by Joseph F. DiPaolo

On September 19, I boarded a plane in Philadelphia to take me, by way of Dallas, to San Jose, Costa Rica. I was headed to the convening General Conference of Global Methodist Church to attend as an observer. As an avid student of Methodist history, I wanted to witness firsthand the birth of a new traditionalist Methodist denomination, just as I had witnessed, last spring in Charlotte, the birth (or rebirth) of a new, progressive United Methodist denomination.

There were certainly many parallels between the two. High quality worship and musicianship were in evidence in both. Instantly recognizable was the breakdown into legislative committees, and the “perfecting” of proposed petitions, before their submission to plenary for debate and vote. Familiar also were moments when a presiding bishop turned to a colleague on the platform for help getting out of some parliamentary tangle.

More significantly, there was real unity of purpose evident in both Charlotte and San Jose. While there was more dissent in Charlotte (especially from African delegates), nonetheless both bodies appeared to enter their deliberations with wide agreement on where they wanted to go. Legislation moved through committees and plenary sessions with efficiency, and in both cases significant matters were dealt with through use of the consent calendar. In both General Conferences, the delegates were largely of one mind theologically; there were no interminable periods of wrangling on the floor, or much uncertainty as to outcomes on most major issues.

Another parallel was the absence of African delegates due to problems in attaining visas. About 30 of the roughly 330 delegates to the GMC conference were unable to make it. But in this area of commonality there was also a major difference: the GMC was able to arrange for remote, online participation by those delegates. After some glitches on the first day or so, the Africans took part fully in all the debates and votes, both in legislative and plenary sessions. This demonstrated that my own UMC could have made the same arrangements last May if they really had wanted to do so.

Despite the absence of those delegates, yet another similarity was the international flavor of the two gatherings, with delegates and guests from Eastern Europe, the Philippines, Africa, and elsewhere. The fact that the GMC event was held outside the USA only emphasized the global aspirations of this new denomination, as did some of its decisions. Two of the six interim bishops elected were Africans (from Nigerian and the Congo), and leaders announced that the next General Conference will be held in Africa.

As to differences, the GMC Conference was much smaller, only about 330 delegates (verses about 800 in Charlotte), with fewer observers, guests and vendors. Also missing in San Jose were protests, caucuses or special interest groups.

A major difference was a baseline of trust in Costa Rica which I have not experienced in United Methodist conferences for decades. Over the years in the UMC, whenever someone came up to a mic to speak, often everyone’s first thoughts were about identifying what group that person represented, and whether there was an agenda behind the stated intent of a proposed action. Bishops in the UMC were often under suspicion for how they presided – most notably in 2016 when one was accused of giving secret hand signals to influence a vote. I saw none of that in San Jose. There seemed to be a presumption of good will on the part of delegates toward one another, and toward the leadership.

Undoubtedly, the biggest difference was the commitment I saw in San Jose to reasserting foundational Christian teachings. In the liturgies, chosen hymns and preaching there was a marked emphasis on orthodox biblical teaching from an historic Wesleyan perspective. During the Sunday worship service, the Apostles’ Creed was recited by the assembly, and with gusto. A surprising emphasis (to me) was the effort to bring back to stage center a focus on the call to holiness, or sanctification. This was once a hallmark of Methodism, but has been largely forgotten over the last century. This was evident even in a revised mission statement, passed on the last day, declaring the GMC’s mission “…to make disciples of Jesus Christ and spread scriptural holiness across the globe.”

A noteworthy difference to watch as it unfolds concerns bishops. The shape of the episcopacy was the most contentious issue delegates struggled to resolve in San Jose. While both the UMC and the GMC will retain bishops in their polity, in the GMC the episcopacy will not mirror the diocesan style of the UMC, with bishops tied long-term to particular conferences. GMC conferences will be led by appointed superintendents, while bishops will give general oversight, reminiscent of early American Methodism, and focus more on articulating and defending the faith than on administration. Given the great cultural differences in different parts of the world, it will be interesting to watch how well this works. GMC bishops will be elected at General Conferences rather than at regional conferences. They also will be term-limited, and be required to stand for reelection.

There was one more parallel I saw between these two General Conferences, and it was perhaps the most striking of all. That was an almost palpable sense of relief and release. Both in Charlotte and San Jose, the assembled bodies were finally free from the deadlock of perennial parliamentary combat, and I could almost feel a sense of relief. Now both groups were free, released to pursue their different visions of what the Church of Jesus Christ should be, and how it might move forward in ministry to the world.

They are two very different visions indeed, likely to reach very different groups of people in North America and around the globe. May each be blessed in all they do that is in accordance with God’s will. But I wonder: how much grief and pain might have been avoided if both sides had been released to do so years – or even decades – earlier.

Rev. Joseph F. DiPaolo is a clergy member of the Eastern PA Conference of the UMC and a past member of the Commission on the General Conference.