A Preface for New Year’s Resolutions

by Peter L. DeGroote

A new year is a time for resolutions. My resolve can be generally summed up in the proposition that something must be done to repair the torn fabric of the United Methodist connection.

We call ourselves a connectional church, a movement of people who embrace each other with honor and respect, compassion and encouragement. The resulting theory is that we are all woven together into a fabric that is wonderful to behold, an exemplar to the world around us. The reality is a shredded picture presenting an image of hypocrisy.

So where is the connectional fabric shredded? In a number of places but in no place greater than when it seeks to deal with gay folks. (Despite the male bias of that word, I am using it here as a shorthand to refer to all LGBTQ persons.)

A few examples, you are welcome to add more:

1. The United Methodist claim is that all persons are of sacred worth but through legislation, policy, and practice gay people become less so.
   
2. We are baptized in the church, encouraged to participate in all things, called upon to give our money, but those of us called to ministry are rejected.
3. We may feel at home in a congregation that embraces us but if we move we can no longer be assured that we will be able to transfer our membership to another UM church because Pastors have been given the right to deny the membership of gay people in a local church.
4. We are expected to support the church’s great programs of social justice and worldwide missions, but in our contributions we are also supporting our own oppression engendered by the claim that our lives and our living are not compatible with Christian teachings. In doing so, we are forced to participate in placing a stigma on ourselves and those we love that is a direct cause of much discrimination and prejudice that gay people experience within the larger society.
5. The church claims to support the civil rights of all people but opposes the civil right of marriage for gay people, seeking to project a theological argument into a civil issue.
6. Even in those states where civil marriage of gay people is legal, the church prohibits the conduct of marriage services by our clergy or in our buildings, denying the pastoral discretion that church law is supposed to allow.
7. Despite 40 years of petitioning and arguing at all levels of the church about its views on gay people, the General Conference has been unwilling to acknowledge that we are a church divided on this issue. It is fair to say that this denial goes a little further than hypocrisy.

So, if I resolve to do something about the shredding of UM connection, what do I do? In many ways I keep on doing what I have been doing, and that is probably what many others will do as well. However, I will explore new methods, be a little bolder, and urge others to join in that effort.

How long will I keep doing it? After 30 years I have seen a lot of changes in practice and procedure on a local level but nothing at the disciplinary or policy levels. In fact, on those levels some things have gotten worse. I do get tired from beating my head against the wall. I notice that most young folks wonder why I bother and some of the old-timers I have known are long gone elsewhere.

What’s the alternative? Going elsewhere is fairly easy. There are many places to go. I’m not ready for that yet, but I understand those who have already gone and will not twist arms in an effort to make anyone stay. But, if some of those bricks don’t begin to move soon, I too will be gone. I have to decide which bricks.