United Methodist Church Offers Alternative Process for Homosexuality Debate

A file photo by Kathleen Barry, UMNS An alternative process for legislation related to the denomination’s stance on homosexuality is aimed at fostering more open dialogue. Demonstrations in support of full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the life of church were held at the 2012 General Conference.
A file photo by Kathleen Barry, UMNS
An alternative process for legislation related to the denomination’s stance on homosexuality is aimed at fostering more open dialogue. Demonstrations in support of full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the life of church were held at the 2012 General Conference.

Organizers of The United Methodist Church’s top lawmaking assembly plan to offer an alternative process for considering legislation related to the denomination’s stance on homosexuality.

To go forward, General Conference delegates will need to approve rule changes when they meet May 10-20, 2016, in Portland, Oregon.

The Commission on General Conference, which plans the legislative gathering, hopes its Group Discernment Process might provide a template for dealing with other contentious issues in the life of the church.

But right now, the commission’s focus is on finding a different way to address a debate that has raged at each General Conference since 1972 and has led some United Methodists to raise the possibility of a denominational split.

The goal is for United Methodist decision makers to discuss the proposals through the lens of “the values of centrality of mission, unity for the sake of mission and our identity as Christians and as United Methodists.”

“What we’ve been doing hasn’t been working, so let’s look at an alternative,” said Judi M. Kenaston, the commission’s chair and conference secretary of the West Virginia Conference.

One goal is to bring out the “middle voices” — those who typically don’t sign up for the legislative committees that deal with human sexuality and don’t speak up once debate gets going.

Commission members, who themselves have varying theological views on homosexuality, don’t have a particular outcome in mind for the process, Kenaston stressed.

“My dream would be that at the end of it, you would have a decision we could all live with,” she said.

Click here for more.

SOURCE: UMNS
Heather Hahn

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s