| Complaint "for" the Methodist Church
February 24, 2000
Robert C. Morgan
280 Browenton Building
2000 Warrington Way
Louisville, KY 40222-3407
After a great deal of thought, prayer, and discernment this letter is sent by Dotti Berry, along with Jane Jenkins, a member of Centenary United Methodist Church, as a complaint against the Reverend David Thomas, Senior Pastor of Centenary United Methodist Church in Lexington, Kentucky. Jane Jenkins is a member of Centenary United Method Church. Dotti Berry was denied membership by Reverend Thomas for the specific reason that she is a homosexual, a sinner in Reverend Thomas’ view and unworthy of membership in the Church.
Based on the above, we bring the charge together. The pastor’s actions constitute a chargeable offense as he violated several sections of the Book of Discipline on page 656. His violation of specific duties is verified by section 2624(d), "failure to perform the work of the ministry" as well as paragraph 2624(e) which is “disobedience to the Order and Discipline of the United Methodist Church.”
BACKGROUND BY DOTTI BERRY
I began attending Centenary United Methodist Church in Lexington, Kentucky around March of 1998. My upstairs neighbor, Jane Jenkins, who invited me to visit, immediately introduced me to David Thomas, the senior minister, and his wife, Karen. Jane has been a member of Centenary for many years.
When Jane invited me, she asked for permission to share with David that I am gay. She said David had mentioned to her that he was possibly going to preach a sermon, which would touch on that issue. Since Jane knew me to be an open, gay Christian, I responded that I did not mind at all. She wanted to tell him because she thought he might want to talk with me as he put together information for his sermon.
At any rate, although I had met David and I was aware that he knew about me through Jane, he did not approach me in any way before this particular sermon. In the sermon, he preached that homosexual people could not inherit the kingdom of God. The next week after he preached that sermon, he asked Jane what I thought about his sermon. I said to Jane "If David wants to know what I think about his sermon, he should ask me."
I saw David several more times without him mentioning it. Finally, at his home one night with a newcomers group of people who had recently visited the church and were interested in learning more about Centenary, I was one of the last people to leave. At the end of the evening, David and I stood and chatted. Finally, I said to him (after I explained that I was aware that Jane had told him I am gay and that it was important to me to find a church where I could be honest) that I could not envision attending a church where I had to lie about who I am. I told him as a Christian, I found that to be incongruent. I said to him "If you can’t go to church and tell the truth, where can you go?" Then I said to him, "I understand that you are interested in hearing what I thought about your recent sermon. David, I want to preface my comments by saying that I do not want to offend you because I respect that you are the minister; however, I have to share with you five words which describe what I felt ‘Thank God you're not God.’ " We continued to talk after that before I left his home.
I continued attending Centenary United Methodist Church and finally, a couple of weeks before Easter of 1999, I decided that I wanted to meet with David and talk to him about joining the church. During our conversation, which was about an hour, he finally just told me that I could not join the church. He said he realized it seemed that I was being penalized for being honest. I replied "I am being penalized for being honest, because other gay people in the church, many of them my close friends, are allowed to sing in the choir, play in the orchestra and teach the Sunday School classes ... only because they do not tell the truth about being gay. It does not change their behavior or orientation; it only changes your knowledge of it."
The bottom line is I was told I could not join the church because I was not willing to view being homosexual as a sin -- and therefore repent of my sin -- in order to join the church. I explained to David that we differed on a key point, which is that I do not view it as a sin. I feel that my sexual orientation is as much as part of how I was born and "who I am" as the color of my eyes and my right handedness. Unfortunately, David does not view it this way and feels that distinction disqualifies me for membership in the church.
My feeling is that if those criteria were held to everyone in the church, Centenary would have no members. "Besides, if I am a sinner because of who I am, bring me into the fold." Let the Church’s witness be a light to me don’t cast me out! That makes no sense. The decision by David speaks of fear. The sad part is that the lesson David has taught my friends, and me is that if we want something of value, we should lie about it. In my opinion, that is not a good message to be taught by the pastor and the church, nor a value I want to retain.
I cannot begin to tell you the anguish and grief I have experienced due to David’s inappropriate decision. Thank goodness, I have an exceptionally strong personal relationship with God. Otherwise, I might have been one of those who committed suicide. After all, our group is seven times more likely to commit or attempt suicide and the majority of those are from Christian homes. And it is not happening because we are distressed over being gay; we are distressed over the spiritual violence that is perpetuated against us.
THE CHARGE AGAINST REVEREND THOMAS
We bring this charge together, Jane as a member of the United Methodist Church and Dotti as a prospective United Methodist denied membership in the Church by Reverend David Thomas. We believe David violated the Constitution of the United Methodist Church by telling Dotti she could not join the church. This is also a chargeable offense because it is disobedience to the Order and Discipline of the United Methodist Church.
Specifically, The Book of Discipline on page 122, in Section V. - Church Membership, paragraph 214, states:
The United Methodist Church, a fellowship of believers, is as a church also an inherent part of the church universal, which is composed of all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and which in the Apostles’ Creed we declare to be the holy catholic church. Therefore, all persons shall be eligible to attend its worship services, participate in its programs, receive the sacraments, and be admitted as baptized or professing members in any local church in the connection.
According to the above paragraph, Dotti undoubtedly qualifies for membership. So … again, why was she as a Christian denied this opportunity by the Reverend David Thomas?
By denying Dotti membership, there were additional violations of the Constitution of the United Methodist Church. These chargeable offenses, because of the disobedience to the Order and Discipline of The United Methodist Church as cited in The Book of Discipline, paragraph 2624.1(e), page 656, are actions which specifically violated the following part of the constitution:
Part I, Division One, Article IV. (paragraph 4 of The Book of Discipline, page 22) "Inclusiveness of the Church -- The United Methodist Church is a part of the church universal, which is one Body in Christ. Therefore all persons, without regard to race, color, national origin, status, or economic condition, shall be eligible to attend its worship service, to participate in its programs, and, when they take the appropriate vows, to be admitted into its membership in any local church in the connection...".
David’s action is also in conflict with paragraph 117 (The Book of Discipline, Part IV, The Ministry of All Christians, Section IX. Called to Inclusiveness, page 112), which states:
"We recognize that God made all creation and saw that it was good. As a diverse people of God who bring special gifts and evidences of God's grace to the unity of the Church and to society, we are called to be faithful to the example of Jesus' ministry to all persons. Inclusiveness means openness, acceptance, and support that enables all person to participate in the life of the Church, the community, and the world. Thus, inclusiveness denies every semblance of discrimination.
The mark of an inclusive society is one in which all persons are open, welcoming, fully accepting, and supporting of all other persons, enabling them to participate fully in the life of the church, the community, and the world..."
In addition, it is in conflict with paragraph 65 G of the Social Principles regarding Human Sexuality (page 89), which states: "... We insist that all persons, regardless of age, gender, marital status, or sexual orientation, are entitled to have their human and civil rights ensured… We recognize the continuing need for full, positive and factual sex education opportunities for children, youth, and adults. The Church offers a unique opportunity to give quality guidance and education in this area . Homosexual persons no less than heterosexual persons are individuals of sacred worth. All persons need the ministry and guidance of the church in their struggles for human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care of a fellowship that enables reconciling relationships with God, with others, and with self. Although we do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching, we affirm that God's grace is available to all. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons..."
This statement makes it clear that the statements about inclusiveness in the Constitution and in paragraph 117 do not exclude lesbian and gay persons. In fact, it is quite clear that, even when The United Methodist Church considers the "practice" of homosexuality to be incompatible with Christian teaching, it nonetheless welcomes gay and lesbian persons to be included in the ministry of the church.
DOTTI’S REASONS FOR FILING THIS COMPLAINT
Filing this complaint isn’t about winning and being "right." It is about seeking justice and fair treatment, within the United Methodist Church, for all people. I cannot rest until the church’s bigotry toward certain groups of people is eradicated. If this is the way it is going to be, then the Book of Discipline needs to be changed to reflect this bigotry. On the other hand, if there is to be a congruency between what the Book of Discipline says and what is enforced, then David Thomas’s actions have definitely broken the intent of the Book of Discipline.
Whether David meant to or not … whether he understood what he was doing or not … he took an action that he does not have the authority to perform, which was to deny me membership in the Church. And, he did it specifically because he knows I am a lesbian. His action was a violation of the gospel and of me. Again, it was a specific act of spiritual violence.
I affirm my worth in God and value my dignity and integrity as a person of faith. It is extremely important that I advocate for justice not only for myself, but for the thousands of others who have been told -- directly as I was, or indirectly through sermons, polices and practices -- that they cannot and do not belong in The United Methodist Church. To accept David's rejection is to cooperate with his bigotry.
Together, as a member of the United Methodist Church and as a prospective member, we bring this complaint against the Reverend David Thomas.
Sincerely,
Jane Jenkins,
Member, Centenary United Methodist Church
Dotti Berry
cc: Al Gwinn
|
