Protocol Negotiators Say Separation Pact 'No Longer Viable'

by

UPDATES 2 p.m. June 8 with Wesleyan Covenant Association statement below.

A group of centrist and progressive United Methodists who helped negotiate the independent agreement to divide The United Methodist Church issued a statement June 8 saying they believe the document is "no longer viable" as a means of resolving the denomination's differences.

Representatives of UMCNext, Uniting Methodists, Mainstream UMC, the LGBTQ advocacy group Affirmation, Methodist Federation for Social Action and Reconciling Ministries Network posted the statement on a new website, Protocol Response. The website includes an option for viewers to sign on to the statement.

Absent from the response are representatives of traditionalist United Methodist groups, specifically the Wesleyan Covenant Association, Good News, and Confessing Movement. The WCA launched a separate denomination, the Global Methodist Church, May 1. Had it been enacted, the Protocol would have provided $25 million over four years for the establishment of a traditionalist Methodist denomination.

The Rev. Tom Berlin, lead pastor of Floris UMC in Herndon, Va., and a frequent spokesman for centrist United Methodists, told United Methodist Insight that the response was prompted by wanting to share information with the church about their constituents' current views on the Protocol.

"Centrist and progressive groups say we no longer support the protocol; it's unhelpful to have that info and not share it," said Rev. Berlin. "The church is in a time when everyone is discerning God's will for the future. When we put the response together, we thought it was important for General Conference delegates to understand what our groups were saying.

"Many delegates said they didn't support the Protocol and wanted to amend it," he continued. "A mediated agreement only holds if it is unamended."

"Now we're two years [after the Protocol was introduced] and it will be two years before the next General Conference," Rev. Berlin said. "Mediated agreements are negotiated at a moment in time and best acted on in that moment. If you don't act on it for four years, many of the conditions in the agreement will have changed."

The launch of the Global Methodist Church is one of the "changed conditions," Rev. Berlin added.

"The Global Methodist Church has now started, and churches are using Paragraph 2553 [to disaffiliate]," he noted. "If they desire they can join the Global Methodist Church, but many are simply becoming independent, or joining another denomination."

Rev. Berlin said the Protocol Response was not crafted as a reaction to a movement that is trying to substitute Book of Discipline Paragraph 2548.2, which provides for a simple transfer of property to another Methodist denomination, for the "gracious exit" of Paragraph 2553, which requires departing churches to pay annual conferences two years of apportionments and 110 percent of unfunded pension liabilities.

"Paragraph 2553 was proposed by a member of the Wesleyan Covenant Association at the 2019 General Conference," Rev. Berlin said. "It was supposed to be the 'gracious exit' and I assume it was thought to be fair and equitable at the time. I don't know why they now think Paragraph 2553 isn't equitable. It seems odd."

He said that the traditionalist groups that helped draft the Protocol were notified about the statement before it was released via social media. However, no representatives of traditionalist groups were part of the discussion of the statement, Rev. Berlin said.

Rev. Berlin also said that the Protocol Response wasn't consciously timed to be published during the U.S. annual conference season, but he acknowledged that the timing is fortuitous.

"During an annual conference season people talk a lot," said Rev. Berlin, whose church is in the Virginia Annual Conference. "I do know we've heard more concerns about where we will be in two years.

"The point is, this is a time when United Methodists are making decisions about the future. Many of us want to stay [in The United Methodist Church] and create the denomination we think God wants us to create. Others want to create other expressions of Methodism."

Rev. Berlin stressed that the groups which drafted the response aren't attempting to retaliate against traditionalists' actions.

"I hope people would understand that sharing this information is an act of goodwill," he said. "It's not an attempt to harm anyone, but to give people the information they need to make important decisions."

Wesleyan Covenant Association President Jay Therrell responded to Insight's email invitation with the following statement:

"The WCA is deeply saddened that with no consultation and little notification, that progressive and centrist signers and endorsers of the Protocol have chosen lawlessness and chaos over an orderly, amicable, grace-filled separation by withdrawing their support from the mediated agreement. This further erodes trust and pushes theologically conservative congregations to the place where they are required either to pay onerous and punitive exit fees or litigate their way out of the denomination. Things did not have to be this way. The WCA will contend for our churches and clergy.”

The text of the Protocol Response follows.

A Statement About The Protocol Of Reconciliation & Grace Through Separation

In the aftermath of the 2019 Special Session of the General Conference and the subsequent crises it caused within the United Methodist Church, Bishop John Yambasu of Sierra Leone (now deceased) experienced a deep calling to bring healing to the denomination. Drawing on the relationships built over many years of leadership and ministry, Bishop Yambasu and other Central Conference Bishops convened a diverse group of church leaders representing centrist, progressive, and conservative constituencies within the Church.

Over time, this initial group solidified and became the unofficial mediation group that produced the Protocol of Reconciliation & Grace through Separation. Facilitated by world-renowned mediator Kenneth Feinberg, Esq., the mediation team acknowledged the reality of irreconcilable differences in theology, biblical interpretation, and disciplinary practices within the UMC. Then, guided by a commitment to principles of amicable separation, the mediation group met over a period of six months and developed a mutually agreed-upon framework that proposed a special, time-limited pathway for churches wishing to disaffiliate from the United Methodist Church.

The Protocol Agreement was publicly unveiled in January 2020 and, shortly thereafter, its enabling legislation was submitted for consideration at the 2020 General Conference. What no one could have foreseen, however, was the sudden onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic, which locked down whole communities, disrupted domestic and international travel, and caused multiple postponements of the General Conference. One of the chief impacts of the pandemic for the United Methodist church will be that the Protocol Agreement first released in early 2020 will not be legislation considered until the postponed General Conference meets in 2024. By this time, four years will have gone by since it was originally proposed.

Out of a spirit of transparency, trust, and accountability, members of the mediation team have reached out to the organizations that initially supported the Protocol Agreement, General Conference delegates, and others within our broad constituencies. The overwhelming consensus among those with whom we spoke is that the once-promising Protocol Agreement no longer offers a viable path forward, particularly given the long delays, the changing circumstances within the United Methodist Church, and the formal launch of the Global Methodist Church in May of this year.

Moreover, bishops and church leaders in the Central Conferences, especially in Africa and the Philippines, have consistently voiced serious misgivings about the Protocol and its potentially disruptive impacts in their geographical regions. Since the Protocol was first released, these initial misgivings have crystallized into firm opposition in annual conferences worldwide.

Given the growing opposition to the Protocol within the constituencies we represent, the dwindling support among General Conference delegates, and the serious reservations of Central Conference leaders, we can no longer in good faith support the Protocol of Reconciliation & Grace through Separation or work towards its adoption at the next General Conference.

We are profoundly grateful for the prayers, time, and sacrifices made by all those who contributed, directly or indirectly, to the development of the Protocol of Reconciliation and Grace through Separation. That effort represented an extraordinary convening process that engaged people of diverse geographies, backgrounds, and theological perspectives to think through the possibility of achieving amicable separation. While we can no longer endorse the Protocol Agreement and its enabling legislation as a whole, our organizations and constituencies continue their strong support for some of its most essential provisions, including:

A continued commitment to finding constructive paths for individual congregations to disaffiliate from the United Methodist Church using BOD ¶ 2553. We, therefore, implore bishops, district superintendents, and conference trustees to facilitate amicable departures after congregations pay their required pension liabilities.

A renewed dedication to acknowledging the historical role of the Methodist movement in systems of systematic racial violence, exploitation, and discrimination. We, therefore, urge the General Conference to allocate $39M over the next two quadrennia to strengthen ministries by and for Asian, Black, Hispanic-Latino, Native American, and Pacific Islander Communities and ensure that Africa University can continue its vital work of training the next generation of leaders.

Continued abeyance on all administrative or judicial processes addressing restrictions in the Book of Discipline related to self-avowed practicing homosexuals or same-sex weddings through the adjournment of the first conference of the post-separation United Methodist Church.

As we move through this season of Pentecost, we continue to pray for the Holy Spirit to fall afresh on God’s Church and lead us even deeper in the way of Christ,

Respectfully submitted,

Mediation Team Members

Rev. Thomas Berlin, representing UMCNext, Mainstream UMC, Uniting Methodists

Rev. Egmedio "Jun" Equila, Jr., Philippines Central Conference

Janet Lawrence, representing Affirmation, Methodist Federation for Social Action, and Reconciling Ministries Network

Rev. David Meredith, representing Affirmation, Methodist Federation for Social Action, and Reconciling Ministries Network, member of UM Queer Clergy Caucus

Dr. Randall Miller, representing Affirmation, Methodist Federation for Social Action, and Reconciling Ministries Network

Endorsing Organizations

Neil Alexander on behalf of Uniting Methodists

Bridget Cabrera on behalf of Methodist Federation for Social Action

Ann Craig on behalf of Affirmation

Rev. Ginger Gaines-Cirelli on behalf of UMCNext

Rev. James Harnish, on behalf of Uniting Methodists

Rev. Mark Holland on behalf of Mainstream UMC

Rev. David Livingston on behalf of Mainstream UMC

Rev. Jasmine Smothers on behalf of UMCNext

Cynthia B. Astle serves as Editor of United Methodist Insight, which she founded in 2011. To reproduce this content elsewhere, please email for permission.