The Appellate process does not allow witnesses to take the stand.
Rather, the questions will be determined by trial records and arguments
from the counsel.
"There really is a limit to what the committee can do," Campbell said to
the UMNS.
The nine members for the committee on appeal will also be chosen from
conferences (districts) outside of the Western Pennsylvania Annual
Conference where the initial case was held.
Lesbian minister speaks about coming out speech, persecution
By
Kristin Colella
Penn State Collegian Staff Writer
January 20, 2005
Beth Stroud, the lesbian minister made famous by her "coming out" sermon
and consequent loss of title, spoke about her experiences last night at
the Pasquerilla Spiritual Center.
About 50 students and community members attended the speech.
Stroud "came out" to her Germantown United Methodist congregation in
April 2003, admitting that she was gay and in love with a woman.
In Dec. 2004, Stroud was tried and found guilty of engaging in
"practices that are incompatible with Christian teachings" by a United
Methodist Church trial court.
Although Stroud is still a staff member of her congregation, the court
removed her title and powers as a reverend, such as the ability to
administer sacraments.
Stroud said she risked losing her ministerial credentials in order to be
her "whole self" and to take a stand against the church's strict
doctrines.
"I knew if I had come out in a very public way, I could lose my job,"
she said, but added her action served a greater purpose. "The day I came
out was one of the most wonderful, freeing, joyful days I had ever
experienced."
Stroud said she found courage to come out and withstand the trial
because she felt God had given her a vocation in life to openly express
her sexuality to members of the Methodist Church.
"I knew God made me special and different from everybody," she said. "I
knew God had some special purpose, ... a calling for me."
Stroud said she feels the church needs to accept gay preachers.
"The trial for me was not about winning or losing," she said. "It was
about educating the church."
During a question-and-answer period, Stroud said she strongly believes
the church will reverse its doctrine banning gay pastors in her
lifetime.
"The church has been wrong before," she said, citing the church's
acceptance of slavery in the 19th century as an example of how it has
incorrectly justified its views with the Bible.
"I think, on this issue, the church will look back and have the same
experience," Stroud said.
After the speech, students in the audience commented on Stroud's
compelling story.
"I found her to be incredibly enlightening," Josh Brimmeier
(junior-psychology) said, adding that he felt she was a strong voice for
the gay community.
Leslie Heller (graduate-college student affairs) said she admired
Stroud's ability to keep her faith and also accept her sexuality.
"It's good to see someone remaining faithful in religion," she said.
<snip>
Defrocked Minister Brings Cause to DC
Washington Post -
Washington,DC,USA
Methodist Lesbian Talks of Her Life, Faith
By
Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 17, 2005; Page B03
It
was a typical Sunday morning at St. Luke's United Methodist Church.
Prayers were said for Helen, a parishioner who is dying. Water was
sprinkled on Sadie and Eilidh, baby girls, newly born. And in between,
the small, unassuming church in Northwest Washington welcomed a stranger
who had, in their eyes, been badly treated by the world.
Irene Elizabeth Stroud was, until last month, an associate pastor at a
208-year-old Methodist church in Philadelphia. On Dec. 2, she was
stripped of her credentials by a jury of 13 Methodist ministers, who
concluded that Stroud, a "self-avowed, practicing" homosexual, had
violated church law.
Stroud, 34, is appealing the decision. In the meantime, she said, she
has been "overwhelmed" by requests from other churches to talk about her
case and her experience as a lesbian called to the ministry. Yesterday,
she accepted one of those invitations, delivering a sermon before about
100 people gathered in the humble sanctuary of St. Luke's, just off
Wisconsin Avenue near the Naval Observatory.
The Scripture reading of the day was John 1:29, a straightforward tale
about the moment when John the Baptist recognized a "dusty, weary
traveler" as the Son of God, as Stroud put it. She said the passage
reminds her of certain schoolbooks that show the Coliseum and other
antiquities in all their glory on transparent overlays while,
underneath, pictures show the same structures in ruins.
Jesus, she said, works in reverse. He is "able to peel away the dirt and
sin of the world and see all the possibilities underneath."
"I
wonder what the United Methodist Church looks like to Jesus," Stroud
said. "Does He peel away the divisiveness and the bitterness? . . . Does
He take away the fractiousness over things that don't matter and see,
underneath, the desire to reach out together to a hurt world?"
Stroud called on St. Luke's to join her church, First United Methodist
in the Germantown section of Philadelphia, and nearly 200 other
Methodist congregations that have declared their opposition to
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
"As long as our denomination continues to hold an official policy of
discrimination, it will be important for local congregations who do not
discriminate to take a stand," she said.
Later in the day, Beth Stroud would speak to a gathering of Methodists
from across the Washington area interested in hearing more about the
movement known as the "reconciling ministries network," which pushes for
inclusion of gay clergy. The meeting was organized in honor of Stroud's
visit by Dumbarton, Foundry and Metropolitan Memorial United Methodist
churches, according to Stroud's cousin, Sandi Stroud. Dumbarton and
Foundry have joined the network. St. Luke's, Sandi Stroud's home church,
has been considering joining for years, said the Rev. Anne Yarbrough,
the pastor.
<snip>
By
KAREN MULLER
Daily Record/Sunday News
Sunday, January 16, 2005
Shirley Sowers, secretary to the Central Pennsylvania Conference of the
United Methodist Church, understands what the Evangelical Lutheran
Church in America is going through because the United Methodists have
had the same struggles over homosexuality and the church.
The ELCA has worked intensely for four years to come up with a clear-cut
policy on whether to allow partnered gays in leadership roles in the
church and bless same-sex unions. The church has been unable to come to
an agreement.
Bishop Carol Hendrix of the Lower Susquehanna Synod of the ELCA told a
gathering of more than 200 clergy Thursday that the issue has divided
not only the larger church body, but the local synod, which includes
York County.
Sowers was a delegate to the United Methodist Church’s General
Conference in May with her husband, the Rev. Gary Sowers of Grace United
Methodist Church in Windsor, when the gay community demonstrated, and
many United Methodists stood in support of them, she said.
“There was a lot of controversy and conversation back and forth,” Sowers
said. “And it’s not over.”
The General Conference voted to add stronger language to the church’s
“Social Principles” supporting the traditional definition of marriage.
The church applied the rule in December when a jury of 13 clergy voted
7-6 to withdraw the ministerial credentials of the Rev. Irene Elizabeth
“Beth” Stroud, a 34-year-old associate pastor of the First United
Methodist Church of Germantown in Philadelphia.
Stroud had publicly acknowledged she was living in a committed
relationship with another woman.
The potential for division is in every denomination, and could be over a
variety of issues, including the interpretation of scripture, said the
Rev. Bud Reedy of Stillmeadow Church of the Nazarene in Manchester
Township.
<snip>
*****************************************
On the Web
*****************************************
Commentary
Good News Magazine, Jan/Feb 2005
United Methodists are indebted to the trial court that met near
Philadelphia December 1 and 2 to hear the case against the Rev. Beth
Stroud. By vote of 12-1, the jury found Stroud guilty of engaging in
practices which the church has declared incompatible with Christian
teaching. By a closer vote (7-6), jurors acted to remove her ministerial
credentials (see news story on p. 38).
Beth Stroud is obviously a gifted person who has related well with those
to whom she has ministered. However, personal effectiveness was not the
issue in her trial, but rather, fidelity to the established standards of
the UM Church.
Our guidelines on sexuality have been worked out prayerfully and
carefully over the past 20 years. They are faithful to Scripture,
consistent with the church's historic teaching, and compassionate toward
all. To establish its standards, the church has utilized Christian
conferencing as well as can be done, given the size of General
Conference legislative committees and plenary sessions.
In
this unpleasant matter, the church was well served by Bishop Peter
Weaver, who was until this summer, bishop for Eastern Pennsylvania and
for Beth Stroud. As a witness for the church's counsel, Weaver testified
he had learned of Stroud's lesbian relationship in a meeting with her in
2003. After seeking various pastoral options that would avoid a trial,
which Stroud rejected, Weaver filed a complaint against her.
Retired Bishop Joseph Yeakel presided over a fair trial. He is to be
commended for refusing to allow Stroud's defense team to present six
expert witnesses who were set to challenge the church's policy on
homosexuality. His ruling was correct. The church's standards were not
on trial-Beth Stroud's lesbian relationship was. We were disappointed,
however, that Bishop Yeakel commented to an observer following the trial
that the church would one day have to apologize to Beth Stroud for what
it had done. This unfortunate, inappropriate comment from the presiding
judge got passed on to the media in a post-trial press conference.
Stroud's defense counsel, Dr. Dennis Williams, stated early that he
hoped the trial would be a "learning moment for all of us." Perhaps it
will be.
Though the defense team could not present their case against the
church's standards during the trial, they did release their arguments to
the media when the court was in recess. One of their arguments claimed
that "it is the consensus of the scientific community that homosexuality
is a status." It claimed that homosexual conduct is inseparable from
this status or orientation and cannot be excluded because it is based on
"an unchangeable personal characteristic."
Whoa, wait a moment here. One wonders just how many times this claim has
been repeated by well-meaning people across America, even in the church.
It is the supposed "consensus of the scientific community," we are told.
The only problem with this claim is that it is not supported with
scientific evidence.
Yes, let's make this a "learning moment." The Opinion Research
Corporation recently asked 1,072 practicing psychiatrists for their
views on various aspects of sexuality; 207 responded. When asked if
homosexuals could be changed to heterosexuals, 53 percent responded
"yes," 24 percent were "not sure," and only 22 percent said "no."
Dr. Ruth Tiffany Barnhouse, who was professor of psychiatry and pastoral
care at the Perkins School of Theology, does not buy this supposed
scientific consensus. In Homosexuality: A Symbolic Confusion (Seabury),
she wrote, "Approximately thirty percent of male homosexuals who come to
psychotherapy for any reason can be converted to the heterosexual
adaptation."
In
an article for the Circuit Rider, Dr. Barnhouse argues, "The frequent
claim by 'gay' activists that it is impossible for homosexuals to change
their orientation is categorically untrue. Such a claim accuses scores
of conscientious, responsible psychiatrists and psychologists of
falsifying their data." (For further professional testimony, see "Hope
For Those Struggling With Homosexuality," on our website at:
www.goodnewsmag.org.)
The supposed "consensus of the scientific community"-that homosexuality
is inborn and unchangeable-is purely a mythical claim kept alive by
endless, non-critical repetition.
The final word in this "learning moment," of course, must be God's.
Nowhere in Scripture is there any textual support for homosexual
coupling. In his book Same Sex Partnerships?, Dr. John Stott sums it up
well: ".the love quality of gay relationships is not sufficient to
justify them. Indeed they are incompatible with true love because they
are incompatible with God's law. Love is concerned for the highest
welfare of the beloved. And our highest human welfare is found in
obedience to God's law and purpose, not in revolt against them."
We
need more "learning moments" from God's unchanging Word.
Reflections on the Trial of the Rev. Beth Stroud
By
Dean Snyder, Senior Minister,
Foundry United Methodist Church
The Rev. Beth Stroud’s trial was painful and sad. Although she was
universally affirmed, even by the prosecution, as an effective and
caring pastor called by God to ministry, Stroud was found guilty of
“practices incompatible with Christian teaching” because she had
publicly announced that she is in a covenanted, partnered relationship
with another woman. Her ministerial credentials in the United Methodist
Church were taken away. As a witness who was not permitted to testify --
someone who in the end merely sat in the audience and observed -- I left
the two-day event sore and achy, as though I had been beaten. I, along
with many others, experienced the jury’s decision as profoundly unjust,
but even those who agreed with the verdict seemed to realize it was
tragic. This is, perhaps, what was most telling about Stroud’s trial: at
the end of the process, something, the process and/or the result,
troubled even those who advocated for and participated in the verdict
and penalty.
At the final press conference, after the sentence had been announced
and the court adjourned, Robert Schumaker, Jr., the attorney who
counseled the prosecutor, was asked by reporters if he was surprised
that the vote to take away Stroud’s ministerial credentials was so close
- seven to six. Schumaker said he was not surprised. “It was a jury of
ministers,” he said, “and ministers by their very nature tend to be
lenient.”
I would add that, more than just a jury of ministers, it was a jury
of Methodist ministers, and Methodists by our very nature tend to be
warm and welcoming. The decision reached by the jury in Stroud’s case is
contrary to our Methodist spirit and nature. For this reason, the terms
of the trial had to be pre-arranged to make any verdict other than
guilty almost impossible. For example, the jury was denied access to the
testimony of those of us invited by Stroud’s defense team to present our
studied perspectives on how the Bible, the Constitution of the United
Methodist Church, and the Book of Discipline (the compendium of policies
adopted by the General Conference, the church’s legislative body, each
quadrennium) might inform its decisions.
Methodism’s fundamental character as an accepting and welcoming
movement reaching out to all is also the reason why, when the verdict
and sentence were announced, the presiding officer and prosecutor, as
well as the jury members, all appeared deeply saddened. Many were in
tears. They had participated in a decision contrary to their deepest
sentiments and commitments as Methodists.
Background Two decisions, one by the Judicial Council, the supreme
court of the United Methodist Church, and the other by the presiding
officer, or judge, of the trial – perhaps based on his interpretation of
another particularly harsh Judicial Council ruling – made a guilty
verdict almost inevitable.
First, a ruling by the Judicial Council (Decision No. 980) issued
last year severely narrowed, to Stroud’s disadvantage, the pool of
clergy considered for the jury. The decision was issued in response to
the case of the Rev. Karen Dammann, a lesbian pastor who, like Stroud,
had informed her bishop that she was in a covenanted relationship. The
Committee on Investigation of the Pacific Northwest Conference of the
United Methodist Church decided she was an effective pastor and voted
not to prosecute her. The Judicial Council disagreed and issued a ruling
that anyone “unwilling to uphold the Discipline for reasons of
conscience or otherwise must step aside” and not be allowed to serve as
members of committees of investigation or on trial juries.
The practical meaning of the council’s decision is that anyone not
willing to unconditionally uphold 22 words of the Book of Discipline
will not be allowed to serve on church trial juries. The 22 words are:
“self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be accepted as
candidates, ordained as ministers or appointed to serve in the United
Methodist Church” (Paragraph 304.3)
Excluded from trial juries are those who believe that to enforce
these 22 words would be to violate the Discipline’s more fundamental and
prevalent commitment to inclusiveness. Paragraph 4 of the Book of
Discipline says: “In the United Methodist Church no conference or other
organizational unit of the Church shall be structured so as to exclude
any member or any constituent body of the Church because of race, color,
national origin, status, or economic condition.”
Paragraph 138 says: “Inclusiveness means openness, acceptance, and
support that enable all persons to participate in the life of the
Church, the community, and the world. Thus, inclusiveness denies every
semblance of discrimination.”
Similar statements appear throughout the Book of Discipline. And
paragraph XXX recognizes that gay and lesbian individuals are “persons
of sacred worth.” In effect, the Judicial Council has decided that 22
words take precedence over the historic fundamental commitments to an
inclusive Connection and, for that matter, all the rest of the Book of
Discipline.
The Judicial Council issued this ruling limiting who can serve on
juries in spite of the fact that the Book of Discipline provides no
basis for this decision. The Discipline stipulates only that the jury
pool shall consist of clergy in full connection and that special
consideration shall be given to make sure the pool is diverse in race,
ethnicity and gender. In Stroud’s trial, as many as 14 persons were
removed from the pool of potential jury members because they were
unwilling to state that they would disregard their consciences in
interpreting the Book of Discipline in the way the Judicial Council has
said it needs to be interpreted. Had they been included in the pool of
potential jurors, the trial results may well have been different.
Secondly, the presiding judge, retired Bishop Joseph Yeakel, a highly
respected church leader, decided that the trial would consider only the
narrowly defined question of whether Stroud is in fact a “self-avowed
practicing homosexual.” Bishop Yeakel read only selected passages of the
Discipline and of Judicial Council decisions to the jury, and he did not
allow testimony from witnesses concerning other sections of the
Discipline. So surprised was I by this decision that I read and reread
the Book of Discipline and relevant Judicial Council rulings to try to
find the basis for it. I read news stories about previous church trials,
such as the Dammann trial last March, to discover if there was a
precedent for his decision to define the trial’s content so
restrictively. The Book of Discipline does say that it is the presiding
officer’s authority to decide on admissibility of evidence, but I could
find no church rule or precedent for Bishop Yeakel’s decision to define
the terms of the trial so narrowly.
Perhaps Bishop Yeakel was influenced by a particularly draconian
Judicial Council decision (Decision 886) which states that no individual
member or entity of the United Methodist Church is free to ignore,
negate, or violate provisions of the Book of Discipline because they
disagree with them. To interpret this as prohibiting testimony about
other provisions in the Book of Discipline, including the Constitution,
during a trial seems to me to be a illogical stretch of the imagination.
Bishop Yeakel is a strong advocate for the inclusion of gay and
lesbian persons in ordained ministry, but as presiding officer, the
terms he set for this trial had the effect of predetermining the
verdict. Nothing that I can discover in the Book of Discipline, in
Judicial Council decisions, or in the precedent of past trials requires
a presiding officer to disallow testimony about the Constitution of the
church or other sections of the Book of Discipline. It would seem to me
that ignoring, negating or violating other provisions of the Book of
Discipline, such as paragraphs 4 and 138, might also be inconsistent
with the Judicial Council’s ruling.
Conclusion These actions illustrate a restrictive spirit
uncharacteristic of Methodism. This is not the way we relate to each
other and live together as Methodists. They are, I suspect, the
consequence of a fear that open discussion and full consideration might
have led to another verdict, and this would have angered those within
the denomination who oppose gay and lesbian clergy.
I think this fear is well grounded. Had open discussion and full
consideration of the Book of Discipline been allowed, there may well
have been a different verdict. While some Methodists, due to their lack
of awareness and exposure, may be threatened by the idea of gay and
lesbian clergy, most Methodists are friendly and welcoming. (Garrison
Keillor makes fun of Methodists for our irrepressible and overbearing,
almost intrusive, friendliness.) A majority of delegates to our
legislative meetings may have voted against the idea of openly gay
clergy in theory, but fewer Methodists would find themselves able to
vote against the Rev. Beth Stroud, an obviously gifted, effective and
called minister, unless the makeup of the jury panel had been defined to
exclude those with a proclivity to be supportive and the terms of the
trial had been so narrowly defined.
I am confident, however, that the true spirit of Methodism will
survive this period of misunderstanding and intolerance. My confidence
is based in large part on Methodists like the Rev. Beth Stroud, who at
great personal cost and risk, have been willing to remain faithful to
their church when that church has failed to be faithful to them. My
beloved Old Testament professor, the late Dr. Harrell Beck, used to tell
the story about a strange man of faith who believed a wolf and a lamb
could dwell together in peace. He installed a cage in his living room,
and each Sunday afternoon he would invite his neighbors in to see the
miracle of a wolf and a lamb dwelling together in peace. Finally,
someone pulled him aside and asked him how he did it. How did he get a
wolf and a lamb to dwell together in peace? The man of faith replied:
“The secret of getting a wolf and a lamb to dwell together in peace is
to have an almost inexhaustible supply of lambs.”
Methodists are not wolves. This is not our heritage, nor our nature,
nor our proclivity. I believe we will not long be able to devour lambs
without the pain and tragedy of it calling us back to the spirit of
acceptance and understanding that is our Methodist birthright. It is
those gay and lesbian Methodists, like Stroud, bearing witness to their
love for Jesus Christ and for the United Methodist Church, who will
transform our harden hearts into hearts again strangely warmed.
In a strange way, the extraordinary efforts to limit the jury pool
and to narrowly define the terms of Stroud’s trial are a testimony to
how little confidence church officials have that ordinary Methodists
will be willing to enforce the rules made by church legislative bodies.
Rules that require such extraordinary efforts to make sure they are
enforced will not long survive. Year by year United Methodists are
experiencing an ever widening circle of exclusion – the exclusion of
jurors, witnesses, and open discussion – in order to maintain the
exclusion of gifted and divinely called openly gay and lesbian clergy.
Such a violation of our deep commitment to inclusiveness too deeply
violates our heritage, values, and spirit to last much longer.
Additional background/perspective from Foundry UMC:
A Foundry Resolution
By Paul Hazen Many in the Foundry family were dismayed by the recent
actions of the General Conference of the United Methodist Church
relating to the inclusion of gay and lesbian people in our Church. The
General Conference approved a resolution that the United Methodist
Church "does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers
this practice incompatible with Christian teaching," which was declared
to be Church law rather than merely teaching or opinion. An effort to
add a sentence simply recognizing that Christians disagree about
homosexuality was defeated. This step backward by the General Conference
was attributed to a reaction against the recent trial verdict in which a
clergy jury in Washington state refused to punish an openly lesbian
pastor by taking away her ordination.
I have heard concerns from a number of members wishing to withhold
their (and Foundry's) financial support of the General Conference. As
Chair of the Finance Committee, I raised the issue with the Finance
Committee and we discussed and prayed about the issue for three months
and then wrote – and unanimously voted to present – a resolution to the
Church Council. I am please to report that the Church Council also
unanimously approved the resolution.
I believe that the resolution firmly places Foundry on record in
opposition to the actions of the General Conference and sets a positive
agenda for positive action. Garrett Peck is leading an issues working
group and we welcome participation from everyone throughout the
Congregation. You can reach Garrett at garrettpeck@comcast.net. The
Finance Committee is also interested in your opinions and thoughts on
this important issue for the United Methodist Church.
A copy of the resolution follows:
FOUNDRY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH A Resolution Prepared and Presented
by The Finance Committee Paul Hazen, chair Approved The Church Council
Karen Beasley, chair WHEREAS the 2004 General Conference of the United
Methodist Church has adopted denomination policies that further restrict
the opportunities for homosexual persons to enjoy full inclusion in the
life of the Church, and
WHEREAS Foundry Church, as a matter of faith believes that these
policies are contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ and incompatible
with its commitment as a reconciling congregation to implement the
fundamental policy of the Church that recognizes homosexuals as persons
of sacred worth, and
WHEREAS certain members of Foundry Church find it difficult as a
matter of conscience to continue to contribute any portion of their
financial gifts to the worldwide institution of the United Methodist
Church, while others may silently wonder whether they should continue in
membership in any church affiliated with the United Methodist Church,
and
WHEREAS Foundry Church in failing to take actions to register its
disagreement with the actions of the General Conference Foundry Church
would fail to be in faithful accord with its decision to become a
reconciling congregation and also would fail in its mission to minister
to those members who are denied full participation in the life of the
Church,
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY FOUNDRY CHURCH THAT the Church Council
establish an issues working group to devise initiatives to make known
throughout the denomination its strong disagreement with the 2004
policies adopted by the General Conference so that Foundry and confirm
Foundry as a beacon of inclusion and a living example of its desire that
the love of Christ be made fully available to all. That among these
actions shall be considered:
1. A request to the Baltimore-Washington Conference that a portion of
its apportionments be used for evangelism and outreach among the Gay,
Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered communities.
2. An invitation to the Chief Financial Officer of the General
Conference to meet at Foundry Church with the Church Council, the
Finance Committee, and the GLBT group to discuss the concerns of Foundry
Church that its financial gifts are supporting an institution which
rejects the full participation in the Church of a large number of its
members.
3. Concrete, active and vocal participation in the Reconciling
Ministries Network and the Methodist Federation for Social Action.
4. Foster an understanding of homosexuality by funding, distributing
and discussing materials that provide an enlightened Christian
perspective on the subject of homosexuality.
5. Drafting and presentation to the Baltimore-Washington annual
conference of appropriate resolutions for presentation at the 2008
General Conference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT in accomplishing these
and other actions devised by the working group and approved by the
Church Council, Foundry shall become a forceful, visible, and vocal
symbol in the United Methodist Church for the redemption of the promise
of Jesus Christ that His love extends to all persons and that the grace
of God shall embrace all who choose him as their Lord and Savior.
Two Challenges for Foundry
Rev. Dean Snyder and Bishop John Schol Urge Foundry to Leadership By
Mark Schoeff, Jr.
Rev. Dean Snyder’s annual stewardship sermon on October 17
challenging Foundry to stay at the forefront of the battle to make the
United Methodist Church a more inclusive and mission driven denomination
was resoundingly endorsed by his boss a few weeks later. On November 21,
Bishop John Schol, of the Baltimore-Washington Conference, asserted that
there should be more churches in the denomination that share Foundry’s
outlook and values. He said Foundry should be “cloned.”
Dean had spoken of some of the tensions between Foundry and the
larger United Methodist Church. Part of that tension is due to our being
a reconciling congregation, but not all; there are other tensions as
well. He also noted that some raised questions about our financial
support of the larger UM Church due to our differences over the full
inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) persons into
the full life and ministry of the Church.
Responding to the question of financial support, Snyder urged Foundry
members to continue to support Foundry so that we could continue to help
change the UM Church’s views on homosexuality, as well as on some other
major challenges facing our society. He pointed to three key facts:
First, the UMC is the third largest Christian denomination. Second, the
two larger denominations are the Roman Catholic and Southern Baptist
churches. Third, those two churches are far more strident in their
condemnation of GLBT persons than the United Methodist Church.
“We’re not going to get much help from the two largest denominations”
Snyder said. “If any denomination is going to speak a prophetic message
about the inclusion of gay and lesbian people in society, it’s going to
be the United Methodist Church. That makes our commitment at Foundry
more important than it has ever been. We must continue being a joyful
voice in the midst of this struggle.” Snyder also pointed to the good
work that the church does in the United States and more than 70
countries on 14, N 12 DECEMBER, 2004 behalf of vulnerable members of
society. “People need to understand that their money is going to
ministries that we really want to support. It is really an extension of
the mission work at Foundry.”
Most heard Snyder’s sermon as a challenge to Foundry to be a firm and
reliable leader in both our community and in the larger UM Church. Five
weeks later, on November 21st, our Bishop, the Rev. John Schol, took
that challenge further. Noting that Foundry is known for its
inclusiveness, its missions and ministry, and the commitment of its
members, Bishop Schol challenged us to “clone Foundry,” to start new
“Foundry congregations.” “Life would be so much better for all of us in
the United Methodist Church if there were a few more Foundry’s around,”
he said.
Bishop Schol was not speaking of buildings or specific programs.
Rather, he was speaking of the values and attitudes that make up the
community that we call Foundry. No one knows how to respond to the
Bishop’s challenge, but some have begun to talk about it. Rev. Snyder
has invited all interested in finding a way to do so to contact him at
(202) 332-4010, or by email at dsnyder@foundryumc.org.
Statement on the Conviction Of Rev. Beth Stroud
Executive Committee,
MFSA, Oregon-Idaho Chapter
December 3, 2004
