The Hypocrisy Exposed Of The “Gay Sex Is Sin” Cadre

The Hypocrisy Exposed Of The “Gay Sex Is Sin” Cadre February 26, 2019

The vote: hypocrisy exposed. Other’s people’s sexual activities (as long as it involves gay sex) are wrong and merit condemnation, but I get to keep all my sexual sins without that same condemnation. 



We’ve had a fascinating day.

After what looked like a lot of deliberate slowing of the procedures in the first session, the Judicial Council delivered their report.

A summary: they found substantive portions of the Traditional Plan unconstitutional and/or illegal.

After that pronouncement, The Rev. Tom Berlin gave an appeal to replace the punitive and gay-unfriendly Traditional Plan with the One Church Plan that gives space for clergy, churches, Bishops, districts and Annual Conferences to follow their conscience. This led to a solemn moment of prayer and then the vote.

The delegates had to decide to keep working on the constitutionally-impaired Traditional Plan (which will surely be thrown out after the Conference) and leave the church smeared with the name “anti-gay” in public perception or give space and freedom of conscience with the One Church Plan.


The Crucial Vote

I admit to sweaty palms and my hands were shaking.

The Death of the UMCAnd the delegates spoke: “Gays, get out.” Well, not true. It’s “Gays, we love you, but you are not in conformance with the Bible. I, ever so holy, get to judge you that you are just not quite good enough. Clean up your act and the doors will swing wide open.”

“Oh, and in the meantime, I can sleep around and watch pornography and grab power and demean other people and no one will EVER accuse me of doing things that are not consistent with Christian practice.”

Yes, the Traditional Plan was voted to stay alive and on the floor. Once more, the One Church Plan was voted down.

I have been predicting this outcome, effectively a take-over of the UMC by the far right, for some time. Doesn’t keep me from grieving, groaning inside, hoping the Holy Spirit can find words to intercede for me because I can’t pray right now.

But the “sure they are righteous” have, at least momentarily, prevailed. The future of UMC appears to be firmly in their hands, nearly completely. I can guess at some of the fallout from this and know it won’t be pretty. In other words, prepare “Prepare for the implosion.”


The dynamics of the takeover

Let’s think about the dynamics of the UMC here. A large percentage of the US church is either centrist or progressive. The US church covers the vast majority of the worldwide budget of the church, perhaps 98% of it. Ponder that.

The African “Interpret the Bible MY way”/”Southern Baptists in United Methodist Clothing” coalition comprise about 55% of the worldwide church but are perhaps, maybe, a generous 25% of the budget. Let’s assume that the rest of us no longer want to be controlled by the Southern Baptists in UMC clothing” and the “Interpret the Bible MY way” African coalition and say, “OK, it’s all yours. Name, insignia, structure. Bye, Bye.”

Now, first, the General Boards and Agencies will be decimated because the “SB’s in UMC clothing/Bible my way African” coalition has no interest in that kind of connectional work. Furthermore, Wespath has already made it clear in their report that, should the Traditional Plan pass, it will cause havoc with our shared pension system. Our retired clergy, many of whom live with sparse means already, will suffer greatly.

The rest of the US church will form a new denomination, and accept the ordinations of the formerly United Methodist Clergy. That’s always a possibility.


More interesting things on the floor: hypocrisy exposed

BUT, things are getting interesting on the floor. Late this morning, a delegate asked for an amendment to petition number 90032,

Here’s how Petition number 90032, written by the (apparently) gay-fearing Tom Lambrecht, reads now:

“Self-avowed practicing homosexual” is understood to mean that a person openly acknowledges to a bishop, district superintendent, district committee of ordained ministry, Board of Ordained Ministry, or clergy session that the person is a practicing homosexual; or is living in a same-sex marriage, domestic partnership or civil union, or is a person who publicly states she or he is a practicing homosexual.” [Should the person admit this, he/she may not serve as ordained clergy in the wider reading of the whole plan.]

The delegate wanted to amend that petition with this addition:

“AND is either living in an adulterous relationship, a polyamorous relationship or in any deviation from the civil definition of marriage.”

Personally, I think they should add as well “and ever uses pornography and was not a virgin on his/her wedding night and has ever spilled his sperm anywhere except in a vagina.” But, that’s just my opinion.

hypocrisy exposedAnyway, the final vote: A “no thanks” hypocrisy exposed vote. Other’s people’s sexual activities are wrong, but I get to keep mine.

More and more speeches have taken hard aim at the giant hypocrisy of the supposedly “Bible-following without question” group. Among other things, The Rev. Adam Hamilton called upon the WCA [WCA: Wesleyan Covenant Association, the schismatic group that is behind the punitive Traditional Plan] members to give up their pensions because the Bible clearly says, “Do not store up treasures on earth.”

This afternoon could easily stay interesting. Keep watching twitter feeds (#GC2019, #UMCGC2019, #UMC,  and UMInsight and I’ll update as I can.


Photo Credit: taken by Christy Thomas from screenshots of the live feed.

"Allow me to step you thorugh this young one... You are ignorant of all that ..."

The Answer To: “Does The UMC ..."
"Oh look...Google shows:"stupid"1. having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense."I was ..."

The Answer To: “Does The UMC ..."
"FACT: The words stupid and ignorant are not synonyms. Look them up. If you are ..."

The Answer To: “Does The UMC ..."
""Ignorant" and "stupid" are the same.As mentioned, there is really no such thing as an ..."

The Answer To: “Does The UMC ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • If you want to pursue your homosexual activities you are free to do so. Nobody is stopping you. But if the majority of those making decisions at the UMC Conference determine that it wishes to retain its believe that such activities are contrary to the Scriptures that is what they will do. If the shoe was on the other foot,you would be demanding that everyone accept the decision and just move ahead.

    Hypocricy? Oh, yes, Indeed. Your’s.

    • David Brown

      I’m not Methodist and have nothing to do with this conference, but your comment cries out for a response. You speculatively create a straw-man statement (“If the shoe was on the other foot…”) and then attribute that to the author, calling it “hypocricy” (sic). Bad form.

    • Reese

      Let me put my foot down. I agree with you. There are a plethora of denominations which welcome homosexual clergy and weddings. Ours does not. Why can’t Methodists have their morals, in writing, while others have theirs? We are Americans. We can select the place of worship which meets our needs. Why must a place of worship conform to outside popular demands?

      • kcwookie

        So you would support a church or denomination that wanted to be white only? There are plunty of churches where blacks can worship so why must a place of worship conform to outside popular demands?

  • Reese

    1) Why are progressives so upset at the passing of the “Traditional” Plan – the bishops and the Judicial Council have failed to enforce the current BoD for decades, so why would anyone expect them to enforce a restated, but essentially the same plan?
    2) Why are traditionalists so elated at the passing of the “Traditional” Plan – see 1) above
    .
    3) Example: Were there not homosexual clergy from UMC pulpits at this GC? Were they challenged by credentials or Judicial or just welcomed and seated? Exactly! BoD? Forgetaboutit!
    4) Example: Was there a not a lesbian bishop from a UMC conference at the GC? Was she challenged by credentials or Judicial or just welcomed, seated, and allowed to speak? Exactly! BoD? Forgetaboutit!
    .
    5) Was serious support for the two exit plans surprising? Not to me. Because, reading the blogs, so many of us are just tired of the subject,, the debate, the whining and distractions from our church life. As expected, for all the time, money, drama, tears and protests, this GC was a complete waste of time. It is a monument to bad management for over 50 years. Nothing has really changed and the WCA and other exit proponents will have a plethora of new examples of reasons to hit the doors.
    .
    6) Bad management? Has our UMC management ever made clear to all seminaries, annually in writing, to be read and signed by all new prospective UMC clergy, “UMC forbids homosexual clergy. Do not apply to UMC”? Forgetaboutit!
    7) Au contraire. I suspect that seminaries were left alone to tell their new students, “Together, we can change the UMC!” Well, they are not changing it much, but they are doing a bang-up job of destroying it!

  • Robin Knauerhase

    The Disciples LGBTQ+ Alliance (Christian Church/DoC) has a couple messages of support for queer and allied Methodists. Before the vote: https://bit.ly/2Tka76t

    After the vote: https://bit.ly/2H586V7

  • Robin Knauerhase

    Thanks for your blog, btw – it has been useful to read between events in the livestream, livetweeting, and offical UMC news.

  • soter phile

    Sad that the primary thrust of a great portion of this article is:
    “Well, we already ignore God’s Word on hetero sex, why start listening with LGBT issues?!”

    why not pray that both parties repent & start listening to God – especially to his design for sex?
    or is your goal for the UMC that everyone be comfortable – even if no one listens to God?

  • jackattak

    I’m not a member of the UMC but if 75% of the duly selected delegates vote against the change, I say “the church has spoken.” (I personally agree with the 25% btw). Your argument is weak as these people aren’t all hypocrites. They would say they have the Apostle Paul and most of the New Testament on their side. I would invite you to the Episcopal Church but too much of these patheos UMC articles are nasty and mean spirited.

  • bWeBaptist

    This split is about Bible inerrancy, ordaining gay clergy, and performing same-sex marriages. Gays will neither benefit nor suffer from this division into two Methodists groups, because they already can get married in many states whether the church allows it or not. It will be women who suffer, by a loss of churches willing to accept a woman pastor and by marriage seminars teaching male headship. This conservative group will begin with denouncing gays and same-sex marriages, and then you will find they are rejecting women pastors.

    Methodists have within their membership those who believe in male headship and this group will identify with those other denominations that teach against homosexuality and who also deny women equality to preach or pastor.

    Openly gay pastors are a rarity, even among those who accept gay pastors. However, there are many gay pastors among evangelical conservative Christians and Catholics. None of these denominations affirm gay pastors, but they are there. Conservative churches know they have gay pastors within their churches, but do not make an issue of it until something happens. Thus, there will continue to be male gay pastors in the split-off Methodist churches. But you can count on it, these split-off churches will not continue to accept female pastors.

  • newenglandsun

    Your sexual sin was condemned ages ago and very few in the Church have chosen to make exceptions for it. This has become an issue in which the Church needed to address.