Clearing up four misconceptions about General Conference, and affirming one that is right on.
50 Days
For the 50 days after Easter, heavy on Methodists’ minds will be General Conference, the quadrennial gathering of United Methodists from across the globe, held May 10-20, 2016. Everyone tries to describe General Conference to the media and their friends…but I find that four descriptions they use are not actually correct.
Here’s four half-truths, and one that is actually true, about General Conference.
1. General Conference is not equivalent to other denominational bodies.
The half-truth is that other denominational groups are similar to–or bellwethers of–how General Conference will be for United Methodism. For example, folks said that the conflict over homosexuality at the recent Anglican Primates meeting portents how General Conference will be for United Methodism, or that since the Presbyterians affirm gay clergy, that the UMC surely will. This is not the case.
The UMC is the only global Protestant denomination in the world, and General Conference is unique in its worldwide makeup, authority, and influence.
- Worldwide makeup: In contrast to the delegations of the Seven Sisters of Protestantism, the delegates that are sent to GC come from all over the world: 58% of the delegates are from the U.S., 30% from Africa, 4.6% from Europe, and 5.8% from the Philippines. No other denominational gathering has that kind of global diversity.
- Authority: The Roman Catholic Church is a worldwide church. However, the authority vested in General Conference is different from the Catholic Church: while they have regional bodies and even a topmost conclave of Cardinals, every doctrine and polity decision is approved/decided by the Pope. In contrast to Catholicism, General Conference is the ONLY body that can speak for The United Methodist Church. No Bishop or agency can speak uniquely on behalf of all of Methodism.
- Influence: the Church of the Nazarene is the most similar, where the USA delegation is only 25% of their General Assembly which has the same authority as General Conference. However, United Methodism’s 12.7 million members are far more influential than the 2.2 million members of their Wesleyan cousin.
So while folks tend to compare policy decisions of other top bodies in Protestantism and Catholicism, none are similar to General Conference.
Side note: the actual parallel to the Anglican Primates meeting and even their Lambeth Conference is the World Methodist Council, which includes all the varieties of Wesleyanism, meeting next on August 31 in Houston, Texas.
2. General Conference is not a proportional body
The half-truth is that delegate numbers to GC are assigned at a rate proportional to their regions’ lay membership. This is not the case.
General Conference does not reflect United Methodism proportionally, and it is not supposed to.
In a recent UMNS article by Sam Hodges, both Africa and the Southern USA complain that they are underrepresented at 2016 General Conference. This continues the trend from 2012, per Joe Whittemore’s analysis of the 2012 General Conference:
[In 2012,] the 2nd/3rd-largest areas of the UMC, the United States’ Southeastern and South Central Jurisdictions, respectively, will see their representation diluted…The SEJ, with 24 percent of total UMC membership, will have 22.3 percent of delegates. The SCJ, with 14.4 percent of members, will have 13 percent of delegates.
Why is GC not 100% proportional? Because General Conference includes mandatory minimum representation by an annual conference: regardless of how small a regional conference is, they get a lay and clergy voice at the table. This means that the UMC gives token representation to:
- unique mission fields (European ACs represent entire countries with different languages and cultures)
- unique geographic challenges (Philippines ACs represent entire islands)
- huge geographic areas (Oregon and southern Idaho get 2 delegates for a land mass four times as big as Missouri, which gets 12 delegates)
So it is problematic both to claim it is proportional, when it isn’t, and for the South USA/Africa to complain about losing delegates, when they hold the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd highest voting blocs (556 delegates, 64% of the vote in 2016). It is therefore troubling to read of efforts to remove minimum representation or reallocate delegates to benefit the South USA/Africa who already enjoy huge voting margins.
GC is not proportional, and it is not meant to be, for the sake of its mission to transform the world. It’s hard to transform the world if you take voices away from huge swaths of it. As Audun Westad, GC delegate from Norway, states in Hodges’ article:
“Whether a democracy is a good democracy or not is not measured on the majority’s ability to take what they claim is statistically theirs,” he said. “It is measured on the majority’s willingness to protect the minority.”
3. General Conference is not a representative body
The half-truth is that General Conference represents the clergy and lay beliefs of their annual conferences. This is not the case.
Delegate selection for General Conference is a political event influenced by caucus groups.
- In Oklahoma, the Mainstream United Methodists and the Wesley Fellowship caucus groups had their slates of who to vote for, and for the past three GCs, the only delegates elected were on those slates.
- In a Texas conference in 2007, the entire delegation was line-by-line the same as a Confessing Movement voter guide.
- When one caucus group gets defeated, like evangelicals in Ohio in 2015, they are quick to blame not the members of annual conference but other caucus groups.
The result is that the delegates elected may not be members of those caucus groups, but they are predominantly elected by them. I don’t know what delegate elections look like outside the USA.
Representative bodies are never truly representative, but strongly tilted by politics, and the same can be said of General Conference.
4. General Conference does not create worldwide uniform polity.
The half-truth is that General Conference creates the same doctrine and polity for everyone that is United Methodist. This is not the case.
Bishop Pete Weaver’s introduction to the 2008 Book of Discipline states:
The Discipline is not sacrosanct or infallible. It is the product of research, prayer, conversation, and worship which provides the most current statement of how United Methodists agree to live their lives together.
This is true, but in polity and practice, it is even more true because it is not even the same book across the world.
Since 1972, Central Conferences (regions of Methodism outside of the USA) could change their Books of Discipline to reflect their diverse contexts. Sometimes it was different educational requirements for clergy (since not every region has access to a United Methodist school), but other times there were drastic differences.
- The 1992 Book of Discipline (written in French for Africa) excluded children of polygamists from receiving communion.
- Liberia currently excludes divorced clergy from seeking to be bishops while the USA and the Book of Discipline does not exclude divorcees from anything.
The truth is what General Conference decides only applies 100% to the United States, which, unlike the rest of the world, cannot adapt language for their region. This colonialist structure has many changes proposed to it for 2016. A Global Book of Discipline (defining what areas are uniform across the denomination) will be a major topic in 2016.
The decisions of General Conference are not applied uniformly across United Methodism. It will take drastic changes to make it either be uniform everywhere, or be adaptable everywhere. Presently, it is neither.
5. General Conference is the worst form of Conferencing–except for all the others.
The truth is that General Conference is a unique but flawed institution, subject to politicking, self-bettering majorities, structural inequality, huge wastes of money, and perpetuation of systemic injustice long beyond the time when the majority know they are wrong.
And yet we believe the Holy Spirit works through General Conference.
Like God’s continuing revelation through hundreds of biblical characters who were incredibly flawed, God works through the people God has, not the people God wants. I believe God wanted a Methodist Church that affirmed women clergy, but didn’t get it until 1956. I believe God wanted a Methodist Church that didn’t put African Americans in a separate-but-unequal jurisdiction, but didn’t get it until 1968. Who knows what Methodist Church will God want in 2016?
So may we make do.
- May we perfect the rules to balance majority rule and minority privilege.
- May we finish well the Imagine No Malaria campaign and embrace a new challenge for 2017-2020.
- May we seek unity without uniformity, diversity with a common mission.
- May we look protestors in the eyes, hear their stories, and remove discriminatory or unjust rules in our polity.
- May we value the delegate representing 175 members in Russia the same as the one representing 60,000 from West Michigan.
- May we be the people our grandchildren look back on and say “Surely this was the greatest generation of Methodists there ever was” instead of “Really? They wasted time on THAT?”
Amen?
Sharing and Response
This article is Creative Commons, which means you can copy it and print, email, post in a newsletter, get it as a tattoo, or whatever…so long as you provide some attribution. Please share with your General Conference delegates and whoever else is interested in this critical juncture in the life of the church.
Thoughts? Thanks for your shares and comments on social media and emails.
Jared Gadomski Littleton
If I share this as a tatoo, is APA or MLA the preferred citation style for tatoos?
Jared Gadomski Littleton
*tattoo
Julie A. Arms Meeks
Numbers 3, 4 and 5!!!!!
Danny
May we continue to affirm our commitment to the unchanging Word of God, the historic Christian Faith, and of Holy Living, unencumbered by sinful lifestyles, that is distinctly Wesleyan?
Surely a great generation will not seek to divorce us from confessional Christianity in order to pursue the fickle fancy of post-modern culture.
Elaine Dawson
I thought the Bible was a living document? And since when do the United Methodists speak for God? We speak for our religion. Not God. God is a mystery and we follow Jesus who loved and celebrated all!!!
Jack Harnish
Another half truth—the UMC is not worldwide or global. We are only present in USA, Philippines, parts of Europe and six countries of Africa. The World Methodist Council is global. The UMC is multi-national.
Ralph A Lawrence
Yes, exactly. This is an informative article. The American UMC brand of Methodism (of which I am glad to be a part) is, as the article indicates, “what it is”. As Jack Harnish says, “The World Methodist Council is global. The UMC is multi-national.” Yes, we are “Methodists” but not the only Methodists (even when we pretend to be!). If you want to see world-wide Methodism that still remembers who John Wesley was and taught, go to the World Methodist Conference (of which the World Methodist Council is the governing body). It meets every five years and is definitely a world movement. It could, however, be more inclusive as it is Wesleyan-Arminian, and leans to the evangelical side, not so much to the “social gospel” side as does American United Methodism. In other words, it recognizes and encompasses, recognizing the autonomy of, not only the Methodists who use “Methodist” in their official name including the CME/AME/AMEZ churches, but other Wesleyan bodies such as the Wesleyan Church, the Church of the Nazarene, and the Free Methodist Church, and numerous “national” Methodist bodies such as those in Kenya, Nigeria, Hong Kong, and many others. To put it another way, the USA-based UMC talks nicely about caring for the world (and definitely does a lot, for sure, e.g. UMCOR, No More Malaria, and much more), while the World Methodist Conference actually reaches out to cover the world, membershipwise, by a ratio of some three to one, or more.
Dave and Patty McIntyre
Great clarifying article, Jeremy. I am a United Methodist. I am not a Methodist. If we are members of this denomination, we are United Methodists. I’m seeing more and more slipping back to the easy use of “Methodist” to describe and refer to our denomination. United is not just a clarifier it is also our name.
Thanks for hearing my concern. And, thanks again for a good article.
Dave
Patrick Scriven
Great post, Jeremy. My one critique is of this sentence:
“And yet we believe the Holy Spirit works through General Conference.”
I would amend it by adding one little word.
“And yet we believe the Holy Spirit CAN work through General Conference.”
As always, thanks for your insight.
LONNIE D. BROOKS
It is a fascinating thing to see so many United Methodists boast that our Church is worldwide. There are no United Methodist churches in Australia, China, India, Japan, Korea, the Middle East, South America, or much of Central America, or in the Caribbean. In our home continent of North America, except for an extremely small presence in British Columbia, we’re found only in the United States. Jan Love calls us an extended national church, and she’s right on target, because I just named well over half the population of the world among whom we’re not even making an effort to be present in membership.
dave werner
OTOH, though The United Methodist Church is not found in places like those you mention, we are part of the World Methodist Council. http://worldmethodistcouncil.org/about/
LONNIE D. BROOKS
We’re also part of the hole catholic church, but neither makes The United Methodist Church as worldwide church.
Cindy
Where ever any United Methodist go into the world around the world, United Methodism is there. There is no United Methodist Church in Barrow, AK, but United Methodisim is there.
Ralph A Lawrence
Thanks for your comment. See my reply to Jack Harnish, above, to clarify how the World Methodist Conference is much more of a world-wide “Methodist” organization.
R Jackson
If the decisions made at GC only impact the UMC 100% in the USA, then why are African and Asian UMs voting on decisions that impact the USA UMC and not their own areas? Something about that sounds wrong to me.
Danny
That is a half-truth as well. At least here in the Philippines, we follow the American UMC lockstep. We use the same BoD and many of our ministers are products of American UMC seminaries. Although, we tend to be more religiously conservative than our mainline brethren in the USA. What happens to the American UMC does affect us. We have had schisms for this reason, some congregations and districts wanted a national Methodist church that is independent of the UMC, and they left to form their own.
I cannot say how the other Conferences are like, but at least here in the Philippines that is the case.
Lloyd Fleming
Very helpful. Thank you.
David Febo
It seemed you were talking about my Annual Conference. Puerto Rico Methodist Church. Instead of comforting me it actually makes me sad. The same group in control of our church for over 20 years will do about anything to stay there. I feel vey alone in my quest for justice, democracy and equity.