Responding to an increased awareness of the inequities visited on homosexuals, in 1972, the United Methodist Church proposed a statement in The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church (the UMC official statement of law and doctrine) reading: "homosexual persons no less than heterosexual persons are individuals of sacred worth." meaning, homosexuals are loved by God as much as heterosexual peoples.
Some feared this was a step too far and might be interpreted as the church condoning homosexuality, so the phrase "though we do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian doctrine" was added, making it clear that homosexuals would not be eligible for clergy positions and the UMC would not condone homosexual marriages. That is where we stand today.
Some in the church, myself included, would like to retain the "individuals of sacred worth" statement as written but delete the "we do not condone" language, giving individual pastors the leeway to make their own decisions about homosexual marriage as they see guided by their own enlightenment and understanding of scripture.
I tend to see pastors the same way I do doctors. We require them to do significant work to develop the judgment necessary to accomplish their job, and I think we should let them use it. The most likely outcome is that some UMC pastors will perform gay marriages, and some will not. I think that's fair.
Even discussing this change means that some want to leave the UMC and slander it. In the twenty-first century, I don't see how an American or European Methodism can survive if homosexuality is gonna be a third rail. In my heart, I know Christ would not want that. I avoid using the phrase "I know" with anything regarding Jesus, but I feel strongly about this. Jesus would not deny a sacrament to anyone that loved and, in his life, celebrated love, food, and fellowship with everyone, even those rejected by the church leaders.
