Have you ever been to a session of the General Conference of the UMC? If so, could you call what happens there “holy conferencing”? If not, something has to change.
The GC is the only body that speaks on behalf of The United Methodist Church. It is where we establish church law and make decisions that will come to bear on our denominational life for at least one quadrennium. It is crucial that our denominational decisions be steeped in prayer and discernment. Our conferencing should be rooted in the holiness of God and guided by the Holy Spirit. There is a great deal at stake in many of our decisions.
Personally speaking, “holy” is not the adjective I would use to describe what went on at the 2012 GC. It was a spectacle that would have made the Ringling Brothers blush. Constant protests and, finally, the stopping of all business of the GC by LGBT protesters is what most people will take away from our time together. Oh, and the Twitter feed–that was ugly. Despite the approximately $8.5 million we invested in this event, we accomplished very little of significance. We honed our skills of insulting one another via social media and left more divided than when we began. That is immoral.
The 2016 GC is beginning to loom like a storm on the horizon. A funnel cloud might be a better analogy. Given recent events relating to ecclesial disobedience and the possibility of a division of the UMC into two or more denominations, I think we should expect the atmosphere of 2012 to seem calm by comparison.
I suggest that we close the GC meeting space to all but delegates, bishops, and other essential personnel. Anyone who wishes to watch the proceedings can do so via live streaming. We should ban all caucus groups from having a presence inside our gathering space: no protests, no signs, no distribution of materials, no flash mobs, no stopping our work together. We should focus on the business at hand with as little distraction as possible. There is plenty of work to do relating to a broad variety of ministries. There will be issues related to security of appointment, our international ministries, our work with the poor, our ministries with people with disabilities, and outreach to young people. Legislative proposals regarding our stance on human sexuality will undoubtedly come forward. There may be various restructuring plans to consider. To have all of this business function in an atmosphere of constant distraction is unfair to the people who care deeply about these ministries. To have this business preempted by the protests of a single group–as may well happen again–would be another sign of deep, abiding dysfunction in our denomination.
Some may object that this proposal would silence demonstrations in favor of LGBT ordination and marriage in the UMC. It would not of course silence any legislation or discussion of these matters, and discussion and legislation belong properly within the business of the GC. Further, we should bear in mind that counter-demonstrations are possible as well. Do we really want to operate in such a way that any group that feels strongly enough about its position can interrupt the work of the GC, particularly in light of the enormous cost of this event? According to the UMR, the 2016 GC will cost almost $11 million. How do we want to spend that time and money?
David F. Watson 
This strikes me as common sense. We have more than 1000 delegates per year at my AC and we close certain sessions, especially when voting for delegates, to only voting members. Why would we do that when voting for delegates but not for the event for which we elect the delegates?
What I hear here is a call to control the floor space rather than “close” the event in the sense of a public meeting being closed. The U.S. Congress has a closed floor. Only people with permission are allowed to go onto the floor. People may watch from the galleries — but may not disrupt the work being done. And every session of Congress is carried live on TV.
There is no reason why the General Conference could not adopt the same rules.
Thank you. That is a more accurate way of putting it.
I think this is a great idea, David. You are suggesting not only a closing of the legislative floor space (the “bar” of the conference), but a closing of the room, as well, no? The “bar” is already closed to non-delegates. Marshals monitor each entrance during the session and refuse entry to anyone who is not a delegate. (Of course, they are instructed not to use force to keep people out. That is how the demonstrators got access to the conference floor.)
You are right that the distraction of demonstrators in the observers’ gallery (signs and noise) causes problems with the atmosphere of holy conferencing. I am skeptical that live streaming will be able to adequately convey to observers what is happening on the floor. But I am willing to give it a try to lessen the “political” nature of the conference Returning it to a more spiritual tone would be very helpful to its overall process.
Thanks for this comment, Tom. Yes, you’ve accurately summed up what I’m suggesting. I’m sure we can find some way of live streaming the events on the floor–if there’s really a will to do so on the part of the GC leadership.
Pingback: A #GC2016 no brainer | John Meunier
I hope this won’t happen. As I understand it, the rules against gay marriage and ordination would have become even stricter if the protesters had not demonstrated and the bishops agreed to halt legislation on sexuality.
If proposals come again to increase the severity of punishments against gay marriage and ordination, I would expect there to be similar protests to halt their passage.
So, it’s acceptable to circumvent the process of Holy Conferencing and the democratic way our church is governed, simply because of an ideology that says “my perspective on this issue outweighs what anyone else thinks?”
Beginning with the chosen logo for General Conference, there has been communication of 2016 Portland as an impending carnival of protest and overthrow of United Methodist order and traditional teaching. “Go there” is but a twist on Jesus’ command. Residing in the western wing of our big house, I assure you that planning for “hospitality” is already underway.