Watershed in Cleveland

SEIZING THE BLESSINGS of a rising stock market and unexpectedly plentiful reserve funds, the United Methodist General Conference approved millions of dollars for innovative programs serving overseas churches, ethnic groups in the U.S., young people, older adults, urban needs, ministries to the deaf, and even the production of cable TV spots to attract new members. But good feelings about expanding the mission of the 9.6-million member church (which includes 1.4 million members overseas) were dampened by a stormier-than-usual conflict over homosexuality. This year's clash over how to regard gays and lesbians--it's been on the agenda of these quadrennial meetings since 1972--may mark a watershed in the debate.

"The body is lacerated.... This issue is not going to go away," said Linda Campbell-Marshall, a United Methodist district superintendent from Hope, Maine.

"To blame us for the disunity seems unfair," said Maxie Dunnam, dean of Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky, and a leader of a doctrinally conservative coalition. "I have not had a joyful moment today, and I am not joyful now."

Amid a host of protesters, delegates from the U.S., Europe, Africa and the Philippines firmly rejected efforts to soften the church's stance on homosexuality. The 992 delegates--half clergy, half lay--voted rather consistently along a two-thirds to one-third divide. (Votes in favor of abolishing antigay policies had been creeping up slightly each quadrennium and reached their high point, almost 40 percent, in 1996.)

After heated debate, the conference acted to retain three major statements in the denomination's Book of Discipline:

* That the practice of homosexuality is "incompatible with Christian teaching."

* That "avowed practicing" homosexuals are barred from candidacy, ordination or appointment as United Methodist ministers.

* That ceremonies blessing same-sex unions shall not be performed by United Methodist ministers, nor take place in a United Methodist church building.

The body also let stand a provision prohibiting the use of church funds "to promote the acceptance of homosexuality." Rejected was a compromise statement that would have acknowledged that United Methodists are not of one mind on homosexual practice.

On the other hand, delegates voted by a wide margin for continuing dialogue on all sides of the issue. They rejected a "loyalty oath" proposal that would have required all ministers and ministry candidates to sign a document declaring that homosexuality is not "God's perfect will for anyone. I will not practice it. I will not promote it." And they gave a thumbs-down to a request for a program to help "persons who seek to leave or not start the practice of homosexuality."

The church's heavily southern conservative wing, according to some observers, had already won the battle a year ago, having organized to get its people elected as delegates at annual (regional) conferences. The moderate-to-liberal camp--strongest in the West, Midwest and Northeast--may have been more complacent about electioneering and lobbying.

This General Conference took place amid controversy about clergy who, after performing same-sex blessings, had complaints filed against them, were brought up on charges, subjected to church trial, suspended from a pastoral assignment, or, in one case, expelled from the ministry. Chicago pastor Gregory Dell comes off suspension July 1, and he plans to resume his ministry to the gay population. "But I imagine I'll be watched closely," he told a reporter.

Tensions rose further early in 1999 when charges were brought against 67 clergy in the church's California-Nevada Conference for concelebrating a service of blessing for a lesbian couple. More tremors were registered when an investigative committee that worked for months on the case dropped the charges. Brushfires flared again when Cai-Nevada Bishop Melvin G. Talbert defended the committee, declaring that the conference's longstanding goal of practicing inclusiveness and justice took precedence over the disciplinary provision. In April a formal complaint was brought against Talbert by a California laywoman, backed by the Coalition for United Methodist Accountability (made up of three conservative or evangelical caucuses). Talbert's bishop colleagues in the Western Jurisdiction have not been in a hurry to consider the complaint. Talbert retires this summer from presiding over Cai-Nevada.

People on all sides of the issue fret about the cost--in money, time, energy and lost mission opportunities--of handling complaints, charges, investigations, trials and appeals. What if clergy continue to perform same-sex blessings, singly or en masse, and the church continues to follow the prescribed disciplinary steps? How many capable, conscientious pastors might be ousted? How many weeks will church officials spend conducting trials?

United Methodists have lately been heard uttering the word "schism," but few believe that homosexuality will split the church. United Methodists are held together by what one bishop calls "Wesleyan DNA" (for Methodist founder John Wesley), by their attachment to the Board of Pension and Health Benefits, and by a clause in the Discipline that bars departing local churches from taking their property with them. (Delegates rejected an effort to change that policy. They also turned down a request for a separate "Evangelical Missionary Conference" in the West to shelter conservatives who feel "marginalized" in that jurisdiction.)