The Bombshell You May Have Missed

There was a firestorm on social media yesterday when Mainstream UMC released a letter they obtained from the North Alabama Chapter of the WCA. The letter is real. It has been independently verified and there has been no denial that I'm aware of. Honestly, there is nothing in the letter that was surprising to read. It largely confirmed what many of us deeply involved in preparations for General Conference already knew. It's just disturbing to see it in print. Here are the major takeaways along with the important pieces that you may have missed. If you don't read all of this please skip to the last point. It's the single most important point the letter makes that you may have missed.

We already knew: The WCA is serious about leaving if they don't get their way. We already knew that if the One Church Plan (OCP) passed that the WCA would form a new denomination. That has been in writing before. The letter also says there is a 70% chance that they will leave "if the special General Conference adopts neither the One Church Plan nor the Modified Traditional Plan, or adopts a Traditional Plan with no enhanced accountability provisions." I'm told by people who would know that the 70% figure is speculation on the part of the author. This single statement is the only item in the entire letter that I've seen refuted.

You may have missed: The Judicial Council ruling in October stripped the Traditional Plan of most of the accountability mechanisms. The only fix that I'm aware of is given in this article by Tom Lambrecht. This fix has two major flaws that I'll try to attend to at another time (In short, it still may not be constitutional and it creates a major problem for Central Conferences). But the point for now is that even the Modified Traditional Plan needs new legislation that we haven't seen in order to add "enhanced accountability" that the North Alabama WCA says is essential for them to stay. Some argue that the OCP is not a compromise. At least the proponents of the OCP are willing to talk about it as a compromise. This letter shows just how firm the WCA is in their unwavering commitment to getting precisely what they want or leaving.



We already knew: the WCA knows that they don't have the votes to pass the Traditional Plan (TP). This has not been said out loud before, but virtually every article and blog we've seen published in the last month has reinforced this. Their focus has been on the problems with the OCP, selling us on the Connectional Conference Plan, and/or telling us how important an exit plan is. I don't think it is fair to say that the TP is dead on arrival, but it is on life support. The leadership knows this and has made it clear by where they are putting their energy.

You may have missed: This is why the "gracious exit" is so important for the WCA. Please remember that the Traditional Plan includes a gracious exit for progressives that 1) the progressives never asked for and 2) contains a giant loophole that lets the WCA leave also. Petition 10 for the Traditional Plan (#41 if you have the ADCA) says churches, etc. may leave if "it is in irreconcilable conflict...on issues of human sexuality, or with the way such requirements are being enforced..." Note that this is the same kind of language used in the North Alabama WCA letter. If the accountability that they are seeking is not in place (and by their own admission it probably will not be) then they will most likely exit. If the TP's exit provision is passed then they have exactly the exit plan that they need. This is important. If the first item we tackle at General Conference is an exit plan then the remainder of General Conference will include planning for a future that some of the delegates have no intent to be part of. 



We already knew: The WCA is well organized. They have an executive meeting already scheduled for the days immediately following General Conference and they have a tentative meeting planned the week after Easter to organize a new denomination. It makes sense to be prepared, and they have done this. We should have no animosity towards them for this.

You may have missed: The WCA is organized for an exit. Here's the key sentences: "We urge churches and pastors to participate in the convening conference if necessary and to take steps to withdraw in concert with one another. The WCA will be providing counsel throughout this period and will provide steps for churches and pastors to follow in transitioning from the UM Church to what is next if that is needed. A team of legal strategists will provide overall strategic advice." The WCA is preparing for a mass exodus, including having attorneys ready to go. The response to this is "Why wouldn't we be organized like this? Every group should be." I disagree. I have made no preparations in case I decide to divorce my wife. Because I'm committed to her. That's not what you do when you are committed to a person or an organization. In 2015 an elder in the Great Plains Conference surrendered his credentials at Annual Conference. It felt like a big deal. He brought his framed certificate with him just in case we voted the way he thought we would vote on a key issue so that he could make a big spectacle of surrendering his credentials. It was a charade. Nobody hires a divorce attorney if they are not planning on divorce. Nobody comes to Annual Conference with their credentials in hand unless they already plan to turn them in. Nobody lines up the attorneys and "legal strategists" to leave the denomination unless you plan to leave.

And the most critical piece that you may have missed: This is the real bombshell in the letter. This is the one part that surprised me and that is most disappointing. The exodus will happen no matter what we decide at General Conference. 

We already knew that there was at least one member of the WCA executive board who guided his church out of the denomination. The WCA never removed him or discouraged him. Now listen to this word for word quote from the letter: If the special General Conference adopts the Modified Traditional Plan with the enhanced accountability provisions, there still may be churches which are intent on departing from the United Methodist Church. The WCA will work with those churches to transition into a new Methodist movement. Those churches which indicate a desire to be part of something new will be invited to a convening conference. Other churches would be given the opportunity to move to what is new at a later time, if they decided that became advisable."

Even if we get precisely what we want, there will still be churches (like that of the person mentioned above) that choose to leave. "The WCA will work with those churches to transition into a new Methodist movement." and "Other churches would be given the opportunity to move to what is new at a later time..."

Friends, it does not get clearer than that. The radical right in the UMC is leaving. Period. Some say that the One Church Plan will lead to their departure. That is not true. They have already announced their departure. Some say adopting the Connectional Conference Plan will keep them in the fold. That is not true. They have already announced their departure. The question for the rest of the UMC, and for General Conference, is whether we should give the radical right permission to take others with them. I'm not inclined to do that.

The CCP Is (and should be) DOA

In the lead up to General Conference we've seen renewed interest in the Connectional Conference Plan (CCP). It should be noted that virtually every person who has written favorably of the CCP is publicly associated with the Wesleyan Covenant Association (WCA), Good News, or both. Every indication points to the Traditional Plan leadership understanding that they do not have the votes to pass their plan or the (largely identical) Modified Traditional Plan. Advocating for the CCP appears to be an attempt to siphon votes and momentum away from the One Church Plan (OCP). You shouldn't fall for it.

But first, an argument in favor of the CCP. I genuinely appreciate the Commission on a Way Forward spending time and energy on a creative plan that deliberately avoids any perception of winners and losers. At a different time I think I could have advocated for this plan. I appreciate that, like the OCP the CCP gives space for differences of opinion. I appreciate that it gives us more flexibility from an unfortunately large and burdensome Book of Discipline. Following, though, are some fatal flaws that make it Dead on Arrival at General Conference.

1. The CCP Simply Cannot Pass

On the day in 2016 when General Conference broke I'm convinced that nothing of  substance could get a majority vote. Time has passed and now I do think a majority could vote for the right plan. But the CCP has 8 constitutional amendments that require a super-majority. That's just not going to happen. But what if somehow it did? For the CCP to take effect it has to be approved not only by General Conference, but by a 2/3 aggregate vote of the annual conferences. Remember that in 2016-17 we couldn't get a 2/3 vote on women's rights. If we can't get 2/3 agreement on that it is unfathomable that we would get a 2/3 vote on all of the CCP amendment.

2. The CCP Has Not Been Fully Vetted

Last October the Judicial Council ruled on the constitutionality of both the OCP and the TP. Their rulings are one reason why the TP now is struggling so much. They did not, however, review the CCP. As mentioned above, the authors of the CCP have identified 8 constitutional amendments that are needed. There is no guarantee, however that those are the only amendments needed. It is very conceivable that if the CCP somehow got the requisite vote at General Conference the Judicial Council would then rule it is still unconstitutional. We've then completely wasted time and money and are back to drawing board in 2020.

3. The CCP Timeline Is Unworkable

 The published timeline for implementation of the CCP shows that it will not be fully implemented until 2025. We have two general conferences between now and then. We have six more years for voting patterns to shift and for culture to shift. The WCA has vowed to leave if anything other than the Traditional Plan passes. If they stay true to that then we could have a very different church in the next 6 years. At a time when most of us recognize that institutions need to be more nimble the CCP locks us into one mode for the next 6 years.

4. It Is the Separation Before the Divorce

This has been my chief complaint from the beginning. The thesis of the CCP is  that we have so many theological differences that the only way forward as one denomination is to separate ourselves into three mini-denominations segregated by theology. Note first that this is precisely the same way that American society has segregated itself politically. The result of our political segregation is political extremism and animosity towards those who we disagree with. The CCP institutionalizes echo chambers that we speak into at a time when we especially need to listen to those we disagree with. The echo chambers will simply reinforce what we already believe, reinforce our stereotypes, and ultimately drive us further away from each other. 

In his 2008 book Staying at the Table, Bishop Scott Jones wrote that "liberals need conservatives and conservatives need liberals." He's right. This is what the One Church Plan provides. The CCP isolates us from each other before an inevitable divorce. Don't let that happen.