disobedience over the issue of homosexuality. Rev. Tupper is forcing this issue.

Nine pastors face charges

The key phrase in a wedding ceremony is apparently "I now pronounce you..." I had written about Benjamin Hutchinson, the gay pastor in Cassopolis, Michigan who was forced to resign about 10 days ago. Shortly after that, partly to make sure he had health benefits, he married his partner.

That wedding took place a week ago. Thirty clergy, many with rainbow stoles, attended the ceremony along with more than 100 other guests. Hutchinson was delighted with the support. At the close of the ceremony about half of the pastors joined the main officiant in saying "I now pronounce you husband and husband." The names of nine of those, including the main officiant, have been turned over to the Kalamazoo District Superintendent of the United Methodist Church. All nine now face disciplinary procedures. The bishop will now work out a resolution that will hopefully avoid a series of pastor trials.

The lead officiant was Rev. Mike Tupper. He has already gone through the resolution process with this bishop when a complaint was filed after Tupper officiated at the wedding of his lesbian daughter.

Hutchinson had strong words for the United Methodist denomination:

Because of the disciplines, our queer youth are killing themselves. And it is a religious terrorism by the doctrines they hold. Our youth are killing themselves because of it. Moment by moment as we speak here, there’s children killing themselves because the church says ‘no, you are not a child of God. You can not be married and officiate the sacraments.’ So the church must change for the well-being of our children.

Pastor resigns

Rev. Benjamin Hutchinson has been the pastor of the Cassopolis United Methodist Church in Michigan for three years. The congregation knew he was gay and knew he had a partner. That bit about the partner meant that Hutchinson was a "practicing homosexual" and violating the denomination's rule book, the Book of Discipline. It seems the bishop never asked Hutchinson directly until a few days ago. Hutchinson didn't lie, so was told to resign. He and his partner were not married, but the sudden unemployment and need of such things as health insurance prompted the two to get married.

Under Hutchinson's guidance the congregation quadrupled in size and the finances stabilized. Quite an accomplishment for such a short period of time. Naturally, many in the congregation say this will prompt them to leave the church. Many others are protesting. The congregation is grieving both the loss of a beloved pastor and the display of such blatant discrimination.

The denomination, in spite of their rule book, is coming around to the idea of their pastors officiating at the weddings of same-sex couples. When a pastor breaks that rule there is an effort to keep the pastor in place and avoid a trial or any other punishment. The denomination, even apart from the rule book, hasn't shifted position on gay pastors yet. They've just lost another excellent pastor, and in the process have destroyed a local congregation.

Defense and resiliency fund

I got an email from Reconciling Ministries Network, which prompted me to find this story on their news blog. The story is about two United Methodist pastors in Virginia, Rev. Amanda Garber and Rev. Dr. John Copenhaver, who performed same-sex marriages. There are two things to note from the message.

First, the two pastors were not defrocked. It appears they agreed to suspensions (Garber for 1 month, Copenhaver for 3) instead of facing a trial.

Second, Reconciling Ministries Network has created a clergy defense and resiliency fund, which will cover the lost salaries of both Garber and Copenhaver. The message is pastors will not be facing hardship for their actions. Alas, their churches must deal with the harm caused by the condemning language from the denomination.

Camp Beloved

Carl Thomas Gladstone is part of he Young People's Ministries of the North Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church. He sent me a note about:

A senior high camp for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer or Questioning (LGBTQ) teens and ally friends. A week of belonging. A week of affirmation. A week of new experiences and new friends.

A week of experiencing God’s unconditional love and total acceptance exactly the way you are!

Camp Beloved is a senior high camp (completed grades 9-12) for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer or Questioning (LGBTQ) teens and ally friends that offers all your favorite things about camp (like swimming, campfires, goofy games, good music, and nature) and encourages you to be you – the unique, authentic YOU!

It will be held at Lake Louise United Methodist Camp, June 14-20, 2015. $399/person. More information here and registration here.

I've heard from allies that while Lake Louise Camp is used by the United Methodist Church, it is not owned by the denomination and not subject to its policies. Because of that registration is not through the denomination's camp programs, but instead directly with the camp.

Please pass this on to any high school youth who might benefit.

Truth and Reconciliation

Last week I made it to University UMC in East Lansing for "A Time to Share in Giving Thanks and Witness." This was the time in which Rev. Ed Rowe and Rev. Mike Tupper filled us in on the details of the Just Resolutions they had signed two days before with Bishop Deborah Kiesey. The text of both Just Resolutions are included at the end of this post.

Ed welcomed us to the gathering. He then welcomed M Barclay, Assistant Director of Communications at Reconciling Ministries Network. M told us of her difficulties of being a lesbian called by God to to ordained ministry. M captured most of this meeting on video, which has now been posted to the RMN website. Ed and Mike urge supporters to view the video.

Rev. Tom Robinson offered a prayer of joy and thanksgiving, for reaching a resolution, for a bishop willing to work to avoid a trial. There were many people to thank, alas I cannot name them all.

Peggy Garrigues and Mark Thompson are two out, but "non-practicing," clergy in the Michigan conferences. Both told their stories of the pain of being both gay and clergy. Peggy spoke of her gratitude for the workers and supporters behind the scenes and over the years. Mark talked of the grace of being able to speak to us and the grace for us to hear.

David Lundquist is a former General Secretary to the General Council on Ministries. He described the process that brought us to this point. The denomination's Book of Discipline clearly states that a pastor must not officiate at a same-sex wedding or commitment ceremony. Ed and Mike obeyed the part of the Discipline that requires pastors to provide care for all, and so violated the rule against officiating at same-sex ceremonies. In both cases a complaint was filed against them. When a complaint is filed the first step by the bishop is to hold a meeting with the pastors and those who filed the complaint. The goal is to reach a Just Resolution acceptable to all parties. If no agreement is reached, the bishop has three choices: (1) dismiss the complaint, (2) refer the matter to a committee of the Board of Ordained Ministry, or (3) refer the matter to the church judiciary for a trial.

Since this Just Resolution concludes the matter I don't think it is possible for someone else to file another complaint to attempt to force a trial.

Mike Tupper told us why the complaint was filed against him. He had signed the marriage certificate at his daughter's wedding to another woman. Mike told us about that day. You can read the wonderful details here.

Ed Rowe told his story. He began telling us that the Methodist Church had taught him about inclusion, so the current situation is all our fault. Ed grew up in a Missouri Synod Lutheran Church. He saw its exclusion, in particular against his father, who was a Mason. That turned him off from church. Some time later he saw the local chapter of the John Birch Society picket the local Methodist church. That was a pretty good clue the Methodist Church would welcome him too. It was there he learned about a God whose love and grace embraced all people.

Ed officiated at a same-sex wedding last June because he understood the damage to the couple, to the United Methodist Church, and to his sacred calling to be a pastor to all people if he didn't treat the lesbian couple the same way he treats straight couples. It was an amazing wedding. Lots of scars were bathed by the "sacrament" of the wedding. There was healing.

The Book of Discipline is about covenant. Many talk of a covenant between pastors and some say this covenant is broken when a pastor disobeys the Discipline. However, there are many other covenants, such as offering pastoral care to all. Ed says his ministry is about those who are left behind. A person can't be a little bit inclusive.

Those who attended were given copies of the Just Resolutions that Mike and Ed signed. Ed and Mike accepted the consequences of their decision, which are to create a Truth and Reconciliation process. The key paragraph in Ed's resolution is:

Rev. Rowe will work with the Michigan Area Episcopal Office to form a design team with clergy and lay persons from across the Michigan Area, including LGBTQ persons. The team is charged with planning, implementation and resourcing an area-wide series of events using a "Truth and Reconciliation" model at which LGBTQ and other interested United Methodists can have a safe place to tell their stories. These events will have the stated goal of reducing our church's harmful rhetoric and actions toward LGBTQ persons. These events will be planned to occur over the next 18 months.

Mike's key paragraph is almost identical, with the addition that he will work with Ed. Mike's resolution includes a couple more points: He will write a paper presenting the various theological positions in the West Michigan Conference and explain why he chose his own position. He will tell his story at every opportunity and serve as a resource for churches working for inclusion.

Ed told us he came up with this as the resolution in two steps. The first step came from Jerry Peterson of the Ruth Ellis Center. The Center serves as a safe space for sexual LGBTQ youth, many of whom are homeless because their families rejected them. The center also provides a wide range of services for the youth. As part of those services the Center had worked with researchers in the Family Acceptance Project. When a gay person comes out to family the family frequently responds with words and actions believed to help the gay person but actually cause harm, sometimes to the point of suicide. The Family Acceptance Project doesn't try to change beliefs, only behaviors. This guides a family to help, not hurt or kill, their children.

I volunteer at the Ruth Ellis Center and was able to hear about the Family Acceptance Project when it was presented to the Center's staff. I wrote about it on my personal blog.

Ed's second step was to hear about Truth and Reconciliation commissions from Rev. Tom Robinson. Tom told us his story. Tom is black and while he was growing up one of his aunts was asked to sing at a white church – but was only allowed to sing from behind a screen. Some of us are still behind the screen.

Tom was part of a Truth and Reconciliation process in Detroit. The city is among the most segregated cities in America. That situation is because of many decisions by many people over many years. Racism still causes pain, but it is a big issue we are too willing to not talk about. The Truth and Reconciliation process is a way to talk about the hurts that result from a situation. Hearing the stories allows movement towards reconciliation. The most famous use of a Truth and Reconciliation process is South Africa, though it has been used in several other places around the world, such as Rwanda.

Ed talked about what he and Mike agreed to do. Their Just Resolutions are based on "Do no (more) harm." They will create a safe space for LGBTQ people to tell how the denomination's policies, words, and actions have hurt them. Others who desire to testify will also give their testimony. The testimony will be filmed and edited. The result will be shown around the state with the intent of showing the church how deeply some of us have been hurt – most church members, says Ed, don't have a clue of the depth of the pain. Then there is hope of guiding the church to behaviors that welcome and not wound. Ed says that he wants to change behaviors; he is not trying to change beliefs. Ed's faith in this process is based on his belief in the compassion and love in most United Methodist leaders, clergy and lay, who once they hear of the hurt that is being done would be willing to change their words and actions, if not their beliefs, to do no more harm. If a person disagrees with the film they may talk or shout at the representatives accompanying the film or at the screen, not at the wounded person. There have been too many times where discussion of LGBTQ people brought out wounding words that then cannot be unsaid. Ed says there is a hierarchy of hurt. The pastor hurt by a neighboring pastor who performs a same-sex ceremony is in a lot less pain than a teen who is told by the youth pastor he is going to hell.

Ed made it clear that in working through this complaint he has been following the Book of Discipline exactly. It is through the process outlined in the Discipline that he and the bishop agreed to this Just Resolution. Ed was also clear that it is not appropriate for the church to be having conversations about LGBTQ people without LGBTQ people included in the conversations. Therefore LGBTQ people will be involved in all parts and stages of the Truth and Reconciliation process.

Ed turned to us, especially LGBTQ people, for help. He and Mike can't do it by themselves. He listed several ways we can be involved. People are needed to:

* plan how this process will work.
* staff the commission, who can focus on the testimony and not on themselves, including those who are good at making the witnesses comfortable and helping to draw out their stories.
* do the technical stuff, run cameras, set up microphones, edit and assemble the resulting video.
* research who to ask to testify. If you know of someone with a story to tell, pass the word to Ed and Mike.
* give their testimony.
* get and prepare sites around the state where the stories will be told.
* do organizational work behind the scenes.
* give financial support. The bishop did not authorize a budget, though she said she would help raise money.

During the question and answer session a young man said we shouldn't limit stories to LGBTQ people. He said he is the son of Mark Thompson, the gay pastor. He has also been hurt and has a story to tell.

Here is Ed's email address:

And here is Mike's:

They are not here as links to avoid web crawlers from harvesting the addresses and sending then more spam. Please tell Ed or Mike how you might help and who has a story to tell.

I have offered Ed, Mike, and the team the services of this blog to help with communication. I'll post notices as they come available.


Ed asked that the text of the Just Resolutions be posted as well. Here they are:

Just Resolutions

Between

Rev. Edwin A. Rowe and Rev. Melanie L. Carey and Rev. Elbert P. Dulworth

This Just Resolution agreement results from a complaint submitted by Rev. Melanie L. Carey and Rev. Elbert P. Dulworth against the Rev. Edwin A. Rowe for conducting a same-gender wedding ceremony on June 28, 2014. After receiving this complaint Bishop Deborah Lieder Kiesey conducted a supervisory response in this matter under the provisions of the Book of Discipline 2012 (¶363).

As a result of the Supervisory Response process conducted by Bishop Kiesey, the persons signing this document have entered into the following Just Resolution agreement:

1) Rev. Rowe acknowledges that he knowingly and intentionally violated ¶2702.1b and ¶2702.1d of the 2012 Book of Discipline, as an act of personal faith and conscience, and acknowledges that others may have felt hurt by his action.

2) Rev. Rowe will work with the Michigan Area Episcopal Office to form a design team with clergy and lay persons from across the Michigan Area, including LGBTQ persons. The team is charged with planning, implementation and resourcing an area-wide series of events using a “Truth and Reconciliation” model at which LGBTQ and other interested United Methodists can have a safe place to tell their stories. These events will have the stated goal of reducing our church’s harmful rhetoric and actions toward LGBTQ persons. These events will be planned to occur over the next 18 months.

3) Bishop Kiesey will extend an invitation to all lay and clergy from across Michigan Area (including conference and district leaders) to participate in stated events, and to ecourage participation by persons of all theological perspectives.

4) Each of the parties to this Just Resolution Agreement agrees tha tthey will not disclose the content of any other conversations which may have taken place during the Supervisory Response Process or speak on behalf of any other party to the agreement.

5) This Just Resolution having been agreed to by all parties shall be the final disposition of the complaint in this matter.

Just Resolution

Between

Rev. Michael Tupper and Rev. John Boley

This Just Resolution agreement results from a complaint submitted by Rev. John Boley against the Rev. Michael Tupper for conducting a same-gender wedding ceremony on August 17, 2014. After receiving this complaint Bishop Deborah Lieder Kiesey conducted a supervisory response in this matter under the provisions of the Book of Discipline 2012 (¶363).

As a result of the Supervisory Response process conducted by Bishop Kiesey, the persons signing this document have entered into the following Just Resolution agreement:

1) Rev. Tupper acknowledges that he knowingly and intentionally violated two sections of the 2012 Book of Discipline, as an act of personal faith and conscience, and acknowledges that others may have felt hurt by his action.

2) Rev. Tupper, who desires to remain a part of the clergy covenant in the West Michigan Conference, will work with his clergy colleagues by using the proper channels toward changing the discriminatory language and provisions in our Book of Discipline, while continuing to advocate for the LGBTQ community within the United Methodist Church and providing pastoral care to all people under his appointment.

3) Rev. Tupper will work with the Michigan Area Episcopal Office and Ed Rowe to form a design team with clergy and lay persons from across the Michigan Area, including LGBTQ persons. The team is charged with planning, implementing and resourcing an area-wide series of events using a “Truth and Reconciliation” model at which LGBTQ and other interested United Methodists can have a safe place to tell their stories. These events will have the stated goal of reducing our church’s harmful rhetoric and actions toward LGBTQ persons. These events will be planned to occur over the next 18 months.

4) Rev. Tupper will develop a written theological statement which accurately presents the several existing theological positions within the context of the West Michigan Conference and includes his personal theological conclusions about the position he has chosen for himself.

5) Rev. Tupper will avail himself of every opportunity presented to him to tell the story of his spiritual journey as an act of witness, and will offer his services as a resource to help our churches be more welcoming and inclusive.

6) Each of the parties to this Just Resolution Agreement agree that the terms of this resolution may be shared with the public as needed. Further, they agree that they will not disclose the content of any other conversations which may have taken place during the Supervisory Response Process or speak on behalf of any other party to the agreement.

7) This Just Resolution, having been agreed to by all parties, shall be a final disposition of the complaint in this matter.

Another pastor charged

Last Wednesday I attended the celebration of the Just Resolution of the two United Methodist pastors in Michigan who performed same-sex weddings. I wrote about the meeting but haven't posted it yet because I'm verifying details with one of the pastors.

The same day the United Methodist News Service wrote about another complaint against another pastor. But this story has a wonderful twist. The pastor is Rev. Kelly Carpenter of Green Street United Methodist Church in Winston-Salem, NC. The couple who filed the dispute are Ken and Scott. They asked Carpenter to preside at their wedding. Carpenter declined, saying he didn't want to harm the other ministries at Green Street Church. So Ken and Scott filed charges against Carpenter for "failure to perform the work of ministry" and "gender discrimination." Both are chargeable offenses. The issue is now before the local bishop.

Carpenter is pleased with this development and would sign the complaint against himself if he could. He cited the contradictions: He must either violate the ban on discrimination or the ban on same-sex ceremonies.

Green Street Church made news 20 months ago when the church council decided not to hold any weddings, gay or straight, in the sanctuary until the denomination's ban is lifted. Carpenter has held blessing ceremonies elsewhere for both straight and gay couples, but the marriage certificate must be signed in city hall.

The North Carolina state ban on same-sex marriage was lifted before the denomination's ban. The church has decided to maintain its ban while the denomination's ban remains.

Just Resolution in same-sex marriage cases

A Time to Share in

Giving Thanks and Witness

For Achieving two Just Resolutions

Across the Michigan Area

Wednesday, November 12, 2014 at 11:00 am

University United Methodist Church

1120 S. Harrison Road

East Lansing, MI

Join other clergy and laity from the Detroit and West Michigan Conferences in celebrating the signing of Just Resolutions by Rev. Ed Rowe, Rev. Mike Tupper, Bishop Deborah Kiesey and those who initiated separate complaints against Ed and Mike for having performed same gender ceremonies earlier this year.

For the first time in the history of seeking Just Resolutions we have the amazing opportunity to create a safe place for our LGBTQ siblings to tell the story of how our Church’s words and behaviors have caused deep and often deadly harm.  Using the South African “Truth and Reconciliation” process we can hear these stories in a way that does “no more harm.”  This process does not try to change or convert anyone’s beliefs.  Instead it is based on the belief that once people are fully aware of the hurt being done they will covenant to change their words and actions in order to do no more harm.

Both Ed and Mike along with others will be present to:

• Lead in moments of thanksgiving and appreciation for Bishop Kiesey and her graceful leadership in the supervisory response processes as well as that of the complainants which led to these Just Resolutions and the avoidance of church trials
• Provide a brief overview of the disciplinary process
• Share their stories and the specifics about each Just Resolution – similarities and differences
• Explain the Truth and Reconciliation concept and how it will be used
• Offer a time for questions from those gathered
• Invite input and participation by others who can help plan and implement the objectives of the Just Resolutions
• Offer prayers for these achievements and what lies ahead to be accomplished

We are excited and blessed with this opportunity and covet your participation.  Please come and bring others with you to be part of this significant time in the life and future of United Methodists across Michigan.

Connectional Table panel on homosexuality

There was a notable event sponsored by the United Methodist Council of Bishops. It was part of the Connectional Table which "oversees the coordination of mission, ministries, and resources across the denomination." As part of that it is hosting a series of online conversations as a dialogue on topics of interest. One of those conversations was a few days ago and put on by the Human Sexuality Task Force. The primary topic was homosexuality. This panel was translated into French, Portuguese, and German, the languages of the worldwide denomination. At peak viewership 450 computers (around the world?) were receiving the streaming.

The news reports say there were six panelists, five of whom are (or were) members of the Council of Bishops. Those reports are unclear about who else was in the room. Surely a moderator and a cameraman to get the program out onto the web. There was also a screen to view videos, one of which was submitted by the mother of a gay son who had committed suicide because the church's new youth pastor had declared the lad was going to hell. But it isn't clear there was a live audience, how big it was, and who was in it.

One thing is clear: If there was an audience it didn't include gay people. Which means once again there were a bunch of people pontificating about us (even if some of them were on our side) without our presence.

Frank Schaefer's reinstatement upheld

Almost a year ago Rev. Frank Schaefer was convicted of performing a same-sex marriage ceremony for his gay son, which defies the rules of the Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church. Schaefer was defrocked and lost his job in Pennsylvania. A few months later the bishop of California offered him a job. There is more of Schaefer's story here.

That defrocking was appealed and in June a regional appeals committee reinstated Schaefer and restored his credentials. That decision was appealed to the denomination's Judicial Council.

The Judicial Council held their fall meeting last week in Memphis and issued their ruling today. The decision of the appeals committee is upheld. Schaefer will keep his credentials.

If I understand correctly the article put out by the denomination, the trial issued two penalties. The first was a 30 day suspension. The second was power granted to the Board of Ordained Ministry to change the suspension to termination if Schaefer didn't follow all the conditions of the suspension. Since Schaefer refused to say he would never perform more same-sex ceremonies the BOM declared a violation of the terms of the suspension and terminated Schaefer.

The Judicial Council said that the penalty had to be fixed at the trial and a harsher one could not be imposed later. I take that to mean Schaefer was reinstated on a technical interpretation of procedure, not on a ruling of the underlying issue of pastors performing same-sex ceremonies.

New pastor at Redford Aldersgate

Today Redford Aldersgate United Methodist Church commissioned Julie Herod as Assistant Pastor of Finance and Administration. Her main duties are finance and stewardship and she will also assist in worship, teaching, and pastoral care.

Julie and her partner Sue Selewski have been members of Redford Aldersgate for over a year and Julie decided it was time to put her talents to work for a church that has welcomed her and Sue. Here is a photo of Julie and Sue.

This is a photo of the comsissioning service. From the left are Pastor Courtney Williams of the West Outer Drive campus, Pastor Julie Herod, Pastor Jeff Nelson of the Redford campus, and Staff Parish Chair Murray Davis.

A tradition at Redford Aldersgate is for all of us to lay hands on a person, this time in celebration. Pastors Julie and Jeff moved to the center of the sanctuary. All of us formed a human chain laying hands on Julie or on the person in front of us. We are all connected in community.

Pastor Julie told us a bit about her story. She heard a call to ministry at the age of 10. But when she was ready to act on the call she was told it was not possible. Julie turned to a career in finance and administration and served as both Controller and CFO in various organizations.

Twenty years later she returned to the call and earned a Masters of Divinity from Baptist Missionary Alliance Theological Seminary in Jacksonville, Texas. She was ordained through the International Association of Community Churches and served churches in Texas and Michigan. This is a photo of Pastor Julie telling her story.

You may wonder how a lesbian in relationship can serve as a pastor in a United Methodist Church given the restrictions in the Book of Discipline. This is a personnel decision strictly within the local church. Pastor Julie was not appointed by the bishop. She is not an elder in the denomination. She is offering her gifts and talents to the church and the church is gratefully offering her a way to put those talents to work. We welcome her commission to work among us and for us.

At the bishop's office

Alas, I must replace the original post under this title. I had written more than was appropriate. What was in this post might have damaged Ed's negotiations and I don't want to do that. I deeply apologize to Ed and all others working for inclusion.

I will discuss with Ed what might be safe to say and what isn't. If and when that happens I might post an alternate version of the events.

With humble apology,
Your citizen scribe

Church Acceptance Project

I had some time this morning to talk to Rev. Jeff Nelson about Rev. Ed Rowe's meeting with the Michigan Bishop tomorrow. As part of that Jeff mentioned that Ed will be basing his Just Resolution on ideas he had learned from the Ruth Ellis Center (where I'm a volunteer) about the Family Acceptance Project. I won't go into how Ed will use it as a way of resolution.

However, I can say more about the Family Acceptance Project. I learned about it one evening two years ago at the Center. Caitlin Ryan of San Francisco State University gave a presentation to the staff and I was asked to sit in. I wrote about it in my other blog, the one I use to share LGBT news with friends and family. The post is here. Replace every reference to "parent" with "church" and you get an idea where Ed is headed.

Jeff said Ed's big goal is to reduce, hopefully eliminate, harm. And he means real, serious harm. Jeff does not want to see another forum where our harm is put up against the "harm" that conservatives in the denomination claim when the issue is discussed. It is time to end that nonsense.

Just before I talked to Jeff I chatted with another member of the congregation, an ally. She had talked to a friend who has a gay son. The friend has expressed remorse that her son will be going to hell when he dies. She has probably said as much to her son. That is the harm, to both mother and child, Jeff is talking about.

Jeff had another bit of news. There is a second pastor in Michigan who performed a same-sex ceremony. This one is from the more conservative West Michigan Conference. His meeting before the bishop is Thursday.

United Methodists and marriage equality in Michigan

Rev. Jeff Nelson of Redford Aldersgate UMC told me about this situation back in July. He kept me updated in short conversations. Yesterday, he emailed me to say it is time to expand the circle of support.

A while back a same-sex couple came to Rev. Ed Rowe of Central United Methodist Church in Detroit to ask him to perform their wedding. The couple are members of the Central congregation. They made the request knowing current denomination policies prevent Ed from officiating. As I understand it, the couple intentionally wanted to force the issue with Michigan Bishop Deborah Kiesey. Would she insist in punishing those who violate church law, perhaps even hold a church trial, or would she follow the lead of other bishops in saying those who perform same-sex ceremonies will honored and not punished?

I first encountered Bishop Kiesey during General Conference in 2012 in Tampa. That day the Conference had affirmed by over 60% the statement that homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. I was part of a protest of that vote I wrote about my experience here. That evening during the communion service Bishop Kiesey was the preacher. She did an admirable job of offering healing to all of us. She expanded on the scene after the Resurrection in which Jesus serves breakfast to the disciples on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. Three times Jesus commands Peter to "Feed my sheep." Bishop Kiesey expanded the phrase a bit: "Feed my sheep. All of my sheep." Many of us in Michigan were delighted when she was appointed as bishop of the Michigan Area just a couple months later.

In that email to me Jeff wrote:

In June Ed Rowe performed a same gender wedding for two members of the Central congregation. He did this will the full support of Central’s church council and leadership. He informed Bishop Kiesey and his District Superintendent of this pastoral act prior to performing the wedding.

The wedding was a joy-filled, healing and gospel centered event where the love of Christ was on full display and power of the inclusive community evident to all who attended.

In July Ed officially retired from the ministry.

As usually happens a complaint against Ed was filed by the Dean of the Cabinet and the Superintendent of the Detroit Renaissance District (essentially, Ed's boss). Ed was asked to describe what a just resolution would look like to him. I understand he wrote a letter spelling out his views. Ed selected former District Superintendent Tom Robinson to be his support person.

Last week, Ed and Tom met with Bishop Kiesey, her clergy assistant, and the two who filed the complaint to begin the just resolution process. During the meeting about 30 people from both Michigan Conferences met for prayer, support, dialogue, and worship.

A second conversation of the two teams is scheduled for Monday, September 29th at 1:30 pm to be held at the Michigan Area Office, 1011 Northcrest Rd. Lansing, MI 48906. Ed has requested that all willing people come to be part of a prayerful witness during this second dialogue. Jeff wrote:

We believe that our bishop wants to do the right thing and our prayerful presence has served to bolster her courage.

Please share this post with all your friends and fellow congregants. Ed needs our support.

Any news on this issue I will post to the Dedicated Reconciling United Methodists blog in the same manner as this post. Please check back for updates (and perhaps join some of the DRUM events described in the blog).
http://dedicatedrum.blogspot.com/

Jeff says that Ed closes his notes by writing:

Grace, Peace, Power and Pride

A call for unity

My dad sent me an article by two United Methodist pastors in North Carolina. They make a plea for unity because they don't want to see the denomination split over homosexuality. As part of that they call for everyone to follow the Book of Discipline the rule book of the church.

To our opponents they say that the issue will be at the forefront of General Conference for a while, so when it changes the Book for more equitable treatment of sexual minorities, you must follow that, in the same way you demand we follow what is there now.

To us they say in the same way we must follow what the Book says now (including bans on same-sex weddings) and work for it to be changed in an orderly way.

While I like the idea of telling our opponents who demand our compliance now that they must comply later, I don't buy the second point.

As I saw when I attended a General Conference two years ago in Tampa, the denomination has a very large African delegation and they're not going to allow change soon – not in 2016 and probably not in 2020. The American part of the denomination can't wait that long. Those growing up in the denomination now don't want a church that discriminates against their friends. Delaying a welcoming church will drive them away.

So how do we lessen Africa's influence? There are proposals being prepared for the 2016 General Conference to do just that. But without our open rebellion and defiance there won't be the urgency to pass such proposals. We will prove to American conservatives they have two choices – split from the Africans or split the denomination.

Refrocked!

Frank Schaefer, the United Methodist pastor who was defrocked last fall, has been reinstated. That action was taken by a Committee on Appeals for the Northeast region. Schaefer and his defense team had asked for the appeal. The appeals committee did not say anything about the guilty verdict, but said the punishment – defrocking – was too severe because it was based on what Schaefer might do (perform another same-sex wedding) not on what he had done. The proper punishment was a 30 day suspension, which the committee declared has already been served. He is now owed back-pay.

Bishop Peggy Johnson of Eastern Pennsylvania will return Schaefer to a church in her area. She probably cannot return him to his previous church. Schaefer also has an offer to work under a bishop in California.

This case could be appealed to the denomination's Judicial Council. So far, no one has said such an appeal will happen.

Conservatives are annoyed and say this strengthens the call for a denominational split.