General Conference 2019: A Beginner's Guide

With a special called General Conference coming around the corner in 2019, and knowing that onlookers (pastors, congregants, those outside the UMC) will be watching with varying degrees of knowledge around all it entails, I thought it might be helpful to write up a simple FAQ for those who are not experts in all things United Methodism. This will not be exhaustive and is meant only to give a basic framework for those who are interested in what is happening, but are not familiar with UM structure and jargon.

Note: Since I am not an expert on all of these topics, if at any point you are reading and think, "Scott, that is factually incorrect!" please let me know and I'll do my best to update this page to be as accurate as possible.

What is a General Conference?

General Conference (GC) is a gathering every four years of between 600 - 1,000 delegates (clergy and laity, aka pastors and non-pastors) who vote on issues that effect the global denomination. This includes, among other things, amending the Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church. The last General Conference was in 2016.

What is an Annual Conference?

Annual Conferences are the basic unit of The UMC. Think of them as regional areas. Pastors are not members of churches, we are members of an Annual Conference and are sent to churches/ministry appointments, typically in that region. The name is a little confusing because it is also what we call our annual gathering of pastors and lay leaders in each Annual Conference. The most important thing for this conversation is that pastors are ordained at the Annual Conference level.

What is The Book of Discipline?

The Book of Discipline (BOD) is the governing document of our denomination. It contains many things (statements of faith, constitution, additional church legalese, etc.), but broadly speaking and most notably for this conversation, it contains the rules and regulations for the UMC, and outlines what steps are to be taken when those rules are broken by churches, pastors, members, etc.

Why is there a General Conference in 2019?

At the 2016 General Conference in Portland, OR, the debates surrounding our denomination's stance on human sexuality (including same-sex weddings and ordination of LGBT persons) appeared to again be at a point of impasse on the floor (it has been a heated debate since the phrase "The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching" was first added to the Discipline in 1972). One UM leader stood up and asked the Council of Bishops "to lead." This was/is abnormal, as typically bishops are expected to remain as non-partisan as possible during the Conference, and are not voting members of the body. The GC delegates agreed that something new in procedure was needed, and the Council of Bishops agreed to gather as a body for the remainder of the day and report the following day with some sort of novel plan to help move the conversation forward. What they came up with became what is now known as The Council of Bishops' Commission on a Way Forward. The GC 2016 delegates agreed to table any and all debates around human sexuality in favor of this Commission working for 2-3 years on one or more plans that would be voted on at a special called General Conference in 2018 or 2019.

What did the Commission on a Way Forward do?

They met for about two years and considered three potential ways to amend the BOD, two of which were written and presented to the Council of Bishops for recommendation. The two presented were the "One Church" Plan and the "Connectional Conference" Plan. The "Traditional" Plan was not written nor presented, and was only written (not by the Commission on a Way Forward) after the Council of Bishops issued their recommendation.

Who was on the Commission on a Way Forward?

32 people in total. Efforts were made to include a diverse array of clergy and laity.

If you would like to know more about the Commission and their work, click HERE.

Why was the Traditional Plan not written and presented by the Commission?

According to the Commission on a Way Forward:

The request to include a full Traditionalist Model was received by the Commission on a Way Forward just prior to its last meeting, which began on May 14, 2018. Members of the Commission on a Way Forward registered concern that the time available did not allow for the full conciliar process utilized for the other two plans offered by the Commission on a Way Forward. The One Church Plan and the Connectional Conference Plan both received intensive and comprehensive participation from the Commission and the Council of Bishops over an extended period of time. While there was some support within both the Commission and the Council of Bishops for a Traditionalist Model, the support was modest enough in both groups to discontinue the Commission’s earlier work on this model. In order to serve the May, 2018 request from the Council of Bishops, the Commission on a Way Forward resubmits the sketch sent to the Council of Bishops in November, 2017 as our work on the Traditionalist Model along with the history of this work and its implications for various bodies in The United Methodist Church.

Source: Way Forward Report

Which plan did the Council of Bishops recommend?

The One Church Plan, by a "large majority" according to those in the room.

What does each plan say?

If you would like to read the One Church Plan and the Connectional Conference Plan in their entirety, you can read the Way Forward Report. Here's the short version for each one:

The One Church Plan emphasizes contextualization, would not effect churches outside the US, and allows the decisions around marriage and ordination to be made at the most local level possible. The de facto policy of United Methodist churches would be to disallow same-gender marriage, but churches that wished to do so could change their local church rules by passing a simple majority vote at a church conference (all members of the church can vote). Ordination would be decided by each Annual Conference's Board of Ordained Ministry and clergy session (the voting session for UM clergy at Annual Conference). Pastors will have the right to perform same-sex weddings, but will not be compelled to do so.

Important Note: This plan has been incorrectly discussed as requiring local churches to vote on same-sex wedding policies. That is untrue. Churches are not required to vote if they do not wish to allow for same-sex weddings on their campus.

The Connectional Conference Plan would create three branches within the UMC, a progressive, centrist, and traditionalist branch. The progressive branch would adopt full inclusion across the board. The centrist branch would look a lot like the One Church Plan. The traditionalist branch would keep our current language regarding homosexuality and would create stricter punitive measures for those who broke the rules. Annual Conferences would vote on which branch to join, and then any churches or clergy in each Annual Conference that wanted to be affiliated with a different branch could vote and do so. The three branches would financially support common boards and agencies.

The Traditional Plan (or now the Modified Traditional Plan) would keep our current language around homosexuality ("incompatible with Christian teaching") and would enforce stricter punishments for those who broke the rules. Notably, there would be no due-process for clergy who perform same-sex weddings. First offense would bring unpaid suspension of one year. Second offense would mean credentials are stripped.

Lastly, there is the Simple Plan, which would remove any and all language in the Discipline that would prevent full inclusion in ministry with LGBTQ persons throughout the world. Notably, this plan would change the policy of Central Conferences (Europe, Africa, and Asia), and it is unclear to me whether this plan would mandate same-sex weddings and/or LGBTQ ordination in all churches and conferences globally (at least where legally permitted).

So what is going to happen at GC 2019?

The delegates that gathered for GC 2016 will again gather, this time in St. Louis, on February 23-26, 2019. They will vote on the plans, knowing the Council of Bishops recommended the One Church Plan. There will possibly be amendments to the plans before they are voted on. I could get in the weeds here about the standing rules, which amendments might come up, how the voting might go, etc.

Here's the important bit: we don't really know what will happen. 

One of the plans may end up passing. Most Methodists hope something passes, and many wonder what will happen if/when one plan passes.

If the One Church Plan passes, a conservative caucus of churches and pastors known as the "Wesleyan Covenant Association" (WCA) has announced they will be forced to leave the denomination, on principle. UMC policies would not change overnight, churches and annual conferences would have to decide if they wanted to vote to change their policies, and that process alone could take months or years depending on the church and conference.

If the Traditionalist Plan passes, we can expect a similar exit from those on the more progressive end of the denomination, though no planned schism has been announced, as far as I know. The Traditionalist Plan would go into effect in 2020.

If the Connectional Conference Plan passes, there is a lengthy and exhaustive time-table of how and when those changes would take place, and we can all worry about that bridge when we get to it.

If the Simple Plan passes, presumably the effects of policy change would be immediate, and conservative churches (like the WCA caucus) would begin to exit.

And then there is, of course, the possibility that nothing passes and we find ourselves facing the same debates at the General Conference in 2020.

So what do we do now?

First and foremost, we wait and try to be as non-anxious as possible. For all the plans mentioned above, except the Simple Plan, there is a detailed plan on implementation of new policies and there will be ample time to fret over "what comes next" when one of the plans does actually pass.

Second, be careful what media coverage you rely upon. Major media outlets notoriously lack nuance when covering General Conferences, and clickbait headlines do a poor job at capturing the in's-and-out's of a very complicated situation. When in doubt, ask a pastor or someone you know who is in the know, or look for official UM communication before relying on the quickly-typed analysis of a blogger (...says the blogger).

Lastly, for now, we continue to be the Church. I imagine in most our churches, this General Conference is not the most important event on our calendar coming up. Stewardship campaigns, winter retreats, mission projects, etc. are all in the forefront of our minds and should remain there.

God has called each and every one of us to be about life-changing, world-transforming ministry in our homes, our neighborhoods, our communities, and our other circles of influence. That anointing is true yesterday, today, and tomorrow, regardless of votes and amendments and everything else.

So we can pray for the 864 delegates, and we can remain informed, and we can hold on to hope in this season of Epiphany, knowing that God's Spirit is very much alive, and despite its faults, the UMC is very much alive as well. May God's Sprit continue to find a home within our denomination.