The Bulgaria-Romania Provisional Annual Conference posted a report from their annual conference meeting detailing a vote to withdraw from The United Methodist Church and join the Global Methodist Church. This decision was hailed by Traditionalists in the United States, but Bishop Patrick Streiff of the Central and Southern Europe Central Conference, who oversees the Bulgaria-Romania Provisional Annual Conference, told that body prior to their vote that he did not understand why they wanted to separate.
The report by the Bulgaria-Romania AC is notable in that it makes clear the different understandings between the annual conference and Bishop Streiff on proper procedure in voting to separate from the UMC. The annual conference took the view that, according to Paragraph 33 of the Book of Discipline, it had ultimate authority to make decisions as it wished. Bishop Streiff indicated that the annual conference should follow the provisions of Paragraph 572, which is the only place in the Book of Discipline that lays out a procedure for an annual conference in the central conferences to separate from the UMC (a point reiterated in a subsequent letter). Bishop Streiff regarded the vote of the annual conference as out of order according to UMC rules, but the annual conference proceeded anyway. Bishop Streiff indicated that he would regard the Bulgaria-Romania Annual Conference as an autonomous church (the result of separation under Paragraph 572), but the conference reiterated that they intended to join the Global Methodist Church.
In the end, whether or not the decision properly followed UMC rules may be moot. The Bulgarian church already changed its articles of incorporation under Bulgarian law. The Central and Southern Europe Central Conference may have little legal recourse to opposing the decision and little incentive to fight a unanimous decision by the annual conference.
Traditionalists in the United States are likely to want to use the Bulgaria-Romania conference's decision as a precedent, but it is worth pointing out the special circumstances of this case. Bishop Streiff clearly indicated that he regarded the move as illegal according to church law. But because of the complexities law involved in resolving disputes about church law across national boundaries and different secular legal systems, that objection is hard to pursue. Within the United States, church law is likely to matter more to secular legal processes.