Posted on 07/02/2010 7:42:20 AM PDT by ZGuy
For the second time in less than a year, the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society (GBCS), an official agency of the denomination, has published an article arguing that sexual relationships outside the covenant of marriage are not necessarily improper.
“An Ordained Single Woman and the Discipline,” published June 7 as part of the “Sex and the Church” series in GBCS’ weekly Faith in Action online newsletter, contends that sexual relationships should not be off-limits for unmarried UM clergy.
Last August, the controversial series featured an article by Unitarian “sexologist” Debra Haffner who wrote that one can have “a moral, ethical sexual relationship” regardless of ”whether one is married or single, 16 or 35 or 80, gay, bisexual or straight.”
The current article, written by a divorced, female United Methodist elder, takes issue with language in the United Methodist Book of Discipline that states that a failure to remain “celibate in singleness” is a “chargeable offense” for UM clergy (¶2702.1). The writer, who is not identified by GBCS, asserts that the exchanging of covenant wedding vows is not necessarily “a dividing line between moral and immoral” sexual relations.
[The] demand for celibacy [on the part of] an unmarried clergyperson leaves little room for the heart’s search to find a home in our human world.
We are extraordinarily confused by years of theological tradition and imaginative biblical reflections on: the “perpetual” virginity of Mary; a supposedly celibate Jesus; …and effusively generous women errantly assumed to be asking for forgiveness from some sexual sin….
Yet, I can’t look at this great creation of such deep, creative erotica as found in an orchid, the mossy green of the deep forest…a passion of a thunderstorm, a hill of daffodils…the rich textures of rock and sand or the…sun setting across the city in the evening announcing a coming nighttime of dreams without wondering what if… [final ellipsis in original]
I cannot look at this great creation without wondering where we might find ourselves if we insisted that rather than “just say no,” we explored what expressions of rich, loving, abundant, heart-filled, kind, honest, truly mutual, vulnerable human sexuality might look like.
Though our delusions are rich, I think we all know that a wedding and its exchanged promises are not the dividing line between moral and immoral sex…. To label true expressions of intimate, sexual love of our unmarried ethical leaders as innately “immoral” seems a bit off….
What if within this context of the 21st century, we focused on the way that good sex, within a trusted relationship, is mutually healing, mutually humbling, touching, mutually vulnerable, connected to God’s deep and powerful mysterious grace?…
What if we determined that our sexual expressions of this love is [sic] part of God’s creative, wild, abundant abandon, and part of a “for God so loved this fecund, creative, wildly [sic], passionate, colorful, diverse, energy-filled world.”
Imagine a Church that talked like this…. Imagine a Church without the attitude that a wedding or a hymen is the dividing line between moral and immoral….
Imagine how many of those things that everyone is afraid of — embodied in a fearsome rule such as that in Discipline ¶2702.1 — would dissolve as we began to truly govern ourselves knowing when “moral sex” is ready to be manifested with a partner and when it is not.
In an “editor’s note” preceding the article, Faith in Action editor Wayne Rhodes noted that the author of the column requested “that it be printed anonymously due to the strong opinions expressed and the nature of the Disciplinary strictures on her role as an ordained elder in The United Methodist Church.”
∞
Responding to the article via a letter to the editor, North Georgia Conference layman Mark Smith criticized the General Board of Church and Society for acting as “a willing conduit for unbiblical, nontraditional and unwise views on sexuality.” By publishing such a piece, “GBCS continues to be a lightning rod for denominational division,” he wrote.
Mr. Smith also characterized the writer of the column as demonstrating “narcissistic myopia in supposing that she’s presenting a new, more positive perspective on sexuality.”
What her article [advocates] — libertine sexual practices, and among unwed Methodist clergy, no less — is exactly what Jesus warned against and is exactly what the ancient Israelites were told by God to resist…. And it is precisely what has wreaked untold havoc on our own society — the major victims being women and children — since the sexual revolution of the 1960s….
We don’t lessen sin by supposing it to be something else or by using creative language to explain it away. That’s what children do. We are supposed to aspire to spiritual maturity.
The Rev. Jim McConnell Another letter to the editor, from the Rev. Jim McConnell, a retired clergy member of the Texas Annual Conference, argued that the Book of Discipline’s moral guidelines for UM clergy, including those governing appropriate sexual behavior, are “important and necessary standards for clergy and models and guides for lay persons.”
He said such standards reinforce key “biblical and traditional values of restraint, boundaries and covenant.”
[Restraint] is at least in part an expression of love because it denies self for the sake of another….
Boundaries protect the vulnerable. They also help keep those of us in positions of power or authority from inappropriate behavior that would injure others or ourselves….
Covenant expresses caring, dependability, and faithfulness…. God has repeatedly covenanted with God’s people and said something like: “You can count on me and I am counting on you!” The marriage relationship is described as a covenant and I believe expresses the same kind of thing. A husband or wife says, “You can count on me and I am counting on you!”
∞
In launching the “Sex and the Church” series last year, Bishop Deborah Kiesey (Dakotas Conference), president of the General Board of Church and Society, and Jim Winkler, the board’s chief executive, issued a joint statement saying the series would “help provide needed education to our children and ourselves.”
The “Sex and the Church” series is overseen by Linda Bales Todd, director of the Louise and Hugh Moore Population Project at the General Board of Church and Society.
∞
Paragraph 2702.1 of the United Methodist Book of Discipline reads as follows:
A bishop, clergy member of an annual conference, local pastor, clergy on honorable or administrative location, or diaconal minister may be tried when charged (subject to the statute of limitations in ¶2702.4) with one or more of the following offenses: (a) immorality including but not limited to, not being celibate in singleness or not faithful in a heterosexual marriage; (b) practices declared by The United Methodist Church to be incompatible with Christian teachings, including but not limited to: being a self-avowed practicing homosexual; or conducting ceremonies which celebrate homosexual unions; or performing same-sex wedding ceremonies; (c) crime; (d) failure to perform the work of the ministry; (e) disobedience to the Order and Discipline of The United Methodist Church; (f) dissemination of doctrines contrary to the established standards of doctrine of The United Methodist Church; (g) relationships and/or behavior that undermine[s] the ministry of another pastor; (h) child abuse; (i) sexual abuse; (j) sexual misconduct or (k) harassment, including, but not limited to racial and/or sexual harassment; or (l) racial or gender discrimination.
After further reading of the article I am left wondering what part of “THOU SHALT NOT” does this person not understand?
Yeah - who would wan’t to imitate the celibate life of Jesus, anyway!
In the Bible Jesus forbids divorce and remarriage unless you are protestant. Henry VII inserted an addendum to Matthew. They are given complete sexual license.
You know xzins.. there are a few Pastors like you in the old mainline churches..people cling to them and hope they never retire..
For the most part UM,Pcusa,UCC have become Christian in name only.. they are more interested in social action replacing the gospel .
We see something similar in the seeker friendly evangelical churches going the political or new age direction ...
We are closing in on the return of Christ ....the birds have nested in the mustard tree, the leaven of false teaching is growing the church.. soon ..very soon we will see the King
I’m close to hanging it up, RnMom. Some recent stuff here in our own UMC area has me depressed beyond measure. I’m doubting that I can in good faith trust children’s spiritual training to anyone outside our own county.
Our district superintendent, opposed to some recent goings-on, quoted a statistic from Barna that says that 91% of our youth today see no problem with same-sex marriage. He said that many evangelical churches are aligning with that. I assume it’s for “seeker friendly” reasons.
I have delivered some hard sermons on the subject this past month. I intend to write an article for local/regional papers broadcasting this error on the part of the denomination.
Popularity won’t follow.
You know I've never bought into the idea of women having senior pastoral roles in churches. If that makes me a sexist, then I can live with that. But it seems to me that having women pastors is just a small step on the road to apostasy. A literal reading of Paul's epistles clearly states that this is an error. However if you use a "liberal" interpretation on this subject, I guess you can allow for it. But when you allow for liberal interpretations of what appears to be the plain text of scripture, you eventually lead yourself to liberal interpretations of what is and is not sin and what is or is not holy.
I don't think Whitefield had a female clergy in mind when he started the Methodist Church. I think that if you trace the history of that movement, you will find that it corresponds to the whole social gospel movement that is destroying our churches and turning them into dens of depravity.
I have NEVER agreed with the "seeker friendly" approach and it has nothing to do with being a Catholic (truth be told, there are plenty of "cafeteria Catholics" who take the same approach).
When our Lord called the Disciples, He called them, He didn't negotiate with them, He called and they dropped what they were doing to follow Him.
After the Ascension, the Apostles had one difference AMONG THEMSELVES over circumcision, but they NEVER watered-down the Gospel. People became Christians knowing exactly what it meant, there was nothing to negotiate. Christ said that the gate is NARROW, it's open to EVERYONE, but it's still narrow.
EXACTLY
EXACTLY
Truth is truth...Jesus told us this would happen ...and blessed are you
**************************
Why have a church at all?
Or then can get an "annulment"from the Catholic church ...same thing except the church gets money
Why don’t they just fess up and admit that their god is Satan.
As I recounted here at FR my UMC pretty much kicked me out for raising some uncomfortable questions for our two pagan “pastors” (two left wing racialist political agitators) about the GBCS role on taking the lead in sending Elian Gonzalez back to slavery. GBCS was the bag man for hiring “Elian’s father’s lawyers” and footed most of the bill.
Ever since I have referred to the entity as the United Marxidist Church and a full fledged member of the liturgical wing of Comintern. Nothing I have seen since leads me to reconsider those conclusions. There is no idea too left wing for the GBCS to embrace.
I know that some of the congregants are Christians, fewer of the clergy, and virtually none above the DS level.
I’m a refugee as well. It took me years of mourning to get over what happened to the Methodist church of my youth. Finally, I found a Traditional Anglican church. We are using the same liturgy that we used in the Methodist Episcopal church of long ago, before the mergers and “modernization” — as if you could improve upon the Bible. Christ’s words were prophecies of what is to come IF we can establish His Kingdom on earth, and clearly, that has not happened yet! The Bible is just as relevant today as ever.
Keep it up, xzins!!! There is no component of liberty more fundamental than the legitimate married family.
I can't post an audiofile of this one, but I would like to direct anyone interested in listening to a good sermon on traditional marriage to click here, then scroll down to "Issues to be addressed for the Church to see revival", and click on the link labeled "Marriage."
"It is for procreation, yes; but also procreation under a Covenant with God. Children are the hope of society...."
Ping
Baptist ping
In our Diocese there is no fee for the tribunal. I asked a pastor maybe 10 years ago and he said he had worked to end the charging of a fee precisely because of complaints like yours. Now it is funded out of the Diocesan budget/cathedraticum, etc.
I’m so naive: I read the headline and thought the offishul person was saying that all young ministers should get married. That was shocking enough.
But hey, sleeping around .... parTAY!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.