And language was indeed a focus of the 1984 General Conference.

During the debate on the wording of a new standard for ordained clergy, the GC asked for a Judicial Council Decision specifically regarding the constitutionality of the proposed ordination standard. The Judicial Council ruled in Decision 542 that,

. . . the addition of the words ". . . fidelity in marriage and celibacy in singleness" . . . does not establish absolute requirements nor affect the right to appointment of ministerial members in good standing. (JC Decision 542)

Following the above Judicial Council ruling, the GC body adopted the proposal that called for clergy to commit to "fidelity in marriage and celibacy in singleness" (UMNS, 2001d; Discipline, 1984, Para 402.2, page 189, Para 404.4, p. 192; Discipline, 2000, Para. 304.2, p. 184; Moore, 2000a).

But the GC also adopted more new language about homosexuality:

. . . Since the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching, self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be accepted as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church. (UMNS, 2001d; Moore, 2000a; Discipline, 1984, Para 402.2, p. 189; Discipline, 2000, Para. 304.3, p 185)

UM clergyman John Moore (2000a) reported an instance in a debate over the wording change in which UM clergyman David Seamands (Kentucky) stated that "celibate gays and lesbians could be ordained" and that the new wording only excluded " those who are both self-avowed and practicing."

Although it isn’t clearly stated in any of the resources I had access to, these GC actions and word usage could be the source of the footnote in the Discipline that spells out that a "self-avowed practicing homosexual" is a person that "openly acknowledges to a bishop, district superintendent, district committee of ordained ministry, board of ordained ministry, or clergy session that the person is a practicing homosexual" (Discipline, 2000, para. 304.3, p. 185 ).

In spite of the above changes and additions, there were no changes made in the Social Principles at the 1984 General Conference (UMNS, 2001d).

The adoption of these petitions, and their very specific language, at the 1984 GC were defeats for Affirmation and its supporters, but they had come prepared for defeat. The day after the GC approved the prohibition of candidacy, ordination and appointment of "self-avowed practicing homosexuals," Affirmation members distributed brochures to GC delegates and visitors, asking their congregations to become "reconciling" and to disregard the discriminatory policies approved by the GC. Within two weeks, two congregations on opposite sides of the country had voted to become Reconciling Congregations: Washington Square UMC in New York City and Wesley UMC in Fresno, CA (RCP, 2000b, p. 11; RMN, select 1984, para. 4). By the end of the year, nine churches had become Reconciling Congregations (RCP, select 1984, last sentence).

 

Next: 1984-1988