On to the Book of Resolutions....

One little-known fact about the United Methodist Church is that we have a publication which is updated every four years called The Book of Resolutions. It's not a little book - it's a significant tome, filled with resolutions on social issues.

In truth, as a United Methodist minister, I have found that when I introduce The Book of Resolutions in a Bible study or Sunday school, most of the people in the class tell me they had no idea that this book existed. They wonder if the resolutions are binding - do you have to agree to be a Methodist? You do not. Do clergy have to agree to maintain our credentials? We do not.

So why do we have this book? From the Book of Resolutions, pp. 24-26:

The resolutions say, "We care!" Delegates to the General Conference of The United Methodist Church believe that we each need and deserve the guidance of the whole denomination as we face daily hopes, struggles, joy, or pain. The resolutions and Social Principles express our Church community's beliefs and give us evidence that the Church means for God's love to reach into situations faced each day, not just on Sunday mornings. Not all of us are intimately involved with each issue, but someone, somewhere, is. 

So today, we began debating social issues that may or may not be included (or amended) in our Book of Resolutions. We're Methodists. It's what we do.

The first petition came from the Church and Society A Committee:

Petition 20138 (p. 222) calls for Opposition to Israeli Settlements in Palestinian Land. In the words of the Committee Chair, this petition advocates "an end of military occupation and full respect of human rights of all under international law."

This petition calls for certain actions to be taken by all nations, and all United Methodists in the U.S. The petition explicitly does not support a boycott of products made in Israel, but does oppose import of products made by Israeli companies operating in occupied Palestinian territories. It also recommends that all United Methodists read a Kairos Palestine document, written by Palestinian Christians, and "take up its call for nonviolent actions seeking an end to military occupation."

The C&S A committee overwhelmingly supported adoption of this petition: 50-14.

However, there was a sufficient number of people who disagreed with this decision to form a Minority Report (Calendar item 439). A proponent of the Minority Report stated, "We will not participate in any activity that isolates or demonizes the other." He went on to say that we must instead support moves that will help Israel & Palestine sit down and forge a political solution. Boycotts undermine these attempts for peace. Boycotting is punitive. We must return to the table and look for another solution. A positive investment approach is the better approach. Those who signed the minority report believe we must have clear language that leads to trust-building, and this language is missing in the Book of Resolutions.

After discussion on both sides, the motion to substitute the minority report was defeated: 45% for minority report/54% against minority report. Unfortunately, there was some concern that not all delegates understood what they were voting for. This may sound irresponsible, but I can assure you that these votes are not always easy to understand. Flipping between the ADCA and the DCA so you can review the petition, the amended petition, and the substitute petition while trying to keep up with the discussion on the floor requires a high degree of concentration. If you miss the bishop's voting instructions, you can become confused as to what a "yes" vote means. Still, the instructions were clearly given and the vote was taken. The complaint that was lifted after the vote was ruled out of order.

So we went on to debate the original petition.

Speeches for:

Church & Society A
committee member shows
map of how possession of land
has shifted over the years.

• Financial statistics from the U.S. State Department reveal that far, far more money is spent on military support of Israel than of Palestine.

• We have a long-standing tradition in our church. We stand with the marginalized people. This act of divestment is an act in solidarity with those who are suffering.

• We must accompany our words with actions. One way we can do this is through divestment. This is a moral and nonviolent action. We have seen the results of divestment in making changes against apartheid in S. Africa. This goes back to our Methodist tradition: there is no holiness but social holiness; there is no religion but social religion. We cannot use our resources to enhance the suffering of other people. [note: It was pointed out in another speech that divestment is not called for in this petition. This petition does call for a boycott, which is different.]

Speeches against:

• A speech against says that the church should not be involved in politics. The Prince of Peace will bring peace to the land - this is not our job. 

• This is not a simple issue - this is an extremely complex, regional issue. If we support this petition, we are only adding fuel to the fire - we are not hitting the issue here, at all.

• We have a method in our Book of Resolutions for establishing boycotts. We are not following this method. (This was proposed as a point of order, but was counted as a speech against, since it does not question the Rules of General Conference.)

We heard wrap-up comments from the Church & Society A committee: This petition is simply our willingness to cry with our brothers and sisters in Palestine. We cannot solve this problem, but we can share in their grief.

And then we voted: the body voted to support the petition and encourage countries and Methodists to accompany our words with actions.

Clearly, not all agree with this decision. This is not a new phenomenon! But it will be stated, as the committee recommended, in our Book of Resolutions. And the Resolutions will continue to be instructive, but not binding.

Many have questioned why we have this book. Certainly, debating issues such as these can take a lot of time on the floor. But I, for one, am glad to be a part of a denomination that cares enough to recognize and debate these issues. I am glad that United Methodists stand with a long line of People called Methodists who are willing to raise our concerns about social issues, engage in debate, and speak our mind about how we understand responsible Christian living.

Note: This issue was followed on the floor by an extremely emotional debate about divestment. I wish I could give details on all our deliberations; but I have to admit my limitations. I hope this post gives you some idea of the process, the issues, and the arguments that are put forth as we debate social issues at General Conference.