In the classic Humphrey Bogart Film, Treasure of the Sierra Madre, Bogart is confronted by men on horseback who claim to be Mexican officers.
“If you’re Federales, where are your badges?” He asks.
The reply is the memorable line,
“Badges? We don’t need no stinkin’ badges!”
A few months ago, Rev. Frank Schaefer, a Methodist minister in Pennsylvania was defrocked by his denomination for officiating at a wedding of two homosexuals. His removal from the teaching ministry followed proscribed rules and guidelines set forth by his denomination for violating church doctrine and practice, doctrine which he no doubt pledged to adhere to as an ordained official of the Methodist church. His removal instigated volleys of condemnation from liberals within and without the church body.
The same thing was about to happen in the New York City area, when Rev. Thomas Ogletree officiated at such a ceremony. Same rules, same doctrine-Different outcome.*
Bishop Martin McLee declined to prosecute. Bishop Peggy Johnson from the Philadelphia area, said she was filled with "jubilation" over the decision.
“If you’re the church authorities, show me your commitment to church doctrine.”
“Doctrine? We don’t need no stinkin’ doctrine!”
The Methodist Church risks schism over the issue. There area many within the denomination who were outraged by the Pennsylvania ouster. There were many outraged over the Bishop’s refusal to adhere to Church ordnances and doctrine.
Other trials are pending. Several Ministers have refused to stop violating the 40 year old rules set forth in the Methodist Book of Discipline.
Rev. Steve Heiss (Binghamton, NY) refuses to submit to church discipline as he waits for his own trial. Following the decision to defrock Frank Schaefer, he told Religion News Service,
A few months ago, Rev. Frank Schaefer, a Methodist minister in Pennsylvania was defrocked by his denomination for officiating at a wedding of two homosexuals. His removal from the teaching ministry followed proscribed rules and guidelines set forth by his denomination for violating church doctrine and practice, doctrine which he no doubt pledged to adhere to as an ordained official of the Methodist church. His removal instigated volleys of condemnation from liberals within and without the church body.
The same thing was about to happen in the New York City area, when Rev. Thomas Ogletree officiated at such a ceremony. Same rules, same doctrine-Different outcome.*
Bishop Martin McLee declined to prosecute. Bishop Peggy Johnson from the Philadelphia area, said she was filled with "jubilation" over the decision.
“If you’re the church authorities, show me your commitment to church doctrine.”
“Doctrine? We don’t need no stinkin’ doctrine!”
The Methodist Church risks schism over the issue. There area many within the denomination who were outraged by the Pennsylvania ouster. There were many outraged over the Bishop’s refusal to adhere to Church ordnances and doctrine.
Other trials are pending. Several Ministers have refused to stop violating the 40 year old rules set forth in the Methodist Book of Discipline.
Rev. Steve Heiss (Binghamton, NY) refuses to submit to church discipline as he waits for his own trial. Following the decision to defrock Frank Schaefer, he told Religion News Service,
“The ambiguity of it was so awful and so painful.”
Heiss is right, though not for the reason I suspect he says this. The ambiguity is on the part of the denomination’s willingness to stand its ground on the biblical principals originally set forth as their standards of practice. At the heart of this is doctrine. In particular, the doctrine of inerrancy.
R. Dale Tedder, Jr. writing for the Florida Confessing Association regarding United Methodist Authority and the Question of Inerrancy wrote,
There really should be no ambiguity here. But the fact that Tedder felt it necessary to write in support of scriptural authority indicates that there is within the Methodist ranks.
Heiss is right, though not for the reason I suspect he says this. The ambiguity is on the part of the denomination’s willingness to stand its ground on the biblical principals originally set forth as their standards of practice. At the heart of this is doctrine. In particular, the doctrine of inerrancy.
R. Dale Tedder, Jr. writing for the Florida Confessing Association regarding United Methodist Authority and the Question of Inerrancy wrote,
“Scripture is ultimately authoritative because it is inerrant. Authority has to do with the right to impose obligations. God, as the "author" of the universe, has the right to impose any obligation he desires. Any ultimate authority less than God is an idol. However, humanity could not know God and what he required were he to have remained silent. However, the Christian faith has always believed that God has revealed himself to his creation. To say that God has revealed himself to his creation is to confess that his revelation was successfully given and received. Though the recipients of such a revelation are by no means inerrant, surely the Revealer is. Therefore, United Methodism must claim that Scripture alone is the Church's final authority. To affirm this is to do more than declare allegiance to an amorphous doctrine of inspiration. Instead, the authority of Scripture can only be truly sustained if is grounded in the sovereign hand of the Lord who continues to exercise his authority over his Church through his inerrant Word.”
There really should be no ambiguity here. But the fact that Tedder felt it necessary to write in support of scriptural authority indicates that there is within the Methodist ranks.
*12 Mar 2014 
The Philadelphia Inquirer
The Philadelphia Inquirer
By Tricia L. Nadolny INQUIRER STAFF
WRITER tnadolny@phillynews.com 610-313-8205 TriciaNadolny
No trial for cleric who led gay
wedding Bishop overseeing Methodists in N.Y.C. area also suspends any future
actions.
No comments:
Post a Comment