Advocates for justice

This is a post about the United Methodist Church that I’m specifically not posting to my brother blog that deals with UMC news. I’m doing it this way because there is a general point behind it.

Two weeks from today the United Methodist General Conference will be in progress. This is a special and limited Conference of delegates from around the world. There are only three proposals on the agenda, all dealing with how or if the denomination continues to exist. I won’t go into the three plans, only to say one is designed for all of us – progressive to conservative – to live together, another is a conservative takeover, and the third is just too complicated to be considered. The conservative organization, the Wesleyan Covenant Association, has already declared we do it their way or they leave. The conservative plan is so punishing that if it is approved many, perhaps most, progressives will leave.

I am not a delegate. I’m not going as an observer/demonstrator (I did go observe and demonstrate at the 2012 General Conference and that was so painful I’m not about to repeat the experience). I will be paying close attention from my home.

Leading up to GC I’ve been reading the Hacking Christianity blog written by Rev. Jeremy Smith. He has been explaining the issues around the various plans, including the various maneuvers of the conservatives.

The conservatives currently call themselves the Wesleyan Covenant Association, trying to claim they are more faithful to Methodism’s founder John Wesley. Before them was Good News, who took their name from the Gospels in the Bible. Gospel means “good news” and they’re called that because Jesus as God become human is good news to humans. They were trying to claim that their conservative viewpoint was liberating for humans the same way the Gospels are.

I mention all this because Rev. Smith laid out how the WCA plans for General Conference were first laid out in a Good News document … in 2004. For fifteen years they’ve been working on expelling those who don’t think like they do under the goal of “unifying” the denomination. This is a supremacist tactic.

In Rev. Smith’s post there was this comment by Jan Nelson:

Did this document [the plan from 15 years ago] result in some part from the IRD? I’ve understood that their goal was to destroy the UMC (and others) as effective advocates for justice and their motives were political, not at all theological. Is that close to what’s in this?

Rev. Smith did not answer Nelson’s question, nor did anyone else.

Fifteen years ago a partner with Good News was IRD, the Institute for Religion and Democracy. It isn’t an organization within the United Methodist Church; they tried to influence several mainline Protestant denominations. I don’t know how active they are now. I haven’t heard about them in several years.

Back then it didn’t take long for me to understand that the IRD name was a cover. The a better name would be the Institute for Religion Without Democracy. They were trying to undermine denominations that had a democratic way determining religious doctrine. The General Conference of the UMC does exactly that. The IRD decreed doctrine cannot be decided by a democratic process, it is ordained by God and declared by some top church figure, such as a pope. The UMC does not have that kind of office. Yes, this is a very conservative position, one all about maintaining a social and religious hierarchy.

The UMC has a strong and long history of advocating for justice. That the goal of the IRD was to cripple the denomination’s ability to advocate for justice makes sense to me, especially in the era of the nasty guy, and especially considering the rise of an authoritarian leader like the nasty guy has been a goal of political conservatives for about 40 years.

In just over two weeks we may see whether our long history of advocating for justice will continue.