Now, for what I would consider the "low point" of Annual Conference this year....
There was only one resolution that was presented to the Conference. It was presented in the "pre-conference journal" so that all the delegates had it for a long time before conference. To see the original resolution click on the link and then go to page. 34.
What was actually passed was a substitute resolution that is virtually the opposite of the original. (Haven't got a link to that one, will post it if I can find it.)
I would term this the "low point" because of the tenor of debate and conversation around this issue more than what was actually passed.
(As an aside, I was disappointed in what was passed because it sounded very "pro-war" to me--not just a "support the troops," but support the President and everything that has happened. Additionally, the resolution also included an apocalyptic reference about "wars and rumors of wars" at the end of time.)
But, more than the resolution, I was disappointed in the way that people choose to couch their arguments and the cheering and clapping that accompanied debate. I would have hoped that the Bishop might have asked for perhaps a more "prayerful" attitude in our discussion. While it has become the practice of this conference to meld worship and work--- or "worshipful work," this debate did not feel very worshipful in any sense!
Most assuredly, folks had made up their minds about this war and no amount of "debate" was going to change anyone's thoughts. But, if you add to this that our conference rules limit debate to alternating speeches of 3 minutes for and against--and no more than 3 on each side. That would mean that there was a total of 9 minutes of "debate." on the subject. There was no prayer, there was no time of silence to hear God's voice.....it was merely a counting of how many folks stood on each side of this issue.
So...to me this was nothing more than an exercise in divisiveness...without much "worship" of God.