Richard Clarke and the Bush Administration:
Gay Rights Supporters and United Methodist Administration

UMCalledOut
Gilbert Caldwell
April 6, 2004

Richard Clarke, the former counterterroism official under three successive presidents is discovering that his efforts at "truth- telling" are being subjected to vigorous rebuttal and character assassination by the Bush administration. I am reminded of efforts at another time to denounce and destroy Martin Luther King, Jr. by smearing him with the "communist" label. I wonder if years from now, we will be naming streets, schools and buildings after Richard Clarke?

The response of institutions to those who because of conscience seek to speak "truth" about those institutions, determines to some degree the health of institutional leadership: ethically and spiritually. Society has given those who dare to speak out, a name: "whistleblower". I am thankful we have not resorted to using this nomenclature in The United Methodist Church.

I am confident that United Methodist leadership will not emulate the current administration in Washington as it responds to those of us who disagree with our denominational legislation and practice vis-à-vis homosexuality and clergy who are same-gender loving.

The 2004 General Conference has a God-given opportunity to transform our Book of Discipline into a guiding document that reflects the best of Methodist History and current United Methodist Church reality.

Presently, our Book of Discipline, on matters of homosexuality, reads as though it could have been written by those other than the daughters and sons of John Wesley. It could have been written by our brothers and sisters of the Southern Baptist persuasion. They would have difficulty with what we say about women because they have "institutionalized" the secondary status of women and wives as described in First Corinthians, chapters 7 and 14. But, they would be pleased with what we say about homosexuals and the ordained ministry.

Our present Book of Discipline would probably gain favor with the Reverends Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. They have been known to say with less finesse what we say in our rule book, but their meanings and ours are the same. The leaders of the Religious Right would have little difficulty with our excluding language. My fear is that in this presidential election year, they may use our Book of Discipline as a "tool" in support of the Marriage Amendment. The introduction of this Amendment during a crucial presidential election is an astute political move to keep the electorate from engaging in serious reflection on the foreign and domestic policy of the current administration.

The following is more difficult for me to write, but I must! Some of us have first-hand acquaintance with the Rev. Fred Phelps and his followers who in their protests and denunciations of Gay persons and those of us who are their allies, use language and mechanical puppets that are beyond description. He and his followers and their orchestrated hatred of homosexuals, remind me of the faces of hatred, of those women and men who stood outside public schools to scream at and berate the black boys and girls who racially integrated those schools for the first time.

Our Book of Discipline seeks to distance United Methodism from the Phelps mentality by saying "homosexual persons no less than heterosexual persons are individuals of sacred worth." We also say, "Certain basic human rights and civil liberties are due all persons. (This includes "homosexual persons") But, as we speak of "The Ministry Of The Ordained", (paragraph 304.3) we say, "...the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching, self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be accepted as candidates...."

We have a history in our nation of praising words of inclusivity, while doing deeds of exclusivity. Is our United Methodist dichotomy in words and practice when it comes to homosexual persons, our way of expressing duplicity that imitates our national contradictory practices and also meets Fred Phelps in the middle? I know none of this is intended, but to a world looking at us from the outside, "perception is reality".

In Pittsburgh, delegates whom some would name "conservative", the "moderate majority", or "progressive", have the opportunity to begin the spiritual transformation of our denomination for the 21st century. They can do this because the delegates are more than the theological/political labels we unfortunately confer upon each other. They are persons who have said a loud "YES" to that God has done, is doing and will do in Jesus Christ! They are United Methodist leaders, lay and clergy who because of belief and experience are unafraid to say and sing to themselves on the floor of General Conference: "Spirit of the living God, fall afresh on me. Spirit of the living God, fall afresh on me. Melt me. Mold me. Fill me. Use me. Spirit of the living God, fall afresh on me."

The Holy Spirit can encourage the unexpected. The Holy Spirit can move all of us to "higher ground". The Holy Spirit liberates us to transcend differences of the past and empowers us to begin anew. There are no "winners and losers" in church-decision making.

One of my gifted colleagues and long-time clergy friends, Kent Millard has written that In Pittsburgh where rivers interact, intersect and blend, the same can happen to the wonderfully diverse group of people called United Methodists! I pray this will happen.

Gil Caldwell Denver, Colorado

The Rev. Gilbert Caldwell of Denver, Colo., is a retired United Methodist pastor. Gil Caldwell was an activist with Dr. Martin Luther King in the historic civil rights movement. He is a retired pastor, having served the church in several annual conferences and national agencies.