April 9, 2024
By Rev. Dr. Scott Field
“Having heard all of this you may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say you did not know.” – William Wilberforce, Speech to the House of Commons, 1791.
William Wilberforce, member of British Parliament, champion contending for the abolition of the British slave trade in the 18th century, was very clear that when facing an injustice, whether global in scale or in the realm of personal relationships, a choice must be made by the person or persons who can right the wrong.
A Wilberforce Moment has arrived for the General Conference delegates.
Let’s be clear: the question of whether provisions for congregational and annual conference disaffiliation will be extended to Central Conferences, including Africa, is of a much, much smaller scale than the abolition of the British slave trade. That is obvious.
But there is also an obvious connection in knowing about an injustice, having power to correct the injustice, and choosing to do nothing about it.
So, what do we know about the General Conference meeting this month?
African Voices Will Be Suppressed; African Votes Will Not be Counted
There is widespread and uneasy awareness that African voices and votes will be suppressed at the coming UM General Conference. Whether by design, default, or unintended and unexpected consequences, here are the facts:
General Conference letters of invitation to African delegates were late in being sent. Consequently, many African delegates have struggled to get visa interview appointments. Some have been unable to get appointments at all. Others have attempted to get visas by traveling US Embassies/Consulates in other African nations. Of those delegates who have applied for visas, many are being denied.
For the cases where delegate visas have been denied, few letters have been sent to alternate delegates and those that have been sent have arrived only recently. Again, as a result, the only visa interview appointments available now are far past the General Conference dates. Any visa approvals for alternates seem unlikely even if they have a letter of invitation to the General Conference.
Beyond the visa conundrum, as of this writing (April 6) our contacts in Africa indicate that for the African delegates who have received visas, few have been notified of any travel arrangements secured by the General Conference for their attendance in Charlotte.
At the current rate, I estimate that perhaps 70-80 of the expected 275 African delegates will be absent. That represents 29% of the African delegates whose voice will not be heard and whose vote will not be counted.
UMC Leaders/Influencers in the US oppose any disaffiliation option for African United Methodists…or any other United Methodists
Bishop Thomas Bickerton, currently president of the UM Council of Bishops, has declared that the UMC needs to turn the page on any further congregational disaffiliations. Bishop Bickerton told the rest of the Council of Bishops, “I admit to you I’m eager to get past all this. I want us to stop talking about disaffiliations.”
MainstreamUMC and other progressive UMC influencers recognize that in pursuit of their “Three R’s Legislative Agenda” at General Conference, the UMC might lose Africa and The Philippines. Posting a “win” for their legislative priorities (The “Three R’s”: Regionalization of the Denomination, Revised Social Principles which redefines marriage, and Removing restrictive language regarding homosexuality) seems a foregone conclusion since many conservative delegates from the US have left the UMC and the number of African delegates will be suppressed.
Beyond a calculation that dismisses African and Filipino United Methodists as collateral damage in pursuit of the Three R’s Agenda, MainstreamUMC and the coalition of other progressive caucus groups demand that there be no votes at all affirming any extension of disaffiliation under anywhere.
The Current Fiction of Centrists and Progressives
Centrist and Progressives have promoted a fiction that the Book of Discipline already includes a provision for Central Conferences to leave the UMC. A DS on the Central Committee on Central Conference says so, per UM News Service.
What is left unsaid is the provision in question (par. 572) refers to the process through which areas of the UMC can become autonomous Methodist denominations. This specifically retains authority for the UMC to determine if the “statement of faith” and the plan of organization of the group is acceptable to the UMC. It does not provide for disaffiliation by individual congregations and, importantly, requires the “statement of faith” and the “plan of organization” to be approved by the other annual conferences in the Central Conference, by the Central Conference itself, by the General Commission on Central Conferences, and by the General Conference of the UMC. This process is labyrinthine in the extreme and may take 6-8 years…with all authority and agency in the hands of the UMC.
Besides, not one Annual Conference in Africa or the Philippines has asked to become an “autonomous Methodist church.” They have asked for the option of congregational disaffiliation that, to this point, has be reserved to the USA exclusively.
Disaffiliation is on the Agenda of General Conference. Will any petition be allowed to see the light of day?
The question of whether disaffiliation provisions will be extended is on the General Conference agenda. A quick search of the online Daily Christian Advocate identifies 19 petitions on paragraph 2553 (which was to end last December 31). There are other petitions proposing new disciplinary authorizations for churches and annual conferences to separate from the UMC.
The United Methodist Guidebook to the Postponed 2020 General Conference, in its section on “major issues” to be considered by delegates, includes this:
The coming General Conference faces a handful of petitions to extend Paragraph 2553, so that it can continue to apply in the U.S. and expand to churches in the central conferences. Another petition sets forth a process for churches that seek to reaffiliate with The United Methodist Church. (p. 25)
However, with the Council of Bishops, who lead each legislative session of the General Conference, wanting to “turn the page”, and the centrist/progressives who are committed to defeat anything related to disaffiliation, along with the suppression of African delegates for whom the option of congregational disaffiliation would be a means of local choice, it seems likely that disaffiliation proposals will be buried.
No one will put it that plainly, of course, but what other conclusion can be drawn?
Parliamentary maneuvers will be deployed to keep disaffiliation off the agenda; petitions will be put down in legislative committees and consequently will not be considered by the plenary session. Disaffiliation options might also be sequestered on the island of unaddressed petitions because, well, because the General Conference did not have enough time to consider them before adjourning on May 3rd.
That could well be the case.
You might think no one will see, but it will be obvious to all United Methodists and the larger world. Our team in Charlotte purposefully has African United Methodists who are coming as observers because they want to be able to report directly to their congregations “back home” how they are treated by The United Methodist Church.
The media will be in Charlotte, too.
Headline in the Sunday news of May 5?
“United Methodists approve same-sex marriage; deny Africans freedom to choose their future.”
The WCA’s Fair for Some Fair for All initiative is based on the expectation that there are and will be General Conference delegates who prefer justice to political tribalism in the church and will, given the opportunity, vote to allow United Methodists outside the USA to choose their future. Perhaps the same might be allowed for UM congregations in America which have been told by their Annual Conference officials to “wait until after General Conference before you make any decisions about the future.” That is a cruel irony if, after the General Conference, no option for genuine consideration and decision-making has been made available to them.
William Wilberforce pointed out to the members of parliament in 1791 that even if nobody knew how they voted, they must contend with their own conscience. What if you have the opportunity and the ability to correct an injustice and purposefully refuse to do so?
A Wilberforce Moment has arrived for the UM General Conference and each of its delegates.
“Having heard all of this you may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say you did not know.” – William Wilberforce, Speech to the House of Commons, 1791.
_____________________________________________________________________
Many, many thanks to all who have supported our Fair for Some Fair for All Campaign. Your generosity is amazing! Thank you for your partnership.