This post is for Free Methodists, wondering about the upcoming special seating of General Conference. If you don’t want to read the whole post (it’s long), know that I believe that it is imperative for our denominational health to allow an extra two years before the next General Conference.
Last night, I popped back on social media to ask a question and discovered that there was more debate about the upcoming General Conference special sitting (and the resolution we are voting on) than I was expecting. My conference delegation already knows my opinion, but I will also make it known here.
A bit of history. I’ve been a superintendent now for nine years. In those nine years, I’ve learned a few things. I’ve learned that a document that has been cobbled together, amended, and changed, over a 160 year history, can be quite inconsistent. It can also no longer fit the needs of the current organization. I’m not talking about our theology or doctrine. I’m talking about things like the roles of the bishop, the superintendent, the world ministry center, the conference. I’ve learned that Bishops often do not have the time to do what is most strategic, because of the many things that the Book of Discipline requires them to do. I’ve also learned that my job as the Superintendent of Genesis is vastly different than most of my peers. Because of the size and resourcing in Genesis, I’m blessed with a staff that can help manage many of the details. Without a staff, too much of my time would be spent on putting out fires, meeting with committees, selling property, staying up-to-date with changes in the law. I simply would not have the necessary time to think or lead this region of churches strategically to fulfill the mission of Jesus together. During a time of significant decline in the Church, it’s imperative that we allow more leaders the freedom and time to think and lead strategically into the future.
Over the years, I have been on a number of task forces focused on these issues of restructuring the things that are hampering us as an institution. There have been so many that I have a folder on my computer, entitled “too many task forces.”
Frankly, my time on all these task forces has been discouraging. Why? Because our current denominational rhythm does not allow enough time for us to dig in, answer the questions we need, get appropriate change recommendations in place and begin to test them before the next General Conference. One of my most discouraging moments regarding all of this was when someone sent me notes from a task force that had met almost 20 years ago. In the notes I discovered that this group of people were addressing the same concerns we were and coming to the same conclusions, yet little had changed.
I’ve been so discouraged about being on these task forces that when the current one (the Unleashing Missional Momentum group that brought the resolution to extend two years) was being formed, I passed. I didn’t think I could take one more task force that didn’t get anywhere.
At the moment, I have a bit of hope. This group is asking the right questions. They are seeking the Lord. They are prayerful. They are taking an enormous amount of their own time to dig in. They are coming up with good discussion for national leadership. And, bluntly, they need more time if they’re going to get it done.
Do we need the extra two years to wrestle through these questions? Absolutely. If we do not wrestle through these questions will the dysfunction in our systems hinder a movement of the Holy Spirit? Absolutely. Does that mean that the Holy Spirit will not move among us? Of course not. But I’m keenly aware that in our past history, the movement of the Holy Spirit had to separate itself when the institution would not change. This was the case with John Wesley, and this was the case with BT Roberts. I am prayerfully hoping that this time things can be different, and we can re-create a system that supports and celebrates the movement of the Holy Spirit rather than hindering it.
This is not a power grab. The next General Conference will need to discuss, debate, amend, and vote on the changes. But in my opinion those changes are necessary if we are to ever again, as a denominational system, become a Spirit-fueled movement.