Rules!

 On our first night together, the evening’s agenda ended with the Adoption of the Rules of the Conference. These rules govern how we conduct our proceedings. They include definitions of who can and cannot vote, who can and cannot sit “in the bar” (with the delegates on the floor of Conference), don’t let your cell phone ring, don’t record anything for copyright purposes, etc. They are, in a word, tedious - there’s just no way around that.

 Since General Conference last met, a committee has worked to go through the rules with a fine- tooth comb and amend/delete/add anything that they believed would be an improvement for this GC. Attention was given to items that could cut down the amount of time delegates spend considering legislation. Financial considerations were also at the forefront. Delegates received the proposed Rules a couple of months ago. Doubtless, many have also gone over the changes with a fine-tooth comb. So...the Rules were presented in a very civil manner, and we walked through them, with the intent that they would be approved in small chunks until we got to the end. Sadly, this did not happen.

 Early on in the proceedings, people began to raise objections and offer amendments to the Rules. There was a lot of concern about defining who could come into the bar and putting closely-written restrictions on when and why the Presiding Bishop could call for an unscheduled recess. I believe this concern (which was mentioned multiple times at various points of the evening) comes from fear that a demonstration such as the one that occurred in 2008 GC would happen again. In 2008 in Fort Worth, a large number of people (delegates and non-delegates, clergy and lay) came onto the floor of Conference wearing black stoles to protest the church’s stance on homosexuality. Tonight, much energy was put into amending the Rules so that demonstrations like this explicitly could not happen again. The problem with amendments to the Rules is that they are supposed to be given to the committee for consideration and then not acted upon for 24 hours.

 Early on, it was agreed that the committee (bless them!) would stay up late to deal with the amendments so we could then approve them in the morning. This is necessary because we need the Rules in place before we can get on with our administrative work. Another problem with amendments is that you are not allowed to speak to them - they just go back to the committee. Now, this is good and bad. It is definitely good in that you can’t make an amendment and then give a lengthy speech for your amendment and then take 2 speeches for and 2 against before closing the matter and sending it to committee (an extremely time-consuming process, particularly considering the number of amendments proposed). But it’s bad in that you obviously have a rationale for making your amendment, but you can’t give your fabulous rationale to the committee. So, basically, the people who made the rule are asked to revise the rule without being given any new information on why the revision should occur.

 Based on my experience so far, I think the good far outweighs the bad on this one. So, we took these amendments and gave them to the committee; then we proceeded with the next section, which, inevitably drew more amendments. At one point, a motion was made that we suspend the rule that says we can’t speak to the amendment. But this did not pass. There was, however, considerable discussion on the rules related to suspending the Rules. This went on for some (long, very long) time. Finally, a motion was made that we invoke a rule that said we could just get on and be done with the Rules. (The rule in question said that we had to finish our work by 9:30. It was nearly 10:00 when the rule was invoked.) Sadly, it was ruled that, since we had not yet approved the rule that would allow us to be done with the Rules, we had to keep forging on.

 Finally, it was somehow agreed that we would send all amendments to the committee to hash it out. I did, most certainly, pray for the Rules Committee members as I walked out of the Conference Center and made the trek back to my hotel. I must admit that my enthusiasm for General Conference was a bit bruised in the proceedings. Not only was this process tedious and such an incredible “downer” after the joy of opening worship, but it was clear, even to me - a first-time delegate - that these amendments are proposed to further particular agendas. Take the issue of who can enter the bar, for example. This Rule is truly quite straightforward. It does not appear to need further illumination. And yet, it was the subject of much concern. In place of a simple sentence, a paragraph was proposed (in multiple places). I just cannot support making more restrictive rules that don’t really do anything to make the original rule more effective. It seems like those proposing the rule were just trying to send a clear signal to any would-be protesters that such things will not be tolerated at this GC. And this point is being made at the expense of a lot of people’s time.

 As I see it, the bar is, per the rules, reserved only for delegates and pages and this rule should be respected. But, honestly, how much harm is done by a peaceful demonstration (wherever it occurs) versus the amount of harm done in adding lines and lines of legislation to ensure (quite impractically) that such a thing could never occur? I don’t know for sure, but I imagine we spent more time haranguing this issue in plenary session than was spent on the demonstration that prompted such concern. To follow a hope-filled worship with a spate of attempts to tighten up legislation in ways that seem rooted in suspicion and fear of losing control - well, it wasn’t the best way to end the day, and I’m afraid it doesn’t bode well for the tone of future legislative discussions. Still, all in all, it is great to be here. And it is a privilege that I deeply appreciate.

 I am thankful for the clergy of the CTC who elected me to this position. To stand among so many brothers and sisters of the UMC on the floor of Conference for opening worship tonight was exciting and hopeful and humbling. Rules will be rules - it's still great to be Methodist!