While the 2024 General Conference closed the door on disaffiliation, it opened a door — by a plenary vote of 629-96 — for disaffiliated churches to reaffiliate at some future time by requiring affected annual conferences to develop and adopt their own reaffiliation policies.
The petition originally under consideration by the Conferences legislative committee (Petition 21027) laid out a thorough process that included questions to be asked of churches seeking reaffiliation. It required the cabinet or other body designated by the conference to review the written answers provided and conduct an interview with key leaders of the local church to include the pastor, lay leader, governing body chair, finance chair, trustees chair, and pastor-parish relations committee chair. The cabinet and the bishop would then submit recommendations to the annual conference to readmit the church for an initial two-year probationary period. A final vote on full admission could be held after that, contingent on subsequent recommendation by the cabinet and the bishop. If approved by the conference, the church would then be required to pay two full years of apportionments before it could receive appointed clergy. The petition also prohibited churches from receiving grants from the district or the conference during the two-year probationary period.
The legislative committee struggled with the complexity and the rigor of the process mandated in the petition and replaced its language entirely to emphasize an approach of graciousness toward churches seeking reaffiliation. Instead of outlining a specific process to be followed by every conference, the committee version left the details of the process up to each annual conference.
“With a spirit of grace, we welcome those churches which have disaffiliated or withdrawn to rejoin The United Methodist Church. Where applicable, every annual conference shall have a policy of reaffiliation for the churches seeking to return to the connection.”
When this petition came to the floor of the General Conference, the graciousness of the proposal was appreciated, but concerns were raised whether it adequately addressed the Trust Clause. On one of the closer votes of the General Conference (386-304), the plenary approved an amendment to add a final sentence: “Each such policy shall require that reaffiliating churches affirm their commitment to the Trust Clause in ¶2503.” The amended petition was approved 629-96.
Two policies completed and adopted
Prior to the General Conference, the Arkansas and Alabama-West Florida annual conferences had each already begun work on developing its own reaffiliation policy. Alabama-West Florida asked its trustees to develop a policy at its 2023 annual conference session. The trustees developed and published the policy in September 2023. The Arkansas conference would slightly amend and approve the policy as presented to its 2024 annual conference to include the Social Principles as one of the items to be reviewed with congregations as part of its discernment process.
While there are some minor differences in detail between the two conference policies, in broad outlines they bear many similarities. Indeed, the 2024 Arkansas policy appears to be built largely on the structure and, in some places, the specific language of the 2023 Alabama-West Florida policy. Both include a required discernment process (more explicit in Arkansas’ policy), followed by a two-stage voting process by the local church — first the leadership body of the church, then a church conference — each requiring simple majority.
Beyond this, however, the two policies diverge somewhat. The Alabama-West Florida Conference requires that churches seeking reaffiliation have at least 50 members to be eligible to begin the process. The Arkansas policy places no such limitations. The Arkansas discernment process includes a requirement that the church develop a written statement of the rationale for reaffiliation, including “their understanding of what it means to be a United Methodist Congregation and their willingness to support the UMC and the Arkansas Conference with their prayers, presence, gifts, service, and witness.” The Alabama-West Florida Conference does not require such a written statement.
The most notable difference is how a disaffiliated church is received into the conference. In Alabama-West Florida, the entire process is managed by the conference board of trustees, with involvement and approval by the district superintendent, bishop, cabinet and the conference board of congregational development to ensure compliance with Paragraph 259.1 of the Book of Discipline (the process for establishing a new congregation). With that work completed and all approvals received, the trustees then oversee a process to reestablish the congregation with its property and assets duly covered under the Trust Clause as a congregation of the Alabama-West Florida Conference. Reaffiliation is considered to have been completed prior to any action by the annual conference. The subsequent annual conference session welcomes the congregation, but does not take a vote to receive it. There is also forgiveness of apportionments for one year upon readmission provided the church seeks reaffiliation within three years of its disaffiliation.
Other policies to be developed
The remainder of the annual conferences in the United States are in various stages of developing their reaffiliation policies. Some conferences are focusing on managing significant transitions, such as receiving a new bishop, becoming part of a newly organized episcopal area or, as in Texas, uniting existing conferences into a new annual conference (North Texas, Central Texas, and Northwest Texas will hold their unifying conference Sept. 28).Additionally, some conferences had very few disaffiliations (notably California-Pacific, Alaska, New York, Greater New Jersey, Eastern Pennsylvania, Oregon-Idaho, Northern Illinois, and California-Nevada) or none at all (Oklahoma Indian Missionary Conference, Central Appalachian Missionary Conference, and Desert Southwest). Communicators who responded from these conferences generally indicated that they were not developing a policy at this time, and may not unless an expressed request for reaffiliation came from one of their disaffiliated churches. Several stated they believed such requests to be unlikely.
In conferences where disaffiliation had a substantial effect, and were not substantially engaged in adjusting to other major changes at this time, conference communicators generally indicated that their cabinet and trustees had begun or were about to begin a consultation process to develop a policy for their conference. However, none of these has indicated a specific timeline for its adoption.
The foundations laid by Alabama-West Florida and Arkansas, and especially the experience each has in implementing them, may become an important influence in shaping the policies other conferences eventually adopt.
Burton Edwards is director of Ask The UMC, the information service of United Methodist Communications.
