GMC's Theology of Ordination Concerning Sexual Orientation

A recent thread on The Friends of the Global Methodist Church Facebook Page suggested to me that it might be helpful to talk about the ways in which the conversation around sexually nonconforming people is going to continue in our churches. I sense that a lot of folks do not understand how this is not going to go away, and how we need to have discerning minds, lest we make room for theologies that are at odds with our fundamental doctrines.
Link to CHRON article: www.chron.com/culture/religio...

[@lovetruthnetwork4862]

Really appreciate what you shared here, Jeffrey. I'd like to weigh in a bit on this... As one who once identitied as a gay man, was rescued by Jesus' sacrifice, love, and call to repentance, I know longer identify by my past sin. If our sexuality is a gift from God (and it is) then certainly our genuine identity is a gift from God. To then hyphenate an identity (that if acted on would be sin) to my Christian identity makes zero sense and is an extremely dangerous faultline to stand on - hoping it doesn't erupt one day. There are so many issues with embracing a false identity that is merely based upon our strong feelings of sexual/romantic attraction rather than standing in one identity alone - our identity as a redeemed son or daughter of God. There is a massive difference between a person who admits to sinful desires of a variety of sorts and a person who insists that their identity is wrapped up in those desires. As Christians we need to be far more vulnerable than we typically are (James 5:16) with our sin struggles and failures, but that is totally different than refusing to let our sinful identies go to the cross as well as our behavior. I still experience some same-sex attraction at times. It doesn't rule my life any longer. It doesn't prevent me from being a good gift to my wife (or her to me), or being a good father to my boys, or a biblical teacher/pastor, but celebrating and insisting on a trans-Christian, queer-Christian, gay-Christian, non-binary-Christian, etc... absolutely (in my opinion and experience) does get in the way of transformation and the work of sanctification. If the identity thing is no big deal and such a great idea why don't we practice it across the board? If Christian men experience sexual attraction to someone other than their wife, he should refer to himself as an adulterous-Christian or a fornicating-Christian for single guys/gals. Of course, this would be rediculous. Bottomline, within the Church we need far greater vulnerabiluty of our sin struggles and temptation so we can walk together toward real victory (public and private). But commissioning a person into church leadership who is not currently acting out in sexual sin, but is still deeply confused about their identity - with roots bound in the LGBTQ+ world - is not actually a loving thing to do with them, nor for the congregation they will be leading or helping to lead.

[@michelehart8535]

Are you saying a admiting person of LTGBQ+ but not giving into those desires should not be a candidate for Ordained leadership?

[@Zaphod771]

It appears that the history of LGBTQ pastors becoming heretics in other areas is evidence in this regard.

[@Keycity60]

Amen pastor Jeff! The GMC has been given a great gift, a blank slate upon which to found a new denomination USING WHAT WAS LEARNED FROM THE PAST! If an ordination candidate shows up and and says, “I IDENTIFY with “XYZ” sin,” that should automatically disqualify them. I believe if they had a conscience they would disqualify themselves. Name one other sin that a person could identify with/as (even though they promise not to engage in it) and expect to be ordained.

[@randykuhns4515]

the problem isn't that anyone is tempted by any sin, but that any might wish to give latitude to one temptation of sin above other sin especially that of an abomination, we are to call sin what it is, it's sin,.. and we are to Repent which is to RESIST it rather than PRACTICE it, And lastly,..we MUST NOT allow children to witness US, as grown adults giving special latitude to any sin to where they get mixed notions of whether such sin somehow ISN'T sinful,... much less an abomination,..

[@stathamcmc]

I am pastor of a disaffiliated church and we are currently remaining independent. As I look at options for the future I have gone back and forth on the GMC. I have to say this only confirms my concerns about the ability and resolve of the GMC to maintain a scriptural position on critical issues. The GMC has, in my view, imported the same hierarchical mindset that ruled and thoroughly ruined the UMC. They are showing that they are not willing to go "all in" on a Scriptural position. Already they are bowing to the spirit of the age. Why would you ordain an individual who is not only confused about their sexual identity, but they continue to hold identity with their sin? Love them, welcome them to come to church and serve, but for God's sake, don't put them in charge of the spiritual welfare of a congregation! What happens when a drag queen presents with an M.Div and wants to become a pastor? He promises to be celibate. What happens when a biological woman shows up claiming to be non-binary but says she has taken a vow of celibacy? Will the GMC council of Bishops convene and form a Celibacy Board? Sorry but I think this only confirms that the GMC is not for me or my church. I don't want to go back to Egypt.

[@user-zw2nm7zs1b]

Amen

[@Agben35]

I feel like that policy would put the GMC headed for the same issues the UMC is facing today with a good faith effort to make a path/make it possible, but then those that take that path get in, “live their truth” and subvert the new denomination from within just like the UMC leadership has done.

[@buddyroeginocchio9105]

Quite agree, if this is to be GMC thinking then they have learned nothing from their nightmare UMC experience.

[@paulcampbell7518]

I can’t believe that certain Christians think that allegiance and obedience to our God should be subordinate to our sexual drives - Especially drives that inspire conduct that has clearly been deemed sinful. We all have a choice - To hate our sin and strive to overcome it, or to give into it and expect God to submit to our selfish carnal priorities.

[@robertkersten3971]

I d agree with where you landed on this. As I see it, if you’re sexually attracted to the same sex, but realize that is condemned by Scriptures as a sin, and so, are determined to struggle against it; the then proper way is not to openly identify as such, but rather deal with this in a band meeting type of support. This brings me to another issue that, in my opinion will also affect the future growth of the GMC. If the GMC expects to fulfill it’s aspirations to truly restore the best of Methodism, then there will have to be a greater acceptance of class meetings or something similar, then what has been currently demonstrated, or else it too, will eventually falter.

[@plainspokenpod]

Absolutely. Without reclaiming small group ministry in earnest, all efforts towards holiness will fail.

[@Speachism]

Praying for you and the Methodist church.

[@kennethsanders1694]

Agreed Jeffrey. Identifying as “gay” and not practicing is like identifying as a “cat” and not practicing. People are not gay or straight. They are sinful or not sinful.

[@larryjames6138]

As someone who stands outside the Methodist Church and looks inward with love and compassion, let me offer you an objective point of view... If you accept the abomination of the desolation, you have defeated the whole purpose of the largest Church schism in the history of the United States.

[@user-lu9mf7wk7v]

Initially disagreed with Jeffrey's remarks on Side B Christianity, but upon further review I found the issue to be more nuanced than I initially thought.

[@solemntime9121]

Amen, let us always biblical.. I hope GMC will clearly stand upright with the Scripture on dealing this kind of issue.. We must stand against with that said union of the same genders.

[@buddyroeginocchio9105]

What the blazes is "gay but celibate" and how can that, whatever it is, be objectively discerned for the purpose of sanctification?

[@kellyferguson8790]

Totally agree. “Gay” is a verb meaning being homosexual is an act.

[@user-le1oh7dj5i]

Holiness 1st then evangelism

[@bernhardbauer5301]

UMC or GMC what is the difference? Christ is the cornerstone. Romans 6:6: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that we should no longer serve sin.

[@plainspokenpod]

In this case, the difference is that those who commit sexual sin will be defrocked in the GMC, whereas they will be lauded in the UMC

[@grumpy1020x]

@@plainspokenpod Defrock...and how do you think you'll do that? Peeping Tom in their window? Or is there some other way in public or in Church that you'll know that they aren't "non-practicing". It appears to be "smoke and mirrors" for some none the wiser to get members and the collection plate. Why did you leave the UMC?

[@CSAreson]

I have to agree with your ending comments. The conversation we need to be having is what is holiness. If we can't see how we are going to deal with all sin not just one, can we really call ourselves Wesleyans?

[@michelehart8535]

I seem to remember the Bible says something to affect that if you even "Think it" you already sinned, so with that said, how can one celibate LTBGTQ+ Ever be ordained?....

[@plainspokenpod]

Two responses: 1) If one is warring against sinful thoughts, I think that is the biblical standard, 2) If pure thoughts are required to be considered for ministry, then we should go ahead and give up. Thoughts matter, and they are sin. Following this setup, though, means that nobody is really eligible for spiritual leadership and/or gay sexual sin is treated as a special class of sin. But sin is sin. It is all inappropriate in the life of all believers. The folks who should be leading us are those who should know how to do holy warfare and prevail. There’s no reason why folks who were once slaves to same-sex attraction can’t qualify. The condition is warring against the flesh.

[@KevinHale-vq2xr]

Non scriptural is a better term

[@grumpy1020x]

So, GMC is willing to ordain "non-practicing" or celibate homosexuals. How is this any different than UMC? UNLESS you see someone "in the act", how will you know? One could live with, buy groceries with, cook with, walk hand in hand with etc. etc. etc. and you'll be none the wiser. To your reference about other sins, who says that their sins are ok or "not sins"? Aren't we to repent, ask for forgiveness and attempt to turn from the behavior? Homosexuals are trying to invalidate their sin, or say that it is no longer sinful behavior apparently as the GMC is beginning to usurp. I said it quite a while back, GMC is trying to blossom too quick and outgrow the UMC and is going to simply become the UMC "lite". Are you saying that a "non-practicing" adulterer would be ordained GMC? How about "non-practicing" thieves? How will you verify? You have already said that you think there should be a physical agility for clergy, or that they should have a certain body type or physical appearance. To homosexuals, this is their identity. How can you ordain someone that sees this as their identity and not their sin? Why did y'all leave the UMC?

[@plainspokenpod]

The way that it differs from the UMC is that the UMC now believes, despite what is in writing, that same-sex sexual behavior is not an affront to God. The GMC meanwhile readily acknowledges biblical standards of porneia. This is really quite different. In this segment, I do highlight that some people seem to care more about same-sex sexual sin than red-blooded heterosexual sin. That is a problem. It is a problem when believers aren't as scandalized by a pastor who loves money as they are by a pastor having gay thoughts. The point I was making is the same as what I think you're saying here: All sin is a problem. We shouldn't make special allowances for any of them. While I technically fit the category of a "non-practicing adulterer," that isn't how I 'identify' in Christ. That is the problem I'm highlighting (and I think you're agreeing with) here. Verification of an elder's growing sanctification is indeed something that the denomination is morally obligated to do. While one cannot speak to another's inner state, one can look for fruits. If the fruit of a person's ministry is to foster an identity that is at odds with biblical righteousness, I think we have a problem. I stand by my words about Christians needing to be good stewards of the bodies God has given us.

[@grumpy1020x]

Doesn't ordaining gay pastors make the Church complicit with that sin? I intentionally left out "non-practicing" because that's presupposing that their telling you that their non-practicing is true.

[@plainspokenpod]

@@grumpy1020x As a lot of these chats are beginning to highlight, it depends very much on how the 'gay' part of them figures in. If it is something they are holding onto, then that is a problem. If it is something they are warring against, then this doesn't bother me. To my mind, it is like a pastor warring against his sexual desires towards women other than his wife, or warring against his love of money. The moment he gives in, he is unworthy of the pulpit. But if he identifies as a miserable wretch, hates his sin, and seeks a new life in Christ, then I am willing to call him brother. Do you think I'm missing something?

[@jamesbarksdale978]

I agree that ordaining celibate, chaste homosexuals to ministry is a bad idea. The GMC is shooting itself in the foot before it even gets off the ground.

[@plainspokenpod]

Well, the way I talked through it addressed whether or not the individual is warring against their own sin, or if they are accepting it alongside their identity in Christ. I wouldn't be comfortable being characterized as saying that it is categorically a bad decision to refuse ordination to any individual who has struggled with same-sex attraction. I'm only against those who choose to believe that these feelings can be something that is good and holy.

[@bamyers08]

After sticking through the entire episode, my only question is, how do you confirm that a clergy person is being celibate? How does the GMC confirm that those desires aren’t being acted upon in other ways? I understand that there are people that are formally homosexual and that they give up that desire in order to serve Christ. I think that is a super courageous and admirable way of going about things. I myself, as a speaker, preached in a sermon that repentances of course important but I also added that if the person is an unrepentant sinner, that they should not be in the pulpit. To me, repentance is a willingness to identify and work in earnest to remove or turn away from that sin in your life. I would think that it is on par with your explanation of warring against sin, on a daily basis

[@plainspokenpod]

Yeah it isn't just a willingness to do so, but a compulsive response to the love of Christ to do so. It isn't a defensive war but an offensive one. We do battle against any and all sin in our lives. To your first area of analysis, the only way to speak to people's private behaviors is to make sure we have a nosy culture in the church. The class meeting was designed to be just this. People in leadership should be expected to be in small covenant groups that are responsible for speaking to the private lives of members. If we don't do this, many will continue to be in the pulpit who shouldn't be.

[@bamyers08]

@@plainspokenpod I agree. I like the premise of the class meeting but how willing are people going to be to share their deepest darkest secrets with others in the church and not expect to be judged by those others or for rumors to swirl? I know for me, I take my sins very personal and I we all have regrets about our pasts and we don’t really want to share those things. At what point is it ok to keep things between you and God vs you and the class meeting? I believe as brothers and sisters we are to hold each other accountable but doing that in a loving, respectful and non-judgmental way is difficult. I would think it would cause a “holier than thou” situation/moral superiority situation.

[@plainspokenpod]

That's one of the things that surprises a lot of people: It doesn't really happen. People who participate find that others honor them, forgive them, are gracious with them. If someone judges and is unwilling or unable to share well, they flunk out (as they should). People who gossip and share people's business flunk out (as they should). Sure, it takes time to figure out who those people are, but it also takes time to build trust and share as we ought. The only ones left in the end are those who can be responsible with others' information. But also, men and women really shouldn't be combined. I don't know how this has ever been done well. My wife and I had to reckon with it being impossible to be done well. We don't go as deep as weekly confession like in the band meetings, but the phony level on which men and women relate while together isn't really worth the time or energy that goes into facilitating such gatherings.

[@bamyers08]

@@plainspokenpod what is the difference between band meetings and class meetings? I’ve been a Methodist all my life and we never had anything like that from what I know of. I was also never taught about it in confirmation.

[@ddjjj33]

Can one truly claim they are going on to perfection if they deny the transformative work of the Holy Spirit? Especially as it pertains to church leadership, it would seem that one would need to establish a firm hold in the new creation and identity of Christ. To use for example the sin of murder, one wouldn’t say, I’m still a murderer but not currently practicing murder (same for adultery, etc). I really have serious concerns about the GMC. I desperately want to believe it will not succumb to the woes of the former. These seemingly “small” items always prove enormously consequential in the long run.

[@joer5627]

GMC best not go this route.

[@plainspokenpod]

It’s a hard position to be in. It would be strange if the denomination made room for every sin in the hearts of clergy except for same sex attraction. As long as they are going to war against their sin, I feel okay with this.

[@user-zw2nm7zs1b]

I think that Asbury will try to shape GMC into its own marketed image.

[@plainspokenpod]

This is the nature of things. Everyone wants an institution that preserves and represents their values. Asbury holds a lot of power in this equation. To some degree, they have done a fantastic job standing against the prevailing elite culture of the UMC. Though I have concerns about their campus culture, I am delighted to have them as a central entity rather than the 13 UMC seminaries...

[@user-zw2nm7zs1b]

@@plainspokenpod A great move of God must be resourced from many more springs than the one at Asbury University. What if God wants to do a new thing with resourcing local churches other than the seminary model? Can the predictable good choke out or resist the faith discovered great new thing? This emerging Wesleyan movement was not created to save Asbury Seminary.

[@plainspokenpod]

@@user-zw2nm7zs1b Oh I see. Look, Wesley Biblical Seminary, United Theological Seminary, and another six or seven seminaries have been approved officially by the GMC. There will be more. Also, there will be pathways into ministry that aren't seminary-heavy, as we will have to have the same approach to clergy around the world.

[@allenschneider1847]

We should identify ourselves as children of God and followers of Christ who have struggles in various areas of our life. I'd much rather one confess: I am child of God who struggles with substance abuse rather than make affirmation that: I am a drug addict. (Same for issues of sexuality.) There is a difference as to who we are by identity and areas of our life for which we still need healing and transformation.

[@Pedro-bk1ic]

Having sinful sexual desires is one thing. Rooting your Christian identity in those sinful sexual desires is another. Ordaining a man who identifies as a gay Christian is an entirely avoidable error.

[@hunker1982]

Jeffrey, I think what you are talking about is largely, or completely, a problem of language: 1) I suspect that Rev Boyette is simply using the language that we have long been familiar with in the UM Book of Discipline. 2) I doubt that a Christian who sincerely vows to live a celibate life to avoid the sin of acting on their same sex attractions would then use their attractions as part of what defines them. 3) I would say that in this case, the disadvantage of acquiescing to progressive language which seeks to shape our perception of norms is nullified by the vow of the person in question. 4) The advantage of using the progressive language of homosexual "identity" in this case is that we make the case more clearly that behavior is what is important, regardless of how one identifies. 5) The GMC's stance on this matter is firm, consistent with the long held traditional view in the UMC. I hope that we don't fly off the handle before seeking clarification. We haven't even had our first General Conference yet. If we need to add language addressing how one identifies, we can do that.

[@plainspokenpod]

1. I agree. I don't have any problem with Boyette's language or with the official stance of the GMC, provided we don't make room for Side B Christianity. 2. I understand why you doubt. Look into Side B Christianity. 3. Commitments made by moderns, Christian or otherwise, aren't worth much. 4. I'm not sure it is a victory to separate actions from identity. 5. I sure hope I don't come off as flying off the handle. I'm trying to do the opposite of that.

[@deej7928]

You reported the news in a professional way with some contextual commentary. It made us think about it. There is a name for that. It's called excellent journalism. Carry on brother! Blessings

[@hunker1982]

​@@plainspokenpod 1) If the concern is that there will be a wedge into the organization and that clergy won't keep their vows, that's an issue of enforcement. Law without equal and consistent enforcement is no law at all. 2) Good grief! There is no end to intersectional seeds of tribal division the progressives will create. We should pay attention to their language to see what we're up against, but I hope that the church will speak against Marxism. There is neither Greek nor Jew, neither slave nor master. As you posed last week, the question is whether your life is marked by submissive obedience to Christ. 3) You're right about the modern value of commitments. The answer is not to lower church standards, but for the church to push Biblical standards. 4) I think the church should clearly reject all forms of intersectional identity. The progressive trick is to get us to accept our proclivities for who we are, so that challenges to our actions are viewed as attacks on our very existence. This must be defeated. 5) YOU are the one who first said that we shouldn't fly off the handle, when you brought up James Lambert's analysis. I agree with both of you. It is critical that we have these discussions, but we are woefully lacking in the skills and spirit of productive civil discourse.

[@carp614]

Side b christianity is not Christianity.

[@kellyferguson8790]

Self identified instead of their identity being in Christ Jesus.

[@caman171]

I love you all but must disagree. To identify as an alcoholic is not a sin. Its honesty. It is true that "in Christ" that's not your identity, but as a human it is. An alcoholic who abstains is the most noble person there can be, and no one can deny that they are denying the will of the flesh. i dont think side B Christianity "celebrates" their condition. But if a person must lie in order to be accepted, how is that any kind of sanctification? All this will do is encourage cover up and lies, forcing the person who is gay to simply avoid the issue. Unless you are willing to forbid ordination to all celibate people, theres no way of avoiding ordaining a gay person at some point. They will just avoid the issue and pretend to be heterosexual and celibate. I have never met a person who has acheived entire sanctification. If its even possible, you will lose it the very moment you realized you have attained it, because recognizing that youve reached that goal, is to lose your humility, putting you right back at the bottom. Can a humble person ever really believe that they are humble? No. The minute you think you are humble, is the minute you lose your humility. My church would never ordain a divorced person or a female. Methodists ordain both. So how do you prove a divorced person isnt living in adultery according to scripture? i would ordain someone like Becket Cook in a heart beat. Few heterosexuals are as devoted to the truth as he is.. He IS a living sacrifice. Sorry for the rant, I dont have a dog in the Methodist fight, but in your zeal to leave the Saduccees, i dont want you to become a Pharisee

[@CHIKOMBA]

DO NOT DECEIVE AND CHASE AFRICAN AGAIN!