|
by Rev. Tom Lambrecht : 04/21/2000
For years, the "liberal establishment" of the United Methodist Church has accused evangelicals and conservatives of causing division within our denomination. (We have been causing "division" simply because we have refused to go along with the agenda being promoted by some of our leaders.) How ironic it is, then, that the "liberal establishment" of the California-Nevada Annual Conference has taken the first action of division, which may end up in the schism of the United Methodist Church.
The committee on investigation consists of seven clergy members of the annual conference and two lay observers. The committee is nominated by the bishop, in consultation with the board of ordained ministry, and it is elected by the annual conference. As such, the committee acts for the annual conference. (See Discipline, ¶2626.3a) Cal-Nevada Bishop Melvin Talbert has strongly supported the pro-gay agenda, and he commended the committee on investigation for "a job well done."
The committee on investigation is the first step in the judicial process holding members of our church accountable to the Discipline. The committee investigates (as the name implies) the complaint that has been brought against (in this case) individual clergy persons. "If in the judgement of the required number of committee members (five votes required) there is reasonable ground for such charges, they shall sign and certify the charges as proper for a trial." (¶2626.1)
What the Cal-Nevada committee on investigation did was to admit that there are reasonable grounds for charges ("These respondents acknowledge their participation in the celebration"), yet they failed to certify the charges as proper for a trial. Rather than judging the facts of the case, they judged the law itself. Because they disagreed with the church law, they declined to enforce it. There is no mechanism for anyone in the church to appeal this decision. It effectively blocks any action against the 67 ministers who flagrantly and intentionally violated the Discipline of our church.
By this action, the Cal-Nevada committee is exempting its annual conference from obedience to the Discipline. They have broken their ordination vows to uphold the Discipline of our church. They have made their own consciences superior to the decisions of General Conference, which adopted the law in question by an overwhelming majority. In effect, the Cal-Nevada Conference is thumbing its nose at the rest of the church and saying, "No matter what the Discipline says, you can’t make us obey it?"
Can they not see that by their rebellion they are undercutting the covenantal and connectional nature of our church? Where personal values and conscience override the agreed-upon Discipline of our church, there is no longer any "connection" between us as United Methodist Christians. By its failure to enforce and uphold the Discipline, the Cal-Nevada Conference has withdrawn from the United Methodist connection.
The Cal-Nevada action was politically calculated to influence the General Conference in May toward changing our long-standing position on the issue of homosexuality. In their second paragraph, the committee on investigation quotes language that has been proposed for at least two General Conferences as an alternative to what our Discipline currently says about the practice of homosexuality.
Now that open rebellion has begun, it will spread, unless strong actions are taken. I believe the Council of Bishops needs to come out with a strong statement deploring the decision of the Cal-Nevada committee on investigation and placing the rest of the church on notice that the bishops of the church intend to support and enforce the Discipline. This May’s General Conference needs to act strongly to reaffirm the longstanding position of the church on issues related to homosexuality. The General Conference also needs to express its displeasure with Cal-Nevada’s refusal to enforce the Discipline and provide a means where UM congregations and clergy who cannot live by the Discipline would be allowed to leave the denomination with dignity and without penalty. The General Conference might even establish a task force to propose ways to reestablish the accountability of the Cal-Nevada Conference to the General Church.
One of the strongest proposals to provide relief to evangelicals and conservatives, who are systematically out-voted and excluded from power in the Western Jurisdiction, is a petition from the Evangelical Renewal Fellowship of Cal-Nevada. This petition to General Conference would allow the formation of a missionary conference in the Western Jurisdiction for evangelicals and conservatives who choose to join it. This proposal would allow United Methodists who want to live by the Discipline to remain within the UMC, while not being forced to support annual conference (such as Cal-Nevada) that are marginalizing them and rebelling against the very things they stand for.
It appears that those promoting the acceptance of homosexuality in our church are not only willing to disobey the Discipline, they are willing to cause the schism of our denomination. We in the Confessing Movement will not back down. We will continue to stand for the transforming gospel of Jesus Christ and live by the truth of Scripture. We remain confident that this is Christ’s church, and "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.