Browse Items (3 total)
Sort by:
-
California-Nevada United Methodist Review, April 2, 1999
The document, California-Nevada United Methodist Review from April 2, 1999, reflects the theological, pastoral, and social challenges facing the California-Nevada Conference of the United Methodist Church (UMC). A significant portion of the publication addresses the ongoing controversy surrounding the January 16, 1999, holy union of Jeanne Barnett and Ellie Charlton, officiated by 69 UMC clergy in open defiance of church law. This event highlights broader denominational debates over LGBTQ+ inclusion and pastoral authority within the church.
The document captures the fallout of the holy union ceremony and the subsequent filing of complaints against the participating clergy. The controversy underscores tensions between adherence to the Book of Discipline and individual acts of conscience by clergy seeking to affirm same-sex couples.
This document is evidence of the UMC’s ongoing struggle to reconcile doctrinal tradition with calls for inclusivity and justice. It provides a detailed account of one of the most visible acts of resistance to church law on LGBTQ+ issues in the late 20th century, illustrating the personal, communal, and institutional dynamics at play. -
"After Wheatley, What?"
This document explores significant debates within the United Methodist Church (UMC) during the early 1980s, with a primary focus on doctrinal issues and the controversy surrounding Bishop Melvin E. Wheatley Jr. of the Denver Area. The controversy highlights tensions over UMC doctrine, particularly related to homosexuality, while emphasizing the broader struggle over theological interpretation and the church’s response to social change.
The publication addresses the theological and doctrinal issues raised by accusations against Bishop Wheatley for his stance that homosexuality is not inherently sinful. These accusations reflect deeper conflicts within the UMC regarding doctrinal authority and the application of the church’s historical and scriptural teachings to contemporary issues.
The controversy centered on whether Wheatley’s views on homosexuality violated UMC doctrinal standards. A Western Jurisdiction Committee on Investigation found no "reasonable ground" for a trial, noting that while there are scriptural condemnations of homosexuality, the interpretation of these passages is subject to the Wesleyan "quadrilateral" framework—Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. The committee emphasized the importance of integrating these four sources in a constructive dialogue rather than relying solely on scriptural literalism or traditional precedent.
This document is a valuable historical resource for understanding the UMC’s struggles with doctrinal interpretation and social issues during the 1980s. It captures the complexities of applying historical teachings to contemporary contexts and illustrates the church’s ongoing efforts to balance tradition, inclusivity, and theological inquiry. -
engage/ social action: Homosexuality
This document is a periodical published by the Board of Church and Society of The United Methodist Church. This issue includes articles, reflections, and columns exploring a range of topics related to homosexuality, social justice, theology, and contemporary challenges faced by the church and society.
This publication serves as a rich resource for understanding the theological debates and social priorities of The United Methodist Church during the late 20th century. It captures the intersection of faith, ethics, and activism, providing valuable insights into how the church navigated controversial and transformative issues in its broader mission.
Advisory Warning
These archival exhibits contain historical materials that reflect the social, cultural, and theological perspectives of their time. Some content may include language, imagery, or viewpoints that are outdated, offensive, or harmful by today’s standards. These materials are preserved to document history and promote understanding, but they may be difficult to engage with for some viewers. We encourage users to approach these resources with sensitivity and awareness of their historical context. If you have questions or need support, please contact the archives.