Jonathan LeMaster-Smith

The Report (Which my hero David Livingston requested) from the Credentialling Committee related to why so many African Delegates were not present.

My notes:

+Some Central Conference Annual Conferences did not provide correct contacts for conference secretaries (or had multiple names)

+Some Central Conference Annual Conferences elected incorrect numbers of delegates as assigned by the General Commission.

+Some Central Conference Annual Conferences had fake certificates of invitation to General Conference

+Some Central Conference Annual Conferences provide an incorrect number of categories as part of their delegate list with repeats of people on various lists.

+Some Central Conference Annual Conference Delegates did not secure visas

+Some Central Conference Annual Conference Delegates are dealing with personal crises.

+Some Central Conference Annual Conference Delegates are just not responding/have had no communication.

My opinion follows:

What I am understanding here is that the General Commission in the General Conference mostly did its due diligence, but due to some bad record keeping, confusion around numbers, and potential bad actors, things happened.

What is wild though is that this was a 5 year process, and the General Commission had a huge undertaking, but it feels like more could have been done to connect, correct, and update. Much of this General Conference feels so last minute and thrown together. That could include the Council of Bishops, the Standing Committee, the Connectional Table, or other groups. But, I don’t know all the ends and outs. I feel like there truly was a good faith effort, but in our efforts to be more global, we might be more diligent and supportive in the future.

Also, hopefully, any bad actors will be held accountable.

Judicial Council Decision 1497 – RE Youth Representation on General Commission on General Conference

From the Decision:
If there is no youth representation then the General Conference is required to identify, nominate, and elect one youth.

While ¶ 511.1.b) says nominees to the General Commission on General Conference must be seated delegates, it appears ¶ 511.1.a) supersedes this. It states: The voting members of the commission shall be elected quadrennially by the General Conference and shall consist of twenty-five members as follows: one person from each US jurisdiction, one person from each of the seven central conferences, one young adult, one youth.

And thus the Judicial Council notes: The Discipline requires youth representation on the Commission under ¶ 511.1a. The General Conference is required to find, nominate, and elect at least one youth to the Commission.

Therefore a youth nominee must be brought forward. (I hear they are working on it).

It seems that we need a reminder on what different conferences do related to bishops and annual conference borders. (Scroll down to the word BASICALLY if you this is long).

Under the responsibilities of General Conference:

¶16.10. To fix a uniform basis upon which bishops shall be elected
by the jurisdictional conferences and to determine the number of
bishops that may be elected by central conferences.
¶16.12. To change the number and the boundaries of jurisdictional
conferences upon the consent of a majority of the annual
conferences in each jurisdictional conference involved.

These are the only responsibilities of the of the General Conference related to Bishops and Central Conferences.

The General Conference is allowed to determine:
-how many bishops the Central Conferences are allowed to elect.
-how the jurisdictions get to elect bishops (they determine how many they elect).
-the determine the boundaries of the Jurisdictional conferences.

They do not determine the boundaries of annual of the annual conferences or how the bishops are assigned within their Central and Jurisdictional Conferences.

Under the Responsibilities of Jurisdictional Conferences:

¶ 27.2. To elect bishops and to cooperate in carrying out such plans for their support as may be determined by the General Conference.

¶ 27.4. To determine the boundaries of their annual conferences,
provided that there shall be no annual conference with a membership of fewer than fifty clergy in full connection, except by the consent of the General Conference.

Also, in ¶ 524.3.b)[The Jurisdictional Committee on the Episcopacy shall]Recommend boundaries of the episcopal areas and the assignments of the bishops.

and ¶ 524.3.d) [The Jurisdictional Committee on the Episcopacy shall] Determine the number of effective bishops eligible for
assignment.

The Jurisidictional Conferences determine the number of bishops, the boundaries, names, and number of annual conferences they have.

Under the Responsibilities of the Central Conferences:

¶31.2. To elect the bishops for the respective central conferences in number as may be determined from time to time, upon a basis fixed by the General Conference, and to cooperate in carrying out such plans for the support of their bishops as may be determined by the General Conference.

and also,

¶ 543.3 When a central conference shall have been authorized to elect bishops, such elections shall be conducted under the same general procedure as prevails in the jurisdictional conferences for the election of bishops. A central conference shall have power to fix the tenure of bishops elected by the said central conference.

¶ 543.8. A central conference shall fix the boundaries of the annual conferences, provisional annual conferences, missionary conferences, and missions within its bounds, proposals for changes first having been submitted to the annual conferences concerned as prescribed in the Discipline of The United Methodist Church.

They get to assign their bishops, they get to determine boundaries of the annual conferences, and create but the General Conference sets the numbers of bishops.

BASICALLY:

General Conference determines how the Jurisidictional Conferences elect bishops but not how many elect or how they are assigned.

General Conference can determines how many bishops the Central Conferences can elect, and they elect in essentially the same way as the Jurisidictional Conferences.

Central and Jurisdictional Conferences determine their own annual conference names, boundaries, and how bishops are assigned.

This social principle states:
Because all people are of sacred worth and certain basic human rights are due to everyone, we are committed to supporting the equal rights, liberties, and protections of all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. We see clear issues of equality and justice in protecting the rightful claims of those with shared material resources, pensions, guardian relationships, mutual powers of attorney, and other lawful claims typically attendant to contractual relationships that involve shared contributions, responsibilities and liabilities, and equal protection before the law. Moreover, because in many countries sexual and gender minorities are disproportionately impacted by social stigmas, discrimination, coercion and violence, we call on churches, governments, businesses, and civic organizations to do all in their power to combat such unjust treatment and to promote equal rights and protections for all.


This language is modified from language we already had in the 2016 Discipline ¶ 162.J (see image below). This has nothing to do with marriage, ordination, or church relationships. It is about the rights of all people to exist and receive the basic human rights.

This is rooted in our theology that all people are made in the image of God, all people are of sacred worth, and all people are deserving of equal rights and treatment.
.
The marriage and incompatibility statements are elsewhere in the Social Principles.

With the passing of Consent Calendar A02,

We have revised a portion of The Social Principles,

The Political Community:

The Preface:

“Love is the fulfilling of the law, the end of the commandment.” Very excellent things are spoken of love; it is the essence, the spirit, the life of all virtue. It is not only the first and great command, but it is all the commandments in one. “Whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are amiable,” or honorable; “if there be any virtue, if there be any praise,” they are all comprised in this one word,— love. ( John Wesley, “The Circumcision of the Heart”)

Our involvement in political systems is rooted in the gospel imperative to love our neighbors, to do justice, and to care for the vulnerable. As United Methodists, we acknowledge that love requires responsible political action and engagement aimed at the betterment of society and the promotion of the common good. We acknowledge that such political engagement demands humility and mindfulness of our own complicity in perpetuating injustice. It also necessitates compassion, prayer, and a willingness to discern God’s guidance.

We believe in the inherent worth of all people, which is established through God’s gracious act of Creation and most fully revealed in the power of Jesus’s life, death, and resurrection. The understanding that people are created in the image of God is a central theme in John Wesley’s teachings.

We further believe that God calls all members of the human family to recognize and protect the dignity and worth of all people and to work for the well-being of all God’s creation. We, therefore, support structures in the church and in civil society that honor the basic freedoms and rights of all human beings and protect God’s creation. In particular, we affirm the important work of the United Nations in promoting peace and security, championing human dignity and human rights, and advocating for sustainable development.

You can read the fully proposed Social Principles Revision Here