Reconciling Ministries Network

Working to Keep the Story Alive

by Rachel Birkhahn-Rommelfanger

“I believe that telling our stories illuminates the world one voice at a time.” - Dan Curtis

 

We gathered to honor the people and an organization working to preserve the stories of African American United Methodists. The African American Heritage Foundation (AAMHC) has worked on creating an archive to house this great narrative. A narrative of persons who struggle to keep a story alive as the bearers of the stories age and pass on to glory; the story of people in a white majority church, who at times worry they will be silenced. The AAMHC is keeping alive the ministry, mission and vision of African Americans in the UMC. This center reminds the UMC of the great gifts, soulful songs, and deep pain of African Americans within our Methodist heritage.

I was honored one Friday night in December to don my best black evening dress and rainbow shawl to represent the Reconciling Ministries Network Board at the African American Methodist Heritage Center’s Ten Year Commemoration. On this night, the story of Reconciling Ministries Network and the African American Methodist Heritage Center were able to intertwine.

A Statement of Counsel to the Church - 2011

Out of concern for the welfare of all God’s people, and, out of special concern for the people of The United Methodist Church, we, United Methodist Bishops – retired, believe The United Methodist Church should remove the following statement from The Book of Discipline (2008):

“…The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.  Therefore self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church.”  ¶304.3

Our lives and ministries over the years have included prayerful, thoughtful consideration of our Holy Bible, our Wesleyan heritage, reflection on our experience of the church and world, and our conviction of God’s intention for a world transformed.

With this statement of conviction and counsel we seek:

• To affirm that the historic tests of “gifts and evidence of God’s grace” for ordained ministry override any past or present temporal restrictions such as race, gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.
• To urge the Church, ecumenical and denominational, to change the manner in which it relates to gay, lesbian and transgendered persons in official statements, judicial proceedings, and in congregational life.
• To declare our conviction that the current disciplinary position of The United Methodist Church, a part of our historical development, need not, and should not, be embraced as the faithful position for the future.
• To make known our names and shared personal conviction on this matter and to encourage other church and Episcopal leaders to do the same.

With increasing frequency we observe and experience the following disturbing realities and know them to be detrimental to the mission of a Church of Jesus Christ:

• Laity and clergy, gay and straight, withdrawing membership or absenting themselves from the support of congregational and denominational Church life in order to maintain personal integrity.
• Young adults, especially, embarrassed to invite friends and expressing dismay at the unwillingness of our United Methodist Church to alter its 39-year exclusionary stance.
• Closeted pastors, currently called and ordained in our church, living divided lives while offering effective appreciated ministry.
• Bishops being drained of energy by upholding Church Discipline while regarding it as contrary to their convictions.
• Bishops caught between care for the Church by reappointing an effective gay or lesbian pastor and care for the Discipline by charging them under current legislation.
• Seminary leaders desiring greater flexibility and openness from the church in order to advance their mission of identifying, recruiting, enrolling, educating and spiritually forming Christian leaders.
• Christian gay men and women understanding themselves called of God to seek ministry opportunities within their United Methodist family Church home, but having to decide between:
  • leaving to go to accepting denominations, or
  • staying and praying for change, or
  • challenging Church law and accepting punitive actions.

Our United Methodist Church, ashamed and repentant in the past, ended official and unofficial restrictions on candidacy, ordination and appointment for reason of race, gender and ethnicity. We believe the God we know in Jesus is leading us to issue this counsel and call – a call to transform our church life and our world.

United Methodist Episcopal Leaders-Retired

Sharon Z. Rader

Donald A. Ott

Beverly Shamana

C. Joseph Sprague

Melvin G. Talbert

S. Clifton Ives

Joe A. Wilson

William Lewis

Forrest Stith

Susan Morrison

Susan Hassinger

Judy Craig

Dale White

William Boyd Grove

C. P. Minnick

Kenneth L.  Carder

Roy I. Sano

Joe Yeakel

Kenneth Hicks

Joseph Humper

Monk Bryan

Jesse DeWitt

Jack Tuell

J. Lloyd Knox

Charles W. Jordan

J.  Lawrence McCleskey

Marshall L. Meadors, Jr.

Franz Schafer

Sheldon Duecker

Fritz Mutti

Cal McConnell

Leontine T. C. Kelly

Openly gay candidate for bishop

by Heather Murphy

This story slipped past me while I was traveling in July, but I wanted to note it.  Reverend Frank Wulf became the first openly gay candidate for bishop in the Western Jurisdictional Conference this summer.  After two days, he withdrew his name after it became clear that he would not be elected. 

"To change our official stance and even advocate for that change is both harmful and subversive, not only to The United Methodist Church but to the larger global Christian church and our commitment to understanding holiness in every dimension of life," said David Parker, of the Central United Protestant Church, who I assume will never have to watch the news and wonder if the people of his state will vote to annul his marriage.

Bishops: Bravely Bold or Blasphemously Bashful

By Leland Spencer

Even more than by my aforementioned affection for alliterative blog titles, this post is inspired by the conversations in the comment section on my last post about Bishop Shamana's ruling of law and David Braden's post about the affirmation of Bishop-elect Julius Trimble. Responses to my post suggested that Bishop Shamana's move may have been strategic or that there is simply not much the Reconciling movement can expect from Bishops. In David's follow-up comment about Bishop-elect Trimble's responses to how he would handle issues related to human sexuality, David reports that Bishop-elect Trimble made a comment about how his role as bishop would be to uphold the Book of Discipline. A similar sentiment is echoed in the article about the California pastor whose DS, despite her alleged identification as an ally, said she would follow up on any complaints that were levied if the pastor solemnized same-sex marriages.

So here's my question: Why are we so willing to tolerate such capitulation by the leaders with the most power who profess in one breath to be allies but then behave in ways that buttress the institution? A few comments pine for the day when a Bishop actually behaves as radically as she or he preaches or professes to believe, but on the whole, we seem to have a respect and a deference for bishops and DSes who are more concerned with fulfilling the requirements of their jobs than living out the truly inclusive message of the Gospel. Yes, Bishops take a vow to uphold the Book of Discipline, but haven't they also made a vow to accept the power God gives them to resist evil, oppression, and injustice in whatever forms they present themselves? Most of the time, those two vows are compatible, but when they are in conflict, which one really ought to be more important? Do we have bishops who hold so steadfastly to their job descriptions that they miss the point of the Gospel?

Martin Luther King, Jr. reminded us that an unjust law is no law at all. When he was in jail for his activism, he wrote his famous "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" in which he expressed his horror at the churches and clergy who valued the laws of their cities and states above the mandates of the faith they professed. Can we not see some haunting similarities today?

If there are truly any allies among the episcopal leadership of our church, let them ordain and appoint lesbian and gay clergy. Let them support the clergy they supervise who lead holy unions. Let them reprimand clergy who exclude lesbian and gay people from church membership. And when people raise complaints against these bishops, let the bishops be brought to trial for taking the vows of their United Methodist membership more seriously than their vows to uphold the bigoted laws of the denomination.

Is any bishop willing to sacrifice her or his position in the name of full inclusion until the day when such activities are no longer condemned but expected? What a prophetic witness for our church that would be!

The Day of Jubilee will Come!

By Jayson Dobney

I am more certain of that now than ever.

Sitting at home, riveted to my computer watching votes being taken across the country for episcopal leaders last week - and talking to friends in various jurisdictions to see how things were going  - I realized that first and foremost: I am a United Methodist nerd.

There was heartbreak.  No doubt.  Heartbreak at seeing allies defeated, heartbreak from talking to friends who struggled with making decisions about voting, heartbreak at seeing our progressive coalitions sometimes split.  Hearbreak at the ruling of law issued by Bishop Shamana of the Cal Nevada conference.

But, there was also a story of such magnitude that it also provides me a glimpse of the future.  Frank Wulf stood for election as bishop as an openly gay man in the Western Jurisdiction!  What a wonderful day.  What an act of bravery and leadership.  Read the story here:  http://www.umc.org/

OK, so he didn't get elected, and he might face consequences now that he has come out in such a public arena.  But his actions have been truly inspiring - at least to me.  In the face of so much that has happened in the last few months at General Conferences, Annual Conferences, and at Jurisdictional Conferences, this, at least, was a moment that showed us what our church will look like someday.  Thanks Frank Wulf for this gift.  Thank you for showing more leadership than a whole council full of bishops.

I now know, deep in my heart and in my gut, that we will see the day when we elect the first, and then the second, and third, and many more, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer persons as bishops.  We will leave behind the fights over membership, ordination, and marriage, and instead will have voices at the tables of leadership.  My dreams have been so small.  I had never even contemplated the possibility of a GLBT person elected as Bishop - God has a way of doing that.  Expanding our vision to things we never thought possible.

That Day of Jubilee will Come!

Pastor is church’s first openly gay bishop candidate

The United Methodist News Service reports on an openly gay candidate for Bishop in the Western Jurisdiction.

Standing before an assembly that would elect two bishops, the Rev. Frank Wulf shared his problem as a candidate for one of the top clergy positions in The United Methodist Church.

"The problem is that I come as a gay man, and I know where our church stands on the issue of same-sex orientation," Wulf said in his candidacy address before the Western Jurisdictional Conference, which represents United Methodists in the western United States, Guam and other U.S. territories in the Pacific.

The delegates, who later approved four statements challenging the denomination’s position on homosexuality, listened intently as Wulf continued: "And I know that the church says … a practicing self-avowed homosexual shall not be ordained or appointed within our church."

By extension, Wulf noted that his candidacy created a quandary for jurisdictional delegates in a denomination that consistently has declared homosexuality "incompatible with Christian teaching."

"I know that if, by some chance, I were ever to be elected as a bishop within this jurisdiction or any jurisdiction, that all hell would break loose …," he said, explaining later that he would anticipate church judicial charges, threats and hate mail.

Full story:
Pastor is church’s first openly gay bishop candidate

A Bishop’s Affirmation

By David Braden

I returned home from the North Central Jurisdictional Conference in Grand Rapids, MI yesterday. We completed our task of electing a new bishop, the Rev. Dr. Julius C. Trimble, reporting the works of the jurisdiction, and confirming the nominations list for general boards and agencies. Sounds somewhat boring, but compared with General Conference it was delightfully more restful and peaceful!

I am still not sure how I feel about electing bishops and other leaders of the Church. For a process that we pray will be led by the Spirit and trust that the Spirit will lift up a candidate anointed by God and confirmed by the Body’s votes, I still cannot seem to get past the political nature of the process. We, lay and clergy delegates of these conferences, campaign and deliver literature and speeches. We meet with progressive and conservative caucuses to await endorsements. We covenant to vote for candidates for ‘x’ number of votes. We testify to the character of a candidate. We tell the truth. We spread rumors. We lie. Where is the Spirit in that?

I was pleased to meet Rev. Dr. Julius Trimble during one of the listening sessions where episcopal candidates present themselves, their vision for the world and church, as well as answer delegates’ questions. I told Rev. Dr. Trimble a bit of my story – that I am a gay man and lifelong United Methodist. That I have LGBTQ friends who feel barred from the Church. What will he do as a Bishop for the LGBTQ folks already in the Church and those who stand outside? A colleague of mine asked the even better follow-up question of “What have you already done in your ministries for queer folks?”

Rev. Dr. Trimble provided great answers, but I was more touched by the response of him and his wife, Racelder Grandberry, at the end of the discourse. Both Trimbles came to me, laid their hands on me, affirmed that I was a beloved child of God, called me courageous, thanked me for my question, thanked me for keeping the faith and staying in the Church despite its shortcomings, prayed that I would continue telling my story, and prayed for the day when the United Methodist Church truly becomes inclusive of all people. The Rev. Dr. Trimble and his wife did not have to do this. Yet they chose to be pastoral. For me it was a spirit-filled moment.

Ultimately, there were several candidates I would have been pleased to have as my bishop. I just pray that those hurt by this process might be healed and feel the embers of the Holy Spirit continue to burn within their hearts. I pray that our new episcopal leaders might live into their role as guardians of the faith and claim their prophetic voices. Only the Lord knows how much we need it.

Blaming the Bishop?

By Leland Spencer

On one level, I was at least disturbed and perhaps hurt when I read the UMNS story about Bishop Shamana's ruling that the California-Nevada conference's affirmation of clergy who conduct same-sex weddings is "void and of no effect." After all, I thought Bishop Shamana was an ally. I love the chapter about her in Bishop Craig's The Leading Women, especially because she created a name for herself in order to extricate herself from the patriarchy of traditional nomenclature. Furthermore, I thought for sure when I read her inspiring sermon from the 2004 General Conference that she was an ally in the movement for full inclusion. How, then, could she use the word "void" to describe the faithful witness of the conference over which she presides?

On a another level, I understand that her job as bishop is to offer a ruling based on the laws of the church. Therefore, she reached the conclusion she had to reach, and I don't think that surprises anyone. Of course the statement has no effect in the realm of church law, and its authors and supporters know that. I am certain that no one voting for the statement of support expected that statement alone to acquit pastors who are brought up on trial for violating church law by doing the ministry God calls them to do. The authors and supporters of the statement of support recognize that, in the words of MLK, "an unjust law is no law at all."

So where does that leave me? Well, I admit that I am still a little bit frustrated with the bishop. I know she had to issue the ruling that she issued--any literate bishop would--but I think she could have done it with more grace. "Void and of no effect" is harsh as well as redundant. I think my irritation in this situation echoes that of the Rev. Gayle Felton, who said in her sermon at the RMN convocation last summer, "I'm frustrated with bishops. If you can't be prophetic when you get to be a bishop, what are you waiting for?"

Additional coverage:
Ruling of Law (pdf)