Box Turtle Bulletin

United Church of Christ Pastors Celebrate Marriage Equality

Timothy Kincaid

May 17th, 2008

The United Church of Christ, along with the Reform Jewish movement and many other religious organizations, believe that their morality their desire to know God requires that they serve justice to those around them. They believe that denying equality to gay persons is not just bad politics, it’s bad religion.

In my review of recent news stories, especially those about the intesection of sexuality and religion, I’ve noticed that there is an increasing willingness for pastors, rabbis and other persons of faith to step forward and declare that religious conservatives do not speak for God. Often these voices for equality come from the UCC.

The General Synod of the United Church of Christ was among the hundreds of churches, pastors, synagogues, and other religious organizations that attached their name and their support to this lawsuit. And they joyously report the news on the UCC website.

The Rev. Kevin A. Johnson, pastor of Bloom in the Desert Ministries (UCC/United Methodist) in Palm Springs, Calif., emphasized that today’s ruling is a continuation of the ways in which marriage has been redefined for the better over the centuries.

“Because of the positive ruling today in California, progress continues,” Johnson said. “Marriage equality for all continues our historical progress toward recognizing that love and responsibility are the keys to quality marriages, not unfair laws based on racial integrity, which were struck down in 1967 but remained in some states until 2000, and sexual orientation, like we have now.”

This is indeed a good week for gay individuals and couples. The decision by the California Supreme Court is monumental and not quickly forgotten.

But in our joy, let us recall that this victory does not just belong to gays. This is a time of jubulation and celebration for all persons who fight in the battle for dignity, equality, and justice.

Reform Jews Offer Congratulations

Timothy Kincaid

May 15th, 2008

The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism has issued a statement in support of today’s California Supreme Court Decision.

The Reform Jewish Movement has long been committed to welcoming GLBT Jews into our congregations, synagogues and communal life and strongly supports legislative efforts to provide equal opportunity through civil marriage for gay and lesbian individuals. As we teach our children, all individuals are created b’tselem elohim, in the image of the Divine; today’s ruling reflects that concept of inherent equality.

This is a historic day, a day to celebrate. Tomorrow, however, is the day to begin organizing against the all-but-inevitable initiatives to amend the state’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage equality. As soon as we finish today’s victory toast, we are ready to roll up our sleeves and get to work.

Their efforts are more than welcome.

Anti-Christian Bigotry

Timothy Kincaid

May 14th, 2008

Today I ran across some anti-Christian bigotry of a particularly nasty sort. As I was recently accused by Peter LaBarbera of being an anti-Christian bigot, this caught my attention.

I’m including a selection here. I hope no one is offended as it is pretty hateful and vile.

yet another connection between the United Church of Christ (UCC) and perversion.

We hear that the UCC is still searching for a partnering church that cater to swingers.

For the sake of accuracy, we also recommend a name-change to UCS: United Church of Sodom.

Enough with this phony “Christ” talk.

We envision a host of liberal Protestant mergers under the UCS banner beginning with proud homosexualist bishop (Vicky) Gene Robinson and his wayward Episcopal Church.

It’s been quite a while since I’ve seen such a venomous attack on Christianity and Christian churches. But, surprisingly it wasn’t atheists or agnostics that were spewing hate. It wasn’t Wiccans or Muslims or “homosexualist Jews”.

Nope, all this anti-Christian bigotry was brayed out by Peter LaBarbera. Ah Pete, it’s no wonder you didn’t accept our challenge to point out Box Turtle Bulletin’s bigotry. You forgot that it was you who wrote it on your own site.

Jay Bakker and Soulforce Meet With Joel Osteen

Timothy Kincaid

May 14th, 2008

For Jay Bakker, growing up as the son of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker was more than a little chaotic. Until the collapse of their Christian media empire in 1987, his parents were superstars. But at age 13, his father went to prison, the family’s closest friends denounced them, and Jay’s world changed completely.

Perhaps it is this unique experience of having been at the crest of the conservative Christian world only to feel betrayed that has allowed Jay to question the purpose and meaning of his Christian faith. And Jay’s openness has left him with conclusions and direction that are unlike many others in that world.

One area of disagreement is with whom God accepts and welcomes. A careful study of scripture led Jay to conclude that many of those who are not welcome in the pews of most churches are those whom God most seeks to know. And in revisiting scripture and the nature of God, Jay came to believe that homosexuality is not sin.

Jay now is joining Soulforce to take that message on the road in an effort called The American Family Outing. And because of his history and his connections, Jay has access to religious leaders that most gay people cannot dream of.

The first stop was in Houston, TX at the megachurch of Joel Osteen. There Bakker was able to arrange for a meeting with Osteen. From the Houston Chronicle

Bakker said Osteen was most gracious, had chairs reserved for the LGBT community Sunday morning and made time to meet after the 11 a.m. service.

During their chat, the two men agreed to disagree.

“I don’t think homosexuality is a sin, and they do,” Bakker said, “but it was very nice of Joel to introduce me to his family. I met Joel’s wife and mother, and they were just great. … I’m really grateful.”

Don Iloff, Lakewood’s chief of communications, agreed the visits and meetings went well.

“Dodie Osteen, Joel’s mother, wanted to meet Jay,” Iloff said.

“She knew him as a little boy. And everybody liked Tammy Faye and Jim, Jay’s dad. He has his flaws but … ”

Iloff said it was a pleasure to host members of the LGBT community at Lakewood. “They’re very, very sweet people. They’re the nicest people. I didn’t expect anything else, really.”

The communications chief also said members of the LGBT community are welcome at Lakewood, but he and the Osteens don’t have much more to say on the subject of sexuality.

While it would have been phenominal had Osteen take the opportunity to requestion his theology, his response is nonetheless encouraging and to be welcomed. As more people in the conservative evangelical Christian movement come to know gay people and their allies, the stereotypes can drop away and the animosity diminish. And while we can differ on the interpretation and application of Paul’s conflation of Greek words in an epistle to a church in Rome 2,000 years ago, I hope we can do so without engaging in Culture War.

I am very appreciative of the work that Soulforce does. And I am very appreciative that a straight preacher is willing to see that his mission to spread the Gospel includes using his family name to gain access to some religious leaders who would drive gay men and women away from their faith.

I wish them much continued success in their campaign.

LaBarbera rants on like… well, LaBarbera

Timothy Kincaid

May 13th, 2008

In response to our criticism of his alliance with racists, Peter LaBarbera has lashed out in his usual way, ranting and frothing and void of all reason or accuracy.

Pete doesn’t rebuke his allies David Duke and Ted Pike for their racism and anti-Semitism. He doesn’t admit that he is fearful of the story that might come out in court if VanAdslen is prosecuted. He doesn’t allow that “the homosexual”, the witnesses, and the police just might be telling the truth. He doesn’t acknowledge that his language contrasting Velasquez with the “strapping, clean-cut, All-American looking young man” lends itself to racism.

Ah, but if he did any of that, he wouldn’t be Peter LaBarbera.

No, instead Pete identifies me as “the Left”, accuses me of hate, and calls me an anti-Christian bigot like Barney Frank (I don’t know why he brings up Barney Frank, but I’m guessing it’s because he’s Jewish and we know what Pete’s allies think about those radical homosexual Jews).

Oh, and to prove that LaBarbera is not a racist he posts a picture of a Black ex-lesbian (yes, he capitalizes “black”). If it wasn’t so tragic it would be funny.

OK. Sure I question the theology of exclusion and condemnation. Yeah I point out when conservatives twist Scripture, logic, and truth to fit their anti-gay agenda.

But “the Left”?

Anti-Christian?

Now that’s what I call irony.

So we have a challenge for LaBarbera: Hey, Pete, give us an example of how our writings here at Box Turtle Bulletin show that we hate Christians. Provide us an example of the anti-Christian bigotry that you think is so prevalent on this site.

Racists Gain More Allies from the Anti-Gay Movement

Timothy Kincaid

May 12th, 2008

The defense of homophobic violence that started with an article by Ted Pike on David Duke’s virulently racist and anti-Semitic website has now been taken by Peter LaBarbera to his fellow anti-gays: Concerned Women for America (CWA)’s Matt Barber, and Bob Knight of the Culture and Media Institute.

Bob Knight and Peter LaBarbera are old friends from when they were part of Concerned Women, but I really don’t know if either Barber or Knight also share Pike and Duke’s racist and anti-Semitic agenda. They may just have been brought into the alliance by LaBarbera.

Obama Supporter to Marry Bush Daughter

Timothy Kincaid

May 10th, 2008

Tonight Jenna Bush, the daughter of President Bush, will marry Henry Hager in a ceremony at the president’s ranch. Officiating will be Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell.

This is an unusual selection in that Caldwell has endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and will be campaigning for him. Caldwell, whose church had supported an ex-gay ministry, raised concerns in January among some gay Democrats about Obama’s commitment to equality.

Jenna Bush released a book in September of last year about the personal experience of a young woman in Latin America living with AIDS and her opinions about the efficacy of “abstinance only” education differ from those of her father.

We wish the young couple all happiness and hope that Jenna’s wedding day goes without a hitch.

Hutcherson’s Wacky Priorities

Timothy Kincaid

May 9th, 2008

Every pastor knows that there are certain Sundays in which attendance will be high. Christmas and Easter, for example, will draw those who identify as Christian but generally find other things a higher priority at church time on Sunday mornings.

Another day in which visitors are expected is Mother’s Day, when dutiful children make Mom happy by going to church with her before brunch.

Some churches have a liturgical calendar that establishes themes for each Sunday accross the denomination. But non-liturgical pastors tend to strategize their sermons on ‘Visitor Sundays’ so that they appeal to irregular attendees and so that they fit with the theme of the day.

For example, on Christmas a pastor might talk about Christ coming to the world and the change that Jesus made on history. Or he might discuss the sacrifice of His parents, the humbleness of His birth, or even the persistence of the Magi. So too would a pastor generally find Mother’s Day a time to celebrate the special recognition of mothers in the Bible.

But whatever the theme, on Sundays that are likely to draw visitors, a thoughtful pastor will avoid esoteric doctrines or the minutia of theolgical denominational differences. And while some fire-and-brimstone preachers will take the opportunity to call down God’s judgment on the sinner in the pew, most will avoid a sermon that is likely to frighten away or alienate a non-believer.

This Sunday is Mother’s Day. And in honor of that event, Rev. Ken Hutcherson has selected a non-traditional theme. From his church’s website:

Friday, 09 May 2008

Please keep praying for a great turnout for this Sunday’s services for two reasons:

1.) It’s Mother’s Day! We want to honor all of our mothers.
2.) This Sunday will be the first of a two part series on why homosexuality is still a sin.

Pray that many lives will be changed.

Pastor Hutch

What mother is going to want to bring her kids to church on her special day to hear a sermon about gay sex? I can’t imagine who - other than Pastor Hutch - would think this topic is appropriate for Mother’s Day.

Which makes me wonder: is Hutcherson completely obsessed with homosexuality, or is it the only subject that makes him a topic of discussion on blog sites and feeds his ego?

(hat tip GoodAsYou)

Christianity Today Recaps Response to the Day of Silence

Timothy Kincaid

May 2nd, 2008

Derek Keefe wrote a recap in Christianity Today of the various responses to the Day of Silence: boycott, protest, Day of Truth, and Golden Rule initiative. His final comments offer much-needed wisdom to conservative evangelical Christians.

Evangelicals are by definition a gospel-proclaiming people. Part of our becoming a wise people is learning to match our proclamation both to the manner of the Christ we proclaim, as well as to the occasion before us. Gospel wisdom, then, means not just learning when to speak, but what part of God’s good news to speak first, and how that news should be delivered. On occasion, we may even find the best way to begin to “speak” this marvelous news is to remain silent.

Methodists Reject Inclusive Theology

This article is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other authors at Box Turtle Bulletin.

Timothy Kincaid

May 1st, 2008

Last night the delegates to the United Methodist Church’s General Convention voted to reject a proposal from their committee to be more inclusive of gay Christians. Instead they voted to accept a minority recommendation with harsher language.

The Rev. David McEntire, pastor of First United Methodist Church in Lakeland, said he was not happy with either alternative presented to delegates.

“It was a very painful decision. I had hoped we would reject the minority report so we could return to the present language. The minority report is a little harsher,” he said. “In the church in Lakeland, there are gay persons and families of gay persons. This statement is not going to change my actions. I’m still going to be a loving, inviting pastor.”

However, conservatives in the United States were strongly supported by Methodists from Africa and Asia to push through the more prohibitive wording.

Delegates from Africa spoke several times, strongly supporting the position against homosexuality.

One man from Africa said that “we love homosexuals, but we detest what they do.”

The Convention did, however, take one tiny step forward.

They also approved a new resolution opposing homophobia and heterosexism. In a separate resolution, the General Conference asked the United Methodist Board of Church and Society, the church’s social advocacy agency, to develop educational resources and materials on the effects of homophobia and heterosexism, the discrimination or prejudice against lesbians or gay men by heterosexual people.

Yet, interestingly, a third of the delegates voted against opposing discrimination and homophobia.

I believe that the vote of the Methodist Convention illustrates a problem that exists and will continue to grow within international religious movements.

I think it likely that had the delegates all been from within the United States, there would have been significant change to the policy. While there may not have been a change in policy on marriages or civil unions, the declarations about immorality and the proud exclusions of gay persons would have disappeared.

But conservative elements within the American church ally with Africans and play upon cultural biases to force their views on their fellow American Methodists. And while they play on African homophobia, they do nothing to address the murder and violence against homosexual persons on the African continent. Rather than condemn brutality, they reject the message of Christ so as to entrench their political alliances and continue their assured success in the politics of their church.

We see this also in the Episcopal / Anglican debate. Conservative Episcopalians looked away when their allies in Nigeria advocated jailing those who even met to discuss discrimination against gay persons. They never objected when Anglican allies in Zimbabwe propped up strongman Robert Mugabe and his campaign of terror against homosexuals.

And it gives us a warning of what is likely to happen within the Methodist Church. Conservative Methodists are just as likely to place victory over the faith of their more liberal brothers as more important than upholding human rights and decency. Sadly, the battles within the churches have become less about the gospel of Christ and more about the gospel of coercive and restrictive power.

But I believe that American Methodists will, within the next decade, become both aware of and disgusted by the treatment of gay men and women in Africa. They will see the violence, hear the dehumanization, see the discrimination, and begin to empathize with their gay brothers and sisters. This will become more pronounced as younger people grow into positions of authority and as traditionalists retire and the churches as a whole become more liberal.

And they will begin to resent that their church’s policies of discrimination and condemnation are being dictated by foreign delegates who are operating from within a culture of bigotry.

However, the current growth of most Christian churches is from Africa and Asia. And with growth comes influence and power.

I think it is nearly inevitable that there will be scism and division in most American mainstream churches, especially those who are part of a larger international body. The minorities within those American churches that seek to hold to tradition and rejection of gay persons will align with African and Asian movements and those who believe in an inclusive theology will find fellowship with European affiliates.

Further, it is likely that there will be consolidation of the divided churches, with the liberal branches melding into a united protestant Christian church. Evidence of such a direction was visible even within this Methodist Convention by the vote for a full communion agreement with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

The ELCA already has five full communion relationships with The Episcopal Church, the Moravian Church in America, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Reformed Church in America and United Church of Christ.

I believe that within the next decade or so, the face of religion in America will be far different than it has been for the past few centuries. We live in interesting times.

The Votes:

• Approved, 517-416, keeping the statement that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.
• Rejected, 574-298, a measure that would have changed the church’s definition of marriage to include same-sex unions.
• Approved, 544-365, a resolution opposing homophobia and discrimination against lesbians or gays.

News Sources:
The Christian Post
The Ledger
The Ft. Worth Star-Telegram

United Methodist Church May Change Policy on Homosexuality

Timothy Kincaid

April 30th, 2008

The United Methodist Church meets every four years in a General Conference. Currently they are meeting in Fort Worth, TX.

A legislative committee of the UMC met for about seven hours on Monday and came up with a proposal to change the church’s statements on homosexuality. Though they began as liberals and conservatives, they reached concensus as centrists.

The Ledger reports on the proposal

The church’s current policy declares, “The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching.” A legislative committee has proposed a sweeping change to that policy, taking a neutral stance, calling “all members of our community of faith to commitment, integrity and fidelity in their sexual relationships.”

The proposal also acknowledges the strong disagreements within the church and asks “the Church, United Methodist and others, and the world, to refrain from judgment regarding homosexual persons and practices until the Spirit leads us to new insight.”

Almost 1,000 delegates will vote today whether to accept the proposal of the committee. In 2004 a different proposal to soften opposition was defeated 55% to 45%. Supporters of the change are hopeful but not yet confident in a positive vote this year.

Regardless of the outcome of the vote, this conference has already yielded results that can only be seen as promising for those who believe in full inclusion within the church.

The Star-Telegram reports that the ideological center of the Judicial Council has shifted to one that could be supportive of LGBT Methodists.

Five newly elected members to the United Methodist Church’s Judicial Council — the denomination’s “supreme court” — could change the dynamics of the nine-member council on such issues as homosexuals in leadership roles, denomination insiders said Monday.

The council previously had a 6-3 conservative majority. But only one of the council members elected Monday is conservative, joining the sole conservative member remaining on the council, said Mark Tooley, director of the UMAction program of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, a conservative and evangelical organization.

Time will only tell whether about the Council’s decisions. However, as homosexuality was a central dispute in the fight over the Council members, this may be a hopeful indicator for today’s vote.

Good News for Gay Presbyterians

Timothy Kincaid

April 29th, 2008

In 2005, Rev. Jane Spahr was brought up on charges for officiating at the celebration of gay unions. In 2006, a regional church court found that she had not acted appropriately.

The AP reports that the highest court of the Presbyterian Church (USA) has overturned the regional court’s decision.

The highest court of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has found that a Northern California minister did not violate denominational law when she officiated at the weddings of two lesbian couples.

The ruling announced Tuesday by the Louisville, Ky.-based court overturns a decision against the Rev. Jane Spahr last year. A regional judicial committee had found Spahr guilty of misconduct and gave her a rebuke — the lightest possible punishment.

The church’s high court found that the ceremonies Spahr performed were not marriages, so she did not violate the church’s constitution.

The panel reiterated the church’s position that Presbyterian ministers can bless same-sex unions as long as the ceremonies don’t too closely mimic traditional weddings.

Christian Youth Group Participates in Day of Silence

Timothy Kincaid

April 27th, 2008

Warren Throckmorton has a letter from a student at Appalachian State University in Boone, NC. She, and the Campus Crusade, participated in the Day of Silence and found it to be rewarding and illuminating.

To those of you reading, I wish I could tell you in person because this day deserves more than a short summary. Yesterday, the LGBT community saw something revolutionary- they saw Christians loving them and more than that, they saw the love of Christ. What would happen if next year, hundreds of Christian students walked around with duct tape in silence?

I have to tell you about how I felt yesterday walking around in silence with duct tape. I felt humiliated at times, and other times proud. You see, everywhere I went, people stared. I felt like a leper, completely stigmatized from people. In fact, I was experiencing what the LGBT community has experienced for decades.

As I was walking to my dorm, I realized why 30% of LGBT students report having missed one or more days of school per year out of fear. Walking by a dorm, someone opened their window and yelled a derogatory statement to me. I was scared. There was such anger in his voice that I was fearful to walk by the dorm again later that day. I was reminded of Lawrence King, a 14 year old who was murdered because of his homosexuality just two months ago.

I am appreciative of the participation of this young woman and others like her who were challenged by the Golden Rule Pledge to join in standing up against violence. I would also love to hear the experience of any gay people who had Golden Rule participants join them.

Petition Before UMC to Censure James Holsinger

Jim Burroway

April 27th, 2008

When last we heard from Dr. James Holsinger, President George Bush’s Surgeon General Nominee, it looked like his nomination was stuck in limbo. This came after Box Turtle Bulletin examined Holsinger’s 1991 white paper for the United Methodist Church’s Committee to Study Homosexuality, a paper which significantly misrepresented the bibliographic sources that he cited.

I forwarded a copy of our findings to several Senators on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee which held hearings on Holsinger’s nomination. Coincidentally or not, some of our findings appeared to make their way into the hearing. Needless to say, things did not go very well for Dr. Holsinger.

Since then, allegations have arisen of Dr. Holsinger’s possibly questionable financial dealings and conflicts of interest involving grants to the University of Kentucky’s Chandler Medical Center (while Holsinger was its Chancellor) from the Good Samaritan Foundation (while Holsinger was a trustee of the GSF board). According to these allegations, the grants were drawn from $20 million earned from the 1995 sale of the United Methodist Good Samaritan Hospital in Lexington, Kentucky, to a for-profit corporation. According to complaints, the hospital was the property of the Kentucky Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church, and GSF should have handed the money over to the church.

The United Methodist is currently meeting in Fort Worth, and among the business before its various committees is a petition to censure Dr. Holsinger for his involvement in the Good Samaritan Hospital sale. The petition was submitted by Rev. Andrew Weaver, Ph.D. of Brooklyn, NY, and will go before the Judicial Administration Committee.

I spoke with Rev. Weaver over the phone, and he acknowledged that if Holsinger was censured, it would be a very unusual event in the church. He also pointed out that the allegations against Holsinger were also unusual, going against the “trust clause” which he described as being an important part of UMC property governance going back to the days of John Wesley himself, who set up the system of trustees for the governance of chapels and organizations. According to Rev. Weaver, Dr. Holsinger’s actions on the GSF board were contrary to these principles.

Here is the full text of the petition:

Whereas, James W. Holsinger, MD, was elected to our church’s Judicial Council in May, 2000, and has been president of the Judicial Council since 2004, and

Whereas, the duties of the Judicial Council include “determining the legality of any action taken by any body created by or authorized by the General Conference” and the General Conference has therefore recognized as a matter of critical importance that members of the Judicial Council avoid conflicts of interest, as illustrated by the prohibition on service on other boards and agencies of the church, and

Whereas, following election to the Judicial Council in May 2000, Dr. Holsinger joined the board of trustees of the Good Samaritan Foundation (GSF) of Lexington, Kentucky, in July 2000, knowing that GSF had, three months earlier, in May 2000, become the subject of litigation by the Kentucky Conference of the United Methodist Church, and

Whereas, two former members of the Judicial Council who worked with Holsinger from 2000-2004, Sally C. Askew, Esq., and Sally B. Geis, Ph.D., stated that Holsinger never mentioned having joined an organization that was being sued by a constituent body of the United Methodist Church, nor did he at any time address possible conflicts of interest involved in being a member of the UMC’s Judicial Council while engaged in significant litigation against the UMC, and

Whereas the essence of the lawsuit between the Kentucky Annual Conference and the Good Samaritan Foundation related to church property ownership issues, and the Court found there was an “express trust” on behalf of the United Methodist Church, based on the surrounding facts and circumstances, and safeguarding property trust being a central duty for United Methodist leaders to protect, and a topic of Judicial Council decisions, and

Whereas, the GSF trustees which Dr. Holsinger, member and subsequently chair of the Judicial Council, joined, and of which he became chair in 2003, were in violation of their fiduciary responsibilities as trustees of United Methodist hospital property in the amount of $20 million realized from the sale in 1995 of 330 bed United Methodist Good Samaritan Hospital in Lexington, Kentucky, to a for-profit corporation, and which trustees refused to hand over the proceeds to the rightful owners, the Kentucky Annual Conference (KAC) of the UMC, and

Whereas, according to court records, the foundation’s trustees refused to tell the KAC what happened to the $20 million from the sale of the UMC hospital for nearly five years and as late as June of 2006 the lay and clergy members of the KAC felt compelled to pass a resolution formally seeking necessary “[i]nformation on assets, income earned, tax issues…investment practices, conflicts of interest, and other information” from the foundation, and

Whereas, despite his Judicial Council responsibilities as one of the highest elected officials of the United Methodist Church, and in apparent ignorance of Methodism’s commitment to building dozens of hospitals in the late 19th and early 20th centuries to provide care for the poor and indigent Dr. Holsinger in a letter to GSF grantees questioned the motives and integrity of the UMC, publicly stating his belief that the UMC was “only interested in the Foundation’s money, not its cause” [health care for the poor and disadvantaged], and

Whereas, Dr. Holsinger was not a bystander in these events, but the dominant personality among the trustees and the driving force in the prolongation of the lawsuit, as evidenced by the lawsuit’s rapid conclusion two weeks after Dr. Holsinger’s resignation from the trustees in May, 2007, and

Whereas, during the period of this litigation, Dr. Holsinger was affiliated with the University of Kentucky as Chancellor of the Chandler Medical Center from 1994-2003, and the University of Kentucky’s programs in medicine, nursing, dentistry and public health were awarded 63% of $8,430,363 in grants awarded by GSF from July 1, 1997 through June 30, 2006 including the endowment of two academic chairs valued at a million dollars each, despite GSF’s own policies that, “[major organizations” such as “[h]ospitals, [c]olleges and [u]niversities are not eligible as a general statement,” although exceptions could be made by the trustees, and

Whereas during the time Dr. Holsinger was chair of the GSF trustees, additional conflicts of interest were permitted by other trustees, as admitted by GSF in a May 23, 2005 letter to the Kentucky Annual Conference namely that three GSF trustees who worked at Lexington-area financial institutions were involved in managing or had previously managed the assets of the foundation while serving on the board., and
Whereas the Kentucky Annual Conference told the GSF that it was “unconscionable” that after a decade this gross conflict of interest continued and that the funds were still not being professionally managed by experts with no personal relationship to the board putting Dr. Holsinger in violation of the standards of ethics set by the UMC for trustees of church organizations, and in gross violation of the basic tenets of accepted ethical conduct , and

Whereas, the litigation by GSF against the United Methodist Church, much of it under Judicial Council president Holsinger’s tenure squandered $1,083,133 in legal fees from July 1, 1997 through July 1, 2006, which Dr. Holsinger had a duty to protect for the benefit of GSF’s beneficiaries,
Therefore, the General Conference of the United Methodist Church:

1. Censures Dr. James Holsinger for conduct which we consider to be in grave conflict with his duties as member and president of the Judicial Council, conduct which has dissipated United Methodist resources, which has brought disrepute to the church, and which constitute “relationships and/or behavior that undermine the ministry” of United Methodists;

2. Calls for heightened commitment by all Judicial Council members to ethical standards of conduct, especially regarding conflicts of interest, for full disclosure of pre-existing potential conflicts of interest and for commitment not to enter into new responsibilities after election to the Judicial Council which may conflict with their Judicial Council duties;

3. Calls for all Boards of United Methodist affiliated institutions and agencies to review their by-laws, affiliations and legal documents to assure compliance with Disciplinary paragraphs 2501, 2503, and 2506 and to minimize the potential for conflicts such as KAC V. GSF;

4. Calls for the Judicial Council newly elected in 2008 to review all Judicial Council decisions during the time of Dr. Holsinger’s tenure, recognizing that such decisions are final, but nevertheless reporting to the General Church its findings as to whether any decisions now appear questionable in light of Dr. Holsinger’s conflicts of interest and his litigation against the United Methodist Church while serving as a high elected official.

Golden Rule Day Gathers Steam

This commentary is the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the opinion of other authors at Box Turtle Bulletin.

Timothy Kincaid

April 22nd, 2008

NOTE: The authors at Box Turtle Bulletin do not share consensus on this issue. Watch for further commentary.

Friday will be the Day of Silence, observed by schoolkids across the nation to remind their peers that LGBT kids are often silenced by homophobia and acts of violence against them. This year, the DOS will be in honor of Lawrence King, a 15 year old kid shot in the head by a classmate for being gay.

At the initiation of the Day of Silence, anti-gays became furious. They saw this as an effort to encourage students to think favorably of homosexuality. And rather than risk a reduction in the cultural rejection of homosexaulity, they harshly objected to any effort to draw attention to the verbal and physical violence that gay students experience every day.

So they started a rebuttal, the Day of Truth. As Daniel illustrated, there’s little truth expressed by DOT, but that’s not important to them. Their primary purpose is to make certain that gay students know that they reject the DOS’ efforts to reduce violence and discrimination against them.

Further efforts to counter the Day of Silence include a call to parents to remove their children from school that day lest they find merit in the anti-violence message.

Often this response leaves gay people and their friends confused. “Shouldn’t Christians be the first to oppose violence and cruelty?”, they ask.

Well that message is finally finding a home. A joint effort by Warren Throckmorton, psychology professor at Grove City College, and Michael Frey, a director with Campus Crusade, seeks to support the message of non-violence.

Throckmorton and Frey are encouraging conservative Christian students to join the silent protest, but to also let their classmates know that it is because of their Scriptural belief in the Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

It now appears that they are finding support from some Christian kids who were a bit uncomfortable with the message of rejection and condemnation.

Some bridges are being built. For instance, a Campus Crusade for Christ group at Slippery Rock recently entered a dialogue with a gay support group on campus and will help lead the call for respectful treatment of all students on campus. Randy Veccia, student leader, says the efforts of both groups will serve “to raise awareness that everyone deserves to be loved.” Christian students in high schools in Greensboro, NC are going to reach out in ways not contemplated before.

And the effort now has the support of Rev. Bob Stith, Gender Issues Strategist for the Southern Baptist convention.

I have long thought Christians were missing a great opportunity by not being more vocal in helping to make our schools safe places for all kids. It doesn’t require that we compromise our beliefs. Indeed it can give us a great opportunity that we might not otherwise have.

What a wonderful opportunity to express our convictions in a way that is positive, loving and redemptive. What a wonderful opportunity to train our children to care about all people, to model the example of Jesus and the woman at the well.

Who knows but what this could even be the beginning of a movement that will turn the tide of school shootings and violence in the hallways?

I have no expectation that any of those involved in this effort will change their theological objection to sexual activity between individuals of the same sex any time soon. Nor do I think that is a reasonable demand to make of them.

Further, I hope that we are all careful that efforts are not made to dis-identify those individuals who are currently being targeted for bullying and violence, thus diminishing the message that these specific people - gay kids - are worthy of decency and love.

But I welcome those conservative Christians kids who are willing to stand up against mistreatment of their gay fellow students, whether or not they are convinced of their salvation. And I believe that as conservative Christian students begin to see their gay classmates as children of God and worthy of respect, and as gay students begin to see conservative Christians as allies rather than oppressors, common ground can be reached.

We can all at some point make our theological arguments on their merits once peace is established. But in the meanwhile lets agree to join forces to fight against the common enemies of violence and brutality.

Broadway’s Pastor Calls it Quits

Timothy Kincaid

April 17th, 2008

Rev. Brett Younger, the gay-tolerant pastor of Broadway Baptist Church in Fort Worth has decided to give up his efforts to bring about unity and peace in his church.

After surviving months of bitter infighting over the philosophical direction of his church, the Rev. Brett Younger, senior pastor at Broadway Baptist Church, is stepping down to work on the faculty of a divinity school in Atlanta.

Younger, 47, is going to work at McAfee School of Theology at Mercer University in Atlanta. Members of the church leadership were told about his resignation earlier this week. His last day at Broadway Baptist will be June 8.

I’m saddened by his decision and hope that it does not encourage those at Broadway who were intolerant and unkind to feel justified in their behavior.

See also:
More Baptist Controversy
Broadway Baptist Punts on Gay Members’ Photos
Broadway Baptist Finds a Happy Compromise
Broadway’s Anti-Gays Vote

John Shore Gets It

Timothy Kincaid

April 15th, 2008

In a posting on his blog on CrossWalk, John Shore did not speak out for inclusive theology. But he did something that I think is often missing from the Christian debate about homosexuality; he acknowledged that the conservative viewpoint demands far more of gay Christians than most heterosexuals would ever be willing to give.

I’m not saying that it’s manifestly absurd and even cruel to suggest that everyone within a broad swath of our population spend their lives in emotional and physical isolation. I believe in the tenets of Christianity as ferociously as any Christian in the world. All I’m saying is that, as far as I can tell, we Christians (insofar as we ever speak with one voice) are saying that it is morally incumbent upon homosexuals to spend their lives in emotional and physical isolation. I hear a lot of Christians asserting that gays and lesbians should stop acting like gays and lesbians. But I never hear anyone saying the unavoidable follow-up to that — saying what that really means – which is that gay and lesbian men and women should spend their lives never experiencing what people most commonly mean when they use the word “love.”

Thank you, Mr. Shore.

Wherever one finds oneself on the theological spectrum, it is important that one recognizes and acknowledges exactly what they are demanding of others. This is a conversation in which it is well worth engaging.

The Pope’s Anti-Marriage Record

Timothy Kincaid

April 15th, 2008

In conjunction with the visit of Pope Benedict XVI, anti-gay marriage activist Maggie Gallagher has compiled a listing of the Pope’s rants in opposition to any efforts to provide civil protections to same-sex families.

A new analysis entitled “Pope Benedict XVI on Marriage: A Compendium” [pdf] and published by the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy on the eve of Benedict’s historic U.S. visit, finds that in less than three years of his pontificate, Pope Benedict XVI has spoken publicly about marriage on 111 occasions, connecting marriage to such overarching themes as human rights, world peace, and the conversation between faith and reason.

Sadly, rather than revealing an obsession that places opposition to gay equality as more important than scandals within the church, Gallagher sees this as validation of her quest for civil discrimination.

The short pontificate of Benedict XVI is thus already a standing rebuke to those voices of our time who attempt to make us embarrassed about our concern for, and battles over, marriage, family and sexual issues – to those who see in the contemporary marriage debate merely a distraction from more important issues.

But Gallagher is a bright woman. And even she can recognize that Benedict is a bit extreme.

Marriage essential to world peace? This may strike American ears as an oddity.

Ummm, yeah. Ya think?

Pope Draws Distinction Between Homosexuality and Pedophilia

Jim Burroway

April 15th, 2008

The New York Times reports this morning on comments Pope Benedict XVI made with reporters during his flight to the United States. He talked about the clergy sexual abuse scandal that has affected more than 5,000 victims and cost the church more than $2 billion. He described the scandals as a “great suffering for the church” and for him personally, saying “We are deeply ashamed and we will do what is possible that this cannot happen in the future.”

During the discussion, the pontiff indicated that he recognized the distinction between homosexuality and pedophilia:

Apparently drawing a distinction between priests with homosexual tendencies and those inclined to molest children, the Pontiff said “I would not speak at this moment about homosexuality, but pedophilia which is another thing. And we would absolutely exclude pedophiles from the sacred ministry.”

This would be welcome news, but the rest of the church appears not to have gotten the memo. In response to the clergy sexual abuse scandal, the Congregation for Catholic Education in 2005 issued instructions barring gay men entering holy orders unless they had “overcome” for at least three years. This led to a virtual witch hunt within many seminaries, while priests faced increasing stigmatization within their dioceses. Meanwhile, abuse victim advocates accuse the pope of protecting nineteen bishops who they say have been “credibly accused of abusing children.”

You can learn more about the fals link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse in our report, “Testing the Premise: Are Gays a Threat To Our Children?”

More Facts about Elane Photography

Timothy Kincaid

April 14th, 2008

UPDATE: Decision and Final Order [pdf]

The Decision and Final Order of the Human Rights Commission lays out the facts leading to the determination.

Vanessa Willock sent to Elane Photography the following e-mail on September 21, 2006, a year in advance of her ceremony.

We are researching potential photographers for our commitment ceremony on September 15, 2007 in Taos, NM.

This is a same-gender ceremony. If you are open to helping us celebrate our day we’d like to receive pricing information.

Thanks

Elaine Huguenin responded

Hello Vanessa,
As a company, we photograph traditional weddings, engagements, seniors, and several other things such as political photographs and singer’s portfolios.
-Elaine-

Willock wrote again

Hi Elaine,
Thanks for your response below of September 21, 2006. I’m a bit confused, however, by the wording of your response. Are you saying that your company does not offer your photography services to same-sex couples?
Thanks,
Vanessa

Huguenin in conclusion

Hello Vanessa,
Sorry if our last response was a confusing one. Yes, you are correct in saying we do not photograph same-sex weddings, but again, thanks for checking out our site!
Have a great day.
-Elaine

In November 2006 Willock’s partner, Misty Collinsworth, contacted Huguenin and - without mentioning the sex of the partners - inquired about services. Huguenin responded enthusiastically and sought to follow up.

On December 20, 2006, Willock filed a charge of discrimination against Elane Photography.

The decision included two questions: did discrimination occur based on sexual orientation, and was Elane Photography a public accommodation. The commission found the answer to both questions to be in the affirmative.

Elane’s attorneys argued that Ms. Huguenin’s religious convictions provided exclusion to the New Mexico Human Rights Act. The commission found that questions of the constitutionality of the NMHRA was “not before the New Mexico Human Rights Commission for determination in this proceeding and, accordingly, are not addressed here.