Lord, We Need Your Help

Today, our District Superintendent Ginger Bassford presented at a lunch for authors of the Adaptive Leadership Series published by Abingdon Press. Her book is called, Lord, I love the Church and We Need Help. It seems an apt title to describe my feelings after our first day of plenary.

The work of General Conference is, as I've mentioned, messy. (My friend Clay Andrew compares crafting legislation to sausage-making here.) Petitions are earnestly written, often after years of discussion, debate and despair. Every four years, our Book of Discipline "opens up" for change. And individuals, churches, boards, agencies, seminary professors, clergy, laity, students and others submit their petitions in hopes that the church will adopt a new way of being.

These petitions are far too unwieldy for the entire body of the General Conference to deal with. So they are assigned to committees. These bodies, too, are too large. So each committee is divided into sub-committees. These small groups each take a portion of the petitions and discern how they should be handled. (In my committee, Ministry & Higher Ed, this work was done in sub-sub-committees.) Some petitions are deemed "no brainers" for acceptance or rejection. A list is made. Others are a group of similar petitions that all deal with the same paragraph of the Discipline. These are considered together, and usually one is chosen in favor of the others, which are rejected. Perhaps pieces of the rejected petitions are amended into the surviving petition. Or perhaps a substitute petition is offered in favor of the others. Other petitions are referred to a different committee. And so it goes. As I've said, it's tedious work. Since our first level of scrutiny occurred at the sub-sub level, we then met as a sub-committee to present and approve/reject our petitions.

After the sub-committees have vetted the petitions, the committee meets as a plenary group to review the petitions. The sub-committee chair presents the ones that were recommended for approval. If these receive unanimous approval of the committee, they are immediately sent to the consent calendar for consideration by the plenary on the floor of Conference. If the petition is approved, but the vote is not unanimous, the petition goes in a different section of the Daily Christian Advocate for consideration on the floor. It is noted how many voted for and against the petition.

If a petition is rejected, this is also noted in the DCA (with the number of votes). And if the committee ran out of time before they could consider the petition (even if it had been considered by the sub-sub and sub-committees) - well, it just dies. It is noted on the DCA that the petition was not reviewed and no action is taken.

From here, a number of things can happen. If a petition is voted down or does not make it out of committee, you can resurrect it on the floor of Conference if you get 20 voting delegates to sign a petition requesting that the petition come to the floor. We've seen a bit of that today.

If the committee makes a decision for or against a petition and you are on the committee and you voted the opposite direction from the committee's decision, you can file a minority report. This requires fewer signatures, and I believe they all have to be from members of the committee who also voted in the opposite direction.

CTC Delegates Ed Komandosky (lay), Carolyn Stephens (lay),
Kim Simpson (lay) and Debra Crumpton (clergy)
participate in Holy Conferencing to discuss
the future of our denomination.

Exhausted yet? We haven't even made it to plenary!

Until today.

Today, on the floor of Conference, we went through the grueling process described in my previous post. We spent precious minutes debating and deliberating petitions that have already made it through at least two levels of legislative bodies (in the case of my committee, three levels). It can be disheartening work. At best, we work to perfect a petition that needs some tweaking. At worst, we argue and debate and try to spin our speeches to get our way.

We had a lot of "worst" moments on the floor today. I'm far too tired to try to relate them all here, but I will ask for your prayers.

Remember the Call to Action Report? How about Plan B? Both of these (plus a third plan proposed by the Methodist Federation for Social Action - MFSA) could not gain enough support to make it out of the General Administration committee. Our Rules (remember The Rules?) require us to end our work at 9:30 p.m. each night, so debating into the wee hours is not an option. And so, in a difficult and dramatic evening Saturday night, all plans for restructuring our church came off the table - none made it out of committee.

So Sunday was spent by some regrouping and coming up with a plan that can (hopefully) pass. Only this time, it won't be one committee hashing it out - it will be all 988 of us. And, if today is any indication, it won't be pretty.

The new plan that is getting a lot of buzz is "Plan UMC." I have no idea what it holds, but I pray we can see a way through. (I am encouraged by the leadership of Rev. Don Underwood of the North Texas Conference, so am hopeful that this plan will work.)

The truth is, the UMC must change if we are to continue to be an effective, missional denomination. And we want to be an effective, missional denomination. My attention has been so taken up with Ministry & Higher Education matters that I really can't say what this new plan should hold. But I know we need one.

A highlight of the day was a performance by
the Africa University Choir. Amen!

And I know that we do not seem to be a very united church as we vote on the floor. Clear divisions based on fierce protection of doctrinal standards (that cannot simply be reduced to debates over homosexuality) and - dare I say - distrust and fear are causing delegates to draw lines in the sand.

In some subcommittees, it was evident that some of our Central Conference (international) delegates were taking their cues from other (U.S.) delegates in the room. There seems little doubt that there is a lot of politicking going on. And I'm not sure that the will that is sought in all of this is truly God's will.

We may discuss Plan UMC tomorrow. Or we might spend another day getting caught up in the minutiae of debating, amending and trying to reject too few petitions that have already passed committee.

We only have four days left. And then it's over. The Discipline will "close" and we'll live for another four years with the decisions that have been made. We will also have to live without whatever decisions are left on the floor.

Lord, I love the church and we need help. I invite and encourage your prayers for the UMC. We have a vital mission, we have a heart for mission and social justice and a voice that needs to be heard in this world today. Lives are changed and saved, in every sense, through the ministries of this denomination. I pray we will find a way to move forward.

May God's will be done

A Word About Voting

Voting: it's the meat of what gets done at General Conference. All the work of the petition writers, the sub-committees, and the committees is done so that the plenary of voting delegates on the floor can vote on the petitions and thus change (or not change) the official position and rules of the United Methodist Church.

Pretty important stuff, right?

Now take into consideration the reality that 988 voting delegates are sitting at round tables, spread out on the floor of the Tampa Bay Convention Center. The Presiding Bishop sits at one end of the room and has the task of recognizing the people who wish to speak at a microphone. Let me also mention that the lighting in this room is poor at best. This should help you understand that getting the Bishop's attention on the floor is extremely difficult - especially if you are at the back of the room.

Each voting delegate is given three pieces of paper to use to get the Bishop's attention. Green means you want to speak "for" something. Orange means you want to speak "against" something. White means you have a question. Your job, as a person anxious to speak, is to sit at your seat and wave your paper wildly until the Bishop recognizes you. Once recognized, you go to a microphone, where you are allowed to speak for no more than 3 minutes (a big traffic light in at the front helps keep time - if you are close enough to see it).

A delegate holds up his green card to speak "for" an action.

If you are standing at the microphone, you must remember to speak slowly and clearly, so the translators (remember the 41% international delegates?) can do their job. If you don't speak slowly and clearly, you might be asked to start over at the beginning and repeat your speech. This requires a lot of patience for the body.

Now, Robert's Rules rule the day here at General Conference. So voting (while parliamentarily correct) is rarely straightforward. Typically, a petition is offered, and an amendment is made. The amendment is then open for debate. Speeches are limited to two speeches for, two speeches against. Questions don't count as speeches (although, make no mistake, they usually are!). Sometimes (read: often), an amendment to the amendment is proposed. When this happens, we start again with "two for, two against." And so on, and so on, and so on. Eventually, we either get back to the original petition or we vote on the amended petition (sometimes after it has been amended numerous times).

It's a messy process, to be sure. It's easy to be critical of it, it's easy to get impatient with it, and it's easy to say that we're losing our spiritual focus as we get mired in parliamentary (and political) details. But we are a global church. To have only 988 delegates representing the UMC at this time is pretty spartan, as it is. And to hope to find agreement among so many people...well, it's messy, but it gets the job done.

I just hope we're getting it done according to God's will for the UMC. Prayers are appreciated and necessary. Thank you!

Go, Tim!

Our own Tim Bruster, Senior Pastor of FUMC Fort Worth, has been nominated by the Council of Bishops for the Judicial Council of the UMC.  This is a very big honor, and our entire delegation strongly supports Tim's election.

We're going to vote on these nominations soon. There are nine clergy on the ballot, and we will choose two.

However, before we can do this, we have to be sure that we all understand how to use the voting machine. This is not going well. We are on Round Three of voting for our Favorite Apostle. I like Thomas and Simon. I hope they win!

***

Oops! On Round Five of testing the voting machines, I am required to vote for Peter. I feel coerced.

***

Peter wins! We can get on with real voting.

***

We have an election! Two Lay Members are chosen: Oswald Tweh and Beth Capen.

***

Setback - Alternate Lay Delegate vote in question. Much math confusion....

***

J Kabamba Kiboko and Dennis L. Blackwell are voted in as Clergy Members. This is disappointing to me, because I wasn't voting for them, and I don't know anything about them. Ah, well. On to alternate clergy members....

***

Yay! Tim Bruster receives 94% of the votes as first alternate clergy member for Judicial Council!

And the Votes are Taken...

...and the vote fails.

Set-Aside Bishop

Here I am, hard at work on the floor of General Conference!
Laptop: check; ipad: check; iPhone: check

Big discussion happening on the floor right now about whether or not we will decide to have a "set-aside" Bishop in our Council of Bishops. This would mean that the President of the Council of Bishops would not have an episcopal jurisdiction. Currently, our Council of Bishops has a President who also serves as the Bishop of a particular conference. As President, this Bishop has additional responsibilities that take up about 25% of their time. If this petition passes, we will approve a Bishop who will be "set-aside" to do the  administrative work of the Council of Bishops. However, this will require a change to our Constitution, which means that it will have to be approved by 2/3 of the Annual Conferences. Therefore, if we vote to do this, it will not be official unless the Annual Conferences approve it this summer. (whew!)

An amendment to the petition was made that suggested that we create a study committee to study this possibility for the next four years and vote on it in 2016. Bishop Goodpaster, our most recent President, reminded us that 1968 General Conference did approve this action, but it was not retained when the merger was completed that created the United Methodist Church. It has been studied numerous times since. The amendment failed.

A new amendment was made for the Council of Bishops to create a committee to nominate a set-aside Bishop. This nominee would be elected by the body of General Conference every four years. One of the concerns about the current petition is that the Council of Bishops is given authority to decide who this President will be. This does not maintain the 50% lay/50% clergy balance that we usually require. In answer to this is the argument that clergy and laity elect the Bishops at the Jurisdictional level: if a set-aside Bishop is elected from the floor of General Conference, this Bishop will have greater authority than the other Bishops. It is not the intent of this petition to create a Bishop who has more authority, but one that can dedicate themselves to the administrative work of the episcopacy and help the Council do their work without sacrificing the quality of work they are able to do in their home conference. The amendment failed.

We're headed for recess. I'll keep you posted!

Getting Started With Committees

American delegates tend to wear travel-friendly black.
International delegates, who travelled much farther,
do not seem to ever wear black.

Committee work at General Conference is a fascinating, tedious and inconsistent task. Shortly after our election to General Conference last June, our delegation met via conference call to choose the committees that we would follow. There are 13 committees and 12 delegates, so our conference is not represented with a voice in one of the Church and Society committees. (Fortunately, we have Laura Whitley here as an alternate delegate to cover the proceedings of this committee. She can sit in, watch, take notes, etc. But she has no voice and no vote.) Our alternate delegates each chose a committee to "shadow," so our delegation could learn as much as possible about the proposed legislation.


 My committee is Ministry & Higher Ed. We handle issues related to ordination & appointment of clergy, some issues of clergy conduct, and issues related to our institutions of higher education (included Ministry Education Funds, which is one of our apportioned items.) I think our committee has the most petitions to consider, and we have been working hard to get through them all.

Lunch break with the delegation. We ran into a Bishop.
Can you spot the Bishop?

On our first day of committees, we met as a full group, with a Bishop presiding, to elect a chair, vice-chair, secretary and three sub-chairs. Elections went very smoothly. Bishop Marcus Matthews took nominations from the floor, then had all nominees come to the microphone for no more than one minute to share their name, clergy/lay status, conference and which Bible leader they identified with. Brilliant. I understand other committees' nominees were given time to talk about why they wanted to do this/why they should be chosen. I personally liked our method better - less focus on the leader and more focus on staying rooted in why we are here.

Elections go very fast. In very little time, we had elected David Bard as Chair, which has proven to be an excellent choice. The chair of the sub-committee I am working with is Rev. Amy Gearhart and this was also a very good choice. So far, so good.

We did take time to introduce ourselves as a whole group, which took a fair amount of time (there are over 80 people on the committee). It was good to get an idea of where everyone is from, to begin to learn something about our international delegates, and to start putting faces to names. It's such a huge process, but you have to start somewhere.

An infograph showing something like
how committees work & relate to the whole.
I haven't seen anything like this illustrating
our United Methodist procedure.
Maybe I'll get on this after I get home.

I was told before this began that the selection of the Chair and Sub-Chairs is critical, and I see that this is true. You have to have people who understand parliamentary procedure and who know how to keep things moving forward. They also have to ensure that we are letting all voices be heard and not allowing two or three people to debate the issues. When in danger of getting mired in details, the sub-chair has to know when to table something or move it to a smaller committee. I have heard from some of our other delegates that these gifts are not present in their sub-chairs, and their committee process has been painful.

I see many signs of positive affirmation
of the church's need
to recognize gifts of young people.

Some sub-chairs are fairly young and fairly inexperienced. This is not necessarily a problem, and it is in fact encouraged for young people to take leadership roles (in some committees). I was certainly encouraged as a first-time delegate to put my name forward for leadership (I did not, however, as I wanted to give my attention more to the issues than to the procedure). However, if a sub-committee chair is inexperienced and (dare I say) clueless, this can cause a train wreck. I am extremely thankful that we have such a competent leader in Amy Gearhart.

The future's so bright, she's got to wear shades.
Rev. Brenda Wier is sporting lovely pink
GC Commemorative sunglasses
from Cokesbury ($3.99!)

Our first order of business following elections was to divide into three sub-committees: one for higher ed. concerns, one for Study of Ministry concerns, and one for all other concerns. I chose the Ministry Study group, and was glad that we were able to self-select. Our sub-committee then divided into three sub-sub-committees and divided the petitions (we have well over 100 to consider in our sub-committee). Our sub-committee met to quickly vet the petitions and put them in different categories: those we had consensus on, those we thought the whole group should debate, those we wanted to reject, and those whose language was simply dependent on other legislation passing (i.e. If we do away with commissioning, petitions related to striking the word "commissioning" would pass; if we don't, they won't)

Again, this was a very positive experience. It's early in the process, but so far, this seems a pretty civilized way of going about the work of the church.

Ready to Get to Work!

On Wednesday morning, we were greeted at our tables with our Daily Christian Advocate. (You can find your online copy here, under General Conference Business.) This is a book, printed on newsprint, that is published each day with news of what important things were determined the previous day. Since there are 13 committees and each delegate can only sit on one committee, it is critical that the Daily Christian Advocate keep us all up to date on what is going on in each committee. That way, if you have concerns about the way certain legislation is being treated, you can create a strategy to work around a committee’s decision. (i.e. The new rules state that, if a petition is defeated in committee, you can resurrect it on the floor if you have 20 voting delegates who are willing to request it.)

Which brings us back to - The Rules. Sadly, Wednesday's DCA did not contain a full copy of The Rules, because they had not been adopted. So we returned to the Convention Center Wednesday with high hopes that we could move on this item quickly.

First, I am glad to say, we opened with worship. Bishop Peter Weaver preached. He quoted from the 1st Episcopal Address that was ever given in Conference, when Bishop McKendree admonished Methodists to “Do everything as in the immediate presence of God.” It’s worth taking some time to read that line again. Good thoughts. We also read Wesley’s Covenant Prayer, along with an updated version for our General Conference, which was pretty cool.

We also had a flash mob descend upon us for World Malaria Day. Kind of creepy, but also cool. 

Then, we had two more presentations. The first was the Laity Address, delivered by Betty Spiwe Katiyo of Zimbabwe. She reminded us that the ministry of the laity is a “front line” ministry because laity have access to areas the clergy do not. “Somewhere along the way,” she said, “laity became consumers of religion. And this is not the way it should be.” She then gave a challenge: if each lay person in the UMC brought just one person to Christ each year, the world would be transformed!

Finally, we had the Young People’s Address. The theme was “Charged, Rooted and United.” One of the speakers was a young woman from the Philippines who had to attend via video, since her visa to travel to the U.S. was denied. Both speakers were inspiring, as were the young people on the videos who shared how their faith kept them charged, rooted and united. My favorite quote from the address was, “How would you respond if God asked you, 'Have you done what I asked you to do for my people?'" Another highlight was a young woman who works with children. She said, “I tell them stories from the Bible because if you just say, ‘God loves you,’ they can’t always understand that.’” Young people are less likely to throw out words and phrases with a blanket expectation that they will mean something simply because they have been proclaimed. Finding purpose and meaning in what we do and say is important, and I am grateful for this reminder.

John Wesley is in the house!

After three positive, uplifting addresses, we had to get back to the business of The Rules. Truly, a veil should be drawn over the proceedings, which threatened to postpone indefinitely any proper start to our Conference! All hope for a quick resolution of our problem died when the first amendment was proposed. Remember the 24 hour rule? Well, how are we supposed to begin Conference if we can’t adopt the rules because we have to wait 24 hours to vote on them? What a mess! 

Finally, thankfully, Don Underwood from North Texas stood up and proposed that we suspend the rule that said we couldn't suspend the rules so we could suspend the rules and get on with the vote. Brilliant! The Rules then passed handily (yes, the original Rules that we began with the night before. Sigh.)


Ready to move on to committees!