2 of 3

But this was not the teaching supported by the United Methodist jury on Sunday. In finding Dammann not guilty of the charge of "practices declared by the United Methodist Church to be incompatible with Christian teachings," the jurors seem to have been very swayed by the testimony of retired Methodist bishop Jack Tuell. Recounting his testimony to The Seattle Times, Tuell said that the Book of Discipline "used 'soft words' such as 'consider' and 'condone,' and roundabout phrasing in its statements condemning homosexuality." In contrast, he points to another line from the book: "We reject social norms that assume different standards for women than from men in marriage."

"The United Methodist Church knows how to declare something incompatible," Tuell said. And rather than doing so on homosexuality, it instead chose language that's "fatally ambiguous and uncertain."

The jury bought this line of argumentation, and said that since the charge brought against Dammann was that she engaged in "practices declared by the United Methodist Church to be incompatible with Christian teachings," the question wasn't Methodist teachings on homosexuality, but whether those teachings were declared or not.

"We searched the Discipline and did not find a declaration that 'the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching,'" said a statement by the jury, read by member Karla Fredericksen. "We did see in the Discipline many declarative statements. An example is: 'Inclusiveness means openness, acceptance, and support that enables all persons to participate in the life of the Church, the community, and the world. Thus, inclusiveness denies every semblance of discrimination.' … Although we, the trial court, found passages that contain the phrasing 'incompatible with Christian teaching,' we did not find that any of them constitute a declaration."

Conservatives in the denomination are flummoxed by the decision, which cannot be appealed. "How can there be a not guilty verdict when what she's done is public and she has confessed it?" Asbury Theological Seminary president Maxie Dunnam told The New York Times. "I'm very surprised and I'm very disappointed because it's another sign of anarchy in the church. … We can't continue to live with a whole segment of the church that is deliberately disobeying the church's law."

James V. Heidinger, president of the Methodist renewal group Good News, agrees. "There is no question about what the Reverend Dammann is doing," he told the Post. "It was assumed by most of us that we were just going through due process to make sure her rights were protected, but that she obviously was in violation of church law."

It's likely that the court proceeding will be criticized, especially prosecutor James Finkbeiner. He only called one witness: Bishop Elias Galvan, who praised Dammann's "good work," appointed her as pastor of Ellensburg United Methodist Church in 2003 (more than two years after she wrote to him, "I am living in a partnered, covenanted, homosexual relationship with another woman"), and only brought the charge against her under direct orders from the denomination's national Judicial Council.

After the verdict, Finkbeiner told reporters, "I'm glad I lost, on a personal basis." While he says he still believes the jury disregarded church teachings, he added, "I don't feel bad about that."

next page... |  2 of 3

share this page

March (Web-only) 2004, Vol. 48