For many, liberal and conservative alike, homosexuality was the top issue at the 2000 General Conference. It was talked about and written about in the press for months before and months following the gathering.

Prior to General Conference, the Rev. James V. Heidinger II (Good News, 1999), president and publisher of Good News Magazine, expressed concern about the state of the UMC ("foundational beliefs have been lost in a fog of pluralism, inclusiveness, and diversity" and "United Methodism is a divided church") and announced that the caucus had "produced a seven-step renewal agenda" to present to the denomination as the caucus’ platform for the 2000 GC (Heidinger, 1999; Good News, 2000a). This agenda/platform, which included a call for the church to retain its standards regarding homosexuality, was approved by the Good News Board of Directors and executive committee (Good News, 2000; Heidinger, 1999). The caucus also called for UMs to "submit to the Book of Discipline – or leave the denomination if they cannot do so" (Adams, 2000).

As part of their pre-GC campaign, Good News sent all GC delegates a video entitled UM Decision 2000 (Adams, 2000; Sampson, 2000) in which they raised the idea of "a church split or substantial defection of members, churches, and clergy" (Sampson, 2000; UM Decision 2000). In an article for the Presbyterian Layman, John H. Adams (2000) summarized the three primary suggestions made in the video to GC delegates: that they "reaffirm the current language" in the Discipline regarding homosexuality; that they "increase the accountability" of the denominational leaders to support the position of the UMC; and that they "provide the mechanism for an amicable departure without penalty for congregations and clergy who can no longer live within the covenant of the United Methodist Church." All of these suggestions are clearly stated in the video (UM Decision 2000).

(The UM Decision 2000 group was made up of members from the Mission Society for United Methodists; Aldersgate Renewal Fellowship; Lifewatch, the Renew Network: An Ecumenical Coalition for Women; Transforming Congregations; and UMAction, the Methodist branch of the Institute for Religion and Democracy (see Glossary) (Oden, 2000).

The 2000 General Conference promises to be the most memorable session in recent UMC history. There is consensus on both sides of the gay Christian debate that homosexuality will be the most important area of discussion, . . . according to the Research Office of the General Council on Ministry. . . . Homosexuality was listed as the issue most important for the denomination as a whole. (Timmens, 2000a)

In an address to the General Conference, Liberian Bishop Arthur Kulah stated, ". . . the issue of homosexuality is one of the ‘threatening challenges’ facing the denomination today." He later added, "If the United Methodist Church is to be a global church, it must continue its stance" (Green, 2000).

In a press conference sponsored by UM Decision 2000, an unofficial UM group, three persons identifying themselves as former homosexuals spoke of their transformation from homosexuality. Jim Gentile (executive director of Transforming Congregations, an organization that says it helps people "leave homosexuality") called for the UMC "to quit talking about homosexuals and begin ministering to them" (Woodrick, 2000). The press conference was called in response to statements issued by groups supporting change in the language in the Discipline. Gentile pointed out that the 1996 GC called for ministry to homosexuals but provided no funds for the work. He also stressed his support of Discipline language, saying that, "Calling homosexuality OK is not compatible with Scripture. We are a biblically based denomination" (Woodrick, 2000; Gentile, 2000). (See Appendix S for more information on the Transforming Congregation Movement.)

And the Reverent Fred Phelps from Kansas was present with his supporters, posters, and bullhorn (personal observation, May, 2002), demonstrating against the "Methodist Fag Church" (Phelps, 2000; Good News, 2000c).

During GC, James Heidinger II, president and publisher of the Good News Magazine, and co-editor of the Good News GC newsletter, wrote,

The United Methodist position on homosexuality is both compassionate and redemptive. It is a balanced and nuanced position that affirms the "sacred worth" of all persons even while acknowledging that as Christians we cannot affirm every expression of human sexuality, After all, there are certain sexual practices that contradict Biblical standards and as faithful disciples we must be willing to declare them to be incompatible with Christian teachings. (Heidinger and Beard, 2000)

Hurt and impatience, and support and resistance were evident throughout the groups of delegates and observers.

Supporters of changes in the denominational stance regarding homosexuality were evident among the GC delegates, observers, and volunteers, by from the symbolic stoles (two- to three-inch wide strips of fabric symbolizing the stoles that ordained clergy wear and that gay clergy cannot wear if they have been removed from active pastoral ministry by the annual conferences), the rainbow ribbon crosses and rainbow ribbon armbands they wore, their comments and arguments on the GC floor, and the parent badges (rectangular badges similar to convention name badges, but holding a picture of a gay child and the words "My Child is of Sacred Worth") they wore.

Those resisting the changes were obvious in their behaviors of avoiding those with the rainbow ribbons and stoles, in the manner in which they refused the newsletters of the liberal groups, in the heated ‘discussions’ they initiated with parents and others, by the daily newsletters they distributed, and by their comments/arguments on the GC floor.

Representatives of AMAR (the coalition of Methodist Federation for Social Action, Affirmation, and RCP), Transforming Congregations, Good News, and the Confessing Movement distributed daily newsletters and other materials to all who would take them (personal observation at UMC 2000 General Conference, Cleveland; Good News, 2000b). Members of Soulforce [sic], a coalition of persons of faith (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and heterosexual) that uses non-violent methods of civil disobedience, were visible and easily identifiable by their "Stop Spiritual Violence" t-shirts (personal observation).

Representatives of Soulforce [sic] met with UM bishops to request that their group be allowed on the floor during debates and votes on issues related to homosexuality. Their presence, they said, would give a face to the issues and prevent delegates from regarding the issues as abstract. By the end of the meeting, Soulforce [sic] withdrew their request (Nissen, 2000) and instead, carried out an organized demonstration outside the Cleveland convention center on May 10 (Nissen, 2000; UMNS, 2001d). Following the demonstration in which more than 300 persons participated, over 185 persons were arrested, including UM Bishop Joe Sprague of the Northern Illinois Conference and civil rights leader and UM clergyman James Lawson (Tanton, 2000; Veenker, 2000). (A UMNS general summary of GC actions (2001c) says 191 persons were arrested.) At least nine other bishops, some active and some retired, participated in the demonstration but were not arrested (personal knowledge; Tanton, 2000).

In General Conference actions, the anti-gay votes on homosexual issues continued the pattern first established in 1972. Delegates voted by nearly a two-thirds majority (628-337) to maintain the denomination’s current position on homosexuality, i.e., retaining the words, "the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching" and by a 640-317 vote to uphold the stipulation that "self-avowed, practicing homosexuals" cannot be ordained and/or serve as pastors (Nissen and Bloom, 2000). (A wrap-up UMNS story by Robert Lear, 2000, says the vote regarding ordination was 645-306).) They also retained the prohibition on same-sex ceremonies (646-294) and approved (670-222) moving the prohibition from the Social Principles to "Special Provisions" (Para. 332) of the Discipline. (Nissen and Bloom, 2000).

Delegates also voted down two other gay-friendly proposals: one a proposal that would temper the "incompatible" language by stating that United Methodists were not of one mind with regard to homosexuality (637 to 320) and the other a proposal that would have amended a sentence in the Social Principles to read: "Although we do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching, we affirm that God’s grace is available to all" (Nissen and Bloom, 2000).

Comments during the debate over language and homosexuality varied. One delegate (from Zimbabwe), urged retention of the current language regarding homosexuality, saying that softening the language would support homosexuality and "betray" the African UM church. The Rev. J. Philip Wogaman, pastor of Foundry UMC in Washington DC, noted, "It is not a violation of conscience to admit there is a difference between us." Another delegate stressed that homosexuality is a sin and that this was "not an issue on which we can compromise" (Nissen and Bloom, 2000; Good News, 2000c).

After the vote to retain the Social Principles "incompatible" language, the AMAR group staged a demonstration on the GC floor. One group went to the front of the meeting hall and silently stood in the aisles and in front of the dais, while a second group silently walked the perimeter of the balcony where spectators were seated (Nissen and Bloom, 2000; Good News, 2000c).

Following the vote that denied same-sex unions, the group on the floor moved to the dais and refused to leave. After the presiding bishop allowed a representative of the group to speak, the group again refused to leave, and thirty UMs were arrested, including Bishops Joe Sprague and Susan Morrison (Nissen and Bloom, 2000; Lear, 2000; Good News, 2000c). (The Good News report [2000c], stated 27 people were arrested.) As the protesters were arrested and escorted out of the building, approximately 300 delegates and several bishops stood in solidarity with them (Timmens, 2000b).

Several reports indicated that this was probably the first time that anyone was arrested on the floor of General Conference (Burton, 2000; Lear, 2000; Veenker, 2000; Hinkle and Hastings, 2000; Good News , 2000c).

There were, however, a number of pieces of legislation regarding diversity and homosexuality that seemed supportive of GLBT concerns. A resolution calling for ministry with all persons was adopted. That resolution states in part:

. . . be it resolved that the United Methodist Church dedicate itself to a ministry of Christ-like hospitality and compassion to persons of all sexual orientations, and to a vision of unity through openness to the spiritual gifts of all those who have been baptized into the body of Jesus Christ. Such ministry and openness may include: welcoming sexual minorities, their friends, and families into our churches . . . ; a willingness to listen and open our hearts to their stories and struggles in our churches . . . ; encouraging study and dialogue around issues of sexuality; and praying for all who are in pain and discord over our Christian response to this controversial issue. (Calendar, 2000)

Another piece of legislation that was adopted by a vote of 766 to 172 called on the General Commission on Christian Unity and Interreligious Concerns to sponsor a series of dialogues related to homosexuality and the unity of the church during the 2001-2004 quadrennium (Nissen and Bloom, 2000).

In yet another vote that pro-gay supporters found reasonable, GC delegates rejected (705 to 210) a proposal that would require pastors to sign an oath against homosexuality before being appointed to any church (Veenker, 2000; Green and Purdue, 2000; UMNS, 2001d). The proposed statement read, "I do not believe that homosexuality is God’s perfect will for any person. I will not practice it. I will not promote it. I will not allow its promotion to be encouraged under my authority" (Green and Purdue, 2000; UMNS, 2001d).

In other sensitive actions, the GC body defeated a proposal that would have made the performance of same-sex unions a chargeable offense (Green and Purdue, 2000; UMNS, 2001d). The GC approved an addition to the incompatibility statement in the Social Principles that said, "We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn their lesbian and gay members and friends" (Nissen and Bloom, 2000; UMNS, 2001d). By a 78 percent vote, they rejected a request to support a petition "that would have established a specific denominational program aimed at ‘persons who seek to leave or not start the practice of homosexuality’" (Bloom, 2000; Veenker, 2000).

At a press conference during GC called by the UM Decision 2000 group, Andrea Garcanz, former lesbian and leader in a ministry to the "sexually and relationally broken" (Woodrick, 2000), said, "Something greater is happening in Methodism, but the battle is being played out on the issue of homosexuality. The larger issue is the authority of scripture, and who gets to interpret what the Bible says and stands for" (Veenker, 2000).

At this General Conference, two new gay-supportive organizations made their appearance. One organization, United Methodists of Color for a Fully Inclusive Church (UMOC), was formed, announced, began collecting signatures on a petition promoting full inclusiveness within the denomination, and distributed brochures in Cleveland (Vera, 2000; UMOC).

And over 120 parents participated in supportive activities with the AMAR group. This group, known as the Parents Reconciling Network (PRN) and organized for this specific General Conference by Bruce and Ginny Hilton, both UM clergy from California and parents of a gay child, attended in order to demonstrate to GC delegates that the homosexuality issue was not an abstract issue but a concern that affected parents, children, and families. The parents were easily identifiable by delegates and observers from the "My Child is of Sacred Worth" name badges they wore (observed by author at UM 2000 General Conference, Cleveland).

Both before and after General Conference, the debate continued, and news reports speculated on whether the UMC would split over the homosexuality issue (Veenker, 2000; Woodrick, 2000; Sampson, 2000; Adams; ). Some predicted that the church would split because it is so divided on the issue; others did not believe that the church would split but that the debates would continue. Bishop Robert Morgan (KY) says, We do not believe this will divide the church. Our commitment is to stay together" (Veenker, 2000).

 

Next: 2000-2004