Peace,
Jimmy Creech, Chairperson
Raleigh Religious Network for
Gay and Lesbian Equality

Colorado Convention Center
Denver, Colorado

Newsroom coordinated by United Methodist News Service. a unit of United Methodist Communications

TITLE: Bishops Express Pain Over Gay Issue
SEARCH: homosexuality, gay, lesbian, ordination

April 18, 1996

General Conference '96

Fifteen bishops express 'pain' over church policy on gay, lesbian issues

-- Tom McAnally

THE GAY LIFE

1. SCRIPTURE TALKS ABOUT THE GAY LIFE:
   "... every passage which speaks of homosexual behaviors is clear, unambiguously negative and morally hostile towards them (the actions themselves) .... Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, Romans 1:18-32, I Corinthians 6:9-10 and I Timothy 1:8-10 condemn them directly, while Genesis 19, Judges 19, II Peter 2:6-10, and Jude 7 do so indirectly."
   
   -"Blessing the Unblessable", by Professor David A. Seamands, Good News Magazine, November/December 1992.

   God's standard for the human race in terms of sexuality -
   

   --Genesis 1:27; 5:2: "male and female created he them...... It was God's plan for sexual relations to be in the form of man-woman union, man and wife becoming "one flesh" (Gen 2:24).
   
   -"Is Homosexuality an Alternate Lifestyle?", by David Jeremiah, The Rebirth of America, The Arthur S. Demoss Foundation, 1986.

   -"Because man's sexual identity is defined by God, because his orientation is ordained by God, and because his sexual activity is circumscribed within a heterosexual marriage context, homosexuality cannot be viewed merely as a variant sexual preference or accidental variation within creation (akin to left-handedness) .... Instead, it represents a choice, in some sense, to set one's desires and satisfy one's physical drives in a way contrary to God's appointment and creation. There is no natural homosexuality, for homosexuality is precisely a perversion of nature (understood as God's design for human relations). Homosexuals are made, not born; their disorder is developed contrary to their God-given identity, learned in opposition to the created order."
   -Homosexuality-A Biblical View, Greg L. Bahnsen.

   REWARDS OF THE GAY LIFE:
   Source of the plague of AIDS; average life expectancy-41; with AIDS factored in, age-39.1. 43 percent of homosexuals have had over 500 encounters; 28 percent have had over 1000 (Kinsey); with the threat of AIDS, sexual contacts average 47 per year, 76 during pre-AIDS years (American Journal of Public Health); six times more likely to attempt suicide, and 35 percent are alcoholics (Journal of Homosexuality); 78 percent have been infected by some form of STD (American Public Health Association); 67 percent of all AIDS cases are directly attributable to homosexual conduct, and 50 percent of male homosexuals in San Francisco are now infected with the HIV virus that causes AIDS - up from 7 percent in the early 1980s (Center for Disease Control).

   BIBLICAL COMPASSION FOR GAYS:
   "Like Christ, we must have compassion on the sinner while at the same time we are condemning the sin .... Dr. Melvin Anchell said that whoever decided to call homosexuals "gay" must have had a terrible sense of humor. They are lonely, guilty, often depressed people. Their only hope is Jesus Christ, and we must be His caring ambassadors to them .... The hope of the homosexual today is the same as it was in Paul's day. Jesus Christ can and will wash away any sin. The sin of homosexuality is not a stain too deep to respond to the cleansing power of his blood."
   -Jeremiah, Rebirth.

A PASTORAL LETTER
TO MEMBERS OF MARIETTA FIRST
UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
forwarded by fax from FUMC member 03-26-98

THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
ATLANTA AREA
NORTH GEORGIA CONFERENCE
G. LINDSEY DAVIS, RESIDENT BISHOP
CHRISTINE SELLECK
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY

March 23, 1998

A PASTORAL LETTER TO MEMBERS OF MARIETTA FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH

Dr. Jamie Jenkins, your District Superintendent has informed me of your recent decision to redirect some of your General Church apportionments to other United Methodist ministries. I want you to know that I am disappointed in your action. It is my hope and prayer that this decision will be short term and that Marietta First United Methodist Church will once again be 100% supportive of the benevolent ministries of our Church.

I have been particularly disturbed by the "Report on the Doctrinal Integrity of the United Methodist Church" compiled by your Ad Hoc Committee. I have read the document and found it to be biased, unbalanced, and full of half-truths. It makes- me wonder if your Ad Hoc Committee ever intended to be fair in its "investigation" of the issues confronting our denomination. Obviously, some of the concerns raised by your leadership about our Church are also troubling to me. However, when any group uses one-sided statements to make a generalized judgement, it is unfairly playing on people's fear and bias in order to advance a particular point of view. Frankly, I had expected better.

I am also concerned about your decision to redirect monies to Camp Glisson and the UGA Wesley Foundation. I understand your intention to "keep it within the family", but to divert these funds to those fine United Methodists ministries puts both of them in an awkward ethical dilemma. It is not right for these programs to prosper at the expense of other ministries of our Church or to build their buildings "on the backs" of those who are denied their rightful support.

Your decision not to pay specific General apportionments also places your appointed clergy in a difficult position. Paragraph 619 of The Book of Discipline requires that these staff people be paid "exactly proportional" to the percentage paid on these ministerial support items. Although this paragraph is often overlooked, those who strictly follow The Discipline and Order of our Church will reduce the salaries of appointed staff accordingly.

It is my hope that in the days to come you will reach a better understanding and appreciation for our common ministry together. I am committed to seeking both truth and unity within our Church but I cannot stand by quietly and allow Marietta First United Methodist Church to proceed in a direction which I believe to be negative and contrary to the expressed will of the North Georgia Conference. Your church is not an independent congregation. You are intricately connected to the North Georgia Conference and the National and Global Church through a vital covenantal web of interactive relationships. Be assured that I want to work with you in the days ahead and that I look forward to the time when you can affirm the full ministry our Church.

I am acutely aware of the controversy and division this issue has created within your own congregation but I am also distressed beyond measure at the negative impact your decision is already having within our Conference. I fear this consequence of your action may not have been fully understood or considered in your discussion and voting.

I regret that we stand at this point in our relationship, and I am deeply grieved at the frustration and anger that resides in some that have been parts to this action. I hope that the foundational principles of our Church which for over two centuries have guided and aided our mission as a people of Jesus Christ in the Wesleyan movement will again be embraced by your church in the near future. It is my earnest prayer that this action of your Charge Conference will be reconsidered and reversed. As your Bishop, know that I will continue to love you and work with you to seek reconciliation and God's peace. Let us all agree to be in prayer and Christian conversation in these days to come.

In Christ, G. Lindsey Davis

Membership in the United Methodist Church

The following data is offered for information purposes to you. One area of concern for those of us in Concerned Methodists is the continuing loss of members from our United Methodist Church over the past twenty seven years - 2,292,816, or an average of 85,919 people per year, 7,077 per month, 1,634 per week, or 232.5 per day, for every one of those years. (The average size of a church in mainline denominations is 155 members.) The yearly summary is as follows:

Notes:

*Source of these figures is the General Minutes of the Annual Conferences of The United Methodist.Church,(Evanston, Illinois, General Council on Finance and Administration, 1969-1993.

+1969 is the first year that is being tracked by Concerned Methodists

REPORT TO THE GBGM FINANCE COMMITTEE
SHERATON HOTEL
STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT
MARCH 22, 1992

1. SEVERANCE PACKAGE FOR PEGGY BILLINGS
   In pointing out the wastefulness of the GBGM located in such an expensive environment, I pointed out in my article that "one executive who was terminated with the GBGM was given a severance package of $500,000 over 5 years." This one statement has created a storm of protest among the key executives at 475 Riverside Drive, so I hope and pray that the truth of this matter might be made clear to the whole world of United Methodism.
   
   On May 13, 1988, 13 members of the Executive Committee of the World Division met in Denver, Colorado. One of the main issues addressed at that meeting was the fact that Peggy Billings, Deputy General Secretary of the GBGM, was not being renominated to bar position. The minutes of that meeting in Denver contain these words, "It was agreed to establish. upon completion of a contract satisfactory to Peggy Billings and the GBGM, an account in the amount of $300,000, to cover World Division commitment to the funding of the Project on the Church, Society, and Ethics, to be paid out in terms of the contract. Source of funds: Collins Funds, in the category of administrative expenses of the World Division, one of the two categories for the use of Collins Funds agreed upon with the Collins family and designated by Directors: missionary retirement benefits and World Division Administration."

   On May 21, 1988, the Executive Session of the Women's Division minutes Include the following paragraph.
   "Recommended:

   1. That "The Church, Ethics, and Society Project Plan" be approved. It was voted.
   2. That funding of the above PLAN be in the amount of $100,000 annually, for a 5 year period, with 40% paid by the Women's Division and the balance (60%) to be paid by the World Division; and that the source of funds for the Women's Division share be the Excess/Deficit Fund. It was voted."

   The United Methodist Reporter shared an article with its readers that was provided by the United Methodist News Service. It was headlined, "Two Global Ministries Executives Given New Church-Related Projects." Among other things the article states, "Two high-ranking officials of the United Methodist Church's General Board of Global Ministries who were not renominated to their positions last spring will take on new church-related projects...At its 1988 spring meeting, the board's personnel and nominating committee, in a closed door session as required by the Book of Discipline regarding personnel matters, decided against renominating the two executives for another term in the fall."
   
   Regardless of how one seeks to explain the $500,000 (one-half million) appropriation over 5 years, the simple truth is that a staff member who was not renominated, or in my understanding "terminated as head of a division was "given" a position that offered a "package" of $500,000 over 5 years. When I used the word "package," I also had in mind not only salary, but also pension, insurance, transportation costs, research, seminars and other related costs pertaining to the project.
   
   Yes, I was present in Denver, Colorado on May 13, 1988 when the initial action was taken. I did speak out at that meeting. I clearly recall that the only matter to be decided at that meeting was whether or not the $100,000 appropriation per year would be open-ended or limited to five years. The "wheels were greased" for the half-million allocation to support a person AND project, the recipient of which was one who had not been renominated as head of a division. One bishop on our Board that I highly respect explained this an a "sweetheart deal", but I think the the whole thing was sour and rotten to the core.
   
   The Church and Society Project la now 3 years old, and I have not heard it mentioned the first time. Where Is there a periodic progress report on the Project? How is the project progressing? What will be done with the final report? Will it be publicized for the GBGM to use? What contract was finally agreed upon as acceptable to the author and GBGM? Why was she not renominated to her position an Deputy General Secretary of the GBGM?
   

   The overarching question that I would like to raise regarding the whole matter of severance for Peggy Billings and bar project is simply this, "HOW COULD AN APPROPRIATION OF THIS MAGNITUDE (ONE-HALF MILLION DOLLARS OVER 5 YEARS) BE GRANTED WITHOUT EVER BEING PRESENTED TO THE BOARD FINANCE COMMITTEE?"

   The officers of the GBGM in their letter to all of the directors falsely allude that I did not raise the issue related to the severance pay and project at the May 13, 1988 meeting in Denver. That is incorrect. I raised the issue then, and I continued to raise the issue throughout the quadrennium.

   On May 27, 1989, 1 received a letter from Harry A. Newman In Atlanta, then Field Representative for Mission Cultivation of the Southeastern Jurisdiction. Dr. Newman wrote, "Rumor has it (and I certainly believe it to be true) that those who have been asked to resign from the GBGM during the past months have uniformly received significant cash settlements.. often reported to be in the nature of thousands and thousands of dollars. It seems a bit unusual to me that we are willing to reward those who we have decided to replace because they are no longer fulfilling the needs of the organization while adopting in my own case a policy which penalizes me rather severely because of the unplanned and actually unavoidable death of my wife. My thinking may not be completely clear, but it seems to me that we are penalizing those who are still performing their duties in a completely satisfactory manner and rewarding those who have not done so."

   On June 30, 1989, I wrote a letter to Mr. Steve Brimigion, GBGM treasurer, in which I stated among other things that it was very difficult for me as Chairman of Finance to explain to persons like Harry Newman the allocation of $500,000, regardless of the source of the funds, I asked Mr. Brimigion in my letter, "Where does the Finance Committee fulfill its responsibilities for the receipt of the funds of the Board when these kinds of decisions are made by other persons or groups?"

   I want to go on record once again as saying that no matter how one wants to explain the allocation of $500,000 to Peggy Billings for her salary, fringe benefits, project, and all related costs, the whole matter has a stench to it and is rotten to the core!

   COST OF BOARD MEETINGS:
   

   The officers of the Board in their letter to the directors took issue with my figures pertaining to the cost of Board meetings. As we prepare to begin a new quadrenniun, I would like to invite the readers of this article to carefully scrutinize the attached financial forms distributed by Mr. Steve Brimigion, GBGM treasurer, three years ago (1989), beginning a new quadrennium. This financial report includes the exact financial figures expended in 1988.
   

   Isn't it interesting that the 1988 spring, fall, and organizational meetings cost $1,039,000. Now we are saying that the Board will spend only $700,000 for two meetings in 1992.
   

   Perhaps, a close scrutiny of the 1988 expenditures will shed light on why this kind of unrealistic low figure can be projected. While we spent $l,039,971 on three meetings in 1988, we bad budgeted only $845,000.

   You will also note many other items that greatly exceeded the budget. The General Secretary's TRAVEL in that one year was $64,052 with an appropriation of $50,000. When a member of our Board Finance Committee asked Steve Brimigion bow this could happen, his response was, "Who am I to tell Randy that be cannot travel?"

   Immediately following the meeting in which these figures were received, one of our new directors at that time, Elizabeth Gioni, wrote a letter to Mr. Steve Brimigion in which she included these words, "Unless there is accountability at all levels of the organization which contributed to the $l,000,000 over budget for 1988, we surely are going to witness some mess! Even a quick perusal of the 22 page document of 1989 and 1990 appropriations for Board-wide Priorities, Meetings, General Administration, Treasury, and Services shows exorbitant overspending an meetings plus travel and contingencies in just about every office from the General Secretary down.
   

   I would have thought that significant overspending in any area would require prior approval of at least the Finance Committee, if not the full Board of Directors."

   As one reflects upon these figures, it to very obvious that United Methodists across the world have every right to be concerned about the budget controls at GBGM.

   SIZE OF BOARD
   

   The letter from the officers of the GBGM to all our directors makes note of the fact that "the General Conference, not the Board, has determined the size and composition of the GBGM." While that it is true, be assured that our GBGM is a very powerful board with powerful influence at General Conference. If we were really serious about streamlining costs and providing more money for missions, we could easily go on record in support of petitions to General Conference limiting all Boards and Agencies to no more than 75 members. It is absolutely ludicrous that we have 178 members an our Board of Directors, some of which, oftentimes, come from the very same town and very same church.
   

   Our GBGM cannot blame the General Conference for the multitude of committee meetings, duplication of services, and general wastefulness that permeates nearly every aspect of our Board.

   COST OF MOVING
   

   The letter from the officers of the GBGM states that I express no concern at the cost of moving which has been activated at figures from $9 to $15 million dollars. One of the significant points that the General Conference Task Force is seeking to make is that no matter what the costs, they are able to present facts and figures showing that the costs will be "recoverable".
   

   When key leaders of GBGM learned that the General Conference Task Force recommended relocation, the arrogance of our Board was once again portrayed. Steps were taken immediately for us to request that GCFA and GCOM conduct an independent study. By our Board's action, it was decided that if GCFA and GCOM refused to do it, we would go ahead and pay for the $25,000 study. It should not surprise anyone that GCFA and GCOM refused to do it.

   I would like to refresh the memories of all of our directors that the very last speech that Spurgeon Dunnam made on the floor at our October 1991, meeting, he spoke about the sheer "arrogance" of our Board spending $25,000 for such a study. He alluded to the negative reaction this would have among our constituencies across the church, spending $25,000 for such a project while we are saying to the same people that we do not have sufficient funds for other purposes. I think Spurgeon Dunnam was prophetic in his remarks!

   Although I, like Spurgeon Dunnam, was strongly opposed to the allocation of $25,000 for our own study, I asked Steve Brimigion, our treasurer to keep me as Finance Chairman abreast of any action regarding this study. On March 19, 1992, one day before coming to this spring meeting, I receives in the mail a letter from Steve Brimigion, informing me that the general counsels of the church had declined the request of the GBGM to conduct a study of relocation costs. He then states in his letter, "We have retained PHH Pantus Company as consultants to accurately estimate the cost of any move GBGM might have to make."

   Who did the treasurer consult prior to hiring this firm? How are we to put any confidence in a $25,000 study made by a firm selected by persons adamantly opposed to relocation? When will the study be held? What purpose will it serve?

   If the main reason for not relocating the GBGM is financial, would you not expect the Treasurer and General Secretary to at least consult the Chairman of the Board Finance Committee regarding our Board's response to the whole issue? I have never been asked by the Treasurer or General Secretary to be a part of any group chosen to respond to the report of the General Conference Task Force.

   JURISDICTIONS FROM WHICH STAFF MEMBERS OF GBGM ARE SELECTED
   

   The officers of GBGM take issue with my stating that the majority of the staff of the GBGM comes from the Northeast. I would like for the record to show that the Report of the General Conference Task Force states, "Approximately 70% of the applicants for executive level positions and half of those employed in recent years have come from residents of the Northeastern Jurisdiction."

   "OUT OF TOUCH" WITH SOUTHEAST
   

   The officers of the GBGM attack my statement that the theological and philosophical persuasions of the staff at GBGM are far different or "out of touch" with those of us within the Southeast. Once again, I call to your attention an exact quote from the Task Force report, "The New York City location is at one edge of the United States membership of the United Methodist Church which compounds the perception that it is theologically and philosophically remote from the mainstream of the United Methodist Church."

   The one great proof of the fact that the GBGM in "out of touch" with the people of the Southeast can be clearly seen in the whole relocation issue. While upwards of 90% of the GBGM directors would probably vote against relocation, I will predict that the delegates from the Southeast will vote strongly in favor of relocation.

   Who are the strongest and loudest critics of the GBGM within the Alabama-West Florida Conference. Tragically enough, it in those former missionaries who have served unselfishly for many years under the auspices of the GBGM and now have grave misgivings about the actions of our GBGM.

   The fact that the Southeastern Jurisdiction has traditionally been an enthusiastic supporter of missions speaks more of the faithful, generous people called United Methodists in our area fulfilling the mandate of Jesus Christ rather than strong support of the actions of GBGM.

   GBGM HOSPITALITY AT GENERAL CONFERENCE
   

   The officers of the GBGM in their report take issue with my reference to "many, many thousands of dollars" that will be expended to "lobby"' delegates at General Conference.
   

   The unbelievable "lobbying" efforts on the part of the GBGM forces have already begun with letters having been sent to delegates all over the world. I have attended three previous General Conferences, and I have seen firsthand the powerful political pressure of the GBGM. I only want the "grassroots" of United Methodism to clearly understand in advance of General Conference that when the GBGM plans a huge reception for delegates in one of the most expensive hotels in Louisville, they are creating an "unequal playing field" in an atmosphere where important decisions are to be made. It will be terribly, terribly difficult for particular delegates who are beholden to the GBGM and staff for funding to resist the pressure that the lobbying forces of GBGM will put upon then regarding the relocation issue.
   

   What will be the cost of the reception? What will be the source of these funds?

CLOSING PERSONAL STATEMENT:

Thanks for listening!

Dr. Karl K. Stogall, Chairman
General Board of Global Ministries
Finance Committee

MISSIONARY ORIENTATION
by Reverend Max Borah
Sesser, Ill. 62884