General Conference – the day after

I personally know a delegate to General Conference. We are both in the same performing organization and gave a concert today. We talked for a bit before concert preparation got underway. She said the denomination was very close to splitting before the whole issue was thrown to the bishops who proposed a commission and a possible additional General Conference. She also said in most populations there are about 10-15% who take the firm progressive and conservative stances, leaving 70-80% as moderates. But at GC it seemed more like 35-55% were firm progressives and conservatives, leaving maybe 20% moderates.

Will Green spotted a whiteboard sign at the hotel where the bishops were staying, "Press 1 for Unity. Press 2 for Incompatible. Please vote now." I'm sure this refers to the voting devices used during plenary sessions. At first this seems cute. But the bishops are promoting unity by maintaining the "incompatibility" clause. Pressing either button gets us the same thing. Green wrote:

The UMC has created a situation that guarantees failure. They can promote their version of unity, which leaves many of us incompatible with Christian teaching. Or they can support the church’s current statements on sexuality, which means we are not united.

Someone had pointed out that during GC this has been an issue of "human sexuality" – there was a Human Sexuality Committee, there were items on the agenda about human sexuality. It seems a lot of people in power cannot yet bring themselves to say lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Most of the sexuality issues were really issues about LGBT people.

Green reports the Council of Bishops met after GC. One item on the agenda is the commission that is supposedly going to keep the denomination together and resolve this issue. So all the work to set up the commission, choose who will be on it, get the meetings organized and the work to begin – a very high priority – will happen … in November. The commission won't begin work until 2017. Ready for an extra GC in 2018 or 2019? Um...

Green summarized the situation:

If you think we are going to get the best of the system if we get the right people in the right seats and get them to vote the right way, then hope will die again and again and again. We have been doing that for 44 years and we have lost, lost, lost… Our power is not in the system.

Our power is the equivalent of civil disobedience. Defiantly come out! Defiantly ordain LGBT people! Defiantly officiate at same-sex weddings! Defiantly be in meaningful relationships with LGBT people and be in ministry with and for them!

Because of this new commission (which seems comatose on arrival) all LGBT issues were not voted on at GC. That includes all those petitions wanting to work out what to do with those who defy the Book of Discipline – and most of those were about punishing defiance.

Even so, the Reconciling Ministries Network has some good things to say about the commission and what is going on around it. First, Bishop Ough, now the leader of the Council of Bishops, confirmed that queer voices will be represented on the commission. Second, the full Council of Bishops (not just some of the American bishops) have promised to look for ways to avoid church trials.

The United Methodist news service has an article summarizing all that happened at GC. I saw an item I had missed during the week. This was a petition that requires all petitions get a vote in legislative committee and all petitions passed by committee must get a vote before the full plenary. It passed by 53%. This GC was 10 days. Considering how many petitions did not get a vote, perhaps the next GC needs to be a month long. I'm very aware how fortunate we are that many of those petitions were not acted on.

Rev. Dr. Pamela Lightsey wrote a post for the Reconciling Ministries Network blog. She said that GC wasn't after just oppressing LGBT people. There were several other areas of oppression at work, such as withdrawing from the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. This GC was a strong push towards conservatism. Lightsey wrote:

The genuine clues to help us expose the deep bigotry held by far too many within our denomination come by watching the evidence of the mounting coalescing of persons who believe it’s time to end oppression. These persons understand that where you find homophobia, transphobia and institutional racism, you will also find strategies to deny reproductive rights, ecological justice, affordable healthcare a living wage, and much more.

We're in this together.

General Conference – one last protest

Even with GC approving the bishop's proposal and things seem to be on track for the commission there was still another protest today. This one declared unfinished business – there is still harm being done to LGBT people and that harm will continue (at least) until that special GC concludes its work 2-3 years from now. Yes, there is a glimmer of hope, but the harm continues. Sue Laurie, the one who was unofficially ordained earlier during GC, asked "Where does a LGBT person go to church on Sunday?" The protesters surrounded the plenary floor and sang, "I am not forgotten, you are not forgotten, God knows your name."

Yes, more damaging petitions did not come up for a vote (which we likely would have lost). But this is not a victory, this is merely crumbs. The Book of Discipline was not changed.

The last paragraph of the bishop's response that created the commission is, "We will continue to explore options to help the church live in grace with one another – including ways to avoid further complaints, trials and harm while we uphold the Discipline." Emphasis added.

Add to that a Council of Bishops that has become dysfunctional, with no leadership and too invested in the status quo and keeping the peace. Yes, peace has a higher priority than justice for us.

The result is nothing has changed. And we fell for the glimmer of hope this commission offers us.

Will Green offers some final thoughts. The only new idea from this GC is the possibility of more frequent GCs.



One of the big votes today was whether the denomination should become fossil free by divesting from oil and coal companies. As the issue was debated a delegate quoted John Wesley: "We ought not gain money at the expense of life." The issue came down to whether it was better to divest or to engage.


This is me speaking: I see that as whether divesting is heard louder than engaging. I don't hear the denomination doing a whole lot of engaging, though the Financial Administration Committee or whatever group is in charge of pensions might be doing it quietly – and apparently ineffectively.

Divestment lost by 86%.



Back in 1984 GC added the restriction that "self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers or appointed to serve." Later the Judicial Council decided that was appropriate. Another JC decision says annual conferences "have the authority to decide whether candidates for ordination meet the disciplinary qualifications." Someone finally asked, don't these decisions conflict?

This is an important question because many annual conferences are using the second decision to say they aren't going to ask whether a candidate for ordination is LGBT. That means they are defying the first decision.

JC responded. Nope, no conflict. "The annual conferences have clear authority under the constitution. But that authority does not and constitutionally cannot intrude into the authority of the General Conference." Even so, defiance will continue.

General Conference – refer to the commission

A sign spotted in the observer section of the convention hall:

1980 Study – No Effect
1988 Study – No Effect
2008 Study – No Effect
2016 Commission – Suspect Effect
No Pressure : No Effect

A couple tweets suggest going up to bishops and asking so when is the first meeting of that commission?

Yesterday delegates voted to wait on all the petitions having to do with human sexuality and refer them to the special commission the bishops are forming. More details of all of this in the official UMC news.



Not sure what to make of this one. There was apparently a motion to hold that special GC in 2018 or 2019 at Africa University or in an African country. I'm not sure what happened to this motion. The standard GC in 2024 or 2028 is already scheduled for Harare – with the provision it be held there only if LGBT delegates and advocates can be safe.



Three denominations, Episcopal Church, Oregon Diocese, The United Church of Christ national officers, Society of Friends (Quakers), New England, have written letters of support and encouragement for the UMC to be more inclusive of LGBT people.



GC has withdrawn UMC membership in the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice even though the denomination contributed no money. Support will continue through UMW and the General Board of Church and Society, though the effective voice will be smaller.

General Conference – responding to the bishops

As I reported earlier today the bishops did issue a plan to resolve the intractable human sexuality debates, something delegates are now saying cannot be accomplished through legislation. The plan is to have a commission study every page of the Book of Discipline for language that is hurtful and contradictory then recommend changes. A special General Conference, hopefully in 2018 or 2019, would be convened to consider the recommendations.

But what to do until then?

One motion was to proceed with the bishop's recommendation, but also proceed with the human sexuality petitions that have come before this GC. Thankfully, this was defeated. I say that because some of those petitions would heap more harm.

Bishop Ough, which touched off this whole scenario said the support among the bishops was overwhelming, but not unanimous. Bishop Hagiya said that more traditional bishops were annoyed that while the commission worked there would be a moratorium on church trials and that would open the door to all kinds of violations.

That makes me wonder: Is he suggesting there aren't violations now?

The delegates voted by a wide margin to ask who has the authority to set ordination standards, General Conference or the local Annual Conference? That question was sent to the Judicial Council. The reason for the question is because several Annual Conferences have said they will ignore sexual orientation when determining whether a candidate is fit for ordination.

Another issue did go before the Judicial Council. There were petitions to require minimum penalties for chargeable offenses. These are the things that will put a pastor on trial. An example is officiating at a same-sex wedding. The petition wanted a mandatory suspension of a year without pay (since defrocking doesn't seem to be a thing anymore).

The Judicial Council ruled that a mandatory penalty cannot be imposed when a pastor voluntary admits the offense, and that includes when the admission is part of agreeing to a Just Resolution to avoid a trial. In addition, the annual conference has sole authority on matters related to the character of its clergy members. Transferring that authority to GC, by GC demanding a minimum penalty, is unconstitutional.

There will be no mandatory minimum penalties.

Relying on tweets for news gets interesting. I had left you hanging on the fate of the bishop's recommendation. The various streams of tweets (and the United Methodist news service) said that after lunch the plenary would take up such a motion written by Adan Hamilton (who is definitely an ally). But the news article stopped there. Later tweets say Hamilton's motion was defeated, yet another motion passed by 51%. I don't have a text for this motion. Along the way was a call for the presiding bishop to be removed from the chair. Alas, I have no details.

Many are encouraged by this action. Others worry that is is just another delaying tactic.

Being debated now is petition 60935, which creates a Central Conference in the United States. This is a critical issue because it allows the US churches to say there needs to be a national difference from the global Book of Discipline. And the top of the list of differences is in how we treat LGBT people.

General Conference – bishops respond

I mentioned yesterday that the bishops were asked to lead, to provide a way forward from the apparent deadlock on human sexuality issues. Today the bishops released a statement. It is 3 pages, so I won't quote it all. The statement affirms the goal of unity and calls the church to prayer. They suggest 1-2 hours of plenary time for the remaining days be shifted from legislation to prayer.

I quote from the statement:

NEXT STEPS We recommend that the General Conference
defer all votes on human sexuality and refer this entire subject
to a special Commission, named by the Council of Bishops, to
develop a complete examination and possible revision of every
paragraph in our Book of Discipline regarding human
sexuality. We continue to hear from many people on the
debate over sexuality that our current Discipline contains
language which is contradictory, unnecessarily hurtful, and
inadequate for the variety of local, regional and global
contexts. We will name such a Commission to include persons
from every region of our UMC, and will include representation
from differing perspectives on the debate. We commit to
maintain an on-going dialogue with this Commission as they do
their work, including clear objectives and outcomes. Should
they complete their work in time for a called General
Conference, then we will call a two- to three-day gathering
before the 2020 General Conference. (We will consult with
GCFA regarding cost-effective ways to hold that gathering.)

That called General Conference might take place in 2018 or 2019.

One result of this move, if GC approves, means there will be no improvement of LGBT issues in 2016. There also won't be more penalties and restrictions.

A link to the full text can be found here.



The Love Your Neighbor Coalition held a shower of stoles demonstration. Each stole is displayed from a cross, signifying a pastor who has been "crucified" trhough denominational policies. I've seen shower of stoles displays at Reconciling Ministires Convo. Each stole is from a pastor who has been prevented from being ordained, or who was forced from his/her job because of being LGBT.

General Conference – bishops need to lead

I'm piecing my story from several sources, some of which are Twitter feeds that give only moments in the story, not the full outline. So I think this is what happened. I likely have details wrong.

Bishop Bruce Ough gave an announcement this morning in which he called for unity within the denomination. He was partly addressing behind-the-scenes talk of a schism. Ough was saying there will be no schism.

That spawned a protest, though perhaps not a disruptive one. LGBT people and allies sang "Blest Be the Tie that Binds" as they bound their wrists with rainbow cloth. Some were even on the floor with cloth binding hands to feet behind their backs. The general message is there is no unity if it doesn't address full inclusion of LGBT people. There is no path forward and there doesn't look to be one by the end of GC in two days.

That prompted Rev. Mark Holland and Rev. Adam Hamilton of the Great Plains Conference to say to the bishops: Do something. You're the church leaders – lead. Come back tomorrow with a plan describing what you are going to do. Holland's motion passed 428-364.

The bishops don't have a vote at GC, though they do preside over the plenary sessions. One thing they can do is call an extra General Conference, likely in 2018, and for the purpose of figuring out what to do with this one issue.

At a news conference Ough admitted the bishops are not united on (I think) both the LGBT inclusion issue and the schism issue. Some respond that admitting division in your ranks is not leadership.

Matt Berryman, executive director of Reconciling Ministries Network responded:

Separation conversations are not new, and at this General Conference, the idea has been pushed by conservatives who finally understand that fairness and equality for LGBTQ people in the church will not be silenced. While we appreciated the recognition of our struggle by the Council of Bishops today, we are discouraged by their refusal to meet this head on and bring peace and justice to all of us who serve this church.

The conservative Good News caucus issued a statements:

Bishop Bruce Ough’s morning statement at General Conference should be applauded for its directness and its honesty, but it was also a cause for sadness and disappointment. His confession that the Council of Bishops is divided and unable to provide the leadership we need to be a united and vibrant church is another indication of how serious our dysfunction is.

More background to the story is here in an article in the United Methodist Reporter.

I've had discussions with people since GC in 2012. I heard that schism isn't realistic. Neither side would have enough resources to operate a global church with all the boards and agencies we have now.

General Conference – Jericho March

The committee work is done. This week is mostly plenary sessions. Rev. Stephen Wende made a motion to say General Conference should clear its schedule of all the extra presentations and focus solely on making sure the plenary session gets through all the petitions that came out of committee. He said that in 2012 the petitions from the Local Church Committee never came before the plenary and actions at the local church are the most important. Those presentations can be given at the end of GC.

The motion was passed and sent to the Committee on Agenda and Calendar over lunch. They responded by saying the schedule will not be changed. Many people have come a long distance to give those presentations and cannot reschedule. Many presentations are appropriate for issues coming up for a vote.

I'm uncomfortable with Wende's motion. I admit I don't know him and don't know where he stands on the conservative-progressive spectrum. Even so, in 2012 it was important to LGBTQ people and our allies that we not get through all those petitions. We didn't want more harm heaped on us.



At a press conference this morning the Reconciling Ministries Network and the Love Your Neighbor Coalition presented a letter of support of LGBTQI pastors. It was signed by over 1500 United Methodist pastors. In it they spell out what that support means. That includes:

*If a clergy person is removed from their charge for being LGBTQI, we will refuse to fill their pulpit, serve in their stead or accept an appointment to said charge so as to demand that the charge continue to be filled by our colleague.

*If serving on the Board of Ordained Ministry, we will examine all candidates for ministry and make decisions of their process regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity.

*If a complaint is filed against a colleague for being LGBTQI, we will not support any action to place our colleague on leave of absence as some bishops have sought.

They also called for the church to elevate an LGBTQI pastor into the role of bishop (though this is done at the Jurisdictional Conferences that take place this summer).

This is a significant act of defiance. We'll see how GC responds to it.

After the press conference came a Jericho March around the convention center, with calls to "Tear the Walls Down Now!" I had wondered where Ed Rowe is this week. Since he is retired I knew he wasn't a delegate. No worries. The photo with this post shows he's at the front of the march.

Later a large Black Lives Matter demonstration took over the plenary floor for20 minutes.



The Judicial Council acts as the Supreme Court of the United Methodist Church. The 9 members of the JC are elected by GC and serve 8 year terms. Five seats were filled this time. Four seats are for clergy and five are for laity. This year two clergy and three laity seats were filled. One pastor new to JC is from Norway, the other was born in Vietnam, grew up in Switzerland, and is serving in California. One lay person is from Manila and is a retired justice of the Philippine Supreme Court, another is from Kansas, and the third from Mozambique.

As for whether they are for us or against us, I can only go by a tweet from the Wesley Putnam Ministries, who wrote, "The good news is that the conservatives swept the election – both lay and clergy. This is significant!" This is good news – for him. Not for me. I agree it is significant.