Tag Archives: Book of Discipline

When the Church discriminates, who holds it accountable?

26 Sunday Jan 2014

Posted by in Justice, LGBTQ, Reflections

≈ 13 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

DSCN0590I’ve returned to The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church lately in an effort to better understand what it means to be in covenant with my ordained colleagues, and indeed with all baptized members of the Church. While I think I have a reasonably good understanding of the meaning of covenant, I am increasingly aware of the vastly different approaches within the Church on this matter.

As human beings we cannot help but see covenant through the lenses of our own experience of God, faith, grace, and community. In other words, the very meaning of covenant is formed within the ongoing lived experience of faith communities composed of imperfect human beings working together for the common good.

The Book of Discipline says, “Ordained persons exercise their ministry in covenant with all Christians, especially with those whom they lead and serve in ministry” (para 303.3). This covenant is spoken of as one of “mutual care and accountability.” So there is a sense that in whatever ways the Church seeks the Reign of God, we need to purposefully exercise mutual care and accountability.

The Book of Discipline also says, “The effectiveness of the Church in mission depends on these covenantal commitments to the ministry of all Christians and the ordained ministry of the Church. Through ordination and through other offices of pastoral leadership, the Church provides for the continuation of Christ’s ministry, which has been committed to the church as a whole” (para. 303.4).

So there are covenantal commitments that we make to, with, and for one another, and these commitments are naturally tested over time. I have always understood these covenantal commitments primarily in terms of relationship – relationship with God, with my ministry partners, and with the whole Church. Throughout my thirty years of pastoral ministry in a variety of contexts these covenantal commitments have meant renegotiating relationships that continue to grow and change. I am not the same person I was when I entered ministry. My experience of God and of Church has changed. My theology has changed. The world has changed, as has the Church’s role in the world. In other words, covenantal commitments are not static, and those of us who seek to minister alongside one another must exercise grace and humility in our relationships with one another if we are to have any hope of faithfully dealing with the current discord within the Church over how we welcome LGBTQ neighbors into the Church’s life and ministry.

While I view covenantal commitments mainly in terms of relationship, I am aware of how many United Methodists view it mainly in terms of accountability. These are my sisters and brothers in Christ who see accountability as a matter of all parties agreeing to follow rules of conduct and belief as spelled out in the Book of Discipline. I admit this is true as far as it goes. We do have rules for a reason. However, no covenant relationship thrives on the basis of simply following rules. Any covenant relationship that holds the possibility of being life giving and spiritually enriching needs to be a dynamic interplay of diverse voices coming together to give glory to the One who invites all people into abundant life.

Accountability flows in more than one direction. There is a mutual accountability built into the covenant we have with one another. But do we ever hear anything about the accountability of the United Methodist Church for how it has demeaned and dismissed LGBTQ persons from openly participating in the life and ministry of the Church? Is anyone being held accountable for failing to truly recognize the sacred worth of LGBTQ persons? Is there any accountability of General Conference delegates over several decades for the discriminatory language written into church law? When the General Conference gets it wrong, are we to ignore the royal law of scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself?” (James 2:8) Such love requires mercy over judgment.

According to paragraph 306 in the Book of Discipline, an order of ministry like the one to which I belong along with other ordained Elders, is “a covenant community within the church to mutually support, care for, and hold accountable its members for the sake of the life and mission of the church.” I don’t believe that being a part of this order means surrendering my conscience and my integrity to an imperfect book that is revised by the General Conference every four years. Like all other United Methodist Christians, I seek to understand the witness of God’s grace in Scripture by means of my own experience of God, my reason’s ability to understand the many contextual voices of Scripture and to embrace new knowledge, and the historic tradition of the Church (which, for the record, includes John Wesley’s own rule-breaking for the sake of Christ’s work on earth).

I cannot with integrity simply bow to human law – for that is what the Book of Discipline is – when it violates the human dignity of LGBTQ persons. In challenging or disobeying church law I do not believe I am violating my covenant with others in my order. Indeed, I believe I am protecting covenant from the harm that is done whenever a person made in God’s image feels the sting of the Church’s rejection. I believe I am being true to my calling of continuing Christ’s ministry and welcoming to the table of grace all who seek God!

Words (c) 2014 Mark Lloyd Richardson

Building an Altar for All

21 Thursday Nov 2013

Posted by in Peace with justice, Reflections

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

P1010306I am a United Methodist by choice, since I did not grow up a Methodist. I am a Minister of the Gospel by calling, and that calling originates in my relationship with God. It is a calling I received before choosing the Wesleyan path of discipleship for my own. It is a calling to serve a higher purpose of bringing a message of reconciliation and hope to a broken and hurting world. It is a calling to bless and not to curse, to heal and not to harm, to speak and not to be silent to injustice!

There is a crisis of conscience in my beloved church. Although we say that we discern matters theologically using the lenses of Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience, I believe that on the question of whether homosexuality is compatible with Christian teaching we disregard everything but a few select verses of Scripture. We certainly disregard current and historical understandings of human sexuality, we disregard the prevailing views of major mental health associations, and most importantly we disregard the profoundly painful experience of exclusion that is resident within the voices of LGBT Christians. These are our sisters and brothers in Christ. We effectively slam the doors of our churches on them when we say that their sexuality is inconsistent with being Christian.

In recent days, with a formal complaint being considered against a retired bishop of the church for conducting a same-sex wedding and a trial and punishment of a clergy colleague for officiating at the marriage ceremony of his gay son, it is clear that traditionalists within the church will not even allow ministry to all persons regardless of sexual orientation or gender expression. The Book of Discipline is being lifted up as the ultimate rulebook for appropriate forms of ministry, and within its pages it explicitly states, “Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches.”

Shall not.

Yet they have been and will continue to be because for some of us there is no way to be true to our calling as Ministers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ while excluding some from the means of grace expressed through our ministry.

Indeed more than a thousand United Methodist clergy across the United States have signed a statement (see Altar for All) committing themselves to fulfill their vow to be in ministry with all people by offering the grace of the Church’s blessing to any prepared couple desiring Christian marriage regardless of their gender. It is a form of biblical obedience for those of us who do not consider Scripture to be error-free truth devoid of cultural context.

So along with other United Methodist ministers I face the daily question: Do I follow the immoral remnant of discrimination written into the Book of Discipline decades ago or do I follow the words on the very same page under the heading Responsibilities and Duties of Elders that make me duty-bound “To build the body of Christ as a caring and giving community, extending the ministry of Christ to the world?”

I don’t see how I can do both!

Words (c) 2013 Mark Lloyd Richardson

Biblical Obedience to an Inclusive God

01 Tuesday Oct 2013

Posted by in Peace with justice, Reflections

≈ 13 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

gay-marriage-hands-and-rings

Bishop Debra Wallace-Padgett, resident bishop of the North Alabama Conference of the United Methodist Church, issued a press release yesterday that reads in part:

“A retired United Methodist bishop notified me that he plans to travel to North Alabama, the area for which I am responsible, with the intention of breaking church law. He plans in late October to officiate at the celebration of a ceremony of a same-sex couple who were recently married in Washington, D.C. Though the couple are members of a United Methodist Church in the North Alabama Conference, the celebration will not take place in a United Methodist Church. I urged the retired bishop to reconsider as his officiating at this ceremony would be in violation of United Methodist Church law. I am also concerned that it would encourage the public to only define The United Methodist Church in North Alabama by one matter and not by the rich range of ministries of North Alabama local churches such as feeding the hungry, ministry with the poor, offering hope for those in addiction, sharing the gospel with our neighbors and welcoming all people to worship together and celebrate the sacrament of holy communion….

“Our culture is divided around our understandings of relationships between same sex partners. Likewise there is much debate, pain and struggle among faithful Christians about interpretations of biblical teaching on same-sex relationships. Our United Methodist 2012 Book of Discipline affirms that all persons are of sacred worth and that God’s grace is available to all. Every person is welcome in our churches. The Discipline of our denomination also states that we consider the practice of homosexuality as incompatible with Christian teaching. Our ministers are not permitted to conduct ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions or perform same sex wedding ceremonies.

“As a bishop of the United Methodist Church, I took a vow to abide by and uphold the Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church. I am also committed to continuing to focus those I lead on our mission, which is broader than any one issue. The mission of the church is to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world. I appreciate prayers for all involved in this difficult and painful situation.”

 ♦♦♦♦

The bishop’s press release raises more questions for me than answers. She mentions several wonderful ministries of the local churches under her care, including feeding the hungry, ministry with the poor, and offering hope for those in addiction. If the denomination wrote into its rule book that local churches were no longer allowed to actively engage the hungry, the poor, or persons who suffer with addictions utilizing church ministries on church property, would she be okay with that since it is church law? Or might she challenge it as contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Truth be told, there is a sizeable minority of United Methodist clergy and laypersons who have discerned a different biblical understanding of same-sex relationships and do not wish to have limits placed on our ministry with LGBT persons. We do not wish to say to LGBT persons that we are unable to celebrate with them their committed relationships because they violate church law. Since the denomination has not been of one mind on this matter for decades, a more charitable stance would be to allow faithful United Methodists to follow their conscience. This is what we do in relation to another controversial matter – war. Yet by narrow margins we again and again adopt unjust, uncompassionate rules of church law that exclude people in our midst from the acknowledgment that God accepts them as they are.

The bishop states that everyone is welcome in our churches. But what kind of welcome says to persons, “You are living in a way that is incompatible with what the church teaches?” Granted, in many of our churches, we have a time of confession in Sunday worship so as to acknowledge that we all live in ways that are incompatible with what the church teaches. We are all seduced by consumerism, militarism, and heterosexism. Yet we are still permitted to receive the church’s blessing of our marriages if we seek it. We are welcomed in spite of ourselves. Why would we offer only a conditional welcome to persons with a different sexual orientation?

Finally, it is true that the mission of the United Methodist Church is “broader than any one issue,” as the bishop suggests. However, this sentiment means very little in light of the matter of justice we are discussing. To refer to “the practice of homosexuality” as though it is uniform from person to person is as absurd as referring to “the practice of heterosexuality.” What does that even mean? Every heterosexual person on the face of the earth understands and practices his or her sexuality in an individual manner. Not only that, but society constructs gender identity and it is not simply a matter of being male or female. There is a continuum of gender identification on which we all exist.

There are so many questions surrounding this matter of same sex marriage, and yet the United Methodist Church is stuck in reverse, hoping to stem the tide of reason and new understanding by insisting that church law is the last word. Bishop Wallace-Padgett may be obliged to uphold the restrictive and oppressive language of the Book of Discipline on this matter, but the retired bishop she mentions, Bishop Melvin Talbert, is the one listening to the Spirit and attuned to the radically inclusive love revealed in Christ! The world needs more disciples willing to take risks that challenge the status quo and make transformation possible.

Words (c) 2013 Mark Lloyd Richardson