…The series of petitions that will enable constitutional amendments that would make the church in the United States a regional conference passed by the necessary 2/3 majority.  The amendments would allow for a General Conference made up somewhat similarly as our General Conference now is, that would deal with issues of a world-wide nature, but then in addition provide for Regional Conferences (similar to Central Conferences now) that would deal with issues of a regional nature.  Since much of what General Conference now does relates to the U.S. church primarily, those U.S. specific matters would be dealt with by the U.S. Regional Conference.  The problem is determining what is of a worldwide nature and what is of a “regional” nature.  A study committee will work out the details.  Evangelicals generally oppose this amendment (at least at this time—one argument was, let the study committee show us the details first and then let us do the constitutional amendment if it looks right).  The matter of the Social Principles (what is really at stake is the definition of the family and the matter of homosexuality which are in the Social Principles) immediately came up in conference debate.  Do the Social Principles apply to the church globally or does each region set its own Social Principles?  It is very obvious to all observers that the church’s definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, as well as the matter of whether the practice of homosexuality is to be approved, might well change if the Central Conference votes were removed.  In other words, some are arguing that while the church in Africa may see homosexuality as a sin, the church in America sees it differently.  The matter is not yet settled.  Each annual conference will need to vote on this since a constitutional amendment needs to be ratified by 2/3 of the annual conference members.

+++

…Another constitutional amendment, which would have tremendous implications would change Article IV (p. 22 of the 2004 Discipline), entitled Inclusiveness of the Church.  The article was placed at the time of the EUB merger in order to emphasize that the church is open to persons of different races, national origin, or economic condition.  A sentence in the paragraph now reads: All persons without regard to race, color, national origin, status, or economic condition, shall be eligible to attend its services...and upon taking vows declaring the Christian faith, become professing members….  The amendment, basically, would remove the words without regard to race, color, national origin, status, or economic condition… to make the paragraph read:  All persons shall be eligible to attend its worship services…and upon taking vows declaring the Christian faith, become professing members…  The seriousness of the change cannot be overemphasized.  This is being called the “No Standards, No Conversion” amendment.  The purpose of the paragraph is changed from not discriminating against people on the basis of who they are, to not discriminating on the basis of anything, which could be, what they believe, whether or not they are converted, whether or not they obviously have ulterior motives.  While an incident regarding denial of membership to a practicing homosexual triggered the change, the change would reach far beyond just the matter of practicing homosexuals.  This will require annual conference ratification, so members of annual conferences will have a chance to vote on this.

…Some observers believe another sentence in the amendment could be used to declare the ban on ordaining self-avowed practicing homosexuals and performing same-gender unions or marriages as unconstitutional.  The sentence reads, “In The United Methodist Church no conference or other organizational unit of the Church shall be structured so as to exclude any member or any constituent body of the Church.”  Are we not “structured so as to exclude” gay and lesbian members from ordained ministry and same-gender unions?  Given the new makeup of the Judicial Council, it would not be far-fetched to see them overturn our existing prohibitions based on this amendment.  And again it would go beyond homosexuality, as it appears we could not exclude any group for any reason (such as theological differences or racist practices).

This amendment will require annual conference ratification, so members of annual conferences will have a chance to vote on this.

+++

…The subject of pastoral authority in regard to determining readiness for church membership was debated at length.  In the end, nothing was changed.  A petition, which included the words:  In continuity with our historic Methodist heritage, pastors have the responsibility of discerning one’s readiness to take the vows of membership was defeated 384 - 515.  Then an alternative petition which stated: The pastors(s) and the congregation are to faithfully receive all persons who are willing to affirm our vows of membership also failed 436 - 448.  This means the present ruling of the Judicial Council decision 1032 still stands saying that the pastor has sole authority to determine membership.

+++

 …The church’s position on the practice of homosexuality remains, basically, unchanged.  The major discussion was on the statement in para. 161G of the Discipline, which states The United Methodist Church, does not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching.  A statement strongly supported by progressives wanted to remove the statement and substitute it with the words: Faithful, thoughtful people who have grappled with this issue deeply disagree with one another; yet all seek a faithful witness.  While this statement was supported by the legislative group a minority report finally prevailed:  The statement that passed retained the language of the present statement: “not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching” and also added the phrase sexual relations are affirmed only within the covenant of monogamous, heterosexual marriage.  This statement also included a rewrite of much of paragraph 161G to make it shorter and more understandable.  The crucial vote on this was 517 - 416 (55% - 45%).  Following the announcement of this vote approximately 125 persons in the gallery disrupted the conference by standing a singing “Jesus Loves Me” 40 times.  The next morning a planned demonstration was held when the agreed-upon plan of the bishops to circumvent the rules of the conference against non delegates speaking or having the floor of the conference was carried out by declaring a “recess” (so permission would not have to be given by the delegates).  During the “recess”, a 15-minute demonstration was held; persons in sympathy with the demonstration (including the presiding bishop) stood in solidarity, and then heard Bishop Melvin Talbert (given a live microphone) berate the conference and call the action maintaining the church’s current position a sin. 

+++

…Once the major debate was completed on para. 161G other homosexual-related paragraphs passed without extensive debate.  These included the prohibition of the ordination and appointment of self-avowed practicing homosexuals, the prohibition of the use of apportionment money to promote the acceptance of homosexuality, and the probation of ministers to perform same-sex unions or marriages.

+++

…Paragraph 161C on marriage as “shared fidelity between a man and a woman” was retained 603 - 222.  A minority report would have defined “marriage covenant shared by adults.”  That minority report failed.

+++

…A petition to continue support for the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC) prevailed 418 - 384.  Persons committed to a pro-life perspective had wanted a petition that would have had the Women’s Division and Church and Society withdraw from RCRC, since RCRC is radically pro-choice and much more extreme than the nuanced view of abortion that is presently in the Social Principles.

+++

…General Conference did add a statement to the Social Principles urging ministries to reduce “unintended pregnancies” and to assist support centers that help women “find feasible alternatives to abortion.”  It also acknowledged the equal claim to life and well-being of “the unborn child” and supported parental notification and consent for abortions performed on minors.

+++

…All petitions that would have changed the formula for the Ministerial Education Fund failed.  The fund presently subsidizes the United States seminaries to the tune of over 15 million dollars a year.  This money keeps the seminaries afloat (in some cases barely) but does not directly help students, many of whom graduate with great debts.  An even bigger concern is the overseas seminaries, which receive no money from the fund.  For many this is a justice issue.  In places like Africa where the church is growing rapidly and where students are turned away by the hundreds because of lack of funds there is no subsidy.  In the United States, where seminaries are having problems attracting students, there is a subsidy of 15 million dollars a year.  There was a special action setting aside 2 million dollars for African seminaries but this is a pittance compared with the 60 million (in four years) for the U.S. seminaries.  The General Conference did tighten the accountability of U.S. seminaries by requiring that UM funds be spent only on United Methodist student scholarships or “faculty and staff salaries and benefits for those who prepare United Methodist students for ordained ministry or service as local pastors through the Course of Study program.”  These requirements may also influence the distribution of funds to favor those U.S. seminaries that have more UM students preparing for pastoral ministry.  An annual report by the seminaries will help us monitor progress in this area.

+++  

…The mission statement of the United Methodist Church was expanded by adding the phrase “for the transformation of the world” to the words “make disciples of Jesus Christ.”  The new statement reads: the purpose of the United Methodist church is to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world.

+++

…The New Social Creed proposed by the Board of Church and Society was approved, not as a new social creed but as a “Companion Litany for the Social Creed.”  The Social Creed as it appears in the 2008 Discipline will remain the official Social Creed.

+++

…The membership vows of the church will add the word “witness” to the member’s pledge to support the church (with “prayers, presence, witness, gifts, and service.”

+++

…The four-year $200,000 Study on the Ministry, which ended up with no recommendations except to continue the study, received rough treatment.  The Study had asked that no ministry petitions be considered in 2008 but that all petitions relating to ministry be referred to the ongoing committee.  The conference rejected that recommendation and dealt with a number of petitions.  One of these would allow deacons to serve communion under certain circumstances.  A more important piece of legislation would grant full rights to certain Local Pastors to vote on General Conference delegates.  This, however, would be a constitutional amendment, and will need to be ratified by the annual conferences.  Full voting rights for Local Pastors has been an evangelical cause for the past 40 years so this piece of legislation must be considered a step forward.  Additional changes shortened the period of candidacy for ordination and the period of probation from three to two years each.

+++

…A number of petitions (5 from annual conferences), in the form of resolutions, call for divestment from Israel (from companies that do business with Israel that “cause harm to Palestinians”), were rolled into one resolution that was voted down overwhelmingly (the item actually appeared on the consent calendar).  The resolution calling specifically for divestment from the Caterpillar Corporation was withdrawn before the conference began.

+++

…While it not exactly accurate to say that the conference did away with guaranteed appointments for pastors, it is accurate to say that paragraph 334 was amended to give bishops procedures for terminating an ineffective pastor’s appointment.  Pastors will be expected to be available for an appointment, participate in a review process annually, show evidence of continuing effectiveness in ministry, and show professional growth.  

+++

…A resolution “Opposition to Homophobia and Heterosexism” passed by a vote of 544 to 365.  The objection to the resolution was in large part because of the inflammatory words “homophobia” and “heterosexism,” since both are judgmental and easily misunderstood.

+++

…No action was taken in regard to transgender persons.  A petition from Transforming Congregations addressing transgenderism and sexual brokenness failed.

    A report, “Operational Assessment of the Connectional Church,” conducted by an...

   More Christians were martyred in the 20th Century than in the previous nineteen...

    I was speaking with a fellow pastor several years ago and inquired whether he...