I have decided to write on the advantages and disadvantages of adding a statement to the Discipline about faithful Christians disagreeing about homosexuality. This is an issue that I struggle with myself as the Bible seems to say things about homosexuality, yet in my life sometimes I don’t really see how it matters.

            The advantages of the statement would be threefold. First, it would be honest. The United Methodist Church is a “big tent” from what I see. If you look at my church, for example, you have some very “liberal” and very “conservative” people. We have people on all sides of this issue of homosexuality, yet there is something that connects us as Methodists and as Christians. There honestly is a lot of dissent on this issue from those in our church who is openly gay and are upset at the statement on homosexuality to those that are glad that the Methodist Church takes a “stand” against the issue. We cannot even agree among ourselves, so a statement that faithful people disagree about this issue is a truthful one, and one that reflects reality.

            In some ways this statement reminds of the concept of “informed dissent.” I had read somewhere that in the Catholic Church if one prayerfully considers an issue and after much contemplation on scripture, it is okay to disagree with specific doctrine as you have informed yourself and still disagree. The United Methodist Church seems to be filled with informed dissenters, at least in the Midwest.

            The second positive would be that for those who are homosexual, reading in the Discipline that there is this stand against homosexuality being compatible with Christian teaching yet this is still a matter that is open for discussion and disagreement would make a gay or lesbian person more comfortable with being a Methodist. I think that having that statement in there would open more doors than it would close. One would not need to be a homosexual to reap the benefit of this too, if one were adamantly opposed to any Church doctrine that was anti-gay. For those of us who are on the fence in that big mush ball middle, it opens it up to disagreement, and to feel comfortable disagreeing knowing that there are many others out there who aren’t all that sure.

            The third positive is for those who are adamantly anti-gay it reminds them that it isn’t their way or the highway. It reminds them that although the Bible seems to say, as I stated earlier, that homosexuality is wrong, there are other interpretations, and that one needs to be respectful of these differences. Yet, with the more conservative branches, many may feel compelled to fall away from the church if it appears “wishy-washy” on matters of homosexuality, and many may view the inclusion of such language as a sign of the church’s moral decline. This may cause some to leave or to not consider Methodism as their denomination.

            Personally, I don’t see the inclusion of this language as negative at all except to acknowledge that the continued controversy on this issue does seem to, with the more conservative groups, encourage a church split. In fact, the reaction that I had regarding those that want to split over this issue is mixed as well. There is a part of me that would say good riddance to those who cannot get over this issue, yet that is not a good attitude to have. I am troubled by the complete inability to find middle ground on this issue and for some the addition of a statement that some disagree with the church’s official stand on homosexuality would seem to be a weaker stance.

            I believe the language would be helpful. As I read about the inability to even adopt language that represents the truth of the matter, it is a little discouraging. As a United Methodist, I personally struggle with a church that has decided that based on sexual orientation certain people are denied the opportunity for leadership roles. The liberal in me in conflicted with this. Yet, the conservative in me states that the church is a separate entity and that the piece on homosexuality has been there for awhile, and there are many other denominations that are less vocal about this. However, since I am not gay, and will never experience the first hand discriminations and anti-gay sentiment that is out there, it is not fair that I judge others and restrict church leadership based on sexual orientation. Though part of me believes that homosexuality may not be compatible with Christian teaching, I do not believe that one chooses to be a homosexual. These are the parts that I struggle with. If it was a simple matter of choice, I could see a church edict.

            In conclusion, I really believe that the statement that some Christians disagree, on the whole, would have been a wonderfully powerful, true, and needed statement. I am saddened that it has not passed and do not think that it reflects reality by not being in there.