Lessons from a Failed Plan

by

Special to United Methodist Insight

My name is Ben Boruff. I was a delegate to the 2012 General Conference in Tampa, Florida and part of the Call to Action Steering Team that presented a plan to dynamically restructure the church for the 21st century.

When I joined the Steering Team, I had assumed that the 2012 General Conference would forever be remembered as a world-changing moment for the UMC—a catalyst for denomination-wide positive adaptation and renewed effectiveness.

Ouch, right?

I had to leave Tampa early because I was a college senior, and it was finals week. But I remember sitting on the plane on my way back to Indiana and thinking that I had helped The United Methodist Church turn a page. I had made history. I had helped my denomination become more efficient, more focused, and more unified. I remember texting a bishop and thanking him for the opportunity to talk to the General Conference delegates. I think I tweeted a couple times about unity and hope. Naïve, I know.

The Connectional Table and the Call to Action Steering Team, with the help of independent research and advisory groups like Towers Watson, spent years crafting a multi-point plan to focus institutional resources on statistically proven drivers of denominational vitality. In a matter of days, General Conference delegates morphed those ideas into Plan UMC, a hastily created yet arguably clever attempt to reallocate resources without sacrificing prized parts of church structure. Then, in a matter of moments, the Judicial Council declared the whole thing unconstitutional, effectively negating years of work.

It’s 2019 now, and the upcoming Special Session looms overhead like a dark cloud, the kind that turns the sky eerily green before a storm. Some say that The United Methodist Church is eroding from within like a wooden barrel filled with toxic sludge. Others say that splitting the UMC with a heavy axe will ultimately benefit all Methodists. Many believe that our differences are an integral part of our Wesleyan DNA. And some argue simply that time will heal this denomination.

I learned several important lessons from my work on the Call to Action proposals that I now share with delegates, bishops, and all dedicated clergy and laity. Though 2019’s conversations are different than 2012’s, the Special Session may alter the UMC in a way that General Conference 2012 failed to do. These lessons, if applied thoughtfully, may help us in the months to come.

1. Our system is stubborn, and it naturally resists change of any kind. We have, perhaps intentionally, created a church of systemic self-preservation. Our Constitution, written many years ago, forbids most types of structural adaptation, and our institutional processes inject bureaucracy into all ministerial decision-making, big or small. Some call this fair. Others call it cumbersome. Either way, The United Methodist Church, institutionally, is designed to stagnate, not grow.

2. Our bishops are undervalued, and we waste their wisdom. We spend great amounts of time, prayer, and money electing our bishops to positions of leadership. Then some of us dismiss the Council of Bishops as a group of out-of-touch administrators—stole-wearing CEOs who have been stripped of many day-to-day tasks. At best, this approach is impractical. At worst, it is unethical. It is difficult to call ourselves effective stewards when we squander one of our most valuable resources. I encourage all Special Session delegates to listen to our bishops. We elected them to lead, so we should let them lead. Agree or disagree with their proposals, of course, but listen.

3. Many delegates do not differentiate between passionate urgency and destructive pessimism. The Call to Action Steering Team crafted a sense of urgency because our ministry is important and our membership is declining, but that urgency was always married to hope. The final report of the Interim Operations Team offered this statement: “Business as usual will not suffice, and we are ready to make significant changes in how we work and live together.” Many 2012 delegates interpreted such comments as fear-fueled manipulation, which is part of the reason that, in many ways, the Interim Operations Team’s statement remains true today.

4. Our rhetoric is more secular than we want to admit. We are products of the social and political climates that surround us, and we live in a particularly divisive time. We know that church politics exist, but the next thought is more difficult to swallow: If church politics exist, General Conference is our political arena, which means that delegates are politicians. Instead of pretending that you come to global assemblies with a truly open mind, acknowledge your political nature. Then take steps to minimize the impact of those secular political leanings. Candid conversations require introspection.

5. We can be vicious. Social media posts during and about General Conference 2012 were some of the most aggressive and hurtful comments that I have ever seen. I am now a high school teacher. When I say that some United Methodist online commenters are more spiteful than a group of teenagers on their way to lunch on Subpar Grilled Cheese Sandwich Day (my name, not theirs), I mean it.

I admit, calling the Call to Action a failure is an exaggeration—conversations have value regardless of outcome—and I am proud to have been a part of the Call to Action process. I learned a lot from General Conference 2012.

Like many, I have opinions regarding the Special Session. However, as the son, nephew, and grandson of United Methodist elders and as a former member of the Indiana Annual Conference, the UMC Connectional Table, and—yes—the Call to Action Steering Team, here is what I know to be true: United Methodists are stronger than we sometimes think. United Methodists are clumsy, stubborn, and even occasionally mean-spirited when you put them in a room and call it a conference, yes, but we have courage. And we can be wise when we choose to be.

The future of The United Methodist Church is uncertain. But I, for one, appreciate that these conversations are happening. I remember sitting in a Connectional Table meeting in the Philippines, and someone told me that if The United Methodist Church ever dies, it will die with smiles and meetings. Unwilling to truly acknowledge the end, clergy and laity will grin as they close the last church’s doors and sell the land. I remember looking around the room and, for the first time, questioning the smiles I saw.

The Special Session may be chaotic and emotionally taxing, but it may also be better than the alternative. Silence only reinforces the status quo, and the status quo seems untenable. The only true misstep is to resist having the conversation. Listening closely to opposing viewpoints sparks growth.

I have watched United Methodists misuse important moments. Do not misuse this one. Do not underestimate its importance. Do not approach it casually. Instead, approach it with grace, prayer, and an open mind.

Ben Boruff was a member of the UMC Connectional Table from 2008 to 2012, and he served on the Call to Action Steering Team. He is now a high school English teacher in Valparaiso, Indiana.