There is only one substantive research study that includes GLB UMs, so there is very little with which to compare my findings.

My research confirms many of the findings reported by Gary Comstock (1996) in his book, Unrepentant, Self-affirming, Practicing: Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay People Within Organized Religion. However, there are also some of Comstock’s findings that my research does not support.

Comstock reviewed existing literature regarding BLG persons in organized religion, and he specifically researched the feelings and experiences of 488 bisexual, lesbian, and gay (LBG) persons affiliated with the UCC and the UMC. In his study, 289 participants belonged to the UCC and 199 were members of the UMC. I summarized his findings in the beginning of my dissertation (that section is not yet posted on this website). In the next several pages, I will look at ways in which my findings are similar to and/or different from Comstock’s.

Findings Similar to Those of Comstock

My research revealed a number of findings that are similar in many respects to Comstock’s findings:

• Some UMs were able to stay within the denomination because of supportive local congregations; others stayed by maintaining tangential relationships with the church (Comstock, pp. 225, 229).

Supportive local congregations, as well as the congregations and individuals affiliated with the Reconciling Congregation program, help make it possible for my research respondents to remain members of, loyal to, and/or affiliated with the UMC. Others retain their UM membership but keep tangential relationships with the denomination and are frequently inactive in their local churches.

• Some stayed because the denomination is "familiar home" (Comstock, p. 224).

Many of the respondents in my research say "familiar home" and heritage are the reasons they remain members of and/or affiliated with the UMC.

• Their reasons for staying were bolstered by strong feelings of hopefulness (Comstock, p. 229 ).

My research respondents also report hopeful feelings for change within the UMC.

• The impact of the denomination’s restrictive policy was less apparent in their experiences than in their feelings about and evaluations of their church experience (Comstock, p. 229).

This, too, is evident in the responses of my research respondents. They report that they enjoy, love, appreciate, and value their local church experiences, and they say they feel accepted, included, welcomed, and appreciated in their local churches. For most of them, strong negative feelings come into play when they mention the denominational stance, the "incompatibility" language, the inability to have union ceremonies, and the limits on ordination. Many of these respondents, however, report ways they have evaded, avoided and/or lessened the impact of the denominational stance.

• Most who stay within mainline denominations are active as lay ministers, leaders, officials, and participate more often on local boards and on committees than non-gays (Comstock, p. 229).

While I have no data for other mainline denominations and/or non-gay members of the UMC, the UM BLG respondents who participated in my research are, for the most part, supportive and active in their local churches, including financially supportive.

Findings in Disagreement with Comstock’s Findings

My research also reveals findings that are not in agreement with those of Comstock.

• Most gay UMs did not feel good about their affiliation with the UM Church (Comstock, pp.228-229).

Most of the respondents in my research say they feel good about their affiliation with their local churches but make a point to spell out that they do not like the denominational stances and behaviors with regard to orientation issues.

• Those out to congregations found it difficult; they felt angry, marginalized, and sad (Comstock, p. 229).

The respondents in my research who are out to their local congregations for the most part feel accepted, happy, and welcomed in their local congregations for who they are. Many of these participants, however, make a point to stress that they have taken special care and effort to locate churches in which they could feel accepted, happy, and welcome. Those respondents who say they feel fearful, sad, angry, and marginalized are those respondents who are not out in their local churches, who do not attend open and/or welcoming congregations, and those who want to be ordained (or who are ordained and are in the closet).

Although many of my respondents report feeling sad and/or angry because they are unable to have union ceremonies with their partners, they also point out that they feel good about their involvement in and affiliation with their local supportive congregations. They say they feel comfortable and at home. Nevertheless, most respondents in my research also regularly reiterate that they don’t feel good about the stances of the denomination as a whole.

• The most frequent reason cited for staying in the United Methodist Church was to change the denomination’s policies and practices (Comstock, pp. 227, 229).

But perhaps more significant to the study of gay people in organized religion is the finding that most UMC respondents reported that they remained affiliated with their denomination because they are committed to changing their denomination [emphasis his] (Comstock, p. 229).

Although respondents to my research mentioned working for change as a reason for remaining members of, loyal to, and/or affiliated with the UMC, the most frequent reasons they give for their loyalty to the UMC include (in order of frequency) 1) heritage, family, a sense of religious belonging, and "It’s my church, too;" 2) the local church and its people, including reconciling and/or welcoming congregations; and 3) Wesleyan theology and the UM’s social justice focus. Working for change ranks a distant fourth in the reasons the respondents in my research cite for remaining in the UMC.

Comstock notes that in his research, the reasons given by the UCCs and the UMCs regarding their commitment to their denominations have a common basis: the policies and the practices of their denominations regarding gay people. But there are differences: the UCCs are committed because of their denomination’s policies and practices, and the UMCs stay because they are committed to changing their denomination’s policies and practices [emphasis mine]. Comstock also says, "The consequences for trying to create the best situations and to find the best settings in the UMC would seem to be not greater happiness but ongoing conflict, rejection, and unhappiness" (Comstock, p. 229).

The responses of the participants in my research seem to contradict that. Their responses suggest that as long as they can disregard the denominational stances to some degree and find supportive local congregations in which they can participate fully, they have comfortable situations in which they want to remain. Having comfortable places in which they can worship, grow spiritually, and be accepted as persons of worth nourishes them, strengthens them, and enables them to work for change.

Mixed Findings

• 90% of gay UMs were fully out or out so some people within their local church (Comstock, p.231).

Of the respondents in my research, 91% of the clergy respondents and 95% of the lay respondents report they are generally our and/or somewhat out. However, I asked for information regarding the extent they were out at church, at home, and at work, and my figures regarding being out at church are somewhat lower than Comstock’s. At church, only 71% of my entire research population is out. When comparing the ‘outness’ levels of clergy and laity at church, I found a smaller percentate of respondents who are ‘out’ at church: only 53% of the clergy respondents and 77% of the lay respondents say they are out at church.

• "Gay people remain with the church whether it mistreats them or treats them well" (Comstock, p. 229).

This finding of Comstock’s may be true. However, from the responses in my research, it appears that the gay UM participants in my research do not blindly stay within the church and ignore the mistreatment. Most approach their UM membership/affiliation with full awareness the limitations, the prejudices, the discrimination, and the marginalization that exist. They also say they search to find worship/church settings in which they are treated well.

Many also make it clear that they do have limits, and a handful of respondents say they reached their limits and chose to leave the denomination. Many others say they are constantly questioning the fact that they remain members of, loyal to, and/or affiliated with the UMC, and they indicate that it is possible that one day, they, too, may reach their limits and leave the denomination

No data to compare

• Most gays are either not affiliated with any religious body or are with non-mainstream alternative religious bodies (Comstock, p. 230).

My research provides no data with which to compare this. However, the reactions and statements of my respondents imply that many of them are in congregations that include other gay United Methodists who are also active in and accepted by their local churches and congregations. Additionally, a number of respondents in my research say they have tried non-mainstream alternative religious bodies, have found them lacking, and have returned to the UMC.

In addition, a number of other respondents in my research say they grew up in other protestant denominations that rejected them or had more oppressive discriminatory policies and/or practices. For them, their searches for religious "homes" brought them to welcoming UMCs. All of these new (not born and raised) UM respondents believe that some church involvement is necessary in their lives, and they searched until they found what they describe as "good fits."