Public Religion Research has produced a study of mainline clergy on gay and lesbian issues.
According to this study, 20% of American Baptist (ABCS-USA) ministers believe that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. 28% of American Baptist ministers believe that gay couples should be allowed to enter into civil unions. However, 52% of American Baptist ministers believe that no legal recognition should be extended to same-sex couples. 
See the graph to the right for info on other mainline denominations.
Here are a few more of the study’s findings on American Baptists:
52% of American Baptist clergy support hate crimes legislation.
33% of American Baptist clergy support adoption rights for gays and lesbians.
28% of American Baptist clergy support the ordination of gays and lesbians.
31% of American Baptist clergy stated that the church should not oppose making homosexuality acceptable.
33% of American Baptist clergy support gays and lesbians as lay leaders in their church.
A strong majority of American Baptist clergy reported that the do not believe that the position of ABC-USA on gay issues has benefited their denomination.
You can read the entire survey here or the brief summary here.
Among the mainline denominations, American Baptist ministers and United Methodist ministers were consistently the lease supportive on a number of gay rights questions.
It’s worth noting that one of the two primary authors of this study - Dr. Robert P. Jones - is a M.Div graduate of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Forth Worth, Texas.
Related posts:
- Southern Baptist Motion To Boycott PEPSI Joe Samples, a Southern Baptist messenger from North Carolina, just...
- SBC Pastor Says Jew & 2 Christian Ministers To Burn In Hell According to several news outlets, more than 400 people gathered...
- American Baptist leader Edwin Tuller Passes Away The Rev. Edwin Tuller, former General Secretary of American Baptist...
- Civil Rights Leader & Baptist Pastor Otis Moss Retires After 33 years as pastor of Mt. Olivet Institutional Baptist...
- A North American Baptist Covenant In case you’ve not caught up on your Baptist...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
I’m an American Baptist minister and I support gay marriage.
Unfortunately, it is not surprising that most American Baptists do not.
The only Baptist denomination to pass a resolution endorsing marriage equality (in 2005) is the Alliance of Baptists.
The surprising thing to me was how close the UMC pastors were to the ABC stats. Hereabouts (in Seattle, that is, not in St. Louis which is where I’m actually posting from) I would say the UMC seems on average much more liberated in their thinking on this point than the ABC, especially if you include the ABCNW folks and not just my own somewhat more enlightened Evergreen region. (And they’re more numerous than we are.)
On a side point, did the questionnaire specify the nature and extent of the “hate crimes” referred to in the sentence “52% of American Baptist clergy support hate crimes legislation”? As the recent news from Liberty U shows, whether this or that group is to be protected by such a law may have a bearing on whether someone supports or opposes it…
Leland aka Haruo
Here is the statement made in the survey:
The U.S. should pass hate crime laws to protect lesbian and gay persons along
with other minority groups who might be the targets of violence.
33 strongly agree
34 agree
9 Not Sure
13 Disagree
11 Strongly Disagree
See page 3 of this report:
http://www.publicreligion.org/objects/uploads/fck/file/Clergy%20Report/LGBT%20Topline.pdf
It’s somewhat encouraging that a slim majority of a liberal Baptist denomination still understands God’s plan for marriage and family.
Angela,
As an American Baptist, I am distressed at your comment. Are you saying that you find it unfortunate that most of us stand aligned with the Scriptures and historical Christianity. You should resign.
encouraging finding concerning the uncertain middle (see page 26 Welcome/Inclusion Gap); that is, of this group, the gospel is highly perceived as inclusive. thus, in time, we may witness some in this category move to the supportive group.
Brother BDW,
Thanks for posting these stats,….
It should be of little surprise that professing believers of today are any different than those fifty or sixty years after Christ’s ascension or in the days of old before His incarnation.
The Apostle Paul wrote….
Romans 1:24-27 “Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. (25) For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. (26) For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, (27) and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.”
God has never been unclear concerning the definition of holy matrimony. It seems cultures tend to go with the wind of politics on the matter of relationship and not the truth of the Word of God. These statistics of the “church” are no surprise, they are simply just another example of the reality of the truth of God’s Word is in the midst of a perverse world.
My prayer and aim is that our Nation can once again be exposed to the truth of holy matrimony.
Blessings,
Chris
MJ Fan,
I see you commented from a Waco TX (SWBELL) IP address. I did not know that there were any American Baptist congregations in the area.
One rather odd statistic I got from that report was that there is somewhat stronger support for the ordination of lesbians and gays than for gay marriage. (Compare the first two responses to Q20 to the first two responses to Q22: 65% vs 72%.) I wonder if rewording the marriage question to make explicit the inclusion of lesbians would have changed the response rates visibly.
And as far as being American Baptist in Waco, while it’s true that there are no formally ABC-affiliated churches in that area, if I were to visit there (or even move there) I’m sure I’d still consider myself an American Baptist, or a Northern Baptist, or something.
Speaking of MARRIAGE but having absolutely nothing to do with the topic of gay marriage,
CONGRATS to the WEAVE and his bride, Alexis, who were married in Truett Seminary Chapel Saturday, May 30.
Well said ssalder,…holy matrimony continues to be the standard by which marraige is judged…. this may change, as any government can become less interested and less trained to understand the providential and perfecting a union.
The disturbing results revealed in this polling suggests that there are segments of the religious environment that are more dependent upon government than they are upon Christ.
Blessings,
Chris
I still believe that the government should get totally out of the marriage business and leave that to religous organizations (including any anti-religious organizations that wish to conduct marriages!), including getting out of the use of the words “husband” and “wife”. The state could great a entity, say a “life partnership” and transfer the current legal rights associated with marriage to the life partners, then define who and under what circumstances one can “life partner” with another person.
create not great. sorry about the typo.
RE Cooper, I agree that the government really shouldn’t have any business in marriages. It is still quite baffling, particularly to many folks from other countries.
MJFan, I find it a little odd that you would tell me to resign since you don’t even know me or anything about me other than the fact that I support gay marriage. I’ve served in the local church for 10 years and I’ve been ordained for over 5. I’m faithfully committed to standing for what Jesus stood for: setting the oppressed free, standing for justice and peace, and compassionately loving all people. Denying people the right of marriage does not seem in line with these concepts, so I cannot support denying the right to marry to heterosexual or homosexual people. We can quote scripture all we want, proof texting whatever we choose, but the bible is not a guide book about marriage; in fact, if we follow what the bible says about marriage, then we will need to stone adulterers, own wives as property, support polygamy and multiple concubines, or not touch spouses during menstruation. Please do not say that your own view of “holy matrimony” is based on scripture if you do not also believe that the prior list is also a part of holy matrimony. It’s an institution that we’ve constructed a particular way over time and in our own context. This construct does not make it holy. I would contend that what makes it holy is the deep and committed love between two people who are also committed to loving God and all humanity, standing for justice, and proclaiming peace. In this manner, I would surmise that the beautiful wedding of Weave and Alexis was, indeed, holy. The fact that it was a man and woman had nothing to do with its holiness; what made it holy was the wedding of compassionate love and a commitment to justice.
So, I have no intention of resigning. We can have different views and still both be Christians or Christian ministers. I won’t tell you to resign for denying rights to a minority group, even though I strongly disagree with you, and I request that you respect my autonomy to support gay marriage and continue as a Baptist minister.
Sister Angela,
It matters little what you and I define as holy. God has already provided for us a definition of holiness that He alone executes. Holiness is defined by what God dictates as holy. He is the one that sets us apart, we do not have any power to set ourselves apart by our own definition.
Therefore when BDW and his new bride commit in marraige, it is not holy because they want it to be holy. It will only be holy as they follow the truth that God has revealed as holy.
A homosexual relation is not holy, nor is it loving by biblical definition. The homosexuals that I know would most certainly disagree and are convinced that they have love for one another. The issue though, is not my opinion about what they believe love is or its assumptive qualities to them. What the scriptures teach us is that “degrading passion”, which is the substance of homosexuality, is not holy…it is not set apart as obedience to God.
So, to pretend that God changes because of how we think or feel is to misunderstand the holiness of God. It is up to men and women of God to follow the truth as it has been revealed. Not to attempt to change the substance of truth to meet our assumed emotional needs.
Blessings,
Chris
Chris,
I do sincerely appreciate the manner in which your share your opinion on the matter, that is, with kindness. However, I do disagree with the way you interpret the holiness of God and your interpretation of scripture. I have yet to find solid evidence in scripture that indicates that “homesexual relation is not holy, nor is it loving by biblical definition.” I understand that this is your own personal interpretation of texts and the interpretation of some, but it is not the only interpretation. I know the texts you speak of, but when I study them honestly, paying careful attention to their contexts, placements in the canon, history, and translation, I do not come to a place that tells me that God deems all homosexual relationships as unholy. It is not my job to judge the holiness of any person’s relationship, but the many, many committed and faithful Christian ministers that I know in the LGBTQ community are living holy lives that stand for justice, peace, and love. This is very holy to me. I don’t think that ALL of my LGBTQ ministerial friends live this way, just I like I don’t think that ALL of my heterosexual ministerial friends live this way. But to state that all gay people are void of holiness because of the type of people they love (same sex), is to miss out on many kind, loving, and Christ-like people. I cannot do this.
Sister Angela,
I do appreciate your kindness as well. This subject will tend to send people to emotional highs and lows…but my motive is to try to understand how God has spoke in the matter.
It is important to note what “relationship” means. Certainly anyone living in the LGBTQ community can choose to live a holy life in many aspects of general relationship and living, just as the heterosexual can choose. So, I am not judging the holiness of anyone’s at large relationship. If I turn to the aspect of “sexual relationship” the scripture is clear that there is “degrading passion” and in opposition “passion” that is not degrading. The scriptures do not allow that men having sexual relations with men, and women having sexual relations with women is holy.
The only standard revealed in scripture where sexual relationship is holy is in the context of a man and a woman. It is also possible to have unholy sexual relationship involving a man and woman that are married (abuse, etc.). So then, scripture categorically presents same sex relationships as unholy and then presents hetero as holy or unholy. Same sex relationship though is never depicted as holy anywhere in scripture.
Please don’t hear me wrong. There are many in the LGBTQ community that appear to live in peace and are more civilized people than hetero,…that is not an argument. In the realm of truth though and what scripture reveals in “sexual relationships”,…there is no question that hetero is the only sexual relationship that will be considered holy. The Holy Scriptures speak to no other sexual relationship that is holy beyond marriage of a man and a woman.
Blessings,
Chris
I still don’t know where scripture refers to homosexual relationships as unholy. In fact, I don’t know many places in scripture where marriage between a man and woman is depicted as holy. Instead, when I read scripture, I find examples of rape, incest, abuse, polygamy, concubines, and people (women) treated as property when we read about marriage. I still cannot see this as holy. I find no evidence that scripture clearly states that homosexual relationships are categorically unholy.
Angela,
Are you unfamiliar with 1 Corinthians 6:9 or Romans 1?
In all seriousness, your comments make me think of another passage, Isaiah 5:20:
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
Angela, consider yourself warned. God will hold you accountable for the words you use and the wickedness you encourage. I would plead with you to leave the ministry, because you are playing with fire.
I would be saying the same thing if you were encouraging people to steal or to lie. If you are a minister, you will be held to a greater degree of responsibility for the manner in which you mis-use and distort Scripture.
Angela
Anytime sexual relations beteween people of the same sex are mentioned anywhere in scripture it is always described as being sinful. Period. The reason you don’t see it is because you don’t want to see it.
Derek and Joe,
I’m joining back into the discussion because I’ve been out of town leading a Christian retreat where we used no cell/internet/tv/etc. Incidentally, everyone at this particular Christian retreat is both Baptist and “welcoming and affirming” of gay rights, including gay marriage. Most of those attending said retreat are members of a welcoming and affirming Baptist church where I serve as an associate pastor. There are many ministers just like me. And, while I will agree that we clearly have differing interpretations of these texts (and likely much of scripture), I will respectfully disagree with your assertions and continue serving as a pastor. I’ll also continue to teach as a professor where I’ve studied all the texts you’ve mentioned quite carefully, exegeting them, translating them from Greek (and Hebrew in the case on the ones in the Hebrew bible), noting their contexts and particular situations. For these reasons, my serious commitment to scripture leads me also to disagree with your interpretation. I can understand how you may come to the conclusion that you have; many people believe this way. But I feel strongly that, if you approach the texts without your own preconceived notions of what it is telling you, you may find that it says something quite different. Remember that we all read scripture through our own lens of interpretation. By no means do I intend to exclude myself from reading the bible through my own personal lens, but I also know that faithfully exegeting these texts is part of what made me realize that scripture does not categorically condemn homosexuality. So, acknowledging the deep and beautiful ambiguity of the texts and knowing some of the most compassionate, peace-making, and justice-oriented LGBTQ ministers categorically convinces me that God will not and does not condemn mutual love between people. It’s fine if you disagree with me, but it’s not really very nice to tell me that I’m “warned”, “judged”, and need to resign as a minister.
I’m sure I could find a nice job that would certainly pay more, but my commitment to standing up for the oppressed, proclaiming the peace of Christ, and seeing God in the face of all of God’s children will prevent me from resigning. So, minister and teach I will continue no matter how many close-minded things you say. We can disagree, but let’s do so respectfully.
Furthermore, I wouldn’t encourage people to steal or lie because those hurt other people. Being gay doesn’t hurt other people; if it’s who you are, being gay will help you authentically be the person God created you to be. Loving yourself and others are very different than lying and stealing.
Angela,
There were serious scholars and professors who also interpreted Scripture to validate slavery. No one denies that people with advanced degrees in seminaries will come up with all manner of interpretations - as 2 Timothy 4:3 says: “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires.” I can think of no better verse to describe the retreat you just attended - a group of teachers who, for various reasons seek to validate our culture’s unsatiated thirst for sexual expression without limits. Stripping off the protections and limits off of immoral sexual expression does tremendous damage to a culture and to many individuals. My father is a counselor and deals with sexual addictions on a daily basis. I can assure you that these people are experiencing some of the worst kinds of oppression you can imagine. Sadly, his business is booming in part because of “experts” who told them that any kind of sexual expression was legitimate and even healthy.
When numerous Scriptures echo the same idea (e.g. homosexuality does not honor God), the burden is not on us, Angela - we represent the interpretation provided by a plain reading of both the new and old testament. I’ve heard the standard arguments that come from your position and they involve a lot of intellectual and interpretational gymnastics with not just one, but multiple passages. In an honest moment, I bet even you’d agree with me.
In any event, I felt a need to warn you not because you will stand before me or any of us and give an account for your heresies, but because you will one day stand and give an account to God. I assure you that I did not lightly or angrily issue a warning to you. The people who truly love you want you to be able to stand before God and hear the words every spiritual leader wants to hear: “well done, good and faithful servant”.
I’ve said my piece and will leave it at that. My heart is filled with sadness for those sheep who are led to the slaughter by false teaching and the misrepresentation of Scripture. And I will take not one ounce of joy in seeing you judged either, Angela. But I will rejoice on the day that you look at Scripture with a truly open mind and your eyes are opened to see what real oppression is.
Derek,
I see your sincerity and it is clear that you feel very strongly about your position. I, too, feel very strongly about loving and including all people God created, including persons in the LGBTQ community. I think it’s very apparent that we simply have incredibly different starting points. I don’t think homosexuality is an addiction or something that must be cured. I genuinely believe that God does not believe this, either.
And while I expected you to quote 2 Timothy 4:3 when I mentioned that I also teach, I can only reply in one way. I have dedicated my entire life to faith, learning, inquiry, justice, and peace, all of which I discovered through my own relationship with Jesus (a human who stood for justice and peace and encouraged inquiry). I do not see how dedicated my life to learning about, teaching, and living the faith, scripture, or Jesus’ teachings can be deemed heretical or “in accordance with my own desires.”
While I am not perfect by any means, I have been called by God to a life and vocation that involves being in constant conversation with scripture, committed to the local and universal church, and convicted to stand for justice for ALL people. It is my aim to help ALL people live fully and abundantly. When the church and “Christians” exclude persons in the LGBTQ community from church, do not allow them to have positions of leadership, take away their civil right to marry, and tell them they are going to burn in hell because of who they are, I cannot stand silent and watch. Rather, it is my responsibility, as a person called by God, to stand up for persons in the LGBTQ community in the same way that I stand up for any oppressed group and say, “you and created and loved by God and Jesus desires for you to live a full life.” If Irenaeus is correct in asserting that “the glory of God is humanity fully alive,” then it is my aim to help all humanity live fully. For LGBTQ persons, this involves fully embracing who they are. I am convinced that the glory of God is made manifest in persons loving themselves and others fully; you cannot fully love yourself if you deny part of who you are or are made to feel shame and guilt because who happen to love someone of the same sex.
So, I don’t think my ministry, teaching, or life is heresy or hermeneutic gymnastics. I think it is a faithful way to follow the Jesus who stood up for the outcast and excluded.
Sister Angela,
You do seem like a very kind individual….and you are right to say that we all have our own hermeneutic, yet there is only one true interpretation of scripture. And of course, anyone who is serious about scripture believes their interpretation is correct.
I hope you and I both continue to study and learn from God’s Word. There are a couple of things to consider along the path as I read through your last post. As we interpret scripture by scripture, we see some foundations immerge on which we build our theological point of view.
I will encourage you to consider the Romans passage and context of what the Apostle is discussing. His theme is the gospel…the power of God unto salvation. Within this context he illustrates that some people are deaf to the gospel and refuse the gospel, and turn to their flesh to bolster their defense for a life without God and their reason for living.
Romans 1:21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
There are many people who sincerely acknowledge God, but they do not honor God…and their heart becomes darkened. In our relativistic age… the term that Paul uses for “darkened” can be better understood as confused or “relative” truth based in emotions,… simply because the relative truth has its foundation on the flesh and not in Christ. Many people lean on this type of understanding whether they be engaging in homosexual behavior (sexual relations) or whether they be fornicators (sexual relations, opposite sex) outside of holy matrimony. The deeds are what reveal the understanding. That is Paul’s point and he states that ….
Romans 1:25-27 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. (26) For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, (27) and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
The “they” that Paul speaks about are not those engaging in the “deeds” of homosexual relations only,… it is the deeds of heterosexuals as well. Sin is not an exclusive categorical game. It is for this reason, Paul says…the exchanging of truth…that God is not worshipped. So the reason that someone engages in unholy sexual relations is not because they are serving God,…it is because they have been “given over” to the “degrading passions” which are informed by their flesh. So, God is describing these unnatural functions as “degrading passion”. How can this be interpreted any other way? How do you explain this text to your listeners?
In other words,…What is God revealing as “the natural function” of the man and of the woman? The term natural brings us to a specific result based upon what God has created. What did God created as “the natural function” in the beginning of humankind?
I hope you will continue to study and consider that there is a distinction between natural and the unnatural based upon what God has created and revealed by His Word. It must be considered… that God’s Word has yet to be seen reflecting that His created design encourages both natural and unnatural sexual functions for a man and a woman. The Romans passage is clear to reflect just the opposite of such a thought.
The homosexual does need love,..but it should be the love of the “natural kind” that God has created and ordains as holy (or in other words, something He has set apart for Himself to bring Him Glory).
Blessings,
Chris
Chris,
Again, I really think we simply have very very differing starting points. I do not think there is “only one true interpretation of scripture,” but that there are many diverse interpretations of scripture. So, it seems that our primary difference is not so much the “gay issue” as it is our starting point for approaching scripture. If you only think there is one true interpretation, then I assume that one true interpretation would be your own. To this end, you will disagree with anyone who has a differing interpretation. I think there are many valid ways to interpret the text; for me, I choose to start with both a hermeneutic of suspicion and a hermeneutic of inclusive love. When I take another step and genuinely say that I think the majority of marriage and the “natural” binary divisions between “man” and “woman” are social and historical constructs, then I simply disagree with your interpretation. This doesn’t mean that I think you are bad or wrong, but it does mean that I think such an interpretation of exclusion is contrary to God’s inclusive love.
Angela,
I had not read your first comment that you were a “minister” or else I would not have engaged you in useless dialogue. You can do as many theological, cultural, and linguistic loop-dee-loops as you want to and I am sure someone will care enough about you to be impressed. The fact that you ignore what the Bible clearly teaches does not change the fact that the Bible clearly teaches that.
Sister Angela,
I agree with your understanding of our conversation… that we are beginning at two very different starting points.
Unfortunately, your starting point is also opposed to the Apostle Peter…. He exhorts …
2 Peter 1:20-21 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, (21) for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
In other words there is one true interpretation. There are not varying viewpoints and degrees that are considered as “rightly dividing”. Not every wind that blows has the correct message in other words. That is why God teaches His children to work hard at rightly dividing His word. It is a difficult job.
So if I understand your answer about binary….then there is really “no” natural sexual relation that is created by God,….it would be determined as a relative function in your worldview dependent upon the man or woman’s portrayal of their idea and definition of love. In other words, God is not the purveyor of truth in your view…it is man that finds truth as he or she sees it.
I wish you would define for me in more detail what Paul “is” speaking about in Romans concerning natural and unnatural. Could you?
Blessings,
Chris
Chris,
I want to give your comment the thought it deserves, so I’m not responding in full right now. I don’t think that proof texting is helpful in our conversation, though. Plucking one verse out of many to support your position can be done to support virtually any position.
Joe,
Now there is no need to be ugly. You may think that committing to helping people live fully, standing for justice, and responsibly and faithfully exegeting texts is “loop de loops”, but I prefer to think of it as living my calling with integrity. Sticking my head in the sand and ignoring culture, context, and real people’s lived situations does a disservice to everyone, so I’ll continue to research the theology, contexts, and linguistics embedded in the text because I think this is the most faithful way of reading the bible.
Now, gentlemen, while this conversation is certainly interesting, I’m afraid I’m dedicating a little too much of my time to responding to your blog posts and not enough time working on my dissertation!
Thank you Angela,
When you get the time…feel free to respond to me by email at chris.johnson@fmc-na.com. Dissertations can be hard work and take some time.
Blessings,
Chris