Debate Over Controversial Methodist Ruling on Homosexuality Heats Up

Debate over the recent ruling by the United Methodist Judicial Council on homosexuality and the response of the Council of Bishops continues to stir among congregants within the denomination.

By Audrey Barrick, Christian Post Reporter Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Debate over the recent ruling by the United Methodist Judicial Council on homosexuality and the response of the Council of Bishops continues to stir among congregants within the denomination.

Mixed reactions have spurred following the church court's decision that supported the Rev. Ed Johnson who has returned as senior pastor of the South Hill Virginia United Methodist Church after being suspended for denying membership to a man who was involved in an openly homosexual relationship.

Additional opinions by members of the Judicial Council were recently released as part of the official ruling.

Get Our Latest News for FREE

Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.

Subscribe

The Rev. Keith Boyette of Virginia said, "Contrary to what some will assert, our decision here is not a statement that homosexuals are barred from membership in the local church," according to the United Methodist News Service.

Expressing a voice of dissent over the ruling, Judge Jon R. Gray of Missouri meanwhile said it "abandons the traditional and limited role of the Judicial Council as interpreter of church law and assumes a new mantle as creator of church law," therefore causing a potential loss of court credibility.

"The decision eviscerates our statement that God’s grace is available to all and reduces it to an empty platitude," he added.

Amid conservative approval as well as criticism also stands confusion over the bishops' Nov. 2 statement.

"We are disappointed that the bishops' pastoral letter does not affirm more clearly the Judicial Council decision (1032) but instead appears to be raising questions about it," said the Rev. James V. Heidinger II, president and publisher of Good News, an unofficial United Methodist evangelical organization.

"We are not sure what the intent of their response is," he said, according to UMNS. "We are left wondering if they were questioning the decision, disagreeing with it, or just seeking to clarify the decision and reaffirm the church's commitment to be in ministry to all persons."

The Council of Bishops had written a statement stating that homosexuality is not a barrier to joining the denomination.

"While pastors have the responsibility to discern readiness for membership, homosexuality is not a barrier," the letter stated.

Nevertheless, conservative leaders and lay people lauded the court decision that upheld "existing church law," as Brenda A. Menzies, a laywoman from Franklin, Tenn., told the UMNS.

Menzies referred to the Book of Discipline that holds the practice of homosexuality incompatible with Christian teaching.

On the opposite side of the debate, some labeled the language of the denomination's slogan – Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors – to be "false advertising."

Bishop Violet L. Fisher of the New York West Area wrote a letter saying, "Pastors do have the responsibility to discern readiness for membership, but no one has the right to reinterpret the gospel or our denominational polity to mandate exclusion in the Body of Christ."

Many predict the controversy over the meaning of United Methodist membership will continue for years.

"Undoubtedly, some in the declining regions of the church will continue to try to find ways to circumvent church law," said Mark Tooley who directs the Institute on Religion and Democracy’s United Methodist Action committee and supports the court ruling. "The debate over this issue will certainly continue for some years. But the future of the church, whose membership is increasingly international, belongs to theological orthodoxy and historic Christianity."