General Conference of UMC 2012

            I had the privilege of attending General Conference 2012 of the United Methodist Church. This meeting, which happens only every four years, represents United Methodists from around the globe. It met in Tampa, FL this year. There were around 1000 delegates sitting at a series of round tables. Most of the Indiana delegation was in the same area. I was a “guest,” largely because a member of my local church staff was a lay delegate. I could see how much she read and agonized over decisions they would need to make. I would like to think that I was able to offer some support for other members of the delegation as well.

            On the personal side, I either walked to the Tampa Convention Center, about three miles from my hotel, or rode the bus.

            Other sources can relate the facts of the decisions. You can read one such summary here: http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=8057055&ct=11742349I want to share a little of what I experienced.

            Did I like Tampa? Of course, it is in Florida. I had only one free afternoon, when Bishop Coyner announced guests would not be allowed in the room due to a demonstration. I wondered aloud what I would do. Someone said, “Well, you are in Florida.” I rented a car for the day and went to the beach. When I arrived again the next day, I discovered that the directions had changed, and I could have attended. In any case, it was nice to have some clam strips and a walk on the beach. However, I also discovered that enjoying the beach is a social event. I wanted Suzanne there.

            Had it not been for that, my response would have been something like, “I guess Tampa is OK, but I did not see much. My hotel and the Convention Center.” I say this because I want to say clearly that the delegates and the alternates work. The sessions started at 8 am and they did not sign off until around 9:30 or 10 PM. There were mid-morning and mid-afternoon breaks and two hour lunch and dinner breaks, but it is grueling. The alternates are used in order to give the delegates a well-deserved break. Indiana UM’s can be quite proud of their delegation. They all worked hard. I think that if I ever went as a delegate, I would make sure I had some days before or after to see the territory and relax.

            Worship on Monday night was impressive as an African Bishop David Kekumba Yemba preached.

            I had the privilege of meeting Mark Tooley, the head of IRD. His primary concern is the capture by the politically Left of mainline denominations, including the UMC. Yet, his book, Methodism and Politics in the Twentieth Century, is a quite factual account of the branches of the present United Methodist Church in politics. I found it quite interesting. If you like either the history of the UM Church or politics, I would recommend it.

            I attended the Confessing Movement breakfast once. I passed out literature one morning for them. Most people were gracious. Only one was not. Given all the people I saw, I did not think that was too bad.

As I understood it, guaranteed appointment for pastors is gone, based on "ineffectiveness", but there are protections built in concerning abuse of power by bishops. The effort is to offer some financial incentive and career counseling for pastors who no longer are effective. I stress that I have not read the final document. There was much discussion of how getting rid of lifetime tenure for bishops required a two thirds vote, while this rule that apparently goes back to Wesley could be overturned with a majority vote. However, much discussion by laity was that they must face a work environment that could lead to their unemployment. Removing guaranteed appointment does not go as far as what laity must face in private enterprise. I think one of the difficulties here is that clergy do not have obviously transferable skills to other occupations, unlike most of the skills laity have.

            Quite quickly, I was impressed with the African presence in the room. This made me aware in a quite graphic way of the global nature of this denomination of around 12 million members. Except in one notable case in a debate regarding homosexuality, they offered questions and motions that I thought helpful. I did not always agree with them, of course, but I appreciated their perspective. Maybe what I sensed was freshness and aliveness to their faith that I may find lacking in me and in many other American congregations.

            Adam Hamilton and Mike Slaughter also made their presence known. They did so through their proposal to change the Social Principles of the United Methodist Church regarding homosexuality. Presently, the statement says that while persons of sacred dignity, the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. They supported a change that would acknowledge that United Methodists differed on this matter. It was defeated with a 53-47 percent spread, I think. Taken on its own, the statement is quite harmless. Yet, for many opponents, it represented just the first step in a process of full inclusion and acceptance of what they believe to be sinful behavior. What I do not know is the heart or intent of Adam Hamilton or Mike Slaughter. Do they simply want the denomination to find a way to move past the issue? Do they want the denomination to adopt a stance similar to that of the Episcopal Church, which would mean complete affirmation? Another proposed change was defeated by a larger margin. There was then debate about divestment from businesses that work with Israel. After its defeat, and as the session closed, a group burst onto the floor of the Conference, something that was illegal, but the bishop had a prayer and dismissed for break. For all I knew at the time, they were upset about rejecting divestment. I learned from others that it concerned the sexuality vote. Reconvening, Bishop Michael Coyner, my own Bishop, presided. The group now met in the center of the floor, sang something I could not understand (I learned it was “What Does the Lord Require?”). They were disruptive enough that Bishop Coyner dismissed the conference to an early lunch and said that no guests would be allowed in the hall. What I could not see was if Adam Hamilton or Mike Slaughter were part of these disruptions. I must say that United Methodists in Indiana should be quite proud of the way Bishop Coyner conducted himself. He was respectful to people who clearly disrespected him. At one point, he noted that they had made their point. Later, he said they were hurting their point. He was quite right on both counts. In contrast, Bishop Ough sided with the group that lost the votes by wearing a rainbow type tie as he presided the next day. In doing so, I think he demonstrated his smallness and pettiness. Although the following video does not show how much the noise disrupted the proceedings, you can view the dignified way Bishop Coyner presided here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOFzvuxZr2A&list=PL8CA4B32B8E69649B&index=26&feature=plpp_video

            I must say that the group agitating for a change in the statement on homosexuality, in general, was irritating. They marched around the floor of the Conference throughout. They wore rainbow stoles. I suppose some would be sympathetic and feel sorry for them in some way. However, for me, their actions suggested moral superiority and arrogance. From where I sat, literally, I saw anger and disgust toward those who disagreed with them. Some of my friends on the conservative side on this matter said they saw their pain and tears. I did not. I hope I was not blind. By barging onto the floor of the general conference, they became bullies. They know the process by which to make changes in this denomination. If they did not get their way this time, they need to work harder next time. Although I know many colleagues who would agree with their stance, I hope they would not agree with the method the group used.  

            Another matter about which I found myself concerned was divestment from Israel. The committee shared a narrow map of the Palestine area, claiming that Israel has illegally occupied and taken land. What I find disturbing about this type of map is the fact that it obscures the real atrocity committed against the Palestinians is not from Israel, but from Arab countries. The Arab nations that surround Israel have the money to start a new life for the Palestinians in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, but none of these nations do this. The reason, in my opinion, is simple. They need to hate Jews. In addition, the language used on the floor by one delegate was to compare the behavior of Israel to that of Nazi Germany. It reminded me of how far away I am politically from many in my denomination. Fortunately, the motion was defeated. 

            Plan UMC was a motion to make some structural changes in the denomination designed to streamline and make Boards and Agencies more accountable. The impression I had was that many delegates did not want to leave without making a change here. The feeling was that something needed to change at the denominational level. My own thought, for what it is worth, is that since the denomination is asking local churches to make significant changes for the sake of mission, the national church should do the same. The delegates passed a plan that late Friday afternoon the Judicial Council determined was unconstitutional. I am confident that many delegates left feeling as if they had just wasted the time and money of the church. The delegates reduced the budget for the general church by six percent from the previous four years. Board of Church and Society would accept no cuts.

            There are around 12 million United Methodists in the world. Around 7 million are in the USA, but a number in decline. Within the United States, the South Central and Southeast are by far the largest, the North Central and the New England jurisdictions about the same, and the West the smallest. There are around 4 million in Africa, but a number on the increase. Europe and Southeast Asia are small numbers at present, but Asia is growing. What is interesting is that the American church contributes about 99% of the budget for the general church. One can almost hear the rise of opposition to the African church on this basis, as their numbers at General Conference grows. I would urge you to read what Bob Walters posted on http://www.friendlyplanetnews.blogspot.com/2012/05/no-free-ride-for-central-conferences.html. It is an excellent piece. If it can be well placed, I wonder if “we” should not invest more of the money where the growth is. Just a thought. In addition, the United Methodist Church seems to have trouble where secularity is gaining in strength, namely, in America and Europe. The denomination is not alone in this. However, the denomination is growing in areas closer to tribal and colonial roots. These are quite different mission fields. The principles of growth in one area will not easily translate to the other. At this point, I simply highlight the challenge for the denomination.

            Tim McClendon, a District Superintendent from South Carolina and an episcopal nominee, posted what I thought were some interesting reflections: http://wtmcclendon.wordpress.com/2012/05/06/general-conference-2012-observations/

            Ben Boruff, a member of the team that proposed restructure, offers his reflections on General Conference here: http://www.unitedmethodistreporter.com/2012/05/our-stubborn-system-a-reflection-on-gc2012/

            Some people asked me about whether the UMC will divide. My own thought is no. We will keep having this power struggle within the denomination, one pulling toward what they view as progressive theology, and the other pulling toward faithfulness to the Scripture, the traditions of the church, and to the global church. I would argue that a “conciliar” approach is far better, working with the global church and with other denominations on such matters, but I think those days are gone. People want to be “prophetic,” which generally means the most recent progressive, politically Left agenda. I have stated that I think a basis for a friendly divorce is present. The south central, southeast, evangelical churches, Africa, and Asia, could easily form a denomination of around 9 million. The West, New England, progressive churches everywhere, and Europe, could form a denomination of around three million. To do so would require a division of property, just as in a divorce. In any case, such a friendly divorce would be a far better witness for Christ than what I saw around the homosexuality debate.

I am glad I made the time to attend. I enjoyed my interactions with others. My own hope is simple. The general conference delegates made it clear they have an interest in making some significant changes. Maybe the bishops can figure out a way forward to make some needed changes in the direction the delegates wanted. Since they are the head of the respective agencies of the church, they may have the power to do so, if they so desire.