Much of the day yesterday at General Conference was focused on petitions related to human sexuality and specifically on the church’s policies related to homosexuals. Throughout the conference demonstrators and sympathetic delegates demonstrated and rallied, asking the church to change its current prohibition against “self-avowed practicing homosexuals” being ordained, serving as pastors, and prohibitions against United Methodist pastors officiating at homosexual marriages.

The General Conference voted on various pieces of legislation related to this issue. Some called for liberalization of our rules, and others for making them more restrictive. The debate was civil, but at times gut wrenching. Delegates who are homosexual, or who have children who are homosexual spoke of their faith, experience and pain that results from the church’s current stance. Other delegates spoke of their conviction that God’s will regarding this issue is clear, that God’s design for human sexuality is heterosexual sexual intimacy within the bonds of marriage.

The result of most of the votes on the various petitions were approximately 65% in favor of retaining our current policies and 35% wishing to liberalize our policies. The African delegates, an increasing number of the delegates to our General Conference, are overwhelmingly in favor of the current policies. Apart from their presence, I estimate that the U.S. delegates are probably divided 55% to 45% in favor of the current policies. The U.S. church is deeply divided on this issue.

By the end of the day delegates were emotionally drained as the church had once again wrestled with the most challenging and divisive issue facing the mainline churches today.

During several days of this conference there were two groups of demonstrators we walked past, and between, in order to enter the building. On the one side of the sidewalk were those asking the church to ordain homosexuals and to perform homosexual unions. On the other side of the sidewalk were a group from a small church here in the Dallas/Fort Worth area holding up signs that quoted scripture, carrying their Bibles and from time to time, speaking up to the other side of the sidewalk saying, “Homosexuality is an abomination.”

These two groups of demonstrators characterized for me the dilemma we face, both as a church and as a society. They represent the two poles in this debate. But there are many of us who are not comfortable with either option.

I feel great compassion and empathy for gay and lesbian people who are often treated by religious people as the Pharisees treated the “sinners and tax collectors” of Jesus day. The church today has become known not for its pursuit of love and justice, but for its opposition to gay people. I believe, and the United Methodist Church officially proclaims, that we welcome gay and lesbian people, just as Jesus welcomed each of us in our humanity and sought to draw us to God.

At the same time I am uncomfortable with the far left on this issue. I believe God’s design for human sexuality, “in the beginning,” was heterosexuality and that sexual intimacy was intended to bond together husband and wife and it came with the possibility of becoming co-creators with God. I have held that two human beings of the same sex might be the closest of companions and deeply love one another without sexual intercourse being involved (here I am reminded of David who, the scriptures say, “loved Jonathan as he loved his own soul” - read I Samuel 20 for an example of the depth of the love these two men shared). I realize that, even here, I may be wrong and that God may see this differently. Certainly those on the left believe God sees this issue differently and that the scriptures on this issue reflect the values of the culture of the time, or were addressing specific types of homosexual practice.

I’ll refer interested persons to my book, Seeing Gray in a World of Black and White, where I have written extensively on the arguments on both sides of this issue and laid out my own beliefs. I will say that, on a pragmatic level, to change our churches position and to begin ordaining homosexuals and performing homosexual unions today would destroy the church. My picture of this is someone driving down the highway at 70 miles per hour and deciding to put the car in reverse. The transmission would blow apart. There are many people who see this issue as one of biblical authority and for them, to change the position would be impossible without denying one of the foundations of their faith.

Ultimately the underlying issue for the church is not homosexuality but how we understand the nature and authority of the Bible. The questions we need to be asking, as a denomination, are: What is the Bible? How was it formed? When and why do we view certain clear teachings of scripture as no longer binding (the early church did this with much of the Old Testament, and every church today views some scriptures as not binding, even the fundamentalists do this - I think of Paul’s admonition regarding women praying with their heads covered and remaining silent in the church as but two examples of many - yet many “bible believing” churches allow women to speak in worship and do not insist that women wear head coverings when they pray)? And, when is it not okay to set aside the clear teaching of scripture? The United Methodist Church needs to wrestle with these questions before it comes back to the issue of homosexuality.

As I was leaving conference tonight I began speaking with young clergy on both the right and the left who are yearning for a different approach to this issue - who are looking for a third way. It is likely that I will be inviting some of these clergy together to spend more time in prayer, in dialogue and discussion trying to find a way forward for our church that looks different than this once-ever-four-years debate over the issue on the floor of General Conference.

Okay, I’m going to turn off comments on this post. This week I listened to hours of comments from people on both sides, much of which was simply hurtful. I know many of you have strong feelings about this issue, but I don’t care to carry on the General Conference debate on this blog post. Instead I’d invite you to pray for those with whom you disagree, and, if you disagree with me, please pray for me as well.