Why not give complete coverage?

I am amazed at how far technology has come in the four years since the last United Methodist General Conference. I went as an observer to the 2004 GC in Pittsburgh, and I really wanted to go to Fort Worth for GC 2008, which was held this past week. But finances and ministry commitments at home would not allow for that.

Then, as I poked around the umc.com website, I discovered that this time, all GC plenary sessions would be streamed live over the internet! I tuned in as often as I could, and it was almost as good as being there. I could witness the worship, the special celebrations, and the plenary debates from the comfort of my laptop PC!

But something strange happened on Thursday morning, May 1st. During the session, I suddenly lost my streaming audio and video. The presiding bishop was just about to say something about the conference's action the previous day - and suddenly he was no longer on my computer. I got an animated message telling me that the presentation would continue in a moment.

20 minutes later, the streaming resumed. It appeared that they had just come back together after a break. A delegate stood up to ask the bishop a question, was recognized by the bishop, and he asked about the internet streaming interruption. The bishop's answer frustrated me. He said something like "we were on a break, and they don't broadcast during a break."

I said to the bishop's image on my computer, "You weren't on break the WHOLE time! How come you didn't say something about asking the technicians if there was a problem?"

Tonight, reading the post-conference coverage on umc.com, it finally came together for me: the streaming broadcast was interrupted on purpose - to avoid showing the protest led by the Reconciling Ministries Network against General Conference for its votes to retain the language prohibiting practicing homosexuals from becoming pastors and for stating in the Social Principles that "the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching."

So now my question to the GC is this: why not give us complete coverage!? Since the stream was interrupted at that specific time, it must have been an organized and deliberate effort to not show us that! This was planned in advance, and I am disappointed by the planning.

Now that we have this amazing technology that lets us see what's happening at General Conerence, we should see everything that happens during the GC sessions.

The way in which this unfolded disturbs me. The bishop declares that they are no longer in session so that no rules are violated as the non-delegates sweep into the room. The video stream is interrupted so that we at home don't know what the bishop has done, nor that the GC's spending about $18,300 in lost plenary session time in order to allow the demonstration to happen. (I get that figure by dividing the total budget for GC by the number of minutes for plenary sessions).

I understand that the votes upholding the traditional positions on homosexuality are deeply and painfully felt by those who disagree. I have been present when their feelings have been expressed, and I have been moved by the poignant stories shared by those who desire inclusivity on this matter. But I do not think that these types of demonstrations, nor the removal of virtual observers via the streaming broadcast, help their cause.

And quite honestly, I wonder how much longer we can allow this division to continue and still claim to be one church. The true fact is that we don't act like one church when it comes to this one issue. This debate has raged for almost my entire life! And the position of the church has not officially changed in the whole time. Demonstrations and protests every four years will not change the church. I am not sure that the UMC will ever change.

If the UMC does change, the conservatives will not borrow from the liberals' play book. They will not wait for 40 or more years to get the church to change again, they will break away as soon as the change happens.

I wonder if that activity will be streamed live on the internet?