Based on suggestions from our session at Leadership Institute, this section helps explain the polity of the UMC. We have asked Rev. Amy Lippoldt to help answer these questions. 

Q: If the Protocol for Separation passes at General Conference, will my church need to vote?

A: Nope. The Protocol, as currently written, assumes staying with the United Methodist Church as the default. No entity has to vote unless at least 20% of the membership want to. The first votes will happen at the Central Conference, or for us the USA, the annual conference level. If a vote occurs in an annual conference, 57% of the members present must vote to join a “New Methodist Denomination.” If that mark is not reached, the annual conference stays with the UMC. Once it is known what an annual conference will do, then local churches can vote to do something different than their annual conference. If a church is happy with the annual conference decision to stay or leave, no need to vote! If a church is not satisfied with the decision of the annual conference, the church council will decide if a simple majority or 2/3rd majority will be needed to pass. Such a vote to leave the annual conference would happen at a special called charge conference of the local church. In the case of an annual conference that votes to leave the UMC, any local church can vote to instead stay with the UMC. In the case of an annual conference that stays,

Based on suggestions from our session at Leadership Institute, our team has started a new section to our newsletter to help explain the polity of the UMC. We have asked Rev. Amy Lippoldt to help answer these questions. 

Q: How are bishops assigned to a particular annual conference?

A: Bishops, like all clergy, are itinerant and agree to go where they are sent for the good of the whole church. Inside each jurisdiction there is a committee consisting of two General Conference delegates from each annual conference in the jurisdiction. In the case of the South Central Jurisdiction, 24 people. Every year the episcopacy committee asks for some kind of evaluation from the annual conferences and the bishops themselves. In the spring prior to a jurisdictional conference they also talk with each bishop individually about life in the bishop’s current annual conference as well as their hopes or preferences for the future.

At the end of jurisdictional conference in July, after all new bishops have been elected, this same episcopacy committee will meet to decide placements for all the bishops in the SCJ. This process will be run by an outside facilitator and is designed to be as collaborative as possible while looking toward the good of the whole jurisdiction. Placement selection will take several hours. Once decided, the bishops are told individually of their new assignments. The assignments are then announced to the jurisdictional conference. New assignments take place starting Sept 1. Bishops can serve up to 12 years in one annual conference.

In the SCJ this year, we anticipate 3 retirements, leaving open Central Texas, New Mexico/NW Texas, and North Texas. Additionally, Bishop Harvey has been in Louisiana for 8 years and often that is a time that Bishops move to a new conference. Bishop Muller has also been in Arkansas for eight years but only has one quadrennium left to serve before retirement. Bishops Jones, Schnase, Farr, Saenz, and Nunn have only served four years in their current conferences and so are less likely to move this year.
There is a chance that legislation passed at General Conference in May will effect this “normal” course of episcopal assignment, either by direct legislation, or because one or more bishops decides to alter their future plans in response to the actions of GC.

Our current GP representatives are me, Rev. Amy Lippoldt, and Courtney Fowler, first lay delegate to 2016/19 General Conference.

Do you have a question for the UMC Polity Q&A? Send it to Rev. Amy Lippoldt.

Based on suggestions from our session at Leadership Institute, our team has started a new section to our newsletter to help explain the polity of the UMC. We have asked Rev. Amy Lippoldt to help answer these questions. 

Q: What actually changes on Jan 1, 2020 when the Traditional Plan goes into effect?

A: Perhaps not much. Since much of the Traditional Plan was ruled unconstitutional, its attempt to have ever escalating consequences for non-obedient clergy and Bishops was thwarted. Eight petitions did pass and they could cause real trouble for queer and pro-inclusion clergy. Much will depend on who is enforcing the Discipline and how creative or strict they want to be.
Newly effective legislation does the following:

1. A marriage license now counts as “proof” of someone being a “self-avowed practicing homosexual.” A public statement of any kind does the same.
2. Bishops are no longer allowed to consecrate, commission, or ordain “self-avowed homosexuals.” But a recent Judicial Council decision also said that anyone elected by a clergy session is properly credentialed and must be commissioned or ordained, a Bishop can’t refuse. This recent ruling seems to be in direct opposition to a Traditional Plan petition. Judicial Council will have to clarify itself, most likely through another case sent to them by a Bishop or Annual Conference next year.
3. Boards of Ordained Ministry and district committees are to approve candidates who meet all the qualifications in the Discipline after a “full examination.” The General Board of Higher Ed and Ministry has issued a statement saying the current process in the Discipline constitutes a “full examination” and no further questions or documentation is required to meet the “new” standard. GBHEM is saying no question about sexuality is required, in their interpretation.
4. There are changes to try and keep Bishops from quickly dismissing complaints. Bishops now have to write out why there is no basis in law or fact for the complaint and share that with the person who submitted the complaint. And in a “Just Resolution” “every effort shall be made” to have the author of the complaint agree. Importantly, this does not say they HAVE to agree. Just that a sincere effort shall be made. It will be up to Bishops to interpret this and how much power they let a complainant have.
5. Regarding trials, there is a mandatory penalty of one-year suspension after a conviction for performing a same-sex wedding, and loss of credentials after the second conviction. Keep in mind that we have not had a guilty verdict after a trial in several years. This does not mean people aren’t being harmed by complaints but only that other means of ending the process have been used, rather than an actual trial. As of Jan 1, the church is also allowed to appeal cases to the Judicial Council if there are problems with the process. If a jury would just refuse to find someone guilty, the church still has no appeal.

As has been the case for years, a whole lot depends on the people involved in the process. The Traditional Plan wanted to make the process airtight, to remove any room for people to do other than kick out clergy who want a fully inclusive church. They succeeded in making things more complicated but it is far from airtight.  

Do you have a question for the UMC Polity Q&A? Send it to Rev. Amy Lippoldt.

Based on suggestions from our session at Leadership Institute, our team has started a new section to our newsletter to help explain the polity of the UMC. We have asked Rev. Amy Lippoldt to help answer these questions. 

Q: I’m hearing a lot about a proposed “U.S. Regional Conference.” If that passes at General Conference, won’t it let us change the Book of Discipline for our context and end the fight over LGBTQ inclusion in the United States?

A: No.

If only it were that simple! The Connectional Table has submitted legislation for the creation of a “U.S. Regional Conference.” It would meet following General Conference starting in 2024 and be a place to deal with legislation that only effects the U.S. (e.g. our pension plan). This “Regional Conference” would not replace or change Jurisdictions but be an additional layer of polity. It would also allow the U.S. delegates make contextual changes to the adaptable parts of the Book of Discipline. There is on-going work to clarify which parts of the Book of Discipline are Global and which are adaptable (see ¶101). That work will not be completed until 2024. But in current draft form the Global book of Discipline prohibits LGBTQ clergy as well as same-sex weddings in United Methodist Churches. Could that also change? Sure. But the global church seemed pretty clear in St Louis that is was not inclined to do so. This is not to say that a “U.S. Regional Conference” is a bad idea. But even it’s passing would not create a simple and clear pathway to full inclusion in the U.S.

Do you have a question for the UMC Polity Q&A? Send it to Rev. Amy Lippoldt at alippoldt@greatplainsumc.org.