Officials filibuster UMC General Conference for another two years

Methodist Split Needn’t Wait

Mark Tooley on August 31, 2021

United Methodism does not need to wait until the postponed General Conference on Aug. 29-Sept. 6, 2022, in Minneapolis to formally split.  It can and should do so much earlier with a special called online meeting in which delegates can ratify the 2019 Protocol of Reconciliation and Grace Through Separation. The Council of Bishops can call this meeting at any point. Why wait unnecessarily for another year?

Physically meeting next year for nine days will cost $12 million. It will force 862 people to travel to Minneapolis to transact what could be achieved remotely. Two hundred eighty-eight, if they can get visas, will have to travel from Africa, many of them from obscure regions requiring days of difficult travel. Forty will have to travel from the Philippines, and forty must travel from Europe. It’s all unnecessary.

Eight hundred sixty-two people will be forced to deliberate across nine days in a convention center on business that will not affect potentially hundreds of them because they will affiliate with new denominations emerging from post separation United Methodism (PSUMC). Why should thousands and thousands of human hours and millions of dollars be wasted on this unnecessary process? Why should future members of the Global Methodism or the Liberation Methodist Connexion or other new church bodies facilitated by the Protocol have to adjudicate hundred of resolutions and petitions that will not pertain to them?

And why would persons remaining in PSUMC want those persons determining these policies, many of which will be overturned by PSUMC’s first post-separation General Conference, in 2023 or 2024? What a waste of time, labor, money and spiritual energy! Much of this legislation involves controversial topics sparking fierce debate. Why facilitate this unnecessary contention when the church is going to divide anyway? The Special General Conference of February 2019 was extraordinarily tense as delegates fought over the church’s marriage and sexuality teaching. Why reprise those tensions and many others?

In response to those differences over sexuality, the Protocol was negotiated in late 2019 by representatives of the church’s major factions. It would allow conferences and congregations to choose their future path under different versions of Methodism. The Protocol has been widely endorsed by leaders, caucus groups and annual conferences from very liberal to very conservative. It will pass once General Conference meets.

But the scheduled May 2020 General Conference was postponed to 2021 because of the pandemic and then postponed until 2022. A brief virtual General Conference was scheduled in May 2021 briefly to handle some essential business but was cancelled because of concerns about connectivity especially for overseas delegates. Even so, the actual votes would have been by paper ballot, so nobody would have been disenfranchised, unlike a typical physical General Conference, to which dozens of African delegates typically fail to get visas. Thirty-one African delegate seats, or 14 percent of the African total, were left empty at the 2019 General Conference, largely because of visa problems. Their ongoing disenfranchisement is profoundly unfair.

An online General Conference can ensure closer to full enfranchisement. Delegates will not have to travel thousands of miles. Tom Lambrecht of Good News argues for a distributed General Conference, where delegations convene to participate online together. Yes, of course there will be connectivity challenges. But they are surmountable, and both easier and cheaper to address than the $12 million nine-day physical General Conference in the U.S. that disenfranchises dozens of African delegates.

The vote on the Protocol will not take long and likely pass with an easy consensus. There have been nearly two years of discussions about it. There is little to no active, public opposition. If a brief online General Conference fails to complete this business, which is unlikely, it can meet again online far more easily and inexpensively than any physical event. After the Protocol passes, the post-separation denominations can then begin their new business. Millions of United Methodists then are no longer hostage to the anticipation of the wait, not to mention over 50 years of internal church conflict.

After the Protocol passes, the PSUMC can then convene to remove the church’s traditional teaching on marriage and sex. The new traditionalist Global Methodist Church can convene to ratify its new structures. The Liberation Methodist Connexion, with potentially others, can do likewise. Everyone is liberated to move forward.

Prolonging the wait serves no one. If the pandemic does not lift, the scheduled 2022 General Conference could postpone, frustrating almost everyone. And even if it does meet, even more Africans than usual and possibly other overseas delegates likely will fail to get visas. Dozens of congregations, both conservative and liberal, unable to wait, have already left the United Methodist, including 51 last year. They must pay tens of thousands, and sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more, to take their property. But their determination to leave informs their willingness to pay. Others will follow. Meanwhile, the Protocol, once passed, allows congregations to choose their denominational home without cost.

Waiting until late 2022 or even later for United Methodism to split is unnecessary. Convening another physical General Conference is unnecessary. The 2020 Presbyterian Church USA General Assembly conducted all of its business online across four days. The United Church of Christ’s General Synod met this year online across eight days. The African Methodist Episcopal Church’s General Conference met physically this Summer but 200 delegates in Africa, unable to get U.S. visas, participated virtually, surmounting connectivity challenges. Dozens of United Methodist annual conferences have met virtually.

Americans and people around the world have adapted to online meetings. An online United Methodist General Conference need not be long or arduous. The consensus vote on the Protocol for separating will not take many days, and perhaps only one day. It will save millions of church dollars, facilitate full enfranchisement, and allow all factions to move forward after decades of conflict.

The United Methodist Council of Bishops could and should call this online General Conference to vote specifically on the Protocol. Let’s prayerfully ask them to do so.

  1. Comment by E C on August 31, 2021 at 3:54 pm

    The author’s proposition seems incredibly reasonable — for both sides. Traditionalists will be able to finally take affirmative steps to create a new church body and the progressives will be able to, as they say, “end the harm.”

  2. Comment by Edwin E Beale on August 31, 2021 at 4:02 pm

    At an earlier time, Tom Lambrecht of Good News did not see a virtual event as plausible. I would like to hear his thoughts.

  3. Comment by Pat on August 31, 2021 at 4:25 pm

    I agree with E C, the sooner the better. However, the liberal bishops want to consolidate their power, money and keep all the property. By stalling the vote, the liberal bishops in the USA can move all the conservative pastors in many churches, replace those pastors with liberals in order to control the local church vote. The liberal bishops and liberal members to not want a peaceful exit. The liberals want it all and will stall as long as they can to consolidate power, money and all church property. This is why conservative Methodists are leaving the church and moving forward in their own lives and search for a Bible believing conservative church. The only way to stop this strategy is to simply stop the income of funds to all churches where there is such a desperation, the liberals will agree to meet and approve the separtion. Otherwise, the liberal bishops in the USA Methodist Church will keep all property and sell off or rent to keep their empty churches and their pensions going for a few more years. The California Bishops are already suggesting this as a strategy, other liberals will soon follow as I am sure they are all congregating to get their plan in motion prior to 2022. I pray I am wrong, I want to be wrong, but the liberal’s actions speak louder than any words.

  4. Comment by Reynolds on August 31, 2021 at 4:33 pm

    Mark,

    Why do you think the liberals want a vote? They lose if a vote happens. The longer they delay the more people walk out of churches. Look at the Western AC it is becoming more of a REIT than a church. They want the building not the occupants so the longer the delay the vote the more money they get. I do not know why the WCA has not figured out the game yet. I will be surprised if there is a vote next year.

  5. Comment by Skipper on August 31, 2021 at 6:31 pm

    I see no need to wait for everyone to physically meet together. I would say one thing needs addressing in the Protocol if I understood it correctly. That is that to leave, a church would need to have a 57 percent vote, when a simple majority would be the only fair way to do this. Hopefully this could be brought up without contention. It only seems fair, although I know everything is not always fair.

  6. Comment by Gary Bebop on August 31, 2021 at 7:28 pm

    Thanks, Mark, for this article pointing out the urgency and the unfairness. You have set forth the reasons FOR such a virtual conference, but I would like to see an exposition of the reasons mitigating AGAINST such a conference. Please tell us what actors or special interests stand at the pass to prevent a virtual conference from going forward. Be bold, be candid, be prophetic.

  7. Comment by Mark Cartner on August 31, 2021 at 9:40 pm

    Yes! Yes! and YES!
    This has been driving me NUTS this whole time! What the heck are we waiting for? When we finally get around to doing whatever it is that we’re gonna do, there won’t be any real Methodists left to form whatever it is that we’re gonna form. All we hear from our leaders is, “Be patient. Hang on a little longer.”

    I know they mean well and they’ve got a tough job and I appreciate the work they are doing. But I don’t think they get how desperate some of us are out here and how isolated and alone many of us are. We have no orthodox UMCs to attend. We don’t even know if there are any others like us near where we live that we can connect with in the interim.

    We are in limbo.

    We need a support group of likeminded Methodists in our areas that can meet or communicate in some way so that when it comes time to form new congregations, there will be small groups ready to hit the ground running. And let’s face it, most of our current congregations, even the ones around us that we consider mostly traditional, will probably take the easy path and stay put with the UMC. We’re gonna have to start new congregations in many places like where I live here in NC. There are no staunchly orthodox congregations near me, save for one this isn’t too bad but is a good drive away in another community.

    I wish there were a way for traditional Methodists near me to connect, to find one another, so we can begin to form relationships and plan on starting or attending the same church when the time comes. It would be great if in the interim we could meet and attend services together somewhere near our homes, even it’s not a Methodist service . . . just so we would be able to continue with meaningful, regular communal worship with true brothers and sisters.

    It’s like we need a freaking dating app for Methodists seeking platonic, Christian meetups in our local communities. If I’m alone in this thinking, pardon the rant. I’m frustrated. I need to do something to help, I just don’t know what to do.

  8. Comment by Lee Cary on September 1, 2021 at 8:47 am

    The longer the delay, the fewer laity.

    I recall when the Evangelical United Brethren Church and the Methodist Church united.

    In a small town where I was later the UM clergy, the math had become clear. The union was supposed to be 2 + 2 equals 4. Instead, the new total was 3.

  9. Comment by Pastor Mike on September 3, 2021 at 2:06 pm

    Above, Mark, you wrote:

    “Americans and people around the world have adapted to online meetings.”

    And – our own Bishops and conference staff have encouraged churches to do ministry online throughout the “pandemic” – our conference (and others) have even provided grants to help churches buy cameras and other equipment needed to facilitate online ministry!

    So there is no excuse for our Bishops not calling a virtual General Conference as soon as possible. The only reason – a lack of true leadership from our Bishops; sadly, they are currently about as worthless as our political “leaders” in Washington – and both church members and the American people are getting fed up!

    The savings in money, time, energy and emotional stress is obvious. Our Bishops need to lead. Maybe it is time for lots of local churches (traditional – and even progressive) to start withholding conference funds until Bishops come down from their ivory towers and call a special, virtual General Conference. We are ALL ready to end this impasse NOW!

    And to Skipper above: the 57% vote is taken by an Annual Conference to leave the psUMC; the local church’s Administrative/Church Council decides whether the local church’s vote will be a simple majority (51%) or 2/3 (66%) majority. Just to clarify.

  10. Comment by A. Missionary on September 4, 2021 at 4:52 pm

    I am sorry waiting is so hard for you. But it’s better to wait and get it right than to rush and make it worse.

    One of the biggest challenges of a virtual General Conference is the lack of adequate internet access in some of our central conferences for some of the same delegates you claim to be so concerned about disenfranchising. Another concern which has been raised, which you ignore here, is the fact that a global virtual conference would require certain delegates to attend in the middle of the night. Certainly, you are not proposing that the delegates from the central conferences (those delegates you are so concerned about disenfranchising) be the ones to do so… right?

  11. Comment by Robby on September 5, 2021 at 10:44 am

    Great article, but it makes too much common sense. It’s easy to understand why more and more are turning away from institutional and bureaucratic religion. I agree with all those who believe the vote is being continually and purposefully postponed by bishops of the UMC to buy time to retain maximum financial assets and to solidify progressive control going forward. The congregation that I serve as Director of Family Ministry has lost most it’s traditional-conservatives over the strategic appointment of two successive progressive pastors in an overwhelmingly conservative rural area. Most of what remains is progressive or centrist. When and if a vote comes, it will be too little too late. The progressive strategy is paying off, literally. Progressive “resistance” of the 2019 vote on LBGT vote is now complete, and the WCA and GMC are at their mercy with no bargaining chips to play. It’s criminal what churches are having to pay for disaffiliation.

  12. Comment by Leslie on September 6, 2021 at 7:35 am

    How can the LAITY affect the council to have the vote? What can we do?
    Our pastors are trying to ignore the split because it will split the congregation. Our conference wants to stall so their will be no changes.

  13. Comment by John Marsh on September 6, 2021 at 8:25 am

    A 17th Century solution of paper letters and sailing ships could have completed this task by now. I agree with some of the comments…the delay is intentional. (Sadly our family has already left because of the wait and the vindictiveness of our local Florida leaders)

  14. Comment by John Smith on September 6, 2021 at 9:30 am

    You are wrong. Prolonging the split aids those Bishops that are shuffling Elders to ensure the more solvent churches stay in the UMC and do not take their assets out. In the end the UMC pre and post separation, traditional and progressive, is going to end up vastly diminished consisting of those for whom the term “methodist” is of more importance than “christian”.

  15. Comment by Judy Hall on September 7, 2021 at 8:35 pm

    Do it now! We have work to do.

  16. Comment by Jeff Severt on September 8, 2021 at 4:59 pm

    In response to Mark Cartner from 8/31: I’m also in NC — a displaced UM Elder and veteran church planter in the Triangle. I agree with your sentiments and need a way to connect other displaced/disenfranchised/disillusioned UMs. Others interested in starting a local connection may contact me at NCMethodists@gmail.com

  17. Comment by Robert (Bob) Brooke on September 8, 2021 at 6:33 pm

    I left the UMC four years ago, but remain interested in the outcome of the splits in the denomination. The immediate reasons for the online meeting seems logical, both socially and economically. I agree with the comment above, about seeing the reasons not to move ahead with an online conference. I keep hearing about leaderless bishops. Probably true to some extent. However, the main reason the online offer will probably not happen remains political inconvenience.

  18. Comment by Carlos Eduardo Castano-Mejia on September 8, 2021 at 9:56 pm

    I have to say as a pastor being kicked out of the church recently because of my conservative Biblical views, that we need to split ASAP. We need to leave this destructive environment of heresy and decay in which the progressive and the ultra progressive members of the UMC are sinking John Wesley’s sound doctrine.
    It is the Word of God that ultimately leads us and brings the power of the Holy Spirit into our lives.

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.