Back to
General Conference

Evaluation of GC 2004 by Bishop Jack M. Tuell

While there was a lot of status quo, there were some signs of progress

Reconciling Ministries Network Digest
August 5, 2004

Prior to General Conference when I was asked how I thought the delegates might vote on greater inclusiveness, I usually answered, "They will keep the status quo." My answer now would be more optimistic. While there was a lot of status quo, there were some signs of progress. It is true that legislation surrounding "chargeable offenses" was made more specific and clear, but what this legislation (passed in response to the Dammann verdict) does is clarify what a lot of people thought the Discipline already said. I do not regard this as a big setback to the cause of greater inclusiveness.

In addition, the Conference beat back legislation on the appeals process in church trials that could have been truly damaging. The Judicial Council made two important decisions. In the first, they held that the existing disciplinary language on "incompatibility" did constitute a declaration of the United Methodist Church. In the second, they declined to apply this finding to the Dammann case, and said it only applied to the future. So the Judicial Council's opinions echoed those of the General Conference. The "signs of progress" I say are as follows:

1. The vote on the key petition that would have changed the "compatibility" resolution to a statement that "we are not of one mind" on this issue, lost by a closer vote than at any of the last five General Conferences. The vote was 55% to 45%. The votes on similar resolutions at Conferences in the last 20 years have had majorities in the 60% range. This may be slow progress, but it is progress.

2. The "Unity Resolution" passed on the last morning of the General Conference (in response to news stories that the UMC was considering an "amicable separation") was important for two reasons: First, it acknowledged that we are in disagreement. Second, it was an affirmation (869-41) that the common mission of making disciples is too important to allow us to be divided by those who think they have a corner on "the truth."

3. The most important sign of all was: the impact of the witness made by Reconciling Ministries Network members and their supporters. Every morning, delegates passed by hundreds of quietly singing, praying Christians making a witness to a more inclusive church. The most hardened opponents could not help but be impressed with the authenticity of this witness. Opponents of change cite the "unchristian" tactics of those seeking change to justify their position (which happened after the 2000 General Conference). The 2004 witness leaves no room for such a response. The peaceful demonstration on the floor of the Conference on Thursday struck the same note. As I stood in support of the demonstrators, I was part of a group of hundreds of delegates and many bishops (32, by my count) who were expressing solidarity with the idea of change. It was a powerful moment. So despite the lack of tangible legislative progress at the 2004 General Conference, I feel quite good about it. Victories do not come quickly in important struggles... they come through prayer, conversation, careful study, discernment, and loving and persistent effort. Judged by those criteria, the witness made at the General Conference of 2004 may be a turning point in this journey.

Reconciling Ministries Network 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773.736.5526 Phone 773.736.5475 Fax Email: rmn@RMNetwork.org Or visit us on the web at http://www.RMNetwork.org.