by Peter L. DeGroote
As usual, Baltimore-Washington Area Reconciling United Methodists (BWARM) had proposed a resolution for Annual Conference. For the first time the opposition responded—with four.
Past debates over BWARM resolutions had been somewhere between crude and vulgar. LGBT folks were routinely characterized as sinners, predators, and worse, blighting the reputation of Annual Conference as a place where differences can be debated in harmony with God’s grace.
Despite the nastiness, BWARM was on a winning streak. It's resolution for each of the past three years had passed. In that light, the multiple resolutions from those who oppose changes in the Discipline seemed a shotgun attempt to pass at least one of their own rather than continue their losing streak. It also promised a debating circus. One lay delegate actually resigned in fear of the pain of those debates.
An alternative was found. Through the work of many, and several starts and stops, a motion was offered to table all of the resolutions concerning LGBT matters. Instead, we would have a panel discussion with three people who want to change the Discipline and three who do not. There were procedural hurtles but the motion passed overwhelmingly. A request from Conference youth to add one of their members was granted.
The motion set the panel’s discussion around two questions:
1. How can we as the church most effectively offer ministry and pastoral support to and for our lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender sisters and brothers?
2. How can we as a connectional church relate to and work with each other as the body of Christ given our disagreements over this issue?
After 45 minutes of the panel discussion* we formed into small groups by turning our chairs so that we could discuss what we had heard and thought.
I felt quiet joy and a sense of accomplishment for all those people who, over many years, had helped us get this far. It was difficult to believe I was sitting in a hotel ballroom filled with United Methodists respectfully sharing and listening to each other’s views about the way the Discipline treats LGBT people. The group I sat with had differences but spoke no harshness. Others reported a similar experience in their groups and of a general feeling that we had all learned from each other.
Something momentous had happened. An Annual Conference had overwhelmingly voted to transform a previously contentious and often hateful debate into a holy conversation in which God’s grace was apparent to all. In doing so it formally acknowledged that there are differences of opinion among us and that it is time to find a way for us to listen to and learn from each other. The intention to find a way forward, expressed in a formal Conference action, is foundational for the future.
I recalled the unwillingness of the last General Conference to do the same. Despite the evidence of a constantly growing number of Reconciling Congregations, years of proposed legislation, demonstrations on and off the floor (some with arrests), and the urging of many prominent UM leaders, the last General Conference refused to pass a resolution simply acknowledging that “Faithful, thoughtful people who have grappled with this issue deeply disagree with one another; yet all seek a faithful witness.” **
To be polite, the General Conference looked a little foolish. To be more accurate, the majority told a lie. For those of us in the Baltimore-Washington Conference the evidence was clear:
- We remain a people of different minds about the treatment of LGBT people in the Discipline.
- By acknowledging our differences we were able to come together in holy conversation to learn from each other.
- All were able to join in the closing affirmation offered by our Bishop that we are all members of one body despite our differing views.
We found a way to put the lie behind us. Maybe the next General Conference can do the same.
_____________
*For the Conference news report and a commentary on the event see Pages 2 and 7 of this link: http://www.bwcumc.org/files/umc_pdf_files/UMC_June16_web.pdf
**For the report on the General Conference action see
http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=3082929&ct=5315905¬oc=1
Peter is a second career pastor who has served in several churches in the Baltimore-Washington Conference. Prior to his ordination, he was a secondary-school teacher, a university lecturer in Government, an Associate in a government related professional association, CEO of a national financial institution. Peter was involved in Mid-Atlantic Affirmation, served on the National Council of Affirmation, and sat on the Board of the Reconciling Congregations Program, the predecessor name for RMN and has worked with BWARM (Baltimore-Washington Reconciling United Methodists).