March 18, 2021 | by Amory Peck
Editor's Note: As we continue our “Where Love Lives: Fair and Equal Ordination for All” storytelling project as part of the Western Jurisdiction campaign for a fully inclusive church, we hear from Amory Peck, a lay member of the Pacific Northwest Conference and former Conference Lay Leader and lay delegate to General Conference. In addition to that, she spent time serving on the PNW Board of Ordained Ministry, helping to evaluate provisional candidates for ministry.
For more than 20 years, Peck has been advocating for an LGBTQ+ inclusive United Methodist Church. But as you’ll read her perspective, it’s been a long, arduous journey:
In 2004, as a group of PNW Reconciling Ministries activists were getting ready for a demonstration, a young woman, quite new to our band of advocates, said to us, “How do you people do it? I’ve been doing this work for three months already, and nothing has changed.” While her passion was admirable, her impatience was naïve. At that point, I was eight years “out” in The United Methodist Church, and still a relative newbie to the struggle for full LGBTQ+ inclusion in our denomination.
At the 1996 Pacific Northwest Annual Conference, then Rev. Elaine JW Stanovsky, one of our clergy delegates to the just-concluded General Conference in Denver, was giving her report. Her comments raised questions, and people kept asking for clarification about “the issue.” That phrase propelled me out of my seat to explain that, as a lesbian, it was not “an issue.” It was my life. Most of my memories of that day are a mishmash, but I do remember one response. A man I’d worked beside for years said, “I’ve never liked homosexuals … but I like Amory.” He shook his head and repeated, “I’ve never liked homosexuals, but I really like Amory.” That afternoon I learned, first-hand, the power of letting my life speak.
By the time General Conference 2000 came about, I had run for and been elected as a reserve delegate. In all I’ve attended four General Conferences as a member of the delegation, then two more as a visitor. When I stepped into the fray in 2000, I was joining a conversation on homosexuality that had been going on since 1972.
General Conference 1972 amended the Social Principles by adding, “The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching”. Since the definition of incompatible is “two things so opposed in character as to be incapable of existing together,” the effect of the incompatibility clause was chilling. From that premise hung the rest of the prohibitions that followed. Over the next years, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church was changed to prohibit gay clergy, same-sex marriage, clergy performing same-sex marriages, or allowing those marriages to be held in UM churches. Defying those regulations became a chargeable offense.