The clear object here is that this church officer intends to make the Church accept his views, rather than to accept the Church's published views and leave the ministry (and one would hope the Church) because of incompatibility of his views.
One wonders why the incident took place in MA, but the trial is taking place in PA. Certainly the MA location is not in the same Conference as the trial. Did the minister officiate under MA law of the time (2007)? Would a Massachusetts Conference or Bishop stepping in be seen as a discriminatory form of "hate speech" where same-sex marriage had then become lawful under MA state law? Was/is this minister's charge located in PA, and is the trial thus in PA where the ban of same-sex marriage is still in effect?
And why has this taken six years to bring the minister to trial? Knowing the Church law being beyond question in this matter, why was this minister's qualifications not suspended immediately? If his dismissal from the Conference to be effected, would he not have a basis for a civil trial against the Church?
I think you see the morass that tolerance in doctrinal practice has brought the UMC to, eh?
I know a pastor that CHOSE to become a homosexual and he got the thumb from the UMC almost immediately.