Two weeks ago General Conference made a decision around inclusivity that many people within the United Methodist Church are having a difficult time understanding. I’ve taken the last few weeks to process my emotions before putting anything out into the wild west of the Internet. I am still sad. I am still angry. However I have seen a few glimmers that give me hope for a new thing.
To provide some context, the United Methodist Church operates under a Book of Discipline that governs our denomination’s beliefs and policies. For years there has been a debate regarding the line that was inserted in the 1970s – Homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Now, the Traditionalist plan that passed will not only keep this statement, but will strengthen it by intensifying consequences for any clergy or Bishop who chooses to ordain or marry any LGBTQ+ persons. This decision was received with a significant amount of backlash from moderates, progressives, and some conservatives who feel as though inclusion is integral to embodying the practices of Christ and had hopes for the One Church Plan that allowed for regional flexibility on the issue. Furthermore, the American media coverage has been far from favorable.
However, it has been most interesting to observe the reactions of those on the side of traditionalists. The public outcry genuinely confuses them. Some have stated, I don’t get it. We aren’t saying gay people can’t come to church. They are still welcome and included.
I decided I wanted to spend some time reflecting on the concept of inclusion.
What does it mean to be included? For some, it seems as though they believe if you are not excluded, then by default you are included. As a straight, white, middle-class, Christian blonde, there are many ways in which I cannot fully understand this concept myself. However, it has drudged up some old memories of a time in which inclusion and exclusion is felt and experienced with a fury – the middle school “mean girl” phase.
Raise your hand if you’ve ever been personally victimized by Regina George. Whether it happened as a child or even an adult, I believe most women have lived in a world in which at some point they were the victim or perpetrator of female relational bullying. Mean girls are a rite of passage for women, along with bad bangs and an awkward sixth grade school photo. For a few years, the circle of mean girls I was subjected to had a terrible practice around sleepovers. They would invite a group to their home including one person who was only given partial inclusion. Honestly I don’t know how it was decided upon as to who would be the reject invitee, but you always prayed it wasn’t going to be you. What this looked like was a sleepover in which sometimes we were all playing together except for one person who was not allowed in the game. It looked like a group of girls ignoring or shunning another during dinner. It looked like a group of giggling friends in sleeping bags on one side of a room and an outsider contemplating whether she should call her mom. In its worst form, they physically locked the pyrrhia out of the room or house. On Monday when people asked how it went, you could say you were there. But you weren’t there.
Is this what it feels like to be an LGBTQ+ person in the United Methodist Church? Allowed to be there, but not allowed to be there. Are we really included if we aren’t allowed to take on positions of leadership? Being able to sit in a church during worship and offer tithes but not being allowed to partake in the sacred covenant of marriage is like bringing a gift to a birthday party but not being allowed to eat cake. It just feels wrong.
I read a great definition of inclusion recently:
Inclusion: treating everyone with equivalent consideration, the same consideration that we give to or want for ourselves; seeking people out and actively connecting with them, listening to them, accepting them, inviting them into our lives
This definition does not match with our current treatment of the LGBTQ+ community in church right now.
What if we used this same practice of “inclusion” on other subgroups within our culture. One of the reasons I chose Methodism is specifically because we ordain women. However, imagine if we went back to the practice of putting a cap on the level of leadership a woman can obtain. What if we used this practice on people of color? Yes, you are allowed to come to our church, but hopefully God doesn’t call you to ministry because that certainly isn’t allowed. Want to marry a white person? Nah. That isn’t God’s order. You have epilepsy or depression or physical disability? Sorry, but you can’t sit with us because I’m pretty sure you’re actually possessed by demons. Sadly this was a reality for for millennia. While there is still much subconscious bias remaining for these subgroups, we are finally getting to a place where at least on a surface level we can say that anything other than full inclusion is wrong.
And yet.
This is the point in the conversation where many with a conservative background begin to shut down. But this is different. People don’t choose to be black or depressed or women. Homosexuality is a sin and a choice, so it should be treated differently. For someone who grew up in a fairly conservative context, I was raised to believe homosexuality is a choice. Yet for some reason as a teenager (much to the annoyance of my youth leaders), I began to question the conservative narrative around homosexuality, even from a biblical perspective. It seemed as though cherry picking six verses and ignoring all the other “smaller” or more common sins wasn’t really fair, but I was too young to know how to articulate that. It also neglected the overall practice of Jesus. However, after years of teaching, I fully and firmly changed my opinion on the matter. You can only watch so many children as they grow and then grapple with their sexuality before you must question whether it’s truly a choice. This was furthered while as an adult, was able to see men and women in their sixties who have far surpassed the “phase” that was their choice of homosexuality.
I want to be clear. I do not think homosexuality is a choice. However, for some of you that is still a sticking point. So let’s pretend like it is a choice.
In that case, I’d like us to imagine that we use this same practice of inclusion for obesity. Technically, obesity is incompatible with biblical teaching and many people believe obesity is a choice of simply eating too much or exercising too little. Luckily science has now taught us that obesity is not actually that simple nor is it a choice. Often obesity is linked to genetics, addiction, or unresolved trauma. However, some are still stuck in this old way of thinking. Would we apply this same principle of biblical incompatibility to those who are obese? Has anyone suggested that a person struggling with obesity cannot be married or ordained? No, because that is insane.
But a sexual sin is different, some might argue. I’m not sure that it is, and I’m certain that Jesus never said that. But okay, let’s go with that argument for a minute. How many clergy are watching porn? How many have had sexual relationships prior to or outside of marriage? How many have been divorced? How many lust? How many are greedy? How many lie? How many are subject to anger? How many do not honor the Sabbath?
My point is this. We are hypocrites. Plain and simple. Romans 2:11 states “But God does not show favoritism.” Malachi 2:10 “Do we not all have one Father? Did not one God create us? Why do we profane the covenant of our ancestors by being unfaithful to one another?”
It makes me sad and angry that people who have been born with a particular sexual orientation are not fully included in our churches. This is not a choice for them, nor is it a sin or lifestyle they are choosing for fun. They are simply another expression of the fullness of God. The LGBTQ+ community has been denied cake for far too long and are tired of waiting on us to decide whether they can play.
My hope lies in the “new thing” that I see taking shape. The one silver lining of General Conference is that it has exposed the dysfunction of our church’s governing system and is causing many of us who have remained quiet to finally say, No more. We are no longer willing to allow our brothers, sisters, friends, and coworkers to feel as though they are anything less than the rest of us. Some within the UMC have begun utilizing the hashtag #anewthing to express a desire for a church that includes everyone in all aspects of church life. It inspired me to write a song of hope for our future, that you can listen to here. I believe God wants us all at the party. I believe God is using all types of varied people to build God’s Kingdom. And I believe we might have a chance to actually be the church if we stop focusing so much on our invite list and start using energy to preach the gospel of love to a group of people who have been shunned and outcast for far too long.
