Release #048 {2912} April 24, 1996
DENVER (UMNS) -- An attempt to soften the United Methodist Church's 24-year-old proscription against homosexual practice was defeated April 24 by a 378-577 vote of the 1996 General Conference.
Delegates to the denomination's top legislative assembly rejected a proposal to change the assertion that homosexuality is "incompatible with Christian teaching" with the acknowledgment that United Methodists are "unable to arrive at a common mind" on the subject.
The defeated proposal is almost identical to one at the 1992 General Conference. During that session, a four-year study committee also asked delegates to add the "not of a common mind" phrase, but that proposal failed.
With the April 24 action, the current language in The Book of Discipline (church law) stands. That clause reads in part: "Although we do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching, we affirm that God's grace is available to all."
The incompatibility clause first entered the church's lexicon at the 1972 General Conference.
During the impassioned, 90-minute debate on the subject, supporters of the failed proposed change called the church to "humility." The Rev. Merlin Ackerson, who presented the proposal said, "Some of us think that homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching; others think it is acceptable in covenantal relationship. This is who we are."
He urged delegates to accept the Church and Society committee's recommendation to adopt language that would admit that ambiguity.
"This statement will help to eliminate and lessen condemnation and adversarial relationship and ... will prevent people from using what the church says as a reason for discrimination and violence against homosexuality."
However, the Rev. David Seamands, a retired seminary professor from Nokomis, Fla., -- presenting a "minority" report that called for retention of the "incompatibility" clause -- said changing the language would be a rejection of "a basic, bottom-line, biblical stance." He also claimed that to condone homosexual practice would be to "reject the biblical standards for all sexual behavior," including that for heterosexuals.
"The biblical standard (condemning homosexual practice) is objective and unambiguous," said Seamands. "It defines intercourse as acceptable only in heterosexual, monogamous relationships."
Along with Seamands, delegates opposing the change cited biblical prohibitions from the Old Testament. The Rev. Mpanga Ngeleka of Zaire, citing Leviticus 18:22, said, "We cannot be divided on the issue of homosexuality. Just as we help people who use drugs and alcohol, we can try to help heal homosexuals, but the Bible is clear: it is wrong."
During the debate, several attempts were made to strengthen the majority report (to include the "not of a common mind" phrase) or soften the minority report (to retain the "incompatibility" language). The Rev. Duane V. Sarazin, Minneapolis, suggested an amendment that read, "Although the majority of United Methodists do not condone the practice of homosexuality, we ... are unable to arrive at a common mind ... "
But laywoman Nancy Duel of Arlington Heights, Ill., rejected the idea of "saying which side is the majority and which is the minority." Such language "defeats the purpose" of claiming a spirit of humility and reconciliation, she said.
Ackerson added that Jesus himself never spoke on homosexuality in the Bible, but called the church to preach God's grace.
"When I'm confused about what the Bible might say, I seek the spirit of Christ, and Christ motivates us to accept all persons for whom he died. Christ loved and embraced all people," he added during a later press conference. "The church shoul do no less."
Delegates will consider other legislation related to homosexuality later during the conference, including a proposal to augment the ban on ordaining "self-avowed practicing homosexuals.<\P>
-- M. Garlinda Burton
If you want to know how to get more information about this story, call InfoServ at 1-800/251-8140.