Bishop Coyner faults Western Jurisdiction for gay rights stand

Bishop Mike Coyner

Indiana Area Bishop Michael J. Coyner on Oct. 15 published his criticisms of the Western Jurisdiction’s stand against the United Methodist Church’s teaching on homosexuality.Delegates to the Western Jurisdiction’s meeting July 18-21 adopted a “Statement of Gospel Obedience” that says the denomination is in error in its stance that the practice of homosexuality “is incompatible with Christian teaching.” The jurisdiction’s statement also urged United Methodists to operate as if that stance in Paragraph 161F of the Book of Discipline, the denomination’s law book, “does not exist, creating a church where all people are truly welcome.”

In his Oct. 15 E-pistle to the Indiana Conference, Bishop Coyner faulted the Western Jurisdiction’s actions in three ways.

He said the statement:

• Comes across as a kind of “neo-colonialism,” distrusting the actions of the global church’s General Conference, which increasingly includes delegates from outside the United States, particularly Africa.

• Is a “very poor substitute for the honorable practice of civil disobedience as expressed clearly by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.”

• Does not “offer the church any way forward on this difficult issue.”

“What if the Western Jurisdiction, which has a proud history of diversity, tolerance, and openness to new models of ministry, had offered some suggestions for our United Methodist Church to move forward on this issue?” Bishop Coyner wrote. “Instead, the actions and statements of the Western Jurisdiction seem to conclude that ‘we are right and everyone else is wrong.’”

WJ bishops responds

Los Angeles Area Bishop Minerva Carcaño, who leads the California-Pacific Conference, and Phoenix Area Bishop Robert Hoshibata, who leads the Desert Southwest Conference, took issue with Bishop Coyner’s appraisal of their jurisdiction’s statement.

“There is a rather large jump from the statement agreed upon at the WJ Conference and neo-colonialism,” Bishop Carcaño said. “Neo-colonialism is a complex socio-economic, political and historical reality that in my opinion is not appropriately used in this situation. It does, however, add gravitas to Bishop Coyner’s statement and elevates a church situation to a level it does not deserve. It does, though, add to the barriers that we continue to erect among ourselves that do not allow us to have the conversation we need to have about not only this issue, but a number of other issues pertaining to the social, moral and ethical fiber of our church and our witness to the world, or lack thereof.”

She added that delegates from the Western Jurisdiction have been seeking change to the denomination’s stance on homosexuality long before the increase in African delegates that was apparent at the 2012 General Conference in Tampa, Fla.

“What I read in the jurisdiction’s statement is not that we know better than everybody else but that we know differently,” Bishop Hoshibata said. “What we taught centuries ago and called it the Gospel of Jesus Christ has changed with the world and with culture.”

The bishops also said the Western Jurisdiction stands in the tradition of King’s practice of civil disobedience during the U.S. civil rights movement.

“Whenever there is any injustice — an injustice against one person, one group or one community — I think those are opportunities to speak out and share our thoughts and our concerns,” Bishop Hoshibata said. “It’s also an opportunity for us to demonstrate what we feel Christ has called us to do when he calls us to justice. This is precisely the Christ-like response I think Martin Luther King would have been supportive of.”

Bishop Carcaño said the Western Jurisdiction “stands in the tradition of Dr. King’s practice of civil disobedience.” She said United Methodists in the jurisdiction have been in prayerful reflection on the matter of inclusivity for a long time.

“It is our collective conclusion that God leads us in a different direction and that we can longer remain silent,” she said.

“We are aware of the disciplinary consequences and believe that faithfulness to God is more important than staying in the ranks and file of the church and continuing to do what we United Methodists have done for too long. We have spoken and lived in contradictory ways; we have said that persons of homosexual orientation are of sacred worth but not worthy of fully being a part of the church.”

United Methodist News Service also sent emails to other bishops in the Western Jurisdiction. Most are traveling this week, and they did not immediately respond.

The Western Jurisdiction encompasses Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, Guam and other U.S. territory in the Pacific Ocean.

Hope for conversation

At the beginning of his response to the Western Jurisdiction, Bishop Coyner stressed that he was writing only his personal opinion as a bishop. He noted that his comments do not reflect the official position of the Indiana Conference, the North Central Jurisdiction or the Council of Bishops.

“Lots of people here in Indiana have been asking me for my personal response, and so rather than having thousands of conversations, it seemed easier to send out one statement for anyone to read who is interested,” he told UMNS.

He added that he hoped his response would “encourage further conversation” among United Methodists.

Bishop Coyner described himself as a member of the “great middle” of the United Methodist Church where he believes many church members find themselves.

“Right now, it feels like people are ‘talking past one another’ rather than having conversations with one another,” he said.

Divisions at GC 2012

The Western Jurisdiction’s actions followed the defeat at General Conference, the denomination’s top-lawmaking body, of a proposal to say the church was in disagreement about homosexuality.

During General Conference, bishops take turns presiding during the plenary sessions, and Bishop Coyner was presiding at the morning session May 3 when delegates rejected proposals to change the denomination’s stance on homosexuality.

After those petitions failed, dozens of protesters gathered on the plenary floor after the break, singing “What Does the Lord Require of You?” Bishop Coyner asked the demonstrators to stop, and when they did not, he recessed the session for an early lunch. “I think you’re actually hurting your point,” he told the group.

The protesters stayed on the plenary floor through the lunch break, and representatives from the Council of Bishops negotiated with leaders of the demonstration and found a solution to the impasse. Germany’s Bishop Rosemarie Wenner, then the new president of the Council of Bishops, opened the session with a statement crafted by the bishops. The Rev. Frank Wulf, a California-Pacific Conference delegate, prayed. And the demonstrators left the floor peacefully.

“That particular protest moved toward being unhelpful when they disrupted times of worship and when their protest came without any advance discussion of their goals,” Bishop Coyner told UMNS on Oct. 15. “Having the General Conference go into recess allowed various leaders of the groups and General Conference leaders to work out a resolution—which I believe was appropriate and fair.”

A way forward?

In his E-pistle, Bishop Coyner suggested that General Conference might one day modify its various statements on human sexuality “first to affirm Christians of good will are in disagreement on these issues, and second to adopt a more moderate and holistic approach to these issues.”

However, he said, such changes should come with “prayer, theological reflection, humility, listening to God and listening to one another.”

The Western Jurisdiction, he said, was not providing a helpful way forward.

Bishop Carcaño disputed Bishop Coyner’s assertion that the jurisdiction’s statement does not provide a way for the denomination to move into the future.

“The statement says that in the West we will live with integrity what we have said as United Methodists—that we are all of sacred worth and all welcomed,” she said. ”We recognize that the WJ statement puts the WJ in tension with other parts of the church. Perhaps this tension will be just what we need to lead the entire denomination to a better place. I am hoping that it will help us create the kind of Christian conferencing we need to be having on all matters important to God; a holy and disciplined conversation that does not wait for General Conference, but that is a daily exercise in our efforts to be faithful to God. For the opportunity to reflect on this matter, I am grateful to Bishop Coyner.”

Bishop Coyner also took issue with those who see the Western Jurisdiction’s actions as a prelude to a schism in the United Methodist Church.

“Perhaps, I have been overly optimistic or hopeful,” he said. “But I do not believe our United Methodist Church will split. To me, it would be a sad commentary about our inability to ‘conference together’ if we allow an issue like sexuality to split us.”

Bishop Wenner, the Council of Bishops president, said Bishop Coyner’s statement “indicates that we need to engage in holy conversation on the question of human sexuality—not only at General Conference, but throughout the quadrennium.”

She said the Council of Bishops takes a lead on this.

“We meet as colleagues from all regions of the church, and we hopefully will model that we are united in Christ and in responding to the call to make disciples even in our diversity.”

The Council of Bishops will meet Nov. 4-9 for the first time with its new members.

Join the conversation....

  1. methodistpie says:

    Bishop Carcano says she is aware of the "disciplinary consequences" of the WJ bishops' stand. What might those be?
    I do believe the rest of us have a right to know, as we are contributing to her salary.

    • jdabbottjr says:

      Bishop Carcano is aware that there are really no disciplinary consequences since none are ever taken. No one will bring charges and if they did they would quickly be dismissed and the person bringing the charges would be planting a church in outer Mongolia.

  2. gingerlouise says:

    Bishop Conyer,

    While I was not at General Conference, from the blogs, website and other available information, I understand that the holy conferencing attempts that were made left many people feeling marginalized, left out and attacked. I also saw that there was an attempt by LGBT supporters to change the wording in the Social Principles to read that we, as a whole, agree to disagree about the church's stance on homosexuality. This, as so many other things failed at this General Conference.
    Let me tell you why I agree with the Western Jurisdiction. I was raised in the Methodist Church in a rural setting. I was taught by my Methodist family that I am a child of a God who knew me before birth and knows every hair on my head, and loves me unconditionally. I have grown to love that the Wesleyan Quadrilateral allows us to think for ourselves, taking into account tradition, scripture, reason and experience. We do not have to agree with everything the church says, unlike some other denominations teach. I have taught the next generations that same concept through confirmation class, VBS, Sunday School, Bible Studies and messages I have delivered during Sunday Morning Worship Services.
    When I was 18, I felt a very strong call to go towards ordained ministry. I finally accepted baptism into the United Methodist Church prior to going to college. I let it be known I have felt this call. Days after I realized and verbalized this call, I realized I am bisexual. I finally understood WHY and HOW I had felt different from other kids my age. I immediately buried this information and did not share this with anyone – family, friend and definitely not church. If I did, I would have been more ostracized where I lived – not straight not normal or safe was the prevalent feeling in that area; and my local congregation would not have supported my desire to be a pastor. They weren't quite sure what to do with a woman who wanted to go into ministry as it was, much less someone who is bisexual or homosexual.
    For years I prayed that I would fall in love with a man. It would make things so much easier. I prayed to be straight so our denomination would embrace me fully and not question my ability based on something I couldn't control. I finally stopped asking God to send me a man to make me appear "normal". I started praying for anyone. Someone. But nothing. Then after 21 years, I met a woman, one I cannot have because she is straight, married and it would have been an inappropriate relationship due to her position of authority over me even if she was available to me. But none the less, I developed a major crush on her. I wanted to make her happy, smile, and support her however I could. The more I interacted with her the more I realized, I had to come out. My eyes were lingering too long. I would space out whenever she was around. Do not covet thy neighbor's wife comes to mind. I lusted in my heart. I came out to my church first because I was more afraid of their reaction than that of my family. Fortunately for me, they accepted me and still affirm my call to ministry.
    Almost 2 years later. I am happier than I have ever been. And sadder. I feel free – like the images that the story of Lazarus conjure up upon his coming back to life. Freedom. Acknowledgment. Grace. And still a sense of isolation. I have had no real role models to mirror and see how someone who is LGBT functions in a ministry or church setting. Just straight people or people so far in the closet they will avoid me because of the same fear I had – guilt by association. Like so many people, I am looking for acceptance, for someone to grow old with, being treated as an equal. Treated as someone who really has learned the lessons of Christ – love thy neighbor, walk humbly with thy God, act justly, and love mercy. So many of the same teachings I heard growing up, that are not offered. I still desire to be a Methodist Minister. I want to share the shear joy of being able to offer someone Communion – the body of my Lord and Savior with others. But because so many people assume bisexual means homosexual, I may never be given the opportunity to serve as a Methodist Minister unless someone else is willing to walk this path of civil disobedience with me.
    The Western Jurisdiction decision to live the faith and belief of Jesus' love to all people is a call to come out come out wherever you are, to be loved as the only you that you can be. We are aware that there are still countries where homosexuality and bisexuality are outlawed. My self preservation when I lived in rural, conservative Oregon was to stay in or face consequences that I was too afraid to deal with. We stay in the closet because we don't feel or are not safe where we are. The Western Jurisdiction is saying that for our areas, we are safe, we are ready to fly the Rainbow Flag. If your congregation is not ready, if you are not ready, fine. Many of us are more then ready. It is time for those of us who are tired of being at the back of the bus, to follow the example of Ms. Parks when she sat at the front of the bus. To say I am United Methodist. I am bisexual. I am God's child and am here to stay. Do not ignore my voice.

  3. jdabbottjr says:

    Some of us United Methodists honestly have no idea how holy conferencing works when one side believes in the authority of Scripture and the other side does not.

    • virginiad says:

      No kidding. I honestly have no idea how holy conferencing works when one side can't even understand that the Scriptures are authoritative in their instruction for women to be silent in the church. How can we be expected to allow people who don't accept Scripture as authoritative on that matter to influence us in holy conferencing? It's a slippery slope. The next thing you know, those same people who reject the authority of Scripture on that matter will be suggesting we shouldn't tell those who are being trafficked into sex slavery in the United States to remain obedient to their masters.

  4. virginiad says:

    What Bishop Coyner fails to realize is that the church has already split. Because of straight people's desire to not make waves or call into question their power to claim the name "United," the split wasn't named and those of us you split off from will be forgotten instead of recorded in history. When you pushed people like me out of the church over time, you didn't call it a "split" even though the church absolutely had split. At least if it was a big public split, I would be seen and recognized and there could be mourning and perhaps later reconciliation, and others like me could be together and have one another for Christian support. Instead, you have WILLFULLY CHOSEN to allow a slow trickling split in which the straight people get to pretend they still belong to the United Methodist Church and no split occurred. All the while gay United Methodist children, myself included, are pushed out quietly, unrecognized, never to be remembered by history, but forever changing the UMC. Your UMC is no longer the UMC, because you kicked us out, so it is not the same church as it was before the split. Stop advocating patience. We are dying out here as you break your baptismal covenant with us. You are KILLING US, and the more you advocate slow patient change, the more you will be held accountable for the death of each and every one of us. And the more you will be guilty of surreptitiously splitting the UMC in such a way as to erase us from its identity and history (instead of risking a more formal split that might at least name us and claim the loss of us as a tragedy and humbly acknowledge that you are no longer the same UMC), all while claiming some moral high ground of having "avoided a split." So glad to know you'd rather protect your "United" Methodist image than acknowledge that you already cruelly, violently split me off from the church of my heritage because of your unwillingness to see and treat me as God does.

  5. Observando desde el banco:
    Esta es la Iglesia Metodista Unida?
    Hmm …..

    Watching from the pew:
    This is the United Methodist Church?
    Hmm…..

  6. melvinwoodworth says:

    I watched as the General Conference affirmed all persons as being of sacred worth and the practice of homosexuality as incompatible with Christian Teaching. I tried to initiate dialogue on the subject with Albert Outler who wrote me, "…as for what passes for Christianity in the West we [his wife and him] have decided we can take it or leave it and we have decided to leave it."
    For decades I prayed for equitable representation of the UM Church in the third world and found it a reality only as a tool to prolong subjugation of sexual minority persons in the US.
    For forty years we who have experienced the grace of God in our LGBTQI friends, seen the spiritual fruit born by our gay colleagues, and marveled at the bonds of affection among same sex couples have proposed suggestions for the church to move forward. The bishop suggests that we might have invited the church into a period of discernment. We have done that and been given offers of dialogue in which those who oppose us have then refused to engage. We have experienced “holy conferencing” as mean spirited attacks on us and our friends. Our denomination has even refused to admit that there is a dissenting voice on this issue. We are rendered invisible and then blamed for the failure to communicate!
    I have no time for civil or ecclesiastical disobedience. I have no desire to break any law, but I am compelled to practice scriptural obedience and to love others as my savior has loved me. I have honored the ordination of my LGBT colleagues, solemnized the marriages of same sex couples, and in the best tradition of Martin Luther King Jr. have been daily ready to face the consequences of my actions. It has been years since I officiated at my first ceremony of Holy Matrimony for a same sex couple, and only weeks since the last. If the the General Church does not believe that we are not of one mind, then the General Church must certainly affirm my actions. If they are not of one mind with me they should have the honesty to proclaim it aloud and enter into reasoned dialogue rather than serving up verbal abuse.
    I am not better than other United Methodists, perhaps worse than most, but God's beloved children will not be refused. Do not be surprised that we, too,are taking our seats at the table of our Lord.

  7. At the heart of the so-called “Gay Gospel”, or “Gay Theology”, is the claim that the Bible does not condemn homosexual acts that occur within the context of loving, committed, enduring homosexual relationships. This, despite the fact that the Bible does appear to condemn all homosexual acts and that the Christian church has steadfastly held this position since Jesus Christ established His church almost 2,000 years ago. In effect, what gay theology is asking, rhetorically, is, “Did God really say that sex within the context of loving, committed, long-term homosexual relationships is wrong?” If the phrase “Did God really say…” sounds familiar to you, it is probably because that is exactly what Satan said to Eve in the Garden of Eden when he was trying to get her to commit the first sin: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” (Genesis 3:1). And that is exactly what is happening in the Christian church today, in the form of gay theology. Satan is using gay theology to get Christians who are homosexual to continue to practice homosexuality and feel good about it, rather than repent of it. See more at http://rethinkingtheology.com/welcome-to-re-think

  8. Jesus would befriend homosexual people (cf. Matthew 9:10; Luke 7:34) and treat them with kindness and respect, without approving of their homosexual behavior; Jesus came preaching repentance from sin, not acceptance of sin (Matthew 4:17; Mark 1:15; Luke 5:32), and He was still calling for repentance after his ascension into heaven (Revelation 2, 3). Jesus did not come to save us in our sins, but to save us from our sins. Jesus said to the woman caught in the heterosexual sin called ”adultery”, “Go now and leave your life of sin.” (John 8:11). Jesus gave up His own life to pay the price for homosexual sins; that’s how much He hates homosexual sins and loves homosexual people (Romans 5:8). Jesus would further demonstrate His love for homosexual people by encouraging them to believe in Him and be saved (John 3:16), and to repent of (turn away from) their homosexual sins. Furthermore, He would change them “in the name (literally, the power and authority) of the Lord Jesus Christ”, just as His Corinthian disciples (His representatives) did after Him (I Corinthians 6:11). This is the kind of love Jesus has for homosexual and heterosexual people alike. The Bible also has this to say about love: “Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.” (Romans 12:9); and “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.” (1 Corinthians 13:6). This, too, is the love of Christ for all of us, including homosexual people. See more at http://rethinkingtheology.com/welcome-to-re-think

  9. I am so saddened by this. This is just like our current government… do things through a back door way to advance a progressive agenda. Once this benefit is given it will be incredibly hard to take away. I just don't understand why we would help people continue to do something that we as a church agree is a sin. It would be like saying to a white collar criminal, we know that you sin in the way you steal from people, but we'll give you $1,000 so you can buy what you need to do it. That would just be crazy. The same is true here. There is no way Jesus would do this. He absolutely would love them, but he would say go and sin no more — and then this no longer is an issue. And I just don't buy the arguement that we are doing this because we know that the government will make us some day. First off, why don't we cross that bridge when it happens. Secondly, why don't we fight it. The Amish are very successful in not having to follow federal laws that are against their religion. Why are they so much stronger than we are. If this does in fact happen, none of my tithe and offerings will go to the United Methodist church. This is just wrong and I will not be a part of it. I don't want to be like all the kings in the bible that were complacent or participated in or encouraged sin. I would rather be like the remnant.

Your thoughts?

applications-education-miscellaneous.png
The United Methodist Reporter wants to encourage lively conversation about The United Methodist Church and our articles in the belief that Christian conversation (what Wesley would call conferencing) is a means of grace. While we support passionate debate, we cannot allow language that demeans or demonizes others, and we reserve the right to delete any comment we believe to be harmful or inappropriate. We encourage all to remember that we are all broken and in need of Christ's grace, and that we all see through the glass darkly until that time we when reach full perfection in love. May your speech here be tempered with love, and reflection of the fruits of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. After all, "There is no law against things like this." (Galatians 5:22-23)
 

*

Google+
%d bloggers like this: