It Was a Good General Conference for Europeans

Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Mission Theologian at the General Board of Global Ministries. The opinions and analysis expressed here are Dr. Scott's own and do not reflect in any way the official position of Global Ministries.

The recently concluded General Conference was an historic one, marking a dramatic shift in tone from previous General Conferences and a clear (if not universal) consensus on the direction for the church in the future. Among the General Conference's many accomplishments were passage of the "3 R's": regionalization, revised Social Principles, and removal of the restrictive language on ministry with and by LGBTQ+ persons in the denomination.

As the wide vote margins on most issues showed, this work of turning from conflict toward a renewed focus on future ministry was carried forward by delegates from all over the world.

In particular, the Africa Forum showed its significance as an organizing body. Heading into the conference, many observers in the United States were uncertain how African delegates would vote on key issues. But the hard work by leaders in the Africa Forum was key in African support for regionalization and the revised Social Principles. Also key was the Africa Forum's grace-filled decision to allow US United Methodists to embrace inclusive ministry in the US context while maintaining a traditional religious and cultural understanding of marriage in the African context.

Regionalization also owes so much to Filipina/o leaders in the denomination. Many of the early leaders of the Christmas Covenant were Filipinos and Filipinas, and it was an annual conference from the Philippines that sent the Christmas Covenant legislation to General Conference, legislation which became the basis for the Worldwide Regionalization proposal that was passed. Drawing on a history of thinking deeply about autonomy and connectionalism, Filipina/o writers have also had some of the most eloquent reflections on and arguments for regionalization.

But I found myself thinking at General Conference how European United Methodists have had a special role in much of what happened at this General Conference. European United Methodists also contributed to the Christmas Covenant and advocating for regionalization. We saw Bishop Rückert's leadership repeatedly in making presentations to General Conference on regionalization and other topics, and Bishop Streiff and others were leading that work before him.

The revised Social Principles arose because of a request from European delegates to a previous General Conference for more globally-relevant statements of the denomination's social teachings.

Removing the restrictive language both is an important step for Western Europeans and validates the general European approach of seeking local control over marriage and ministry, with the understanding that Eastern and Western Europeans will have different approaches.

Even the departure of the Eurasia Episcopal Area, bittersweet though it may have been, was a validation of local decision making about future connectional arrangements by European leaders.

I say this not to lionize European United Methodists or to suggest that they deserve more credit than others. Certainly, there is credit enough to go around for all that was accomplished in Charlotte.

But I think the contributions that European United Methodists made to this General Conference show something important, as do Filipino contributions to the Christmas Covenant. European United Methodists are a very small group spread out over many countries in languages. In many ways, they are functionally marginal to a denomination that is overwhelmingly African and North American.

Yet, it is often from the margins that the most important ideas and innovations come. Without the contributions of European United Methodists to a vision of global equity and a structure that works for all around the world, and without Filipino/a leadership in advancing the project of regionalization, we would not have the church we are now celebrating. Good ideas and insights come from the margins.

The bulk of United Methodists live in the United States and in various African countries, especially the DRC. The relationship between United Methodists in the US and those in Africa will continue to be a critical focus for the denomination, especially as the drive for ratification and implementation of regionalization proceeds.

But as Africa and the United States rightfully receive a lot of attention going forward, the contributions of European and Filipina/o United Methodists remind us that we depend as a connection on the generous offering of gifts, ideas, and insights from our entire connection. Who knows where the next big ideas that will shape the future of the denomination will come from? If the past is any guide, we should continue to look to the wisdom and insight of small groups with unique perspectives.

Recommended Viewing: Living Our Principles

The General Board of Church and Society has produced a series of six videos featuring reflections from United Methodists around the world on the denomination's Social Principles. As GBCS notes in their press release announcing the video resource, the videos feature interviews with United Methodists from the US, Africa, and the Philippines. The episodes, each of which focuses on one section of the Social Principles, range in length from 40 minutes to about an hour. While the Social Principles are being revised, and the new Principles are available for comment, the videos are a useful resource not just for what they reveal about the current form of the document, but even more so for the ways in which they show a common United Methodist document being used and interpreted in many contexts around the world.

The Commission on a Way Forward in the context of global UMC structural reform

Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology at the General Board of Global Ministries. The opinions and analysis expressed here are Dr. Scott's own and do not reflect in any way the official position of Global Ministries.

News broke this week about plans made by the executive committee of the Council of Bishops for the Commission on a Way Forward, the group tasked with carrying out the bishops' plan approved by General Conference to try to find a resolution to highly contentious debates on homosexuality in the UMC. You can read stories on these plans from both UMNS and the United Methodist Reporter. The press release by the Council of Bishops is also available online. In short, plans call for a commission of 20-25 people chosen by the bishops by Aug. 31 to spend the next 18 months preparing for a likely called General Conference in 2018. The Council of Bishops will update the church on the work of the commission every 4-6 weeks.

The work of the commission comes at a time when the possibility of schism over issues related to sexuality seems quite real. There are three important things to keep in mind, however, when assessing the significance of the commission for the future of the denomination.

1. The commission is not just about sexuality but about structures.

Debates over sexuality are certainly the immediate cause that led to the formation of the commission. Yet, as the bishops acknowledged in their statement, "The matters of human sexuality and unity are the presenting issues for a deeper conversation that surfaces different ways of interpreting Scripture and theological tradition."

Hence, the scope of the commission is significant: "Therefore, we should consider new ways of being in relationship across cultures and jurisdictions, in understandings of episcopacy, in contextual definitions of autonomy for annual conferences, and in the design and purpose of the apportionment. In reflection on the two matters of unity and human sexuality, we will fulfill our directive by considering 'new forms and structures' of relationship and through the 'complete examination and possible revision' of relevant paragraphs in the Book of Discipline. We will give consideration to greater freedom and flexibility to a future United Methodist Church that will redefine our present connectionality, which is showing signs of brokenness."

Phrasing the scope this way seems to be an indication by the bishops that everything about how the denomination is currently structured is on the table. Certainly, this is an indication of the severity of the situation in which the UMC finds itself. Yet despite the broad mandate, there are reasons to think that the proposals by the commission may be less than completely revolutionary. Previous study commissions authorized by General Conference have felt beholden to Wesleyan frameworks of understanding the church and its ministry and the accumulated weight of Methodist tradition. That's not to say that the commission might not propose significant changes, but just to note that tradition will constrain the range of options, even given a broad scope of possibility.

2. There is other significant work going on regarding the future of UMC structures, but the various components of that work will not necessarily be coordinated.

Darryl Stephens has provided this helpful rundown of the various referrals by General Conference of work related to the global structures and forms of ministry that characterize the UMC. In Dr. Stephens' list, the Commission on a Way Forward is only one of nine separate efforts to reshape global structures. According to Dr. Stephens, these nine referrals involve seven existing entities and four new ones, including the Commission on a Way Forward.

The degree of communication or collaboration between these nine separate efforts remains to be seen. Certainly some could proceed without much collaboration (the study of US jurisdictions and the global Social Principles, perhaps), but at some level these are all grappling with parts of a larger issue: What does it mean for the UMC to be a "global church" that operates in very different local contexts while preserving some form of connectionalism?

The Commission on a Way Forward has the potential to be influenced by the work of these other groups (though timing may not allow that completely), to ignore that work and proceed entirely on its own, to preempt that work (by proposing its own solutions or by providing for the division of the denomination), or to defer to these groups and leave aspects of reforming the church's structures to them. It is hard to say which approach it will take, but it will be interesting to see.

3. Culture is a significant factor in all discussions about church structures, theology, and sexuality in a "global" denomination.

Robert Hunt recently made this point in a series of articles on this blog (Parts [1], [2]. and [3]). Simply put, while God may be outside human culture, humans are not, and thus views on church structures, theological stances, and understandings of sexuality are all influenced though not wholly determined by culture. The Commission on a Way Forward would do well to recognize this factor.

Therefore, it would behoove the commission to benefit from the insights on the role of culture in Christianity provided by the discipline of missiology. To that end, if you are so moved, write your local bishop and suggest that she or he include a missiologist on the list of names she/he submits for the commission. Then stayed tuned for Aug. 31st to find out who is appointed!

General Conference roundup: Global structures and leaders

This is the first of several posts presenting a roundup of General Conference actions related to the foci of this blog. This first post looks at the General Conference actions related to global structures and leaders in The United Methodist Church.

General Conference approved continued work on a global Book of Discipline and global Social Principles. Proposals for a US central conference died in committee.

General Conference approved five more bishops for Africa starting in 2020, going with the Standing Committee on Central Conference Matters' recommendation rather than a motion to add two new bishops immediately to Nigeria and Zimbabwe.

General Conference approved a provisional central conference for Southeast Asia and Mongolia, allowing missions there to go forward with the process of forming Annual Conferences and thereby beginning to determine their own pastoral leadership. It also approved a provisional Rwanda Annual Conference and deferred the creation of a Uganda Annual Conference to the West Africa Central Conference.

During General Conference, the Judicial Council elected N. Oswald Tweh, Sr., a Liberian, as the head of the Council, the first from outside the US to hold that position.

Responding to a request for a declaratory decision from the General Conference, the Judicial Council ruled that a Central Conference as a body, not its bishops, has the authority to set the time and place of its meetings, addressing questions regarding the 2016 meeting of the Congo Central Conference.

The next roundup, which will be posted next week, will look at actions related to mission work.

Episcopal Leadership and the Complexities of Political Witness in an International Denomination

Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Assistant Professor of Religion and Pieper Chair of Servant Leadership at Ripon College.

I read a trio of articles this morning about United Methodists around the world reacting to issues regarding political rights and persecution. In the first, Rev. Kiboko I. Kiboko of the Iowa Annual Conference provided the latest update in the ongoing saga of his brother, Kano Kiboko, a United Methodist evangelist imprisoned in the Congo for criticizing the government. In the second, UMNS reported on United Methodist responses to violence against farmers in the Philippines protesting for food aid in the face of a severe drought. In the third, Bishop Rosemarie Wenner of Germany commented on the political situation regarding immigrants in Europe.

These three different stories, while united by some common underlying principles regarding human rights, represent three different sorts of political issues on which The United Methodist Church was called to speak. Yet herein lies some of the complexity of the UMC taking stands on political issues. Technically, General Conference is the only body capable of speaking on behalf of the UMC. Thus, the UMC as an institution has said nothing about imprisoned members in the Congo or persecuted minorities in the Philippines or migrants in Europe. Individual United Methodist leaders have.

In the absence of direct comment by the General Conference, one can point to the denomination's Social Principles as official pronouncements on political issues. Yet because they are revised only once every four years (by General Conference), the nature of the Social Principles is such that they speak in generalities rather than address specific situations. Moreover, the majority of the Social Principles were developed with US politics in mind, while none of the three incidents mentioned above occurred in the US. This is a major reason for the push to develop a set of Global Social Principles. Yet even these are likely to suffer from the same problems of broadness and infrequent revision.

The limitations of denomination-wide apparatuses for responding in a timely manner to important political issues of the day highlight the importance of episcopal leadership within The United Methodist Church. Bishops are not only called on to administer the church within their annual conferences, they are also called on to be the face of the church to the outside world within those conferences. That point is well-illustrated by all three stories. In Germany, it was Bishop Wenner speaking to the issue of immigration. In the Philippines, both Bishop Ciriaco Francisco and Bishop Rodolfo Juan were very involved in the UMC's response to the violence against protestors. Rev. Kiboko expressed frustration that United Methodist bishops in the Congo had not spoken out about his brother's plight. Agency executives are also an important witness (as Global Ministries' Thomas Kemper's statement on the Philippines situation shows), but episcopal leadership is crucial.

This arrangement has both advantages and disadvantages. Bishops know their contexts well and are often best equipped to understand and respond appropriately to political situations that arise. They already have established authority with the United Methodist flocks under their care and existing connections to the secular world when a crisis arises. Yet when it comes down to it, bishops can only express their opinions, not make pronouncements on behalf of the church. These opinions are influential ones, and the distinction is lost on many, so this may not be an issue in most cases. There may also be some instances in which the opinion of a bishop does not reflect that of the membership s/he leads or the opinion of other bishops, for better or worse.

Again, this arrangement is not necessarily problematic. Nevertheless, it is worth keeping in mind as General Conference discusses the possibility of developing a set of Global Social Principles that denominational polity determines how and through whom the UMC is able to respond to and serve as a witness regarding pressing political and social issues.

Recommended watching: Pre-General Conference Briefing videos

Videos from the recent Pre-General Conference Briefing in Portland in January are now available on YouTube. Now even those unable to attend the event will be able to see plenary speakers, panel discussions, and other events designed to provide information about the upcoming UMC General Conference. Videos range from approximately a half hour in length to almost an hour and a half

A complete playlist of videos is available.
Readers of this blog, however, may be most interested in one of the following sessions:
Revising the Social Principles (about plans to develop global Social Principles)
Proposals for a U.S. Central Conference
The Worldwide Nature of the Church (including discussions of a global Book of Discipline)
Restructuring Proposals (about general boards and agencies)

Recommended readings on European migration crisis

One of the biggest international news stories of the past week has been the developing crisis of Europe's response to an influx of mostly Syrian refugees fleeing war and devastation in their home country. This story has been slowly developing over the past several years but with new influxes of migrants, the recent deaths of a number of migrants, and a variety of responses by European governments and leaders, the pattern of migration has intensified and produced renewed calls for appropriate European responses.

To help faithful United Methodists understand this issue, UM & Global offers these recommended readings:

A recent UMNS news story about United Methodist responses to the refugee crisis
UMC.org's topic page on Immigration, including excerpts from our Social Principles on immigration
A webpage of Book of Resolutions language about migration
The UMC in Germany's recent statement on refugees and asylum
UM & Global posts by contributors David N. Field and Michael Nausner about migration, especially in the European context
All UM & Global posts on the topics of migration and immigration

Recommended Reading: Nigeria holds final consultation on global Social Principles

I want to update readers on a story UM & Global has been following and correct some of our previous coverage: the process of development more globally-relevant Social Principles.  An important step in that process has been the General Board of Church and Society (GBCS) hosting a series of seven consultations on the current Social Principles around the world.  After two consultations in Washington, DC, at the beginning of this year, I had erroneously reported that this marked the end of the seven consultations.  That was incorrect, and I apologize for the mistake.  While the consultation in Nigeria has originally been scheduled in November, before the consultations in Washington, it was rescheduled due to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa.  It was held at the end of March, and you can read UMNS coverage of it here.

One of the things that I think bears mentioning about the Nigerian discussion of the Social Principles is the strong sense that they can serve to shape the UMC's ministry in that context and can help the UMC project a needed voice that can address important social and political issues in the country.  I think many Americans see the Social Principles as falling into one of three categories: irrelevant, antiquated, or controversial.  We can learn from the Nigerians that the Social Principles can still be an important tool of United Methodist ministry.

Will sexuality debate again derail UMC's efforts to become a more global denomination?

Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Assistant Professor of Religion and Pieper Chair of Servant Leadership at Ripon College.

Last week, I listed a run-down of the various systemic changes that are underway in The United Methodist Church related to becoming a more global denomination.  These include a set of global Social Principles, a global Book of Discipline, and adding more bishops to Africa.  I also mentioned the debate on human sexuality, which has potential implications for global polity.

In examining the timeline for these various plans for the denomination, one can see a potential problem.  The first three proposals, related to the Social Principles, Book of Discipline, and bishops, are intending to collect information at General Conference 2016 but not take final action until General Conference 2020.  The debate over sexuality is likely to come to a head in 2016, and most proposals surrounding that debate are focused on 2016 only.

Thus, these conflicting timelines present a danger: that the UMC could make dramatic changes in polity in 2016 to resolve debates about human sexuality that would derail longer-term, more deliberate efforts to develop a more globally-even and less US-centric polity in 2020.  Of course, not all proposals to resolve the sexuality debates significantly alter UMC polity, and the proposal from the official Connectional Table does not do so.  Nevertheless, a larger number of the other proposals do call for significantly altering how the UMC is structured in the US and abroad.

In pointing out this potential problem, I am not arguing against all changes in UMC polity, nor am I arguing against resolving debates over human sexuality.  What I am arguing is that changes in polity hastily made to resolve one issue are likely to cause a large number of other problems.  I think the processes in place to develop global Social Principles and a global Book of Discipline are promising processes and must be allowed to play out without being short-circuited by American Methodists' need to resolve their issues regarding sexuality.  That is an important issue needing resolution, but the Central Conferences' need to see changes in polity for the sake of greater local flexibility and greater equality with the US must not be sacrificed for the sake of primarily American concerns.

Many readers will remember that at General Conference 2008, a series of resolutions were passed that significantly changed UMC polity to make the denomination less thoroughly US-centric.  These resolutions, though passed by General Conference, were voted down in the Annual Conferences, in large part over fears that they would have opened the door to greater acceptance of homosexuality.  At that time, the sexuality debate derailed the UMC's efforts to become a more global denomination.  We must not let the same thing happen again in 2016.

Change is afoot as UMC looks toward more global future at GC2016, GC2020

The past several weeks have been significant ones for The United Methodist Church in its efforts to move toward a more global footing as a denomination that does not privilege American Methodism as the standard for the denomination.  The church has seen developments in several areas related to this broader shift with implications for the General Conferences in both 2016 and 2020.  Here's a rundown:

First, as previously report on this blog, the General Board of Church and Society wrapped up its series of seven consultations on the development of a global Social Principles with two consultations in Washington, DC.  These consultations will lead to a proposal to GC2016 to authorize a series of public hearings in the next quadrennium, which could ultimately lead to approval at GC2020 of a reorganization of Social Principles into globally-applicable and locally-specific lists.  The Social Principles constitute Part V of the Book of Discipline, the denomination-wide set of guidelines for United Methodists.

On a parallel track to the development of global Social Principles is the effort to develop a global Book of Discipline.  This project would involve separating the Book of Discipline into portions which are binding on all United Methodists and portions which may be altered according to context.  The problem of defining that context intersects with questions about the current structure of the UMC in which the church outside the US is divided into Central Conferences and the church within the US is divided into Jurisdictions.  Presumably, a plan for a global Book of Discipline could change that structure.  At its recent meeting in Maputo, Mozambique, the Standing Committee on Central Conference Matters discussed possible alterations to Part VI of the Discipline, the section on "Organization and Administration" of the church.  The plan here is to seek input on proposed changes at GC2016 but not ask for a vote until GC2020.  This was also an issue of discussion for the Council of Bishops at their recent meeting in Dallas, TX, and will again appear on their agenda when they next meet in Berlin, Germany, in May.

Speaking of bishops, the Standing Committee on Central Conference Matters has also recommended the creation of five next bishoprics in Africa.  The committee is preparing legislation for GC2016 that would authorize a study during the next quadrennium to develop proposals for GC2020 that would authorize changes to the number and boundaries of episcopal areas in Africa.  Such a proposal would obviously benefit ministry in Africa, but it would also continue to change the composition of the Council of Bishops to more reflect the global nature of the church and could also become connected to any proposals to change the Central Conferences structure as it currently exists.

Finally, also in Maputo, Mozambique, the Connectional Table held their third and final panel on human sexuality, focusing on views from outside the United States.  This panel was followed by a proposal from the Connectional Table to amend church law that prohibits clergy from officiating at same-sex weddings and prohibits the ordination of openly gay, lesbian, bisexual, and otherwise queer clergy.  Instead, clergy would be able to determine for themselves whom to marry, and conferences would be able to decide whom to ordain.  While the debate on human sexuality has been most heated in the United States, this development is globally relevant because of the difference in views on sexuality between the United States and Africa and because many American United Methodists have linked the issue of human sexuality with the debate about a possible restructuring of the Central Conferences and Jurisdictions.  Blogger Jeremy Smith has compiled a list of proposals related to human sexuality and church structure that give a sense of the various ways in which the two issues are being connected.  Whereas the above three issues involve action at both GC2016 and GC2020, most proposals on this front are directed at GC2016 alone.

Recommended Reading: Washington DC consultation on global social principles

As previously reported on this blog, The United Methodist Church is currently in the process of trying to figure out how to revise its Social Principles, the official denominational statement of church stances on various social issues, to make them more globally relevant.  To that end, the General Board of Church and Society (GBCS) organized a series of consultations around the world to discuss the Social Principles.  The last two of these consultations were held in January in Washington, DC.  Previous consultations occurred in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo; Maputo, Mozambique; Abuja, Nigeria; and Prague, Czech Republic.

Video from the Washington, DC consultations is available online here.  This link includes videos from the consultations on both Jan. 17th and Jan. 23rd.  Unfortunately, video is not available from the consultations held in the Central Conferences.

In addition to the video, Rev. Becca Girrell, an elder in the New England Conference who participated in the Jan. 17th consultation in DC, wrote a summary of her experiences at the consultation on her blog.  Rev. Girrell succinctly summarizes the consensus of the group on the goals of global Social Principles:

• "Be shorter– less is more
• "Name values (principles), not behaviors (positions)
• "Be positively worded– state what we believe, not what we oppose or fear
• "Be statements that incorporate theology and human dignity– we can’t just re-state a universal statement of human rights, but say something unique to us as people of faith
• "Contain only that which is applicable cross-culturally or world-wide"

The process of revising the Social Principles leads on to General Conference 2016, so by watching the videos and reflecting on Rev. Girrell's words, you can still prepare yourself to be part of this denominational discussion.

Talking about a global denomination

Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Assistant Professor of Religion and Pieper Chair of Servant Leadership at Ripon College.

This blog has been dedicated to fostering conversations about the global nature of the UMC, but fortunately, we're not the only show in town doing that.  Various other groups within The United Methodist Church also recognize the pressing importance of issues related to how we structure our common life as a global denomination.  I've reported in the past about the Worldwide Nature of the Church's survey (now closed) which seeks input where to locate decision-making for American issues within a global denomination.  I'd like to highlight two other forms these conversations are taking and how you can be involved.

The first of these is a series of consultations that are happening to help develop a set of global Social Principles for the denomination.  This previous post describes the genesis of the idea of developing a less US-centric and more globally applicable set of Social Principles for the denomination.  That process is being facilitated by seven consultations about the Social Principles in various locations around the denomination: one in the Philippines, three in Africa, one in Europe, and two in the United States.  Each consultation will include about 20 United Methodists meeting for 2-3 days to address three questions:
1. What role do the current Social Principles play in enhancing the mission and ministry of The United Methodist Church?
2. How much or how well have the current Social Principles served to empower mission and ministry in your geographical area?
3. What might globally relevant Social Principles look like?

The exciting part about this process is that there's a chance for you to be involved.  The consultation in the Philippines has already happened, and applications for the consultations in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Mozambique are already closed.  Nevertheless, the General Board of Church and Society (GBCS) is still taking applications for consultations in Nigeria, the Czech Republic, and the US.  The deadline for the Nigeria consultation is soon - Sept. 15.  The deadline for the Czech Republic is Oct. 15, and the deadline for both US consultations is Dec. 15.

The other conversation about the global structure of the church was a panel discussion during the recent meeting of the Board of Ordained Ministry (BOM) of the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry (GBHEM).  The panel discussed what a global Book of Discipline would mean for ordained ministry, the concern being that some of the current requirements for ordained ministry presume an American context.  Video of the discussion is on YouTube, and the first eight minutes provides an excellent overview of the denomination's plans for a global Book of Discipline.  While it's obviously too late to participate in this conversation, the entire thing is well worth a watch and then a conversation with other United Methodists.

Discussion: Global Social Principles?

The United Methodist Church is in the process of revising its Social Principles to make them "more global" - "globally relevant" that is.  (UMNS news story here.)  The process comes out of resolutions put forward at General Conference 2012 by the European Central Conferences.  The idea is that many of the Social Principles currently speak primarily (or even solely) to a U.S. context.  Thus, the Social Principles become another way in which The UMC remains a primarily U.S.-focused denomination rather than a truly global church.  Yet, thanks to action on the part of General Conference and a recent plan put forward by the Connectional Table, work is underway to reduce or eliminate the American bias in the Social Principles.  The plan will begin with a series of symposia around the world with possible suggestions for General Conference 2016 growing out of these.

In addition to the opportunity to make the Social Principles more globally relevant to all national branches of The UMC, this re-examination process seems to be the perfect time for the church to consider its transnational Social Principles.  As more and more social problems are no longer confined within national borders, it is necessary for churches to speak out on global social issues.  The opportunity to do so in an informed and credible way may be one of the true forms of service that The UMC can render to the global community because of its nature as a global church.

What do you think?  What in the Social Principles should be changed to be more globally relevant?  What should be added to address new transnational, global social issues?  Comment below.