ENVISIONING A SUSTAINABLE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH IN NIGERIA BY 2040

By: Rev. Ande I. Emmanuel

It is true that The United Methodist Church worldwide is having a tumultuous time. Recent events that are happening ranging from the debate over human sexuality, our doctrinal heritage and the church taking place majorly in the United States are clear indications that our church as we know it to be will never be the same in the near future, hence the need for the United Methodist. Church in Nigeria to start thinking of building its momentum towards being less dependent on foreign aid. This week I listened to a Facebook live presentation titled “GMC Thursday Night Live” where Rev. Dr. Sterling Allen was talking to Rev. Dr. Daniel Topalski from Bulgaria on the bold steps of the Bulgarian United Methodists exiting the United Methodist church in order to join the Global Methodist Church, toward the end of the conversation, Rev. Sterling made a statement on Africa Central Conferences not being able to make the sacrifice of joining the Global Methodist Church now because of the support they are getting from the United Methodist Church https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gtqVSr0_zjk&feature=youtu.be. Personally, I feel this statement is ridiculing the Central Conferences in Africa. This type of statement may be true for the few who want to join the Global Methodist Church in Africa but are waiting for 2024, but for the majority who will continue in the United Methodist Church. If such statements are not true, this is the reason why, as United Methodists in Nigeria, we must begin to a stronger self supportive denomination which does not depend too much on foreign money and foreign theology. I know God has blessed with resources both capital and human that could help us do a mission within our context. The truth is, our United Methodist Church will not remain the same in the near future. The fact is that The United Methodist Church in Nigeria is one of the regions in Africa, the church's membership is fast growing. A brief overview of the historical movement of the United Methodism in Nigeria reveals that from 1984 –2016 the church has maintained a steady membership growth of more than 15% annually. Between these period the United Method Methodist Church has grown in Nigeria from: one Muri Provisional Annual Conference to Four Annual Conferences, from 28 pastors to 785 pastors, from 15 districts and 180 charges to 52 districts and 900 plus charges with about 162 preaching centers, from a 145,000 membership statistic to 742,652 professing membership statistics in 2016. Looking at 2020 – 2040, we are projecting 18% annual growth, and by 2040 we are going to have 2, 579,425 professing membership growth. An analysis of the geographical demography of Nigeria provides some interesting facts that include the above projection possible. Nigeria is situated on the western coast of Africa sharing its border with the North Atlantic Ocean, between Benin and Cameroon. It covers an area of 923, 768 km. Different religious accumulations have resided in the land of Nigeria many years ago, but the Islamic religion continues to pre-dominate the northern part of the country and Christianity dominate the south and south-eastern part of Nigeria. Nigeria is a country of about 200 million people. The United Nations Organization has estimated that Nigeria is one of the populous countries on the African continent. By estimates, Nigeria’s fast-growing and youthful population is providing dynamism for Evangelism in the country specifically in the Northern region. For example, at the end of last year, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) revealed that Nigeria’s population is now estimated to have surpassed 193 million, significantly exceeding the earlier U.N. projection of 187 million in 2016 (http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng) . In other words, the U.N.’s much-publicized forecast that Nigeria will overtake the United States as the world’s third-most populous nation by 2050 will likely happen much sooner than that (https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/06/nigeria-become-3rd-populous-country-2050-un-report) . Add to the fact that Nigeria’s fertility rate is 5.13 children per woman, compared with 1.87 per woman in the United States. This is a strong factor in the projected membership of the Nigeria Episcopal Area by 2040. Given the Nigerian covered land area and the growing national population, making it three to four times other African countries put together. This has given Nigeria her vaunted status as the ordained “Giant of Africa”. The current religio-political and socio-economic situation in Nigeria is serving as a clarion call for the United Methodist Church in Nigeria to use this opportunity by coming up with plans. that will boost the growth of United Methodism in Nigeria by 2040. Nigeria is a country with 36 states. plus the Federal Capital Territory. More than 70% of the United Methodists in Nigeria lived in the Northeastern part of Nigeria, in states like Taraba, Adamawa, Gombe, Bauchi, Yobe, Benue, Kaduna, Nasarawa, Kano, Lagos, Abuja, Niger and Plateau make the remaining parts of the country a potential ground for the growth of The United Methodist Church in Nigeria. We envisioned a United Methodist Church that will be strong in the South –South and South East, North West and North Central.There are also potential international areas of growth in the Chad Republic, Niger Republic and parts of the Cameroon republic that shares a border with Nigeria. By 2040, we envision a United States. Methodist Church with the following capacities: 1. A member Strength of 2.5million people (with presence in South-South and South-East). 2. With 2500 local churches and 600 preaching centers nationwide. 3. With 2500 clergy and 700 lay preachers. 4. With 8 Annual conferences and 4 bishops. 5. An established United Methodist University of Nigeria (UMUN). 6. A Rice Processing company in Karim Local Government. 7. A Micro Finance Bank in Karim Lamido 8. 12 trained PhD scholars in relevant fields of human endeavors. 9. A workable clergy pension and medical/life insurance plan. 10. Building a modern Camp and Retreat Centers annual conference. In summary, the following factors will necessitate the above projection by 2040: 1. Rapid population growth. 2. Live impacting programs of The United Methodist Church, for example, Evangelism and Discipleship. 3. A revived interest of young people in the Church is signaling a bright future for United Methodism in Nigeria. Judging from the rapid national population and the growth of the United Methodist Church in Nigeria, we are envisioning more vibrant United Methodist Church in Nigeria by 2040 with more vibrant leadership.

A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF THE PROTOCOL AND THE CHRISTMAS COVENANT LEGISLATIONS AND THE CONTRAST BETWEEN AFRICA VOICE OF UNITY (AVU) AND AFRICA IMITATIVE OF THE UMC IN AFRICA

By: Rev. Ande I. Emmanuel 

Grace and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. I hope my African brethren are doing well wherever you are in this great continent of Africa. I am putting this presentation together to help our African brothers and sisters understand clearly what is going on in the United Methodist Church as we face the uncertainties of our next General Conference. 

Currently, there are two major petitions before the United Methodist General Conference which when passed will determine our future together or apart. One of these petitions is called "Protocol of Reconciliation and Grace through Separation" this is the plan that is calling split in the United Methodist Church. The other petition is called "Christmas Covenant" this is the plan that is calling for unity of the United Methodist Church that allows contextual and regional ministry in the United Methodist Church.

At the moment in Africa, two advocacy teams are working among Africans to promote the above petitions. One is called the "Africa Initiative" which is promoting the Protocol to split the United Methodist Church among Africa to join a new denomination. The other advocacy team is called "Africa Voice of Unity" (AVU) which is promoting the Christmas Covenant to keep the unity of the United Methodist Church.

In this article, I will present a comprehensive analysis of the two petitions and the two advocacy groups in Africa with the sole aim of allowing the United Methodists in Africa to understand and make informed decisions.  

I am a founding team member of the Africa Voice of Unity (AVU), an emerging evangelical, transparent, and Bible-based advocacy team founded by the Africans for the Africans to ensure the sustainability of the United Methodist Church in Africa beyond the next General Conference.

AVU was formed because of the failures of the Africa Initiative in many areas, few are listed as follows:

1.       Africa Imitative has failed to be a transparent group in many faces. It has become too dependent on what is coming from WCA, Good News, Confessing Movement, and other American traditional groups. 

2.       Africa Initiative has failed to initiate anything African since its inception but depended on what comes from the traditional groups in American including easy things like voting at the General Conference.

3.       Africa Initiative is trading Africans for the interest of few individuals. It lacks collaborative tactics in networking with different people across Africa. That is why these few individuals have been taking unilateral decisions at the expense of every one of us.

We need to understand that African United Methodism has the capacity, power, and the right to remain in the United Methodist Church and maintained its definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman even if entire America chooses to change its definition of marriage. There is nowhere in the Bible or our Book of Disciple that suggested otherwise. Marriage is indeed a divine institution rooted in the Bible that is a theological fact and those of us who are saying we do not need to leave the United Methodist Church are not saying anything different. Our remaining in the United Methodist Church means maintaining our name, logo, current position of the church on homosexuality. As United Methodists in Africa, we can set our barrier on human sexuality without any foreign interference and that is what we are looking for in the Christmas Covenant.

I know there is no petition submitted to the General Conference that is in it every form 100% perfect but, to be honest with you the Christmas Covenant in its present form is 75% better than the Separation agenda promoted in the Protocol. I disagree with the statement that the Christmas Covenant is a window to accepting homosexuality in Africa. Though our understanding of regional contextualization may differ, I think it is an exaggeration to say that the Christmas Covenant is opening a window for Africa to accept homosexuality. Africa Voice of Unity is not in any way contradicting itself.

Nowhere in the Christmas Covenant is allowing Africans to legalized same-sex marriage as purported by some individuals in Africa. What we are looking at at the Christmas Covenant is an opportunity to make the United Methodist Church more global by removing issues that are US-centric and allowing for a complete focus on truly global issues. To be honest, leaving the United Methodist Church for an issue that is more American for some of us is not a justifiable reason. Homosexuality at this given time is a US-centric problem. That does not deny the fact that there are homosexual in Africa but means despite their existence, they have not come up openly in our churches to request an official endorsement why because homosexuality is a taboo in Africa, that even in beer parlors people do not talk about it talk less of the Church. This is the same way we have fornicators, adulterers, thieves, and robbers, etc., in Africa who have not come to receive church blessing in such abominable acts and their presence in our church is not causing us to leave the Church.

In African, we can set our barrier to homosexuality and continue our ministries in the United Methodist Church without changing our name and logo to satisfy the demands of some Americans. We can have unity as United Methodist Church in Africa without accepting to change our definition of marriage and without changing our name and logo.

On the Christmas Covenant, the Central Conference Outreach team who are writers of the Christmas Covenant founded this just after General Conference 2019 as a way to push back on the American neocolonialism agenda, which is always exhibited by both American Conservatives and Progressives. Whilst generally the so-called southern Conservative Americans are racist the progressives are generally bully.

Those of us who follow the events in the denomination know that the plan to split the United Methodist Church was crafted by Good News in 2004 and then no Africans were involved in crafting that plan. If the African Initiative was part of that plan then some of us have more questions for them to answer.  In the 2004 document, you can read the plan is clear; to cause chaos in the UMC make it ungovernable until the denomination is divided.

The Christmas Covenant is not seeking to amend the section in the BOD on homosexuality. If you see anywhere in this legislation where it is amending any section on homosexuality please point it out. The point I am making clear is the Christmas Covenant is not in any way allowing Homosexuality in Africa or anywhere because that is not the intent of the legislation. The intend of the legislation is to restructure the denomination. To create a structure that is connectional but acknowledging contextual differences in different parts of the world.

In the Christmas Covenant proposal what will happen is the General Book of Discipline will be addressing theological, doctrinal, articles of religion, general rules, and General administration issues, etc. It will be up to each region to take a position on moral-ethical issues like polygamy, homosexuality, divorce, witchcraft, etc.

In contrast, let me draw your attention to the New Global Methodist Church (GMC) Book of Discipline and Doctrine. GMC is very silent on the issue of homosexuality, go and read their Book of Discipline and Doctrine. I am wondering why the African Initiative failed to push for the traditional plan adopted at the 2019 General Conference to be shoplifted and made the bedrock of the Book of Discipline and Doctrine in the New GMC denomination. 

Now to those who are arguing about being a connectional church and different standards. When you read the Global Methodist Church book of discipline and doctrine it is clear that you are not a connectional church but a regionalized church. The GMC is more of a One Church Plan structure if you read their book of doctrine and discipline. Because in the GMC decisions are mainly made by local churches that even include decisions about the hiring of pastors the local church is the one that hires pastors that means there is no itinerancy and no connectional relationship in the GMC. The GMC is more of a congregational denomination please read their Book of Discipline and Doctrines.

Now back to the facts on the future of UMC in Africa. The Christmas Covenant is not seeking to have UMC approve homosexuality. When the Christmas Covenant is passed at GC 2022 that means the General conference will never again have to debate about homosexuality because we in Africa will always say that issue does not belong to General Conference business. That will be a debate to take place in the regional conferences. What that means is the debate will be done in Europe and the USA. since in Africa, we are very clear that homosexuality is incompatible with the Christian teaching.

Here is a fact. The progressives have founded their denomination Liberation Methodist Connexion. The conservatives have founded their denomination Global Methodist Church. Both of these denominations are Methodist denominations and both are coming out of the protocol agreement. The United Methodist is remaining and going forward.

Of recent, the protocol has become mute as we speak because the separation has already happened the two denominations which are negotiated in the protocol have already been formed and functioning, The two groups are now only waiting for the General Conference to get two things, 1. 25million dollars and 2million dollar. Properties that is church buildings and having to leave without having to pay for pension liabilities. I do not know how the African Initiative was involved in these negotiations and agreements as well as formations. Someone suggested that the African initiative has proposed some amendments to the protocol agreement but that is not possible because the agreement was signed with a clause that, will not be amended, and if any part of the agreement is changed the whole agreement is rendered null and void. That is why at this moment the Renewal and Reform Coalition is pushing the protocol to be on May 8, 2021, special GC agenda to be passed on the NO/Yes vote without amendments, I do not know why the African Initiative is agreeing to that without having their proposed amendments considered. The point being the protocol cannot be amended once that happens the agreement falls apart and a lot of changes will start to happen. The conservatives in America are not willing to take that risk.

 Now to the relationship of the protocol and CC, the protocol is the rearview mirror showing us our past and where we are coming from. The Christmas covenant is our windscreen showing us about the future where we are going. Those who have read the protocol agreement know that there is regionalization in that agreement and the Christmas Covenant is simply providing details of how that regionalization will be like in the UMC. The GMC have their regionalization in their book of doctrine and discipline.

 I am a signatory and an organizer of the Africa Voice of Unity statement. This statement is clear, that we are advocating for remaining in The United Methodist Church. We are not against the protocol but we are clearly and strongly supporting the Christmas Covenant because we see it as the future of The United Methodist Church in Africa. The Christmas Covenant is giving The United Methodist Church in Africa's voice, authority, and power to make our own decisions and take the positions of our conservative, and to maintain our biblical position on marriage. we are not against the African Initiative but we are not in support of it either. There are points we agree with the African initiative but we simply do not agree on supporting the neocolonial separation agenda. We are our people putting forward an African agenda. Whoever, from other parts of the world who wants to engage with us, should engage with us on our terms our agenda, and our positions. We are clear to the connectional church that we are African United Methodists we will not be pushed from the UMC and we will not accept homosexuality we are very clear on that.

We are not standing in the way of those who want to leave and join either GMC or LMC. It is your right and anyone can recruit for their new denomination. We are simply stating the fact that we are United Methodists in Africa we are not leaving. We are the stay group. Our message is clear stay with The United Methodist Church. We are supporting the majority of our African Bishops in staying in the UMC. For those who want to leave it is their right to do so, let us just not spread misinformation about things we do not understand. Those of us in the AVU do not talk much about the African Initiative we talk about The United Methodist Church in Africa that is why we support the Christmas Covenant because we support regionalization and we are against homosexuality in The UMC in Africa. We are Africans and United Methodists. We are staying in the UMC that is our message as AVU.

Those who are staying with The United Methodist Church let us work together for a stronger United Methodist Church in Africa that will be African in nature and spirit. Those who are going to join the GMC or LMC we bless you and wish you well as fellow Methodists brothers and sisters. We hope you will be able to maintain your African identity in those denominations.

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH

The United Methodist Church is a collection of associated congregations of Protestantism whose doctrine and beliefs are motivated by the spirit and teachings of John Wesley. George Whitefield and John Wesley's brother Charles Wesley were also significant early leaders in the movement.

Early Methodists consisted of all levels of society, including the aristocracy, but the Methodist preachers brought the teachings to laborers and criminals who were likely left outside of organized religion at that time. In Britain, the Methodist Church had a considerable impact in the early decades of the developing working class.

Here are the top 10 things to know about the Methodist Church:

1. The Methodist Church began as a reformation classmates because of the way they used "rule" and "method" to determine their religious convictions. John, who was the leader of the club, took the attempted mockery and turned it into a title of honor. 

2. Wesley did not intend to split from the Church of England.

Initially, the Methodists simply sought reform within the Church of England.  As Methodist congregations multiplied, and elements of a distinct theology were adopted, the rift between John Wesley and the Church of England steadily expanded.

In 1784, Wesley responded to the lack of priests in the colonies due to the American Revolutionary War by anointing preachers with authority to administer the sacraments. This was a significant reason for Methodism's eventual split from the Church of England after Wesley's death.  This separation created a distinct group of church denominations. With regard to the occurrence of Methodism within Christianity, John Wesley once noted that "what God had achieved in the development of Methodism was no mere human endeavor but the work of God. As such it would be preserved by God so long as history remained."

3. John Wesley taught four key points fundamental to the Methodist Church.

1) A person is free not only to reject salvation but also to accept it by an act of free will.

2) All people who are obedient to the gospel according to the measure of knowledge given them will be saved.

3) The Holy Spirit assures a Christian of their salvation directly, through an inner "experience" (assurance of salvation).

4) Christians in this life are capable of Christian perfection and are commanded by God to pursue it.. 

4. Methodists are known for their rich musical tradition.

Some of the most well-known hymn writers in Christianity were Methodists.  Most notable was Charles Wesley wrote penned over 6,000 hymns in his lifetime.  Many of his hymns are translated into other languages and form the foundation for Methodist hymnals.  Wesley's hymns are famous as interpretations of Scripture. As a result of his renowned hymnody, the Gospel Music Association acknowledged his musical contributions to the realm of gospel music in 1995 by including his name in the Gospel Music Hall of Fame.

5. The United Methodist Church is the largest American mainline denomination.

With nearly 12 million members in 42,000 congregations worldwide, the United Methodist Church is the largest American mainline denomination. The UMC was formed in 1968 with a merger of the Evangelical United Brethren Church and the Methodist Church.  Today, the UMC is a participating member of the World Council of Churches and the National Council of Churches.  There are seven World Methodist Council denominations in the United States: the African Methodist Episcopal Church; the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church; the Christian Methodist Episcopal Church; the Church of the Nazarene; the Free Methodist Church; the Wesleyan Church; 

6. The Methodist denomination grew from four people to over a hundred thousand in Wesley's lifetime.

From the origin of Methodism, a group of four men who called themselves the “holy club” at Oxford, was an impressive growth in the span of John Wesley's lifetime. When Wesley passed away in 1791, the movement he helped start had grown to 72,000 members in the British Isles and 60,000 in America.  Methodism continued to grow as today, across the multiple Methodist denominations, there are nearly 40 million members worldwide. 

7. Wesley believed in the importance of “social holiness.”

Wesley preached that we needed to be involved in “social holiness.”  He believed we could only grow as Christians in a community, surrounded by people of similar faith and conviction.  In his preface to the 1739 hymnal, he was insistent that “the gospel of Christ knows of no religion but social; no holiness but social holiness.”

8. John Wesley coined the term “agree to disagree.”

Numerous times, Wesley engaged in heated theological disputes with another renowned preacher named George Whitefield. Though they both debated intensely, Wesley reflected on their contrast in beliefs in a memorial sermon for Whitefield by saying:  “There are many doctrines of a less essential nature. ... In these, we may think and let think; we may 'agree to disagree.' But, meantime, let us hold fast the essentials. …” This appears to be the first documented use of the phrase. It was an indication of Wesley’s manner of sticking to his convictions while remaining in connection with those with whom he disagreed. 

9. John Wesley wrote one of the bestselling medical texts of all-time.

Wesley was deeply convicted that God is concerned about our earthly life as well as our heavenly one. To that end, he wrote a medical text for the everyday person titled Primitive Physick.  The book discussed the contemporary knowledge about home health remedies and went through 32 editions, making it one of the most widely read books in England.

Many of Wesley’s suggestions for healthy living remain commonly confirmed. While some of his recommendations were hopeful thinking, the most significant portion of his philosophy was his conviction on continual observation to support hypotheses. Wesley bravely questioned modern doctors about how they sometimes treated humans like machines and that much of their “medicine” lacked merit and evidence to support its effectiveness.

10. Although the Methodist Church is declining in Great Britain and North America, it is growing rapidly in South Korea.

The Korean Methodist Church is one of the largest churches in South Korea with around 1.5 million members and 8,306 ministers. Methodism in Korea grew from British and American mission work which began in the late 19th century.

The first missionary was Robert Samuel Maclay of the Methodist EpiscopalChurch, who sailed from Japan in 1884 and was given the authority of medical and schooling permission from emperor Gojong. The Korean church became fully autonomous in 1930, retaining affiliation with Methodist churches in America and later the United Methodist Church.

The church experienced dramatic growth in membership throughout most of the 20th century, despite the Korean War, before settling in the 1990s. The KMC is a member of the World Methodist Council and hosted the first Asia Methodist Convention in 2001.

THE CHURCH OF GOD IS MATCHING ON

 It is true that the United Methodist Church in Nigeria (UMCN) has already exceeded its target of being a one million church membership in Nigeria. Despite pockets of challenges the churches have faced in recent times, yet it continued to grow and transforming lives. At the moment the Nigerian Episcopal Area has four Annual Conferences, fifty two districts, 724 charges, 233 preaching centers and 48 house fellowships with an estimated membership of one million Eighty three thousand four hundred and sixty two (1,086,462).

This ecclesiastical structure is being catered by one resident bishop, 52 district superintendents and 908 pastors. This remarkable achievement didn’t happen without challenges. The United Methodist Church in Nigeria in the past has been through series of challenges but the recent one which started in 2012 has taken totally a different dimension. Due to the fact that a group of individuals mostly of the same linage around Jalingo, Yorro and Zing who are jurisdictionally under the Southern Nigeria Annual Conference broke out of the Conference and form a group that looks like a Church but has no identity yet. This group started a meeting in 2014 which they called “Annual Conference” but has no presiding bishop. How did this happen? And what could be the way forward? Let’s look at this briefly. Shortly after the demise of bishop Mavula the second resident bishop of UMC Nigeria, the West Africa College of bishop and the Council of bishop sent Bishop Arthur F. Kulah to Nigeria. Bishop Kulah was to unite the Church and to prepare grounds for the election of Bishop Mavula’s successor. By many people’s assessments including myself Bishop Arthur Kulah’s four years was very productive, that at the end of 2011 he was able to unite all the conferences in Nigeria and getting them ready to elect the next bishop for the Nigeria Episcopal Area.

 In 2012 preparation was at the top gear to elect bishop for Nigeria at the forth coming West Africa Central Conference meeting in Sierra Leone. This preparation includes identification/nomination process. These identification/nomination processes produced three candidates from each from Conference. The last process took place in the Central Nigeria Annual Conference and produces Bishop John Wesley Yohanna as the one who scored the highest votes - not only in the Central Conference but in all the Conferences. Bishop At the end of the identification processes John Wesley Yohanna emerged as the only candidate who scored votes in all three conference. Seeing the outcome of the identification/nomination some group of persons mostly of the same linage (who are not members of the Central Nigeria Annual Conference) revolted the outcome of the process in the Central Nigeria Annual Conference. On the allegation that there was an over voting.

It is worth noting that for this group to poke nose into the affairs of a Conference which they are not members was wrong and a display of lack of understanding of Conference independence in the United Methodist Church. Therefore, it is immaterial whether or not everyone living within the jurisdictions of Central Nigeria Annual Conference decided to vote for one candidate. On this I will refer you to the judgment of the UMC Judicial Council here http://www.umc.org/decisions/42161.

 The Episcopal Area decided to present to the West Africa Central Conference (WAC) three candidates for election. One from each Conference to be elected a bishop for the UMC in Nigeria, this development didn’t go well with the Breakaway Faction. So they wrote a protest letter to Bishop Kulah and WACC threatening to boycott the WACC meeting. WACC meeting in Sierra Leone received the letter of boycott and ruled it as unconstitutional. WACC which comprises of 80 delegates from Nigeria, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Cotediviore with only 13 absentees decided to proceed with the business of the conference including election of bishop for Nigeria. Election was conducted with the names of absentees including a chance for an additional name from the floor where none was added. At the end of the election, Bishop John Wesley Yohanna was declared winner after scoring 85% of the total votes. He was subsequently consecrated and assigned Bishop of the United Methodist Church in Nigeria (UMCN). The Breakaway Faction’s choice to absent itself from the West Africa Central Conference (WACC) didn’t hinder WACC from doing it regular business because bylaw the decision of the group to boycott WACC meeting in Sierra Leone was unconstitutional. Let me divert a little bit, this group that boycotted WACC meeting in Freetown Sierra Leone in 2012 is now begging in 2019 to travel to Freetown Sierra Leone on their own expense with a so called Way Forward. Tell me; is “Karma” not real?

UNITED METHODIST SOUTHERN NIGERIA ANNUAL CONFERENCE LEADERS SAY YES TO PEACE

UNITED METHODIST SOUTHERN NIGERIA ANNUAL CONFERENCE LEADERS SAY YES TO PEACE

By: Rev. Ande I. Emmanuel

         Official of the UMC Southern Nigeria Annual Conference at the peace talk

"We should do our best as Christians to live in peace with all people" said Bishop John Wesley Yohanna at the one day Southern Nigeria Annual conference peace talk organized by the office of the secretary of the annual conference.

The United Methodist Church Southern Nigeria Annual Conference, has taken a new dimension in approaching the internal challenges facing it. This was evident in the one day peace talk held at the UMC No.1 Jatutu Memorial Cathedral Magami Jalingo, today April 19/4/2014.

Leaders of the Southern Nigeria Annual Conference that include the Superintendent, 5 district superintendents, Conference secretary, Conference lay leader, Conference UM Women President, Women Desk, Conference UM Men President, Conference Youth &Young Adult President, Conference Evangelism director, Conference treasurer, 10 district Council Directors and lay leaders, Conference choir President, New Life for all President, conference CFA chairman and host others representing the 31 districts in the conference convened at the Cathedral to talk about peace in the church.

In his opening exhortation Rev. Luka C. Kiki, district superintendent of Bali admonished the Church leaders to be faithful stewards of God in their respective places of assignment. He added that all church leaders should be peace advocates, most especially in the period which the church is facing internal challenges. Rev.  Kiki, who read from 2 Timothy 2: 8-10 said "Church leaders must follow the foot step of Jesus Christ." Also in her presentation the Acting Superintendent of the Conference who is also one of the facilitators of the peace talk, Rev. Dr. Eunice Iliya explain to the leaders the need for peace in the Church and  Society. She said as United Methodists in Nigeria, the Southern Nigeria Annual Conference is one conference and we should be our brother and sisters keepers. She added that, though the Conference is facing challenges in areas where some of our brothers and sisters disassociated themselves from the activities of the conference simply because of the last Bishop's election. On that note she said to the conference leaders to still consider the broken faction as brothers and sister even when they declare that, they are no longer United Methodist Church. She further said that there should be no quarreling in the House of God.

The challenge facing the Southern Nigeria Annual Conference began shortly after the last bishop election in Freetown Sierra Leone. Some group of persons who boycotted the last session of the West Africa Central Conference meeting said they will not accept the election conducted in Freetown Sierra Leone because there was an infiltration of votes during the nomination exercise in the Central Nigeria Annual Conference. This group of persons, mostly people from the same tribe/geographical location said they have disassociated themselves from any activities of the United Methodist Church in Nigeria. Though they still use the name United Methodist  Church. The peace talk was aiming at developing strategies of living in peace with them.

Bishop John Wesley Yohanna in his address to the Church leaders, first call for peace, unity and love among all members of the Southern Nigeria Annual Conference. He said "My hands are widely open to accept and work with everybody." Bishop Yohanna encourages all the leaders of the Southern Nigeria Annual Conference to be lover of peace in their ministries.

At the end of the gathering, the leaders expressed  gratitude for the talk and advised that such type of talk should keep going on. The lay leader of the Conference, Hon. Driver Jalo said "We thank God and the organizers of this peace talk, because we have learned a lot here and we will do our best to live in peace with our brothers and sister." In the same ground the UM Women leader Southern Annual Conference,  Mrs. Jummai Isa said "the peace talk has enrich us with more knowledge on how to work  peacefully among ethnic diversity."

Feature of the peace talk include prayer for the Church and State, songs of praise, short exhortation and group discussions.

FALL 2013 DOCKET FOR JUDICIAL COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 23‐26, 2013 BALTIMORE, MARYLAND

 DOCKET 1013‐1
IN RE: Review of Revised Standing Rules of the North Texas Conference in Light of
Judicial Council Decisions 1198 and 1225
Digest of Decision 1225: The case is remanded to the North Texas Annual Conference for
revision and completion of the plan and to fulfill disciplinary requirements of paragraph 604
and to comply with Decision 1198. This plan is to be returned to the Secretary of the Judicial
Council 30 days after the close of the 2013 annual conference. (See Docket 1012‐9)

DOCKET 1013‐2
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the North Carolina Annual
Conference Regarding Report of the Transition Team in Light of Judicial Council
Decision 1224
Digest of Decision 1224: The Judicial Council remands this docket Item back to the Secretary of
the North Carolina Annual Conference with instructions to provide the Judicial Council with the
following: minutes from the 2011 Annual Conference, 2011‐2012 minutes from the district
conferences and a document that locates all districts within the bounds of the annual
conference. Furthermore, the North Carolina Annual Conference is instructed to also submit
evidence that the roles of the District Superintendent and the role of the Assistant to the
District Superintendents have been clearly defined. Submissions must reach the desk of the
Secretary of the Judicial Council no later than 30 days after the close of the 2013 annual
conference. (See Docket 1012‐7)

DOCKET 1013‐3
IN RE: Review of the Conference Plan of Structure of the South Carolina Annual
Conference in Light of Judicial Council Decisions 1204 and 1222
Digest of Decision 1222: We find partial compliance with Decision 1204, but cannot waive full
adherence to mandates of the Discipline. We remand anew to the South Carolina Annual
Conference to follow fully ¶ 614.3 on line item budget of commission on archives and history
for benevolences and ¶ 633.3 on membership of the secretary of global ministries in the
Annual Conference Board of Global Ministries and to report to us within 30 days from the last
day of the 2013 Annual Session. Our continuing jurisdiction is maintained. (See Docket 1012‐9)

DOCKET 1013‐4
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Congo Central Conference
Regarding Mandatory Retirement Age for Bishops in Light of ¶¶ 50, 408, and
543.3 and Judicial Council Decision 1240
Decision 1240: A decision is deferred until the Secretary of the Congo Central Conference
provides minutes of the relevant session. The Judicial Council retains jurisdiction. (See Docket
0413‐4)

DOCKET 1013‐5
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Philippines Central Conference
Regarding the Legality of Proposed Rules for the Election of Bishops
Motion: I move that the presiding Bishop make a ruling on Page 9, Line 229 the whole section
on Committee on Elections.
Specifically, the request was whether Article 2, Part E, Sections 18‐20 and Article 5, Part A,
Section 1‐9 of the Committee on Plan of Organization and Rules of Order (CPBRO) Proposal "are
in conflict with Par. 405 of the 2008 Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church and with
Sec. III, Part A.3 of the Philippines Central Conference Plan of Organization and Rules of Order as
printed in the 2012 Handbook for Delegates, page 85."

DOCKET 1013‐6
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law at the Western Jurisdictional
Conference Regarding the Relationship Between ¶ 2711.2 and the Resolution “The
Sense of the 2012 Western Jurisdictional Conference in Light of Judicial Council
Decision 1237
The Bishop’s decision that the question is moot is not affirmed. The matter is remanded
to the Bishop for a substantive ruling on the question of law within thirty days, and the Judicial
Council retains jurisdiction. (See Docket 0413‐2)

DOCKET 1013‐7
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Texas Annual Conference
Regarding the Appointment of a Pastor in Light of ¶¶ 420, 421, 430, 431, 432, 433,
362, and 2703
Was the appointment process used in moving Rev. Michael Caldwell from Rusk to Lissie
(December 2009‐June 2010) in keeping with p. 363, par. 420, par. 421.1‐3, par 430.1, par 431,
par. 432, par. 433.1‐5a, and with the understanding of fairness in par. 2703.2, par. 362b‐e
within and of The Discipline of the United Methodist Church?
Question of Law asked by a clergy member of the Texas Conference during the Texas
Conference’s Annual Conference Meeting (May 2013).
DOCKET 1013‐8
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Texas Annual Conference
Regarding the “Clergy Triad Process” in Light of ¶¶ 361, 363, and 604
“Is our triad process in keeping with paragraph 361.1(b), par. 604 and par. 363 of The
Discipline?”
This question of law is asked by a clergy member of the Texas Conference during its Annual
Conference meeting (May 2013)

DOCKET 1013‐9
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the New England Annual Conference
Regarding Setting the Agenda for an Annual Conference in Light of Judicial Council
Decisions 367 and 876 and ¶ 605.2
Bishop Devadhar, pursuant to paragraph 51 and 2609.6 in the Book of Discipline, I am
requesting a ruling of law.
Judicial Council Decisions 367 and 876 state in part, “Any organizational structure in an Annual
Conference dealing with legislative matters must protect: the rights of the Annual Conference
to receive and act on all proposals brought to it…and the rights of individual members of the
conference to be informed on and to participate fully in all legislative decisions.”;
In addition, Paragraphs 605.4 and 605.5, direct that “the business of annual conference shall
include receiving and acting upon reports…”that come from a variety of sources.
Before this body, we have 33 action items, including#101‐120, 201‐209, and 301‐304.
Paragraph 605.2 authorizes the Annual Conference to adopt an agenda in order to expedite the
transaction of its business.
My questions are this:
1) When setting the agenda pursuant to paragraph 605.2, and in light of the principles
expressed in Judicial Council Decision 367 and 876,do action items, specifically including
resolutions focused on social issues such as #207 and #208, have the same standing as business
items as reports do under paragraphs 605.4 and 605.5?
2) As business/action items, must they thus be given precedence, along with other business
items mandated in paragraph 605, over other agenda items during the Annual Conference
session that are not covered under paragraph 605 and thus are not mandatory"

DOCKET 1013‐10
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the North Carolina Annual
Conference Regarding the Application of ¶ 613.19 to the Conference Budget
During the 2013 session of the North Carolina Annual Conference a clergy member asked the following
question:
Under the Annual Conference Section:
1613.20. To ensure that no annual conference board, agency, committee,
commission, or council shall give United Methodist funds to any gay caucus or group, or
otherwise use such funds to promote the acceptance of homosexuality or violate the
expressed commitment of the UMC "not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and
friends"(11161.F). The council shall have the right to stop such expenditures. This restriction
shall not limit the Church's ministry in response to the HIV epidemic, nor shall it preclude
funding for dialogs or educational events where the Church's official position is fairly and
equally represented.
Line item 54 in our budget outlines an amount to be sent to the
North Carolina Council of Churches. Does this line item violate ¶613.20?
I have looked at the activities of the North Carolina Council of
churches and have found that their treatment on this issue is decidedly one‐sided and
appears to "promote the acceptance of homosexuality by:
1) Electing a self avowed practicing homosexual as president‐elect of its body in 2011.
2) Advocating for the legalization of homosexual marriage.
3) Admitting into its membership denominations that ordain self avowed
homosexuals and conduct same sex marriages or unions.
4) Providing worship resources that encourage acceptance of homosexuality.
Upon extensive research into the North Carolina Council of Churches position, I could
find nothing that provides the position that the practice of homosexuality is a sin or a call to
repentance. Quite the opposite‐all the literature, position papers, etc., sound the call that the
practice of homosexuality is to be accepted as a normal lifestyle.
Regardless of one's position on the issue of homosexuality and how it relates to the
church I am confident that any reasonable person would admit that the practices outlined
above to "promote the acceptance of homosexuality" the only issue is whether one is
supportive of advancing the acceptance of homosexuality or not.
Docket 1013‐11
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Southwest Texas Annual
Conference Regarding the Meaning, Effect, and Application of ¶¶ 313 and 635.2 in
Regards to the Discontinuance of a Certified Candidate
A clergy member of the Southwest Texas Annual Conference made the following request “I request a ruling
of law as to whether a Board of Ordained Ministry can discontinue the candidacy of a certified candidate for
ordained ministry who has been appropriately recommended by district committee on ordained ministry
without an interview and examination by that Board of Ordained Ministry?"

Docket 1013‐12
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the New York Annual Conference
Regarding the Application of ¶¶ 304.3, 341.6, and 2702 and Judicial Council
Decisions 886, 1111, and 1115 to Petition Entitled “Commendation of Those Who
Have Taken a Stand for Justice”
I request A Ruling Of Law by the Bishop on whether Item 3015, Petition #2013‐310,
"Commendation Of Those Who Have Taken A Stand For Justice," adopted by the New York
Annual Conference on June 7, 2013 violates The Book Of Discipline Paragraphs 304.3, 341.6 and
2702 and Judicial Council Decisions 886, 1111, and 1115 and is therefore void.
Petition #2013‐310 — Commendation of Those Who Have Taken a Stand for Justice
WHEREAS the New York Annual Conference has taken a consistent stand for more than thirty years calling
for the inclusion of God's gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender children in the full life of The
United Methodist Church. It has affirmed that "sexuality is God's good gift to all persons" and that
the diversity of that gift should bar no one from answering the call to ministry, from recognition of
her or his covenantal relationships, or from membership in the church community39, and
WHEREAS the New York Annual Conference has supported same‐sex couples' right to full equality in
civil society (2003 and 2007), has opposed The United Methodist Church's prohibition against samesex
marriages (1999 and 2010), and has supported the recognition that the "sanctity of marriage"
applies equally to same‐sex couples (2007), and
WHEREAS the jurisdiction of the New York Annual Conference includes parts of both the state of
New York and the state of Connecticut, states where civil marriage is legal for same‐sex couples,
presenting a crisis for our churches and clergy who need to provide pastoral care for members and
families who are part of our congregations, and
WHEREAS the New York Annual Conference declared in 2012 that "clergy, lay persons and
congregations encountering institutional discrimination that inhibits equal access to the means of grace
for all persons may feel bound by conscience to offer the ministries and sacraments of the church to all
persons on an equal basis" and that "Those who so act according to conscience do so in a way that is
consistent with the long‐standing principled declarations of this annual conference," and
WHEREAS there have been many prophetic and pastoral individuals and congregations within The
United Methodist Church who have taken actions that are aligned with the New York Annual Conference
and our longstanding efforts towards the inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons in the
life and ministry in the church.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend the Rev. Jimmy Creech
for officiating at the covenant services of same‐sex couples in 1997 and in 1999, subsequently
enduring two church trials in the Nebraska Annual Conference and losing his ministerial credentials,
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend the Rev. Gregory Dell for
providing pastoral care to same‐sex couples in his congregation, Broadway United Methodist Church,
in Chicago, Illinois, who endured a church trial in 2000 and was suspended from ministry for a year,
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend the Rev. Donald Fado and
the 67 additional clergy members of the Cal‐Nevada Annual Conference who co‐officiated at the
blessing of a Holy Union in Sacramento in 2000, and the Committee on Investigation of that
annual conference, who refused to bring charges against those clergy, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend the Rev. Dr. Karen Oliveto
for her pastoral care to eight couples who were seeking to be married during a one‐month period in 2004
when same‐sex marriages were briefly legal in San Francisco, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend the Rev. Amy
DeLong for herpastoral ministry to a same‐sex couple in the Wisconsin Annual Conference in 2009
and enduring a church trial for this pastoral act of ministry in 2011, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend the 208 clergy,
869 laity, and 6 congregations within our own annual conference who have pledged to offer
pastoral ministry to same‐sex couples seeking services of marriage, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend the more than
1,100 clergy across the connection who have pledged that they will also officiate at services
for same‐sex couples, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend Bishop Melvin
Talbert and his call for United Methodists to ignore the prohibitions against GLBT people that
are found in The Book of Discipline and saying "I declare to you that the derogatory language
and restrictive laws in The Book of Discipline are immoral, and unjust and no longer
deserve our loyalty and obedience," a call which has made him the target of opponents of
the LGBT people in The UMC, who have called for his censure, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New York Annual Conference commend all of those
unnamed clergy, laity, and congregations whose bold actions and courageous statements
help to provide for the pastoral needs of same‐sex couples within The United Methodist
Church.

Docket 1013‐13
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the California‐Pacific Annual
Conference Regarding the Legality of a Resolution Urging Bishops, Clergy, Local
Churches, and Ministry Settings “to Operate as if the Statement in ¶ 161f Does
Not Exist.”
On June 15, 2013, those present and voting in the official session of the California‐
Pacific Annual Conference of The United Methodist Church adopted Resolution 13‐16,
Biblical Obedience, which states as follows:
"WHEREAS, the Western Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church at it July 2012
meeting overwhelmingly passed a resolution entitled, "A Statement of Biblical
Obedience,"
WHEREAS the Christian Church, throughout its history, has changed practice and opinion
based on a fuller understanding of how God is at work and through the influence of the
Holy Spirit,
WHEREAS the California Pacific Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church
continues to work toward inclusion and justice for all God's people,
LET IT BE RESOLVED that the California Pacific Annual Conference supports the action taken
by the Western Jurisdiction as outlined in the following statement adopted by the
Jurisdictional Conference
A Statement of Biblical Obedience
In response to our common belief that God's grace and love is available to all
persons, the Western Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church states our belief
that the United Methodist Church is in error on the subject of "homosexuality's
incompatibility with Christian teaching."
We commend to our bishops, clergy, local churches and ministry
settings, the challenge to operate as if the statement in Para. 161F does
not exist, creating a church where all people are truly welcome.
The secretary of the Western Jurisdictional Conference will submit this statement
of Gospel Obedience to the Jurisdictional College of Bishops, each Annual
Conference, and chairpersons of Boards of Ordained Ministry for discussion and
implementation.
LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Pacific Annual Conference will encourage
Conference Leadership, The Cabinet, and the Board of Ordained Ministry to consider
this resolution as a guideline should any disciplinary actions result in living out this call to
be an inclusive church."
Appeal
After the adoption of Resolution 13‐16, Biblical Obedience, a clergy member
requested "for an appeal for a ruling of law under ¶2609.6 on the following
question: Is it legal for an annual conference to take an action urging the church 'to
act as if ¶161F of The Book of Discipline does not exist' as in Resolution 13‐16?"
(taken from the Annual Conference's official Motion From the Floor.)

DOCKET 1013‐14
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Greater New Jersey Annual
Conference Regarding a Resolution That Authorizes the Council on Finance and
Administration, the Primary Task Team and Its Executive Committee, the
Personnel Committee, and the Bishop to Take Certain Actions Between Sessions of
Annual Conference.
May the Annual Conference as the Basic Body in the Church
1. Approve a resolution to adopt the Strategic Ministry Plan, Greater New Jersey Annual
Conference, Pre‐Conference Journal, p. 29, lines 5‐7, and authorize the Conference Council on
Finance and Administration and Primary Task Team between sessions of the Annual Conference
to “review and organize the conference budget in alignment with the plan and
allocate/negotiate any necessary shifts within the budget to carry out the plan?” (Pre‐
Conference Journal, p. 45, lines 10‐12);
2. May it authorize the Personnel Committee, the Council on Finance and Administration,
and the Primary Task Team, between sessions of the Annual Conference, to “review present
staffing and organization and change as necessary...to implement the plan? (Pre‐Conference
Journal, p. 45, lines 10‐12);
3. May it authorize the Primary Task Team Executive Committee and Bishop, between
sessions of the Annual Conference to “assign staff to the plan so that each goal and strategy has
a staff person assigned?” (Pre‐Conference Journal, p. 45, lines 13‐14)

DOCKET 1013‐15
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Greater New Jersey Annual
Conference Regarding the Authority of the Primary Task Team Between Sessions
of the Annual Conference to Approve and Implement a Disaster Response Plan and
Budget, to Approve and Implement “A Future with Hope” Corporation, and to
Elect a Board of Directors for “A Future with Hope”
A clergy member of the Greater New Jersey Conference submitted the following questions in
writing during the 2013 Annual Conference Session:
Does the Primary Task Team have authority between sessions of the Annual Conference to
1. Approve and implement a disaster‐response plan and budget to respond to the
devastation from Superstorm Sandy,
2. Approve and implement the establishment of “A Future with Hope” corporation, and
3. Elect a Board of Directors for “A Future with Hope”?
(Greater New Jersey Annual Conference, Pre‐conference Journal, pp. 133 line 33 – 134, line 19)

DOCKET 1013‐16
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Greater New Jersey Annual
Conference Regarding the Relationship Between the Annual Conference and “A
Future with Hope”
Is the proposal on page 98, lines 28‐30 of the Greater New Jersey Annual Conference Pre‐
Conference Journal, that The Greater New Jersey Annual Conference of the United
Methodist Church, the 580 United Methodist Congregations will serve as the organization the
(sic) underwrites the administrative overhead for A Future with Hope and provides
volunteers and loans administrative staff to a Future of Hope a form of category budgeting
that prevents the Annual Conference from its duty as the basic body in the church to present
and approve specific line item allocations for its proposed annual budget?
Does this provision in the Future with Hope legislation not establish a formal link between the
Annual Conference and the Future with Hope non‐profit corporation that makes the Annual
Conference a guarantor of any failed obligations that may accrue from its (the Future with
Hope’s) administrative and program activities?

DOCKET 1013‐17
IN RE: Review of a Bishop’s Decision of Law in the Greater New Jersey Annual
Conference Regarding the Relationship of the President of the Council on Finance
and Administration with the Future with Hope Corporation, in light of ¶ 612.2b
Does the service performed simultaneously by Mr. John Bishop as President of the Board of
Directors of the Future with Hope Corporation, an entity requesting permission to conduct a
mission fund campaign to raise 12 million dollars from the churches in the annual
conference, and as President of the Conference Council on Finance and Administration, the
entity responsible for reviewing and recommending the request to the Annual Conference,
conflict with ¶612.2.b), the 2012 Book of Discipline, which reads in part: “No...director of
any agency or institution participating in the funds of any conference budget shall be eligible
for voting membership on the council.”?