Pastor Mark Williams

Delegate Reports

Day 8 - Monday, May 3

Fasten your seatbelts. The twists and turns today took us along quite a ride.

The opening worship service of the morning featured Bishop Hae-Jong Kim, the first Korean bishop to preach at a session of General Conference. Bishop Kim spoke about the church as the place to provide both roots and wings for ministry. Bishop Kim warned against fundamentalism of any denomination or faith that clings solely to roots and does not accept the responsibility to stretch its wings. One illustration of the sermon caught my attention and alarmed me. In describing the importance of knowing our roots, Bishop Kim described a young Korean American woman who came to his office for pastoral care. He said that he recognized that she had a serious problem as soon as she walked in the door because "she had a lot of piercings and a crazy hairdo." The bishop explained that he could tell from her appearance that she was struggling to discover her identity. This sermon illustration sounded more like a symptom of a generation gap than an insight into physical appearance as it relates to identity. I think that youth and young adults, tattooed, pierced, dyed hair and all, need not look and behave like Bishop Kim's generation in order to be secure and certain of their identity as children of God.

The first item of business of the day was slated to be the election of Judicial Council and University Senate members. Those who were nominated by the bishops and those nominated from the floor of General Conference last Thursday were placed on the ballot for the two vacant clergy and two lay positions. On the first ballot, delegates cast two votes for the two vacant lay positions. No nominee garnered a necessary majority of votes to be elected. But on the second ballot, Jon Gray, a judge from Missouri in the Southcentral Jurisdiction was elected with over half the ballots cast. Votes were then taken for the one remaining vacant position on the Judicial Council. After several more votes, Beth Capen from New York was elected with over half of the votes. Then, the bishop called for the conference to cast six votes on the next ballot for the six reserve positions. After the ballot was cast, the nine remaining nominees all received a majority of votes(!?). This statistical dilemma highlighted a problem with the software that's being used by the electronic voting machines. Somehow they have not been programmed to be able to handle a multi-vote ballot, although at the delegate orientation last Monday we were assured that not only could they, but that when voting for more than one position on the same ballot the machines absolutely required that votes be cast for all available positions.

Chaos erupted, as motions were made and observations offered in response to the parliamentary and technological fiasco of the balloting. One delegate made a motion that all the previous ballots for Judicial Council be declared invalid and that all future ballots be cast by written votes. Another proposal would have the delegates accept the two elections, and that each of the six reserves be elected by electronic voting, one at a time, in order to avoid the statistical anomaly faced the first time around. In the midst of much confusion on the floor, and clearly confusion from the presiding bishop, the whole matter was tabled until after lunch, when the technological advisors would report on the problem and possible solutions.

After lunch, the technological advisor reported that the program governing the electronic voting system was in error, and that a patch was being emailed that would hopefully solve the problem for future ballots. He announced that he considered the election of Jon Gray to be equally flawed, since there were two positions being voted on when the ballot was cast that elected him. He acknowledged that Beth Capen was elected with a clear and simple majority, since there was only one position being voted on when the ballot was cast to elect her. But he then reversed himself to say that he considered her election also invalidated. He offered no explanation of why Beth Capen's election ought to be also dismissed.

This is particularly troublesome because many of us thought it was very good news that both Jon Gray and Beth Capen were elected. From what I can tell observing them in their committee work, they would bring moderating voices to the current constellation of Judicial Council members. The fact that those calling for their elections to be ruled invalid are conservative evangelical leaders like Maxie Dunnam and Eddie Fox makes the whole situation seem like a successful attempt to pull defeat from the jaws of victory for progressive United Methodists.

The whole matter will be reported back to General Conference tomorrow morning, and voting will resume in one format or another. We will learn then whether Jon Gray and Beth Capen's elections will be declared invalid.

In another remarkable example of undoing a vote that has already been taken, the Discipleship legislative committee presented a petition that called for a careful study over the next four years of issues related to transgender persons. The study was a much more moderate and considered proposal than another petition that sought to declare transgender persons unsuitable for ordination. This proposal came very soon after the midmorning break, and many delegates had not yet returned to their seats. In fact, I was seated for one of our voting delegates who had another commitment. The bishop quickly declared that he saw no one approaching the microphones to speak to the issue, and he called us to vote. The vote passed, approving this study to take place. But then people rose to speak against the study, citing concerns about uncertain costs related to the proposal. After the matter had already been voted on and approved, although with many delegates yet missing from the floor, the committee which had presented the proposal indicated that their were withdrawing their motion for further consideration of financial implications. No one has yet raised the obvious point of order that the petition no longer belonged to the committee to be able to withdraw, considering we had voted to approve it. But yet again, a progressive vote appears to have been overturned, and the matter should reappear in the coming days for another vote.

Some other animated debate arose around diversity issues. Early in the morning, a delegate rose for a point of personal privilege to point out that several instances of intimidation and disenfranchisement for ethnic minorities, particularly ethnic women, had been noted already in the work of General Conference. One Asian-American woman in the Church and Society legislative committee was referenced. It was reported that she had been refused to be recognized by the chair of the committee, although the chair moved on to recognize others with no more legitimate right to speak. When the Asian-American woman eventually was afforded the right to speak in the committee, she pointed out to the chair that she considered she had been treated unfairly. At the next break in the legislative session, another delegate approached the Asian-American delegate and verbally berated her publicly for challenging the chairperson. Clearly, the person speaking to personal privilege this morning in plenary noted, the General Conference has yet to live up to its commitment to empower and respect the racial and gender diversity of our church and conference.

A petition to change language in a resolution from "ethnic minorities" to "ethnic persons" was successfully amended by PNW delegate Kristina Gonzalez. Kristina proposed an amendment to refer to "racial/ethnic persons" in the resolution, in order to recognize the particular issues of both race and ethnicity when we talk about diversity in the church. Kristina's amendment and the whole petition passed overwhelmingly.

On several occasions during the morning and afternoon plenary sessions, individuals rose to point out that the pacing and speed of debate and voting were moving too fast for our delegates that are relying on translation. Bishops have asked for votes too quickly, and the electronic voting machines allow only ten seconds for valid votes to be cast. International delegates relying on translation have at times not had time to hear the translation of the matter being voted on by the time the balloting is closed. Bishops were repeatedly encouraged to explain the matters being voted on more slowly, and to allow time before actually calling for the ten second balloting period to begin in order for translators to adequately communicate the matter at hand. I noticed several Central Conference delegates not voting on many matters throughout the day. Whether because of apathy, lack of clarity, or translation and pacing issues, I don't know. But many people noted today that the standard operation procedure for calling for votes is disenfranchising many duly elected delegates from our global United Methodist Church.

It seems evident that we are still struggling deeply and personally with issues of racial, ethnic and gender diversity within our church and within the General Conference voting delegates. Many of these issues have been addressed and legislated for decades, yet still we see ample evidence that the church simply doesn't "get it" time after time. White privilege, and particularly white male privilege remains powerfully instituted in the way that debate unfolds, even though we have church laws intended to create an equal playing field. With these very old issues still right at the surface of contention and debate, it makes me wonder how the church could possibly be ready to address issues of sexual orientation diversity with any integrity and considered perspective. We can't fulfill our agreed upon commitments to value and empower the voices of women, racial and ethnic minorities and international delegates. Even if we could get the church to begin to work on issues of sexual orientation legislatively, I have my doubts as to whether it would make appreciation of such diversity any more of a reality than it is today. We're more than three decades behind on living up to our promises to respect and value diversity for so many in our church. I wonder how long it will take to make similar promises and then to live up to them for sexual minority United Methodists.

Mark Williams
Pacific Northwest Conference Delegation
First Alternate Delegate

The First United Methodist Church of Ellensburg

Delegate Reports

Day 8 - Monday, May 3