General Conference adjourns

Joey Lopez (Western North Carolina, USA, lay) made the motion to adjourn the 2012 General Conference of The United Methodist Church.


Listen to our latest story



Skip to comment form

  1. Paul Dunham

    It strains the trust of the connection when #gc2012 chose to ignore petitions properly submitted, esp. if that process was politicized.

  2. newpastor

    Agreed, Paul. I have lost a lot of respect for the church this past two weeks. I feel sad. Perhaps we should re-examine our motives in becoming global. Was there some pride mixed in? Are we more proud of calling ourselves global without recognizing that a huge organization like this cannot move, without considering that the gospel has (and should be) proclaimed in cultural mileau. I am concerned that our folks will be dismayed about the extent to which their gifts to church (apportionments) will not be used locally but to prop up this bureacracy and support those who voting on issues based on culture very different from ours.

    1. John

      OK. 600 million is a chunk of change, no doubt. But at 2% of the average church budget, it is hardly a back breaker. When I look at churches who are hiring staff to do work that used to be ther ministry of laity, I have some questions about priorities as well.

      Paul, any 20 delegates could have lifted a petition that was not considered in legislative committee. If you can’t find 20 people out of 988 to say “hey, look at this.” then its pretty clear that that petition was going nowhere.

  3. Roger

    newpastor: No rational person could possibly believe that the GC (as structured) could hope to deal with all of the legislation and other issues that were placed before it. The time wasn’t there. I think it’s safe to say that almost everyone has something with which they can be disappointed coming out of this General Conference.

    For myself I’m glad the GC delegates saw fit to leave the sexuality issue alone. I’m glad the GC moved on guaranteed assignments. And I wish the various versions of the Call to Action had been better thought out; I wasn’t there, but it looks as if there had not been enough time to “sell” the Call to Action restructuring plan leading up to GC.

  4. Glenn

    No Roger it wasn’t not having enough time. The Call to Action folks didn’t do their homework. It became obvious that these “leaders” we’re trying to push a seriously flawed plan–this being validated by the unconstitutionality of their plan and the resistance of a majority of delegates to try to rescue it.

Leave a Reply