Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content at the RNS Archives website.

(RNS) A United Methodist jury Tuesday night gave the Rev. Frank Schaefer 30 days to agree not to break church law again by presiding at same-sex weddings or give up his clergy credentials.


  1. So they are telling him to obey church law ABOVE his conscience? Church law is dogma that has become an idol. All Methodists should stand with this man!!

    • If one’s own “conscience” is the ultimate moral authority, why should any person attend the Methodist Church (or any other church) at all? Why bother listening to any preacher, priest, or bishop?

      • One’s own conscience is ALWAYS the ultimate moral authority.

        Recognizing one’s inner humanity over arbitrary and capricious rules from on high in consideration of others.

        When one outsources moral thinking to others, it is not morality nor thinking. It is simply following along and acting in self-interest.

        “Why bother listening to any preacher, priest, or bishop?”

        Good question.

        Don’t have an answer to it other than it saves people the trouble of thinking for themselves. Maybe you have one. I don’t.

        • I presume you mean that a rightly formed conscience is alway the ultimate moral authority. Otherwise, people could claim a moral “right” to commit what universally are considered crimes.

          • I presume by your statement that you have no connection to humanity in general and can’t possibly empathize with someone who is harmed maliciously. That you have to be told by others why harming people maliciously is a bad thing. My suggestion is that you seek psychiatric help immediately. You are a psychopath.

            Plenty of people commit heinous malicious harmful acts and claim it is their moral right based on what they considered religious based moral codes of conduct. Obviously it puts to rest the notion that morality lies with religious sources.

            Morality is always personal in nature. It depends on the notion that we understand our humanity. That the person next to you is just like yourself. It is always about weighing decisions between one’s personal interests and how it affects others like ourselves. To assign such things to an outside authority is to never make moral decisions.

  2. I find it interesting, and sad, how many people demand their own rights to interpret scripture and practice their faith as they wish and yet seem to work so hard at denying those same rights to others.

  3. Am I the only one who finds it disturbing, or at least a bit peculiar, that the UMC constantly refers to instances like this as “violations of church law” “violations of church constitution” or “violations of church government”? What about SCRIPTURE?

  4. Webmaster, Please take note of the comment I posted 20 Nov. at 5:39 p.m. in response to Larry earlier in the day. Then note his reply on 22 November to my comment of 20 November. Something is amiss here regarding the nature of Larry’s response and the substance and tone of my earlier remark.

    Moments ago I clicked the “Report Abuse” button beneath Larry’s 20 November note, but I do not suggest that there is anything abusive in his remarks at that time. I only wanted to call your attention to the later remark, but there was no “Report Abuse” button beneath it to call your attention to it.