Reflections on the 2008 General Conference

GENERAL CONFERENCE FEATURES Overview: Global Methodism in Ft. Worth

CONFERENCE COMMENTARY

United Methodist teambuilding: Acevedo

Looking to the future with hope: Hamilton

Hope shines through: Millard

God is beyond lobbying: Case

Priorities transcend differences: McCurry

The dilemma of 3 Simple Rules: Reisman

COLUMNS

Editorial Reflections on the 2008 General Conference

RENEW Women’s Network Aftermath

Culture in View To Be a Friend of Caspian

Next Generation Responding to Speakaphobia

The Great Commission Brokenness

From the Hear Prison Praise

Reflections on the 2008 General Conference

Those who attended the 2008 General Conference are still sorting out all that happened—good and bad, encouraging and discouraging. We hope this special General Conference issue of Good News will give you a better understanding of what took place. It was a mixed bag.

Good News was present with our Coalition for Renewal and Reform, made up of some 50 persons from The Confessing Movement, Good News, UMAction, Lifewatch, the Renew Network, and Transforming Congregations. The team worked tirelessly and we are indebted to them.

Our deep appreciation goes to the Rev. Tom Lambrecht, our Good News board chair, who led our coalition and provided outstanding briefings at our nine 7 a.m. breakfasts. On at least one occasion, Tom worked all night without sleep, assessing legislation and preparing his presentation.

We returned home grateful that the church preserved its present standards on homosexuality (see p. 14). They have served the church well for several decades and are consistent with two millennia of church teaching.

We are pleased that we improved the church’s statements on abortion, reformed and improved the complaint process against bishops, and committed $2 million to theological education and pastoral training in the Central Conferences. We welcome the constitutional amendment that would allow probationary members, associate members, and local pastors to vote for clergy delegates to General Conference.

Our biggest disappointment was the Judicial Council elections. None of the three evangelicals who have served ably for the past eight years were nominated by their bishops or elected for another term. Two of the nine on the new Council appear to be evangelical, with the others being either moderate or progressive. It remains to be seen how the new Council will rule in its handling of the Book of Discipline.

A matter left unexplained after the election of the new Council members was who exactly was responsible for a brochure placed on the desks of many delegates the morning of the elections. The goldenrod flier listed candidates who were “recommended by a politically unaffiliated group of fifty jurisdictional and central conference delegates” but didn’t say who these fifty were—it wasn’t signed. It simply appeared on the desks of many delegates. (A conference rule prohibits materials being placed on the desks of the delegates.) The flier’s two lay and three clergy recommended candidates were all elected, and in the order listed on the brochure. Following the elections, a delegate raised a question about the official-looking flier, but the report back was that no rule had been violated.

Then, with talk for some nine months that “holy conferencing” might characterize the Conference, it was seriously overlooked in Fort Worth. On our first trip into the Convention Center, we all were handed a nicely-printed small paper. It looked so appropriate—John Wesley’s stately photo was on the first page. Sadly, it was an attack on evangelicals and the various renewal groups. Sinister warnings were penned about those who seek “enforceable doctrines.” Tasteless cartoons portrayed evangelicals as tearing down Bible study, holy conferencing, and common sense with picks and sledge hammers. The paper was unsigned.

Holy conferencing also got put aside in the cell phone controversy (see article on p. 28). As you may know, the Renewal and Reform Coalition provided cell phones, as a hospitality gift, for Central Conference delegates. When others learned of this, the accusations flew furiously. The UM News Service released a story quoting no less than eight denominational officials (including three bishops) who accused our Coalition of a laundry list of violations: “vote-buying,” “bribery,” “paternalism,” “racism,” “manipulation,” etc. Sadly, none of the eight quoted had made any attempt to speak to any of our Coalition leaders before making their accusations. (The article did quote three Central Conference delegates who received a cell phone. They were grateful and said they felt no conditions or strings attached whatsoever.)

Then, we regret that a young seminarian became the spokesperson for 200 demonstrators on the floor of Conference (see p. 14) and stated that the church’s standards on homosexuality “are wrong and sinful in the sight of God.”

We look at all these experiences in light of the rules of holy conferencing and shake our head in disbelief. “Always speak respectfully. Avoid using inflammatory words. Accurately reflect the views of others when speaking, etc.”

The real hope and future of United Methodism rests in our faithful adherence to scriptural Christianity—a characteristic that marks United Methodism in Africa. Furthermore, Good News affirms the “Four Areas of Focus,” which we fear got overlooked in Fort Worth: 1. Develop clergy and lay leadership; 2. Start new churches and renew existing ones; 3. Combat poverty; and 4. Fight killer diseases. These can and should be implemented within the context of our rich Wesleyan heritage.

Click here to send your response plus the title of this article to us at Good News.