The Relevance of the Book of Discipline

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.” – Charles Dickens, Tale of Two Cities

Introduction

Is the Book of Discipline (BoD) truly a timeless guide for the United Methodist Church’s (UMC’s) identity and practice, or is it facing challenges to its enduring relevance?

In a multifaceted inquiry, let us delve into the complexities of this foundational document, examining its historical significance and its ability to adapt to shifting cultural landscapes.

Join me on a critical-thinking journey as we question the BoD’s role as a litmus test, if you will, for the UMC’s identity and practice.

As you may know, the regular session of the international lawmaking assembly of the UMC, known as the 2024 General Conference (GC), commenced on April 23, 2024, and ended on May 3, 2024, in Charlotte, North Carolina (NC).

After five years, the eagerly awaited gathering of knowledgeable members, clergy, and delegates of the UMC convened once again. Anticipation buzzed through the community, particularly among those who vividly recall the highly contentious and heated floor debates of the previous 2019 GC in St. Louis, Missouri.

The 2020 GC was scheduled to be held in Minneapolis, Minnesota, but was postponed three times due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

As the 2024 GC commenced in Charlotte, NC, it carried with it the weight of past discussions and the hope for constructive dialogue and decision-making.

Those who closely followed the trajectory of the UMC were particularly attentive to the recent gathering in Charlotte, NC, awaiting its outcomes with a blend of curiosity and concern. The events of the past half-decade have undeniably shaped expectations regarding the decisions and discussions that would unfold during this crucial assembly.

One of the primary objectives and strategic pre-planning of the 2024 GC centered around the removal of the 52-year-old statement on “Homosexuality” from the “Book of Discipline,” replacing it with inclusive language that encompasses the diverse spectrum of identities within the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, intersex, asexual, and more (LGBTQ+) community.

The UMC members who know and are familiar with the “Book of Discipline,” Paragraph 304.3, which states:

“While persons set apart by the Church for ordained ministry are subject to all the frailties of the human condition and the pressures of society, they are required to maintain the highest standards of holy living in the world. The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Therefore, self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church.”

On Wednesday, May 1, 2024, the General Conference approved several significant measures: lifting the ban on LGBTQ+ ordination, discontinuing a policy allowing churches to disaffiliate, and restructuring the denomination’s system of regional oversight, known as “Regionalization.”

The General Conference also approved a new definition of marriage, recognizing it as a covenant between “Two people of faith,” with the acknowledgment that the couple may or may not consist of a man and a woman.

It appears that the replacement of an exclusively “Heterosexual” definition of marriage – that is, “God designed marriage to be between a man and a woman” – exposed tensions between U.S. and international delegates, resulting in the decision to implement “Regionalization.”

Based on the lessons learned from the contentious and heated floor debates in the 2019 General Conference, three times postponement of the 2020 General Conference, and the anticipated results of the 2024 conference, many students of the Bible and followers of the Book of Discipline congregations within the UMC decided to disaffiliate under the policy provision or a protocol known as the “Protocol of Reconciliation and Grace through Separation” issued in January 2020 and was supposed to be voted on and adopted in the 2020 GC, which ended at the end of December 31, 2023.

Since 2019, nearly a quarter of the UMC’s congregations, totaling around 8,000 churches in the United States, have departed from the denomination due to disagreements over church policy and theology, particularly regarding issues such as LGBTQ+ rights. Many of these congregations have opted to join either the Global Methodist Church or the Free Methodist Church, both of which align with ‘Wesleyan’ theology and doctrine.

On May 1, 2024, CBS News reported “The denomination had until recently been the third largest in the United States, present in almost every county. But its 5.4 million U.S. membership in 2022 is expected to drop once the 2023 departures are factored in.”

Homosexuality and the Book of Discipline: Historical Perspective

“Our main doctrines, which include all the rest, are three: That of repentance, of faith, and of holiness. The first of these we account, as it were, the porch of religion; the next, the door; the third, religion itself.”― John Wesley

For those who grew up in the Methodist denomination and are familiar with the Book of Discipline, historical issues and the first public debates related to “Homosexuality” took place at the 1972 General Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. This occurred four years after the Methodist and Evangelical United Brethren churches united in 1968 to form “The United Methodist Church (UMC).”

In 1972, the General Conference adopted the Social Principles of The United Methodist Church on “Homosexuality.” That is, “We do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider it incompatible with Christian teaching,” a statement was added to the phrase “persons of homosexual orientation are persons of sacred worth.”

It was also the first time same-sex unions were noted: “We do not recommend marriage between two persons of the same sex.”

Since 1972, internal disagreement over LGBTQ+ issues within the church has been a subject of debate. During the 2016 General Conference, delegates were poised to engage in discussions on these matters, as activists within the church advocated for greater LGBTQ+ acceptance.

However, the dialogue became tense and emotional, prompting the church’s Council of Bishops (CoBs) to postpone the debate and establish a commission to review the church’s stance on LGBTQ+ issues.

Timeline Source: UMC’s News

In 2019, a special General Conference was convened outside the normal four-year cycle, marking only the second occurrence of its kind in the history of the UMC. During this session, delegates decided against lifting the church’s opposition to same-sex marriage. However, they also introduced a provision allowing congregations to depart from the church amidst ongoing disagreements.

As a result, between 2019 and 2023, congregations across the country that forbade same-sex marriage saw thousands of Biblically grounded and Wesleyan theology-aligned doctrine followers leave. This exodus opened the door for more LGBTQ+ friendly policies to be considered and potentially passed at the 2024 General Conference.

Despite the shock to many within the UMC, the lifting of the 52-year-old provision regarding homosexuality at the 2024 General Conference reflected a pre-planned strategy by LGBTQ+ activists. This move, largely unnoticed by innocent and ill-informed congregations, signaled a significant shift in policy and doctrine within the denomination.

Insights into Denominational Shifts: Evaluating the 2024 General Conference

“In a storm, I think, ‘What if the gospel be not true? Then thou art, of all men, most foolish. For what has thou given up thy goods, thy ease, thy friends, thy reputation, thy country, thy life?” – John Wesley

Rather than preaching to the choir, if you will, let’s delve into some thought-provoking questions about the decisions made at the 2024 General Conference of the UMC:

• How do the decisions made at the 2024 General Conference of the UMC reflect the evolving understanding and interpretation of Scripture and theological principles within the denomination (e.g., Leviticus 18:22; 1 Corinthians 6:9; and 1 Timothy 1:10)?
• What implications do the changes in church policy regarding LGBTQ+ issues have for the future unity and identity of the UMC?
• How have historical debates and decisions within the UMC shaped its current stance on homosexuality and same-sex marriage?
• What factors influenced the decision-making process at the 2024 General Conference, and how were differing theological perspectives reconciled or contested?
• How do the decisions made at the General Conference align with or challenge traditional Wesleyan theology and principles of Christian ethics?
• What Biblical principles and passages were considered in discussions surrounding LGBTQ+ issues at the General Conference, and how were they interpreted and applied?
• To what extent do cultural shifts and societal attitudes toward LGBTQ+ rights influence the decision-making process within religious institutions like the UMC?
• How can conversations about LGBTQ+ inclusion within the UMC foster respectful dialogue and understanding among members with differing viewpoints, while upholding the denomination’s commitment to love, justice, and inclusivity?

Ultimately, a comprehensive assessment of the decisions made at the 2024 General Conference of the United Methodist Church requires careful consideration of theological, Scriptural, cultural, and historical factors, while also prioritizing respectful dialogue and unity within the denomination.

Anticipating Outcomes Scenario-Based Perspectives on the 2024 General Conference

As the United Methodist Church reflects on the decisions made at the 2024 General Conference, it is essential to anticipate the potential outcomes and implications for the future of the denomination.

In this section, we explore scenario-based perspectives on the 2024 General Conference, considering various factors such as theological convictions, cultural shifts, historical contexts, and legal considerations.

Through strategic analysis and thoughtful forecasting, let us aim to provide insights into the potential trajectories and consequences of the decisions made at this pivotal moment in the UMC’s history.

Additionally, let us address real-world examples like the legal battles faced by 45 churches that sued a bishop to disaffiliate, examining the implications of such challenges on the denomination’s unity and legal framework.

• The best-case scenario for the UMC members or congregations disregarded/rejected or ignorant about the disaffiliation process and its deadline consequences:

In the best-case scenario, UMC members or congregations who were unaware of the disaffiliation process and its deadline consequences may find themselves in a position where they can assess their beliefs and theological convictions in light of the changes happening within the denomination.

They may have the opportunity to engage in open dialogue with church leadership and fellow members, seeking guidance and support as they navigate the evolving landscape of the UMC.

Additionally, they may find new avenues for growth and spiritual development within the denomination, as it embraces greater inclusivity and diversity.

Amidst the broader societal context, where there are concerns about the indoctrination of innocent children regarding sex change or transgender indoctrination, UMC congregations may prioritize providing a safe and supportive environment for families to discuss these complex issues on their faith values.

• The worst-case scenario for the UMC members or congregations hoped there would not be any changes to the Book of Discipline:

In the worst-case scenario, UMC members or congregations who were resistant to changes in the Book of Discipline may feel disillusioned and marginalized as the denomination moves forward with policies that challenge their beliefs. They may experience a sense of alienation from the broader church community and struggle to reconcile their convictions with the direction of the denomination.

This could lead to increased division and conflict within congregations, as members grapple with differing interpretations of Scripture and theology.

Amidst the broader societal context, concerns about the indoctrination of innocent children regarding sex change or transgender indoctrination may exacerbate these tensions, leading to further polarization and fragmentation within the UMC.

Lessons from International Delegates: Upholding Traditional Marriage Principles

In our exploration of the Book of Discipline’s enduring relevance, we must also consider the insights gained from international delegates at the 2024 GC on the foundational principle that “God designed marriage to be between a man and a woman (Matthew 19:4-6).”

As we engage in critical reflection, it becomes evident that this belief holds profound significance for many within the United Methodist Church, both domestically and abroad.

Through thoughtful analysis of the perspectives shared by international delegates, we gain valuable lessons on the importance of upholding traditional understandings of marriage within the broader context of evolving theological discourse.

Conclusion

In conclusion, our journey through the complexities of the Book of Discipline and its intersection with contemporary issues within the United Methodist Church has provided us with invaluable insights.

As we navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by changing societal norms and theological perspectives, let us remain steadfast in our commitment to the timeless truths of Scripture and the teachings of Jesus Christ.

May we approach discussions with humility, grace, and a willingness to engage in honest dialogue, recognizing the diversity of perspectives within our denomination. By embracing openness, truthfulness, and mindfulness, we can navigate the complexities of our faith journey together, seeking unity in our shared commitment to love, justice, and inclusivity.

Shalom!

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect any affiliated organizations. While every effort has been made to provide accurate and up-to-date information, readers are encouraged to conduct their research and consult relevant sources for further clarification.

Additionally, discussions of theological and doctrinal matters are intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal, pastoral, or professional advice. Readers are encouraged to seek guidance from qualified individuals or authorities regarding specific questions or concerns related to the topics discussed in this article.