San Diego LGBTQ and the Methodist church

Methodists in San Diego and elsewhere face tough questions about LGBTQ clergy and same-sex weddings

In times of turmoil – this week, say – the Rev. Phil Amerson ponders the words of the Methodist church's co-founder.

"May we not be of one heart," John Wesley wrote, "though we are not of one opinion?"

Amerson, First United Methodist Church San Diego's interim pastor, was among local Methodists wrestling with Tuesday's, (Feb. 26) controversial decision of church delegates meeting in St. Louis. By a vote of 438-384, the General Conference adopted rules banning same-sex marriage and LGBTQ clergy.

"I'm deeply disappointed," said Amerson. "And I'm especially concerned about the damage this does to gay and lesbian folks in the community."

Some fear the new rules could also cause a schism in the nation's second-largest Protestant denomination, which trails only the Southern Baptist Convention. (The Methodist church's 12.6 million adherents include about 7 million Americans.)

"Is there going to be a split?" asked the Rev. Bob Rhodes, lead pastor at Pacific Beach United Methodist Church. "I think we're closer to that than we ever have been before."

Among the denomination's progressive believers, the decision was met with dismay. Amerson, the former president of two Methodist seminaries, this week heard from three men who had been studying to become pastors.

"They wanted to know, 'How do I leave this denomination?' " Amerson said.

The adopted "Traditional Plan" was championed by theologically conservative delegates from Africa, the Philippines and other parts of the globe, as well as U.S. churches affiliated with the Ohio-based Wesleyan Covenant Association.

Covenant members were not immediately available for comment Wednesday.

The association's web site links falling church attendance in the U.S. to "the divisive debate over the church's sexual ethics ... "

The Covenant compared this controversy to the Traditional Plan, which, it said, "reaffirms teachings rooted in Scripture and Christian tradition" and "creates new means for maintaining the good order of the church should those means be necessary."

Under the new rules, ministers who perform same-sex weddings could be punished – the maximum penalty would be a year-long unpaid suspension. Bishops would be required to ensure that gays and lesbians do not enter the ministry.

Critics fear the Traditional Plan could lead to an exodus from the church. Among those who considered this move, at least briefly: Bishop Grant J. Hagiya, the Los Angeles area resident bishop and most senior cleric on the West Coast.

"With this conservative turn, I have been deeply conflicted," Hagiya wrote late Tuesday. "The question is, 'can I stay in a repressive and oppressive church with integrity?'

"After a sleepless night, I came to a new resolve. I believe I must stay in the UMC and lead our people within the geographical context we find ourselves in the West."

Dana Hook, chair of First United Methodist's church council and a lesbian, had a similar dark night of the soul. "I told my wife, 'Can we even stay as part of the United Methodist Church'?" she said.

They decided they could, recalling the Mission Valley congregation's referendum last June. By an overwhelming majority, worshipers voted to welcome LGBTQ members and clergy, plus endorsed same-sex marriage.

Many Methodist congregations have a "big tent" approach, welcoming all without dwelling on members' sexual identities. Some take a more conservative view, while still others – like Water's Edge, a Methodist faith community in Ocean Beach – occupy the other end of the spectrum.

"We fly our rainbow flag proudly every Sunday," said Lysa Edward, who worships there. "I hope that we all come to the conclusion that we are all God's children and he loves us the way we are."

This week, Methodist pastors have been inundated with phone calls, text messages and social media queries.

"Folks are confused," said the Rev. John Shaver, lead pastor at San Dieguito United Methodist Church in Encinitas. "They want to know what this all means."

Clear answers may not emerge for months. The General Conference's decision will not go into effect until next year, after it has been reviewed by the church's Judicial Council. That body can nullify measures that violate the Methodist constitution.

At a Wednesday afternoon gathering at First United Methodist Church, pastor Amerson counseled patience and faith.

"It's going to be messy for awhile," he said, "but it's going to be OK."

Others, though, wonder if the time for patience is past. In Pacific Beach, pastor Rhodes noted that the church in 1972 adopted a statement that called homosexuality "incompatible with Christian teaching."

"We have been enduring this for decades and we've been trying to stick it out," said Rhodes, who identified himself as a "straight CIS man" who supports LGBTQ rights. "The follow-up question is: Why should I stick it out any more?"
 

Artfuldodger

Senior Member
LGBTQ needs to reference the bible and the book of Leviticus.

Why stop with the queers?

Leviticus 20:10
"'If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death.

Deuteronomy 22:22
If a man is found lying with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
 
Last edited:

Artfuldodger

Senior Member
Something about sexual sin that God really hates;

1 Corinthians 6:9
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts,

1 Corinthians 6:18
Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.

Colossians 3:5
Put to death, therefore, the components of your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed, which is idolatry.
 

SemperFiDawg

Political Forum Arbiter of Truth (And Lies Too)
Why stop with the queers?

Leviticus 20:10
"'If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death.

Deuteronomy 22:22
If a man is found lying with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.

I got the cynicism of your post, yet it’s a poorly contrived straw man fallacy at best. I know of no pastor nor denomination that condones, much less promotes, adultery nor fornication. Your post suggests a duplicity on behalf of the Church with regards to its treatment of homosexuals vs. adulterers which is patently false. The entire agenda of the LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ, with regards the Church, is to deny homosexuality is a sin, which any literate person who has ever read the Bible KNOWS is NOT true. I have never seen one adulterer, much less a a coalition of adulterers try to force a pastor, a church, or an entire denomination into adopting the stance that adultery is not a sin, yet that is the basis of your point. Simply put, it is a LIE. Not surprising. We all know where your allegiances lie on the social issue.
 

1988USMC

Member
Romans 1:26-27, Paul said, “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."

As far as my feeble mind can understand, sexual conduct outside of biblical marriage of any kind is a sin, it is the only sin that you can commit against your own body, whether hetero or homo, thus you pay the penalty with your body.

You can't be a repentant follower of Jesus Christ and consistently choose to live in sin of any type. Sure we all slip up, that means we confess and repent.

I just can't find anywhere in scripture that condones homosexual behavior.

Semper Fi!
 

Artfuldodger

Senior Member
I got the cynicism of your post, yet it’s a poorly contrived straw man fallacy at best. I know of no pastor nor denomination that condones, much less promotes, adultery nor fornication. Your post suggests a duplicity on behalf of the Church with regards to its treatment of homosexuals vs. adulterers which is patently false. The entire agenda of the LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ, with regards the Church, is to deny homosexuality is a sin, which any literate person who has ever read the Bible KNOWS is NOT true. I have never seen one adulterer, much less a a coalition of adulterers try to force a pastor, a church, or an entire denomination into adopting the stance that adultery is not a sin, yet that is the basis of your point. Simply put, it is a LIE. Not surprising. We all know where your allegiances lie on the social issue.

I'm not saying the adulterers are trying to convince the Church. What i'm saying is why does the Church openly accept members who fornicate? Why do they not kill them as required in the bible? It's not looked upon by the Church like homosexuality is.

The Church doesn't see fornication or adultery as it does homosexuality. I would agree the homosexuals are in an alliance to change what the church sees. I would agree that the fornicators and adulterers are not.

I'm trying to address or see why the Church feels differently, not the homosexuals or fornicators.
 

Artfuldodger

Senior Member
I got the cynicism of your post, yet it’s a poorly contrived straw man fallacy at best. I know of no pastor nor denomination that condones, much less promotes, adultery nor fornication. Your post suggests a duplicity on behalf of the Church with regards to its treatment of homosexuals vs. adulterers which is patently false. The entire agenda of the LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ, with regards the Church, is to deny homosexuality is a sin, which any literate person who has ever read the Bible KNOWS is NOT true. I have never seen one adulterer, much less a a coalition of adulterers try to force a pastor, a church, or an entire denomination into adopting the stance that adultery is not a sin, yet that is the basis of your point. Simply put, it is a LIE. Not surprising. We all know where your allegiances lie on the social issue.

If this comparison is too far to be used, what about how the Church views women? Paul addresses in the New Testament the rules and guides on women compared to men. Women's roles in the house and Church.

1 Timothy 2:9-11
Likewise, I want the women to adorn themselves with respectable apparel, with modesty, and with self-control, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, as is proper for women who profess to worship God. 11 A woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet.

Why did the Church evolve it's stance on women's roles but not with homosexuality? True one is a sexual sin and we know God really hates the sexual stuff. Still though the sexuality of what Paul was addressing is real. The man vs woman is a big reality with God. God has defined our differences and roles.

Yet the Church comes along and caves to women's rights and we now have women preachers and women teaching over men. In some Churches.

Compare this change as to why the Church has not accepted homosexuality.
 

Artfuldodger

Senior Member
Romans 1:26-27, Paul said, “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."

As far as my feeble mind can understand, sexual conduct outside of biblical marriage of any kind is a sin, it is the only sin that you can commit against your own body, whether hetero or homo, thus you pay the penalty with your body.

You can't be a repentant follower of Jesus Christ and consistently choose to live in sin of any type. Sure we all slip up, that means we confess and repent.

I just can't find anywhere in scripture that condones homosexual behavior.

Semper Fi!

I would agree that God really hates the sex stuff to even include lust. Fornication, adultery, orgies, prostitution, etc. Even unnatural sex acts with a hetero partner. Jealousy, adultery of the heart. Sex for recreation maybe. What about birth control? That allows sex for recreation.

In the example in Romans, they knew God and "exchanged" worshiping God for that of Idols. They were turned over to their wild desires. It didn't happen the other way around. They abandoned God first. They were heterosexuals having a desire to have homosexual sex.

Regardless though it's the Church that has different views on heterosexual sex sins vs homosexual sex sins when they should just be sexual sins.
 

Artfuldodger

Senior Member
So the Methodist church “voted” on whether or not to follow the Bible and preach the truth?

It may have started with the ordination of women in the Methodist Church. That may have been their start of not following the Bible. Maybe they could let the female ministers marry the homosexuals.
 

1988USMC

Member
I would agree that God really hates the sex stuff to even include lust. Fornication, adultery, orgies, prostitution, etc. Even unnatural sex acts with a hetero partner. Jealousy, adultery of the heart. Sex for recreation maybe. What about birth control? That allows sex for recreation.

In the example in Romans, they knew God and "exchanged" worshiping God for that of Idols. They were turned over to their wild desires. It didn't happen the other way around. They abandoned God first. They were heterosexuals having a desire to have homosexual sex.

Regardless though it's the Church that has different views on heterosexual sex sins vs homosexual sex sins when they should just be sexual sins.


Never found anything in scripture one way or the other regarding birth control. I do know that the act of sex in marriage (a husband and wife) is a gift from God to be enjoyed. Outside of marriage it is a sin and participants will pay a price for it.
Lust is so pervasive both inside and outside the "church" that it has become almost an accepted practice. " You can look, but you can't touch." All sin in conceived in thought before it is actually committed. We have to guard our thought life to become all we need to be to glorify God. He paid a mighty big price to secure our freedom. I believe we owe Him everything.
 

PappyHoel

Senior Member
I always consult the Bible on these matters not what the GON forum says. Now go read your Bible and see what it says.
 

Artfuldodger

Senior Member
Never found anything in scripture one way or the other regarding birth control. I do know that the act of sex in marriage (a husband and wife) is a gift from God to be enjoyed. Outside of marriage it is a sin and participants will pay a price for it.
Lust is so pervasive both inside and outside the "church" that it has become almost an accepted practice. " You can look, but you can't touch." All sin in conceived in thought before it is actually committed. We have to guard our thought life to become all we need to be to glorify God. He paid a mighty big price to secure our freedom. I believe we owe Him everything.

Off topic but since all sin is conceived in thought, does that mean the mind is part of our flesh? Lust makes me think the mind is part of my flesh.
 
Top