GC2016: The debate about how to debate sexuality

Disir

Platinum Member
Sep 30, 2011
28,003
9,611
910
When the 2016 General Conference begins next month, one of the delegates’ first tasks will be to decide if they want to use a new way to address tough issues.

However, that proposal is already getting pushback — including questions of whether it would pass muster with the denomination’s top court.

The Commission on General Conference, which organizes The United Methodist Church’s top lawmaking assembly, is proposing what it calls a Group Discernment Process to consider complex and contentious legislation. The goal is to help more delegates weigh in on legislation and foster greater consensus among the multinational body of United Methodists on church policies.

Delegates can use the proposed process for any grouping of legislation they choose or even postpone using it until the 2020 General Conference.

Nonetheless, the commission already has a topic in mind for the process’ first use — legislation related to the denomination’s stance on homosexuality.

The denomination bans the performance of same-sex marriages and the ordination of “self-avowed practicing” gay clergy. Fierce and at-times hurtful debate about how the church ministers with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals has raged at each General Conference since 1972.

“We need to expand the ways that we can make decisions and be in conversation with each other,” said Judi Kenaston, the commission’s chair. “This was requested of us by the General Conference 2012 and also was extremely important to the members of the commission from central conferences (church regions in Africa, Asia and Europe).”

Still others argue the process will not help church decision-making.

The proposal “is a distortion of how we as Methodists should understand Christian conferencing,” Mathew Pinson, chair of the North Georgia Conference delegation, wrote in a position paper he is sharing with other delegates.

The Rev. Keith Boyette has written an open letter, saying he believes the Group Discernment Process is unlikely to withstand a challenge before the Judicial Council, the denomination’s equivalent of the U.S. Supreme Court. Boyette, a reserve delegate from the Virginia Conference, is a former Judicial Council member.

“Frankly, I do not see an alternative process that would achieve the benefits that occur under Robert’s Rules of Order,” Boyette told United Methodist News Service.

“I find this Group Discernment Process especially troublesome. I was going to use the word ‘pernicious.’ It is fraught with potholes, fraught with places where problems can arise and where people can walk away from it saying I wasn’t really heard.”

GC2016: The debate about how to debate sexuality - The United Methodist Church

Or..........how to over complicate any issue in one easy step.
 
When the 2016 General Conference begins next month, one of the delegates’ first tasks will be to decide if they want to use a new way to address tough issues.

However, that proposal is already getting pushback — including questions of whether it would pass muster with the denomination’s top court.

The Commission on General Conference, which organizes The United Methodist Church’s top lawmaking assembly, is proposing what it calls a Group Discernment Process to consider complex and contentious legislation. The goal is to help more delegates weigh in on legislation and foster greater consensus among the multinational body of United Methodists on church policies.

Delegates can use the proposed process for any grouping of legislation they choose or even postpone using it until the 2020 General Conference.

Nonetheless, the commission already has a topic in mind for the process’ first use — legislation related to the denomination’s stance on homosexuality.

The denomination bans the performance of same-sex marriages and the ordination of “self-avowed practicing” gay clergy. Fierce and at-times hurtful debate about how the church ministers with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals has raged at each General Conference since 1972.

“We need to expand the ways that we can make decisions and be in conversation with each other,” said Judi Kenaston, the commission’s chair. “This was requested of us by the General Conference 2012 and also was extremely important to the members of the commission from central conferences (church regions in Africa, Asia and Europe).”

Still others argue the process will not help church decision-making.

The proposal “is a distortion of how we as Methodists should understand Christian conferencing,” Mathew Pinson, chair of the North Georgia Conference delegation, wrote in a position paper he is sharing with other delegates.

The Rev. Keith Boyette has written an open letter, saying he believes the Group Discernment Process is unlikely to withstand a challenge before the Judicial Council, the denomination’s equivalent of the U.S. Supreme Court. Boyette, a reserve delegate from the Virginia Conference, is a former Judicial Council member.

“Frankly, I do not see an alternative process that would achieve the benefits that occur under Robert’s Rules of Order,” Boyette told United Methodist News Service.

“I find this Group Discernment Process especially troublesome. I was going to use the word ‘pernicious.’ It is fraught with potholes, fraught with places where problems can arise and where people can walk away from it saying I wasn’t really heard.”

GC2016: The debate about how to debate sexuality - The United Methodist Church

Or..........how to over complicate any issue in one easy step.

Yo, there is no debate? A Fag is a Fag, A Lez is a Lez! Simple, carry on!!!

"GTP"
This one in The Gay House? Yes, he/she will be gone soon!!!
1435410503_white-house--rainbow-scotus-gay-marriage_2.jpg
 
The Methodist Church is not guided by the Holy Spirit and will find itself falling in error if it uses a democratic process to decide fundamental doctrinal issues of faith and morals.
 
Oh, I thought this thread was titled "How to debase sexuality".

This is much less fun than I expected.
 

Forum List

Back
Top