Help Wanted: 8 Martyrs

               

          A friend recently said, "Ten pastors will have to be defrocked before the UMC changes its stance toward gays."    

         Two years ago Frank Schaefer became our first martyr in most recent UMC history. His ministerial credentials were removed following a church trial. (They were later reinstated.) Frank’s story and martyrdom brought light to the harm done to the LGBTQ community by the UMC. It also created tension and pain for our denomination. This brought us closer to making the change to full inclusion.

                I had the opportunity to officiate at my daughter’s same gender wedding last August. A complaint and just resolution followed. Last month I had the privilege of officiating at Rev. Hutchison’s same gender wedding following his forced resignation from the Cassopolis, Michigan UMC. A complaint was filed against me. I’m willing to go to trial and lose my credentials.

                God is looking for 8 more martyrs.

                How can you be a martyr for God’s kingdom of justice and inclusion for all people?

1.       Officiate at a same gender wedding.

2.       Have someone file a complaint. This can refer to any same gender wedding you’ve officiated in the past six years. Some suggestions for people to file the complaint: Your District Superintendent, a Good News evangelical, or even an ally.

3.         Don’t settle for a just resolution when you meet with the Bishop.

4.          Let your case go to trial.

5.          Encourage media (social and traditional and denominational) coverage of every step of your process.

The goal of this martyrdom is to bring light to the harm done to the LGBTQ community by the United Methodist Church. It is also to bring tension and pain to our denomination which is at a tipping point. Hopefully, we will have 8 more martyrs by the 2016 General Conference so that God’s desired changes are voted up.

Martin Luther King Junior said from the Birmingham jail: “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has consistently refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue.”

He also said, “I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.”

God is looking for 8 more martyrs. Will you be one of them?

Mike Tupper, pastor of Parchment, MI UMC, michaeljamestupper@yahoo.com

                

Different United Methodist Responses to Marriage Equality and LGBTQ Persons

Different United Methodist Responses to Marriage Equality and LGBTQ Persons

            Where do you stand? Which of the following five responses reflect your understanding of God’s will in our day for the people called United Methodists?

1.      Severely Exclusive - LGBTQ persons are condemned by God to hell. Homosexuality in any form is an “abomination” in the eyes of God.  

2.      Exclusive – LGBTQ persons are valued by God, but homosexual practice is condemned as sinful. Same gender ceremonies are not ordained by God.

3.      Mildly Exclusive – LGBTQ persons do not represent God’s original intention in creation. But God can redeem the brokenness. In the difficult choices of our fallen world, monogamous same gender relationships can often represent the best Christian response. 

4.      Diversity – Since our church is not of one mind in responding to LGBTQ persons and marriage equality, we should respect the diversity of understandings.

5.      Inclusive – LGBTQ persons are created by God with unique gifts. Homosexuality is not considered by God to be a sin. Faithful, monogamous, loving relationships between any two persons are ordained by God.

I had the privilege of signing the marriage license for my daughter’s same gender wedding in August of 2014. A complaint was filed against me the next day because this is a “chargeable offense” in the United Methodist Church. The complainant and the Bishop met with me on four occasions and we settled “out of court” with a Just Resolution.

 Item four of the Just Resolution statement says, “Rev. Tupper will develop a written theological statement which accurately presents the several theological positions within the context of the West Michigan Conference and includes his personal theological conclusions about the position he has chosen for himself.” This document reflects that work.

In preparation for this statement, I desired to learn more about the exclusive perspectives. I contacted Tom Lambrecht from the Good News organization. He directed me to Dr. Chris Bounds. Chris is a United Methodist elder and Professor of Theology at Indiana Wesleyan University. He graciously agreed to meet with me on December 12^th, 2014. We enjoyed a warm and fruitful dialogue as we shared about our lives and our perspectives. The following document will include helpful information he shared with me.

The “exclusive” perspectives rest on four pillars.

The first pillar is Scripture. The Bible refers to homosexuality six times. Genesis 19:1-11 tells the story of the homosexual intentions of the men of Sodom. Leviticus 20:13 and 18:22-25 condemn homosexual practice as part of the Purity Code of Moses. Paul includes homosexuality in lists of sinful behavior in Romans 1:26-27, I Corinthians 6:9-10 and I Timothy 1:8-10. Every reference to homosexuality in the Bible is negative.

The second pillar is church tradition. Christian churches have taken a stand condemning homosexual behavior from the early church up till the present. They have understood the Scriptures to say that homosexuality is sinful.

The third pillar is Creation. God created humans as male and female to be joined together. The second creation story in Genesis 2 tells about the creation of woman to be a suitable partner for the man. Genesis 2:24: “That’s why a man will leave his own father and mother. He marries a woman, and the two of them become like one person.” Men and women were created by God with specific anatomical features that promote their joining together. Homosexual practice is “contrary to nature”.

The fourth pillar is the Fall. Homosexuality is an expression of the brokenness of creation and the fallen state of humanity. It is one way of expressing original sin – our bent to stray from God’s intentions. LGBTQ persons are born with a specific orientation that represents a deviance from God’s original plan. It is a spiritual disability.

Dr. Chris Bounds summarizes the fourth pillar this way: “However the Church has also affirmed that just because people have been born with a homosexual inclination, exacerbated by the fallen order around them, and fully materialized through personal sin, this does not mean they are without hope of healing from this manifestation of corruption. The redemptive work of Christ made available to believers through the sanctifying work of the Spirit can empower people to keep their homosexual inclinations in check and offer hope of healing of their corrupted sexuality.”

The “Inclusive” perspective stands on six pillars.

1.      The Goodness of God’s creation (Genesis 1:26-31 and Psalm 139:13-14)

God created humans “in God’s image”. The creation story was written to remind us that all of God’s creation is good. “God doesn’t make junk.” Whether we’re black or white, male or female, Chinese or American, homosexual or straight, left-handed or right-handed – we’re all created good in God’s image. Homosexuality is not a choice. It’s a unique gift given by God to certain people and not others. It is good in God’s sight.

The rest of the Creation story emphasizes the diversity of God’s creation. God could have made things to look and be alike. All plants could have looked alike. There could have been only one insect, only one bird, and only one fish. Instead, God chose to create the world using an amazing diversity. We’re incredibly diverse as human beings as well. We realize there’s diversity in our sexuality as well. God created us both homosexual and heterosexual. We can celebrate that diversity.

2.      God’s Inclusion of the “Impure” (Acts 10:1-36)

Gentiles were considered impure, sinful people to be avoided by Jews. The vision and the visit to Cornelius awaken Peter to his mission to reach out to these people. He realizes Gentiles can be Christian without following all the Jewish purity laws. He discovers that “God treats all people alike”.

 Who are considered by some to be the impure, sinful people in our day? The people in the LGBTQ community. What does Peter’s vision and visit have to do with us today in the church? We are called to reach out to those who are considered impure and sinful. We believe God’s grace and acceptance are for all, not for the ‘chosen’ few (the pure, the Jew, the heterosexual).

3.      Challenging the Rules (Colossian 2:20-22 and 3:14)

The Christians in Colossae have gotten caught up in rules that go beyond God’s intentions. It is similar to the problem some of the Pharisees had during the days of Jesus. The Colossians had rules about what they could and couldn’t eat, rules about what they could and couldn’t touch and detailed rituals and festival practices. They taught that one had to keep all of these rules to be a part of the church.

Paul told them this was wrong. He said that Christ died to set them free from rules like those. Later people referred to the problem in Colossae as the Colossian heresy. It’s been a problem we’ve seen throughout the centuries. We find it in rules that some churches hold on to today such as priests who cannot marry and women who cannot be church leaders. As a youth, I was a part of a church that taught that movie theaters, billiards, alcohol, playing cards and swimming with persons of the same sex were all sinful and forbidden. I’ve read about how intermarriage between the races fits the same category. It’s the Colossian heresy still with us.

One rule that is a part of the Colossian heresy today is the rule against homosexual practice. Paul’s words to us are still helpful: “Why be bothered with the rules that humans have made up?” In the next chapter Paul goes on to tell what it should be about instead of those rules. “Love is more important than anything else.” (Col. 3:14)

4: The Commandments of God (Mark 12:28-31)

The Son of God says love trumps human laws. Love is the essence of God’s true law. Loving a person means we value and respect them and do not treat them as second class Christians. Loving gay people as much as we love ourselves means we allow them as many rights and privileges as heterosexuals. The biblical God loves homosexuals and people in the LGBTQ community. The biblical God calls for everyone to love those in the LGBTQ community as much as they love themselves. We allow them to love a partner and get married just as heterosexuals are able to love a partner and get married. This also means we are compelled to advocate for their equal rights and equal treatment.

5. Jesus’ Inclusion of the Outsider (Luke 14:15-24 and Luke 5:12-16)

Jesus reveals what this love for all looks like by his stories and his life. Jesus has a special passion for those who are not treated as first class citizens. He reaches out to help the outsiders. He welcomes in those who are excluded and oppressed. This can apply today to the LGBTQ community who are often excluded and oppressed and treated as second class outsiders. Lord, help us love.  

6.      Jesus and Marriage (Mark 10:1-12)

Jesus values the joining together of two people in a married relationship. Jesus is clear that breaking this marriage covenant is not God’s perfect will. Divorce is the great danger to our families, not same gender weddings.

Mike Tupper’s Perspective

I am willing to live in a church that holds the “Diversity” position. Diversity has always been a hallmark of the United Methodist Church. We hold diverse understandings about most of the social issues of our time including: war, alcohol use, abortion, and capital punishment. The Book of Discipline states in “Our Theological Task”: “United Methodists as a diverse people continue to strive for consensus in understanding the gospel. In our diversity, we are held together by a shared inheritance and a common desire to participate in the creative and redemptive activity of God…      In the name of Jesus Christ we are called to work within our diversity while exercising patience and forbearance with one another.”

I prefer to serve in a denomination that supports the “Inclusive” position. It’s clear to me that the Scriptures indicating that homosexuality is a sin do not represent God’s will for all time. The trajectory of church tradition in responding to LGBTQ persons and marriage equality is moving toward the inclusive position. This can be seen in the changing position of the other mainline denominations and the perspective of younger Christians. Church tradition is shifting as it did related to slavery and the role of women. LGBTQ persons do not live with a spiritual disability, but are given a unique gift by the God of diversity. They are living according to their “nature”. Marriage is the most faithful arena for expressing sexuality so same gender weddings should be encouraged by the church.

Where do you stand? Which of the five responses reflect your understanding of God’s will in our day for the people called United Methodists?

Acts 15 Hope by Len Schoenherr

    The long traditions, laws and world view of Judaism seem to have defined the first decade of the followers of the Risen Christ.  But when Paul and Barnabas and Peter testified to their experiences of the Holy Spirit's activity among the uncircumcised the church faced a decision. Would the amazing activity of the Holy Spirit move the early church to override centuries of codified practice supported by their understanding of the teaching of scripture?  

    The account in Acts 15 marks the beginning of what has been a long, painful, and ongoing attempt to change the the practice of the church as it seeks to align itself with the clear evidence of the Holy Spirit's surprising, and to some, disturbing, activity.

    Some of us have seen the Holy Spirit move among LGBT folks we have baptized and confirmed. They, as we who are "straight", are working at creating loving and faithful relationships and are seeking to live lives of committed discipleship and service to God and neighbor. They love God, affirm Jesus as Lord and Savior and the presence of the Holy Spirit in their lives and relationships is abundantly evident. Those experiences have led us to prayerfully discern that we can no longer deny these brothers and sisters in Christ the blessing of marriage. To do so would be to hinder the work of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

    In breaking with current United Methodist law and practice, we are aware of the pain and anger our behavior causes brother and sister laity and clergy who believe we are acting to destroy the church.  But we also love this church, love it deeply enough and love our LGBT sisters and brothers deeply enough, to prayerfully violate our Book of Discipline. We do so in attempted faithfulness to what we believe is the ongoing activity of the Holy Spirit in continuing the work started in Acts 15. We so attempting to be faithful to the Good News in Jesus Christ.  

   Similiar activity in the past led to the end of slavery, the ordination of women, interracial marriage, permission to marry divorced persons, and an ongoing outreach to "Gentiles" of varied times and places. Changes in those areas did not come about without tension and pain in the body of Christ. We remain divided from sisters and brothers in other faith communities who still oppose the ordination of women on scriptural and traditional grounds.  The Body of Christ remains a broken body. We do not rejoice in adding to that brokenness.  But the continuing pain of exclusion felt by LGBT folks cannot be the price of unity.

   I personally hope and pray for some Acts 15 wisdom for the United Methodist Church I love and have been privileged to serve for over forty years.  

   I continue to pray for our Bishop and our Superintendents 
and for LGBT folks watching our discussions and actions 
as our church struggles with this issue impacting many lives.

God's grace and peace to ALL.

Len Schoenherr, retired pastor and 
Privileged to be the support  person for Rev. Michael  Tupper 
during the Just Resolution of the Complaint filed against him
for officiating at his daughter's wedding.

Make Our Light Shine!

            Is it time for church leaders to ‘make our light shine’? We’ve been living under the clay pot of “Don’t ask, don’t tell”. Maybe now is the time to place our lamps on a lampstand where it can give light to everyone in our church. God might be calling us to tell our stories of celebrating same gender weddings and other stories of ministry with and hospitality toward all people.   

Tom Robinson, a Detroit pastor, shared a powerful story at our Signing Celebration on November 12^th. The story was about Moseli, an African American with a tremendous voice who worked as a nanny for a prestigious white family. She would take the children to church every Sunday at the white church.

            One Sunday she asked the pastor if she could sing at their Christmas Party.  The pastor would have said “no” except for the fact that the man Moseli worked for was an important leader in the church.

            Just before Moseli got up to sing, the ushers carried a screen to the front of the sanctuary. They escorted Moseli behind the screen from where she sang, “Sweet Little Jesus Boy”. At the end of the story, Tom’s father said to Tom, “Today we’re behind the screen. But tomorrow we’ll be in front of the screen.”

            This analogy applies to so many of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters who are kept behind the screen by their church. It also applies to so many in our churches who are expressing God’s inclusive love for all, but are doing their good works behind the screen.

            Jesus said, “You are like light for the whole world. A city built on top of a hill cannot be hidden, and no one would light a lamp and put it under a clay pot. A lamp is placed on a lampstand, where it can give light to everyone in the house. Make your light shine, so that others will see the good that you do and will praise your Father in heaven.”

            Is it time for church leaders to ‘make our light shine’? Our church has placed us behind the screen and under a clay pot with the threat of a church trial and removing our ministerial credentials. But maybe now is the time to “make our light shine.”

I felt God calling me to do that after my daughter told me she was getting married. I’ve kept my light under the clay pot and behind the screen for years. I didn’t want to upset people in the churches I served. But this Lent when I reflected on Jesus’ decision to go to Jerusalem, I heard the call to make my light shine. That decision was confirmed when I heard our Bishop at Annual Conference preach about the courage of the midwives in the face of the Pharaoh. I knew I was not only supposed to officiate at Sarah’s wedding, but also tell my District Superintendent and others what I did. I was supposed to place my lamp on a lampstand.

            Maybe now is the time for you to “make your light shine.” One way you might do that is to write your story of ministry to all people, especially our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. Then share that story with others. One way to share the story is through this blog. I’m willing to post your story on this blog site. Send them to me via my e-mail at michaeljamestupper at yahoo.com. 

The "Good News" Perspective - Looking at the UMC from the Other Side

TOM LAMBRECHT | GOOD NEWS MAGAZINE

Personal Blog

• HOME
• BIO
• CONTACT
• NOVEMBER 17, 2014

When Is Accountability of No Account?

NOVEMBER 14, 2014 BY TOM LAMBRECHT 2 COMMENTS

A trend is developing in the way that some United Methodist bishops are handling complaints against pastors who perform same-sex weddings or unions. Instead of bringing accountability, the complaint process is being turned on its head and used to promote the very behavior that is the subject of the complaint!

This trend began with the Amy DeLong trial in 2011. As the penalty for performing a same-sex union, Rev. DeLong was “sentenced” to write a paper during a 20-day suspension on the meaning of covenant and to help lead discussions among Wisconsin Conference clergy on how to live together in covenant, given our disagreement over same-sex marriage.

This strategy was refined in the Pacific Northwest Annual Conference, where two pastors charged with performing same-sex weddings were given a one-day suspension, and the bishop committed to holding clergy conversations on how clergy can live and work together in covenant, given our disagreement.

A high-profile example took place in the New York Annual Conference, where a retired seminary dean was charged with performing a same-sex wedding. The complaint was dropped with no penalty, and the dean was asked to help lead a clergy conference on living together in covenant with our disagreement.

Bishop Melvin Talbert performed a high-profile same-sex union service in Alabama, against the wishes of the resident bishop of the area, as well as against the wishes of the Council of Bishops Executive Committee. At the Council of Bishops meeting, it was reported that the Talbert complaint process “had been followed.” As of yet, there has been no public statement about the Talbert complaint process. Nevertheless, Bishop Talbert was asked to speak as part of a panel of bishops addressing the issue of how the church should resolve our disagreement over same-sex marriage.

Finally, just this week, two clergy persons in Michigan had their complaints resolved over charges that they performed same-sex weddings. There is no acknowledgement that what they did was wrong, nor is there any promise not to repeat the violation of our covenant. Instead, the offending pastors are invited to be part of a design team to plan a state-wide series of events “at which LGBTQ and other interested United Methodists can have a safe place to tell their stories.” The goal of the events is to “reduce our church’s harmful rhetoric and actions toward LGBTQ persons.”

I could give additional examples of such complaint “resolutions.”

In other words, those who have violated our covenant are invited to help instruct us on how to change our covenant (or at least the way we act under our covenant) to permit the very actions that they were charged with. Rather than consequences for disobedience, we have here the promotion of more disobedience. Only the hope here is that it won’t be disobedience anymore because the church will change its rules.

I don’t think every pastor who performs a same-sex wedding ought to lose his/her credentials. On the other hand, I do believe that there should be some consequence for intentionally and knowingly violating our clergy covenant. To have no consequence means that such violations are permitted and even encouraged. Part of the power of civil disobedience is the willingness to live with the consequences of breaking what one perceives to be an unjust law. But here, practitioners of “ecclesiastical disobedience” have figured out a way to disobey what they perceive to be an unjust church law and not experience any negative consequences at all. In fact, the consequences are to instead undermine the church law and the integrity of the covenant itself.

This situation reminds me of the neighborhood baseball games I played with my friends as a kid. There were times when one of the players violated a rule of the game, but wouldn’t accept the consequences of being ruled “out” in that inning. Because there was no impartial umpire to enforce the rules, the disagreement would sometimes degenerate into an argument. When we all couldn’t agree on the enforcement of the rules, the game would usually break up and the players would head home.

In The United Methodist Church, we now have a number of annual conferences (maybe a dozen?) where it is permitted to break the “rules of the game.” Despite what the Book of Discipline says, pastors are permitted to perform same-sex unions or marriages. Most are performed quietly, under the radar. When a complaint is filed, an agreement is reached that involves no apology or recognition of wrong-doing, simply a plan for guided discussions of covenant. This Orwellian approach hopes that by continuing the endless discussions and allowing violations to occur unpunished, the opposition to same-sex marriage will weaken and disappear.

Why do we need to pass the Hamilton/Slaughter “local option?” We already have local option in at least a dozen annual conferences, no matter what the Discipline says.

One can forgive evangelicals for becoming cynical at this point in believing that progressives are determined to get their way in the church by any means possible. It appears that in many places there are no longer any umpires interested in ensuring that the rules of the game are being followed. Certainly, the disagreement has degenerated into an argument. All that remains to be seen is whether the players break up the game and head for home.

"It's About Community"

            The story I share about officiating at my daughter’s wedding starts out with a conversation I have with Sarah about where she and her partner Ali will stand. Sarah tells me they will not be sitting together during the wedding. I’m incredulous. I ask her, “Why would you do such a thing. This service is all about the two of you.”

            Sarah says to me, “It’s not about us, Dad. It’s about the community.”

            I experienced community at Sarah’s wedding that special August day in the pavilion at Druid Hill Park in Baltimore. Over sixty people spoke in the service. Dozens of people helped with the physical work of setting up chairs for the wedding and adding tables for the potluck that followed. Most of the local people brought food for the potluck. The evening was concluded with an ‘open mic’ where people shared stories and music and some of their talents. The wedding was truly about ‘the community’.  

I also experienced community the past few weeks.

I was thankful for community when I met the Bishop for the third time on October 30^th. The advocate who has gone with me to meet the Bishop each previous time was not able to make it. Len Shoenherr’s father was in the hospital so Len couldn’t go with me. Fortunately, Matt Weiler was willing to step in at the last minute. He was helpful as I processed many last minute negotiating that needed to happen. In addition, there were people praying for me before and during that meeting in a nearby room. I couldn’t have gone through this process without the community of pray-ers (in person and from a distance) over the past six weeks. Thanks to all of you!

I also experienced community the morning of October 30^th. We held the first Michigan Area Reconciling Ministry Network meeting in recent history. Reconciling Ministry Network (RMN) is the United Methodist organization that advocates for and with LGBTQ persons. In Michigan, we have some local churches, some Wesley Foundations, some groups, and some individuals who have been affiliated with RMN. It was good to gather together as one group from both Conferences on October 29^th.

We came together that morning as a community with a passion to make a difference in our Conferences, in our churches and in our communities. We talked about the work of our Marriage Equality Task Force and the hundred and ten pastors who have signed that they would be willing to officiate at a same gender wedding. We talked about the Supervisory Response process for Ed Rowe and myself and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that was coming out of those meetings. We had a frank discussion of “Holy Conferencing”. We concluded by talking about potential legislation for 2015 Annual Conference. We set our next meeting for January 14^th at 10:30 at University Church, East Lansing.

I experienced community the following Sunday night at Nardin Park UMC in Farmington Hills where the Dedicated Reconciling United Methodists (A Detroit area group) had their Annual Potluck. The speaker was Matt Berryman, the executive director of RMN. He talked about how we interact with a baby – we’re willing to act a bit crazy. This is the same type of hospitality and love we’re invited to show to all people. It was good that evening to be in the midst of this wonderful community of folks who understand what this means and live it out daily.

Finally, I experienced community this past Wednesday as about fifty people gathered together at University Church to celebrate the signing of the “just resolutions”. Ed Rowe, Detroit pastor, signed at the same time as myself. Ed is passionate about setting up a Truth and Reconciliation Commission where LGBTQ persons can share their stories. Part of our event on Wednesday was live streamed by RMN to people around the country. It was also covered by some church news sources. We gave thanks to our Bishop for choosing to follow Jesus’ law of love and inclusion in both of our just resolutions.

Martin Luther King Junior referred to God’s kingdom as the ‘beloved community’. He said:

“But the end is reconciliation; the end is redemption; the end is the creation of the beloved community. It is this type of spirit and this type of love that can transform opposers into friends. It is this type of understanding goodwill that will transform the deep gloom of the old age into the exuberant gladness of the new age. It is this love which will bring about miracles in the hearts of men.”
from “Facing the Challenge of a New Age,” 1956

I’m thankful for that ‘beloved community’!

Just Resolution

Proposal for a Just Resolution

Between

Rev. Michael Tupper and Rev. John Boley

                This Just Resolution agreement results from a complaint submitted by Rev. John Boley against the Rev. Michael Tupper for conducting a same-gender wedding ceremony on August 17, 2014. After receiving this complaint Bishop Deborah Lieder Kiesey conducted a supervisory response in this matter under the provisions of the Book of Discipline 2012 (¶363).

                As a result of the Supervisory Response process conducted by Bishop Kiesey, the persons signing this document have entered into the following Just Resolution agreement:

1)      Rev. Tupper acknowledges that he knowingly and intentionally violated two sections of the 2012 Book of Discipline, as an act of personal faith and conscience, and acknowledges that others may have felt hurt by his action.

2)      Rev. Tupper, who desires to remain a part of the clergy covenant in the West Michigan Conference, will work with his clergy colleagues by using the proper channels toward changing the discriminatory language and provisions in our Book of Discipline, while continuing to advocate for the LGBTQ community within the United Methodist Church and providing pastoral care to all people under his appointment.

3)      Rev. Tupper will work with the Michigan Area Episcopal Office and Ed Rowe to form a design team with clergy and lay persons from across the Michigan Area, including LGBTQ persons. The team is charged with planning, implementing and resourcing an area-wide series of events using a “Truth and Reconciliation” model at which LGBTQ and other interested United Methodists can have a safe place to tell their stories. These events will have the stated goal of reducing our church’s harmful rhetoric and actions toward LGBTQ persons. These events will be planned to occur over the next 18 months.

4)      Rev. Tupper will develop a written theological statement which accurately presents the several existing theological positions within the context of the West Michigan Conference and includes his personal theological conclusions about the position he has chosen for himself.

5)      Rev. Tupper will avail himself of every opportunity presented to him to tell the story of his spiritual journey as an act of witness, and will offer his services as a resource to help our churches be more welcoming and inclusive.

6)       Each of the parties to this Just Resolution Agreement agree that the terms of this resolution may be shared with the public as needed. Further, they agree that they will not disclose the content of any other conversations which may have taken place during the Supervisory Response Process or speak on behalf of any other party to the agreement.

7)      This Just Resolution, having been agreed to by all parties, shall be a final disposition of the complaint in this matter.

Rev. Michael Tupper

Rev. John Boley

Bishop Deborah L. Kiesey

                                                                Date:     Nov 11, 2014