The Ecclesiastical Challenge

One of the frequent challenges to my critiques of the Global Methodist Church (GMC) is that everything about the GMC is still tentative - it could all be changed as early as the Convening Conference, which is likely to happen in 2023 or possibly 2024. It's frustrating - because we have to be able to make comparisons to something - and it's also fair - it is true that significant changes can be made.

The argument works the other way, too. Barring another pandemic, the United Methodist Church (UMC) meets every four years to enact changes. In fact, one of the rare statements that we all can agree with is that the structure of the church needs to change. The way that the two denominations address the need for change may become one of the defining differences between the UMC and GMC.

Command and Control

The Methodist movement in the United States began at the same time the nation was born. Historically, it makes sense that the church grew as the nation grew, experienced conflict when the nation experienced conflict (including today), and is governed in a similar way to how the nation is governed. Our legislative (General, Jurisdictional, and Annual Conferences), executive (bishops), and judicial (Judicial Council) branches have checks and balances just as the nation does. Our system of governance is in crisis - we just point fingers at different sides for who is most responsible for the crisis. That sentence is true both  for our secular and our church governance. We are, perhaps, entering a significant new era in both. 

First, some history. When the United States of America first formed, the emphasis was on the States, not America. Prior to the Civil War, the majority of literature spoke of the country in the plural. In other words, a person might write something like, "The United States of America are negotiating with England." After the Civil War, our national identity developed more. Today, even with all our differences, most of us in the U.S. understand ourselves as Americans first and citizens of our state second. 

Compare this to our structure. "The annual conference is the basic body in the Church..." Paragraph 33 of the Book of Discipline (BOD) has been engrained in my head for years. This is one reason that annual conferences may be able to leave the denomination without General Conference approval. As I understand it, legally there is no United Methodist Church that can, for example, sue or be sued. There is a network of annual conferences that have agreed to follow a set of rules and guidelines contained in the BOD.

But our structure has gradually become more Command and Control. Every new paragraph written for the BOD tightens the screws just a little more on the flexibility of our annual conferences and local churches. Over the decades, the BOD has become more and more comprehensive allowing for less flexibility on nearly every aspect of the church, with the notable exception of committee structures within the local church. It is, well, institutional.

The Road Diverges

Traditionalists often say that the root of our current crisis is in the authority of Scripture. I would argue there is another authority that is being challenged - the authority of our Command and Control structure. As we've seen before, we mirror the nation. Trust in authorities and institutions has been declining for decades. This is why I get annoyed with the complaint, "If they [progressives] just followed the Discipline this wouldn't be happening." I don't know any pastor who follows every letter of the Discipline. In fact, I guarantee that if you read that book from cover to cover every person in the UMC will find at least a couple places where they are not in compliance. So what's the solution to this reality? There are two.

One solution is enforcement. We hear it frequently, again from traditionalist leaders. The Traditional Plan at the 2019 General Conference was an ultimatum of enforcement. Enforcement is doubling down on the Command and Control approach. I encourage you to read my Buyer Beware series, particularly the posts on Bishops and Power. Verbally, we've been told that the GMC will reduce the power of bishops and centralized leadership and empower the local church. That's not the reality. In reality, a bishop can unilaterally remove a pastor or prevent a potential pastor from being ordained. In reality, a church that does not pay its full apportionments can be kicked out of the denomination with no recourse. The issue is that if the identified problem is misbehavior, you have to correct the misbehavior. The correction method that the GMC has chosen is enforcement and you can't enforce it if you don't have controls in place. Even if you disagree, I hope you can hear in this way those of us who are more progressive identify the traditionalist approach as one that focuses on law over grace.

An alternative is decentralizing power. Another key phrase we keep hearing: "In the UMC of the future, pastors will be forced to perform same-sex marriages!" First, I don't know anybody who wants to force a pastor to marry them, regardless of their sexual orientation. Second, there is literally nothing in the legislation that has been prepared that would force anyone to marry anybody. Nor, third, am I aware of any conversations among progressive or centrist leaders about forcing this. What we have consistently asked for is choice. But I understand where the question comes from. From a command and control standpoint, it makes complete sense. Command and control doesn't allow for choice. Everything is "shall" or "shall not." The actual plan is a decentralizing of power. 

This is a key difference in the direction of the two denominations. We are at a fork in the road of power and authority. The change in the GMC is now defined. They will be moving towards more control. The change in the UMC is not yet defined, but we will need to change. It is true that what we are doing right now is not sustainable. For this moment in which we are living, I hope we move towards more localized control, exerting denominational muscle only when it is truly necessary for the essentials of the faith.