Recently the Connectional Table of The United Methodist Church engaged in a dialogue over human sexuality. I was under the impression that the purpose of dialogue was to increase understanding, and perhaps even reach consensus. Apparently I was wrong. According to an article on UMC.org,
The Connectional Table, one of The United Methodist Church’s governing bodies, has decided to draft legislation that could change church law “to fully include LGBTQ persons in the life and ministry of the church.”
The draft would be brought back to the Connectional Table at a future meeting for consideration. The April 29 decision to draft the legislation came the same day the Connectional Table began a series of three public discussions on human sexuality.
Wait a minute…. The decision came the same day as the Connectional Table began their discussion? Doesn’t this type of legislation presuppose the outcome of the discussion? If this is how we’re going to operate, why even have the discussion at all?
In 1957 Rudolf Bultmann wrote an essay titled, “Is Exegesis Without Presupposition Possible?” In this essay he argued that all of us bring certain presuppositions to biblical exegesis–this is in fact unavoidable. Nevertheless, we must avoid wholly predetermining the conclusions of biblical exegesis. We reach these conclusions only after rigorous investigation.
The Connectional Table could take a lesson from Bultmann here. We all come to the questions around homosexuality in our denomination with presuppositions and biases, but if our common discussion is to have integrity, we must not presuppose the conclusions of our common inquiry.
The same article continues:
San Antonio Area Bishop James E. Dorff opened the discussion with a Bible study based on Jesus’ prayer for his disciples’ unity in John 17:20-26. Dorff told those in Chicago and online that Jesus prayed for unity so that Christians can be a witness to the rest of God’s people.
“What is our end game?” Dorff asked. “Will we be of one mind? I doubt it. Will we all be of one church? I sure hope so. Will we all be brothers and sisters in Christ? I hope so.”
Sadly, the chances of our all being of one church have never been slimmer.
David F. Watson 
David, I agree. Does it really matter if we are “one church” but not of “one mind” on this matter? And when I say “this matter” I mean it is one of utmost importance. If St. Paul was right (and I believe he was), the practice of sexual immorality in general, and homosexuality in particular, keeps one shut out from the kingdom of God. If we cannot be of “one mind” on what does or does not damn a person, why bother being one church? It seems to me that such a “church” would be a dishonor to Jesus’ prayer for unity.
In Genesis, we read of the people becoming unified and of one mind… But their unity of thought & purpose would have taken them further from God’s plan & purpose. So, according to Scripture God intervened and purposely brought division in order to frustrate their unified, yet ungodly, plan. My point is this: it’s NEVER Godly to just seek unity. Rather, as we seek God & Godly behavior, all who do the seeking find themselves more unified. Stop seeking unity & seek God!
I agree, Dayton. At our umcholiness blog, I wrote an article about schism being the judgment of God. When I look at the times of upheaval and schism in Scripture I find that they are the result of God’s judgment due to lack of faithfulness. IMO, the question before us is not whether or not we will divide as a church but whether or not we will repent and learn from God’s discipline.
http://umcholiness.wordpress.com/2014/04/11/schism-and-the-judgment-of-god/
I hope one of the “lessons” we learn from this that we indeed have a “bent to sinning” (as Charles Wesley wrote). Consequently It is not healthy for a Christian church to rely so heavily on majority/popular opinion or to make decisions by VOTING. Scripture and Christian tradition offer us better alternatives.
My conclusion comes after 24 years of active ministry in the United Methodist Church when I have seen church councils and committees make decisions based on self-interest rather than scripture.
Claiming that your side makes decisions based on “scripture,” while the other side makes decisions based on “self-interest” is 1. Incorrect and 2. Not dialogue
Reblogged this on Mixed Ministries and commented:
Great article about the craziness at United Methodism’s recent Connectional Table.
My response?
In Genesis, we read of the people becoming unified and of one mind… But their unity of thought & purpose would have taken them further from God’s plan & purpose. So, according to Scripture God intervened and purposely brought division in order to frustrate their unified, yet ungodly, plan. My point is this: it’s NEVER Godly to just seek unity. Rather, as we seek God & Godly behavior, all who do the seeking find themselves more unified. Stop seeking unity & seek God!
Please read this article & share your responses!
Dayton
The dialogue has been going on for at least 42 years. Certainly didn’t begin yesterday.
This is all an exercise in futility. Any legislation they send to GC to change BoD language won’t pass. But it is worth noting that the CT has come down on one side of this; perhaps that alone might further the fracturing.
What it may mean, Evan, is that the “center” has shifted.