UNITED METHODIST GENERAL CONFERENCE

UNITED METHODIST GENERAL CONFERENCE

April 26 – May 7, 2004

David Lawrence Convention Center

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Media Placement Desk

PRESS ROOM

Contact: Shirley Whipple Struchen

Bryan Hooper

Nancye Willis

May 1, 2004 Contact: Nancye Willis
(412) 325-6081

(615) 268-8754

United Methodist Body Asks for Re-examination of Dammann Acquittal;

Judicial Council Declares Practice of Homosexuality ‘Chargeable Offense’

PITTSBURGH— The United Methodist Church’s top legislative body, meeting in Pittsburgh April 27-May 7, has directed the denomination’s highest judicial body to re-examine the March acquittal of an openly lesbian pastor, and to determine if a bishop can legally appoint a self-avowed practicing homosexual.

The Judicial Council ruled, by a 6-3 margin, that the practice of homosexuality is a chargeable offense under terms of the denomination’s Book of Discipline. Immediately after the April 29 ruling was read May 1, a motion from the floor asked that the council determine the “meaning, application and effect” the decision would have on the outcome of the trial of the Rev. Karen Dammann, a Seattle-area pastor acquitted in March of a charge of “practices incompatible with Christian teaching.”

The council decided that Paragraph 304.3 of the book of church law, which states, “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching,” constitutes a pronouncement of General Conference, the denomination’s top legislative body.

The council will continue to meet during General Conference and respond to requests from the legislative assembly as they arise.

# # #

NOTE: The full text of the Judicial Council decision, subject to final editing and correction, follows.

DECISION NO. 984

IN RE: Declaratory Decision Regarding the Meaning, Application or Effect of ¶¶ 304.3 and 2702.1(b) of the 2000 Discipline.

DIGEST

Paragraph 304.3 of the 2000 Discipline is a declaration of the General Conference of The United Methodist Church that “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.” The practice of homosexuality is a chargeable offense under ¶ 2702.1(b) of the 2000 Discipline.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

On motion of a delegate from the Arkansas Annual Conference, the 2004 General Conference requested a declaratory decision from the Judicial Council on the following questions:

1. Does the statement in ¶ 304.3 [of the 2000 Discipline] constitute a declaration by The United Methodist Church that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching?

2. If the answer to 1) is yes, does ¶ 2702.1(b) [of the 2000 Discipline], “practices declared by The United Methodist Church to be incompatible with Christian teachings,” incorporate that declaration into United Methodist Church law by reference?

Jurisdiction

The Judicial Council has jurisdiction under ¶ 2610 of the 2000 Discipline.

Analysis and Rationale

Paragraph 304.3 of the 2000 Discipline provides that:

While persons set apart by the Church for ordained ministry are subject to all the frailties of the human condition and the pressures of society, they are required to maintain the highest standards of holy living in the world. Since the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching, self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be accepted as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church.

As stated in Decision 886, the Discipline is “the law of the Church which regulates every phase of the life and work of the Church.” Paragraph 304.3 is unambiguous in its assertion that “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.”

Though the statement, “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching,” is preceded by the word “since,” the inclusion of the word “since” as a conjunction introducing the phrase does not diminish the import of the statement which follows the conjunction. Quite the contrary, its usage connotes an emphatic declaration. Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (Micra, Inc., 1996, 1998) defines “since” as meaning “seeing that, because, considering – formerly followed by that.”

A “declaration” is defined as “the act of publicly announcing; explicit asserting; . . . proclamation. . . .” Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (Micra, Inc., 1996, 1998). In every sense of the word “declaration,” the statement contained in ¶ 304.3 that the “practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching” is a public announcement, an explicit assertion and a proclamation. Paragraph 304.3 has been a declaration of The United Methodist Church, without modification, since it was originally added to the Discipline by the 1984 General Conference as ¶ 402.2 of the 1984 Discipline. See Decision 544.

Only the General Conference has the authority to speak for The United Methodist Church. Paragraph 509 of the Discipline states, “[n]o person, no paper, no organization, has the authority to speak officially for The United Methodist Church, this right having been reserved exclusively to the General Conference under the Constitution.”

In Decision 980, the Judicial Council stated that the The United Methodist Church, in the Discipline, has declared the practice of homosexuality to be incompatible with Christian teaching. We reaffirm our previous decision in this regard and hold that the statement in ¶ 304.3 that “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching” is a declaration by The United Methodist Church.

Paragraph 2702.1 of the 2000 Discipline provides:

A bishop, clergy member of an annual conference (¶ 365), local pastor, clergy on honorable or administrative location, or diaconal minister may choose a trial when charged (subject to the statute of limitations in ¶ 2702.4) with one or more of the following offenses: . . . (b) practices declared by The United Methodist Church to be incompatible with Christian teachings. . . .

The language contained in ¶ 2702.1(b) was first enacted by the 1980 General Conference, four years before the language contained in ¶ 304.3 was adopted. As noted above, the only entity which can make a declaration on behalf of The United Methodist Church is the General Conference. When the General Conference enacts legislation which is codified in the Discipline, the General Conference speaks for The United Methodist Church. See Decision 886 (“The Discipline is the law of the Church which regulates every phase of the life and work of the Church.”). When the language contained in ¶ 304.3 was adopted in 1984, the language contained in ¶ 2702.1(b) was in existence.

In determining what constitutes a chargeable offense under ¶ 2702.1(b) of the Discipline, one must look to the pronouncements of the General Conference codified in the Discipline. The statement in Paragraph 304.3 that “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching” is such a pronouncement. Therefore, the practice of homosexuality is a chargeable offense under ¶ 2702.1(b) as a practice declared by The United Methodist Church to be incompatible with Christian teachings.

Decision

April 29, 2004

DISSENT

We dissent from the majority decision. It is our opinion that the statement, the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian Teaching, does not rise to the status of church law. We contend that the statement, found under “Qualifications for Ordination” in ¶304.3, references ¶161G, Human Sexuality of the Social Principles.

The 2000 General Conference clarified the nature and meaning of the Social Principles in at least two significant ways. First, it illuminated the church’s understanding that the Social Principles are not church law. (That statement is part of the Preface to the Social Principles. The clarification was included in the Preface to the Social Principles but not printed in The 2000 Book of Discipline. It appears in the Errata Sheet of omissions and mistakes for The 2000 Discipline.)

Second, the 2000 General Conference clarified the meaning of ¶304.1 on qualifications for ordination by adding the Doctrinal Standards to the list of items enumerated in ¶304. (See the DCA of the 2000 General Conference minority report to Calendar Item 1544 which added this language to ¶304, clergy must “be accountable to the United Methodist Church, accept its doctrinal standards and discipline and authority.” The General Conference adopted this wording when Calendar item 1544 was presented to the General Conference.) The same calendar item affirmed, “the Social Principles are principles rather than law…(h)istorically the Social Principles have been a teaching document.” (The General Conference voted 467 yes and 435 no, DCA 2000 General Conference vol. 4, p. 2468).

Par. 161G, referenced by ¶304.3, does state that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. This assertion, however, does not have the force of church law. Par.304.3, standing alone, is inconclusive and does not represent a definitive declarative statement by the General Conference.

The same is true of the General Conference inclusion of the Doctrinal Standards within ¶304.1. When considering any part of ¶304 in relation to the provisions of ¶2702.1 (b), we must also consider all nine enumerated provisions of ¶304.1. Most of the nine enumerated qualifications (a-i) of ¶304.1 are not stated in language that makes a candidate accountable for specific actions, as does the provision of ¶304.3. However by inserting the Doctrinal Standards into point 1 of ¶304 it becomes possible to question a candidate about specific pronouncements within the Doctrinal Standards. Surely such questioning would be of equal importance to questions about sexual orientation.

For example, under ¶103, Article XVI of the Doctrinal Standards we have incorporated the Confession of Faith from the Evangelical United Brethren Church which is titled Civil Government. It states:

We believe war and bloodshed are contrary to the gospel and spirit of Christ. We believe it is the duty of Christian citizens to give moral strength and purpose to their respective governments through sober, righteous and godly living.

If the process for chargeable offenses is to include specific questions about actions and behaviors there is no reason to assume that one characteristic, for example sexual orientation, should be examined while others such as opposing war are not considered. That war and bloodshed are contrary to the provision falls within the applicable standards that we expect our clergy to follow under the provisions of ¶ 304.

Larry Pickens

Sally Brown Geis

DISSENT 984

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case. I do not believe that Par. 304.3 is an unequivocal declaration that homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. I must also confess that I made an error in concurring with Decision 980. More research and prayerful consideration have convinced me that I never should have concurred in saying that The United Methodist Church has made a declaration in Par. 304.3 that homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Additionally, I do not believe the Judicial Council had the right under our enumerated powers in the Discipline to tell any group of persons that they should abstain from being a member of a Committee on Investigation or a trial court pool. Any such abstention is an individual decision. The Judicial Council itself has always refused to let any person or group dictate to it when a member should abstain from taking part in a decision, indicating that such a decision was a personal one to be made by each individual.

Sally Curtis AsKew