 |
||
|
||
A live report from the 2005 US National Conference and General Conference. Wednesday Morning10:40 We're back, after a long break. Ran out of coffee again, but there is no detectable rip in the cosmic fiber, no impending apocalypse. I don't want to belittle the lack of coffee, because it is a huge issue, when UBs run out of coffee. But it appears that life will continue, though most likely in a diminished form. Certanly not the abundant life God desires for us. 
Bishop Paul Hirschy leading the US National Conference, with Tom Brodbeck, chairman of the Discipline Revision Commission, in the background at the other podium. The Local Church CovenantTom Brodbeck says he has three amendments from the Central delegation. Move one point to another place, change the word "in" to "through" in another place. Little stuff. Sounds like something a Historian would think of. The other is to amend the covenant's sixth point. It now reads: "They are willing to pay an annual partnership fee." They preferred this wording, which the conference passed: "They support the ministry and mission of the United Brethren Church, USA, through the annual partnership fee." Anthony Blair brought a proposal from Mid-Atlantic, that the local church covenant include a signature line for the bishop. Tom Brodbeck said his motion is out of order, since this wouldn't be actually included in the Discipline, and we're dealing now with Discipline revision stuff. The Bishop said that tomorrow, I'll have a copy of what the covenant will look like. Hmmmm. I will, huh? Paul Michelson expressed a concern that signing the covenant every two years would basically involve a referendum of sorts every two years within local churches regarding whether or not they want to participate in the denomination. Blair Dowden offered an amendment, which was adopted, which requires local churches to agree to support the world of the camps and college. I wish they wouldn't get so specific in the covenant. And I'm not sure what that means. If a church doesn't want to support HU because of something like a particular professor's theological views, are they kicked out as a member church? How many churches, during the past two years, would have said, "We can't conscientiously sign the covenant, because of its requirement that we support the college"? Oh well. Here's the covenant. I'll keep it updated to reflect amendments.
The covenant was voted on, and adopted. The way it looks above is really really close to the final version. Todd Fetters, the secretary, has the exact wording adopted. Ministerial delegates to the national conferenceWe're on a proposal to define what we mean, with the newly-adopted language in the Constitution (via the National Conference referendum), by the term "active licensed ministers." Does that mean currently-serving ministers? Does it include retired ministers? Who does it refer to? Tom Brodbeck offered an official interpretation which would mean "all duly received conference ministers." Or something like that. Every minister who currently has a vote in an annual conference would have a vote at the National Conference. The Discipline revision proposal says, "All licensed United Brethren ministers are eligible to serve as voting members of the US National Conference." There is a proposal to substitute that wording with, "That active licensed ministers be defined as those ministers duly received by the national conference." I'm not sure I have the specific motion right, but the idea is there. Luke Fetters thinks we're adding something to the Constitution. Well, we are. People will be asking what "active" means, so an interpretation is needed. This problematic wording should have been caught by the 2004 National Board, before they approved the wording of the referendum, but it wasn't. And now we're stuck with bad terminology embedded in the Constitution, which can only be changed by another referendum. How do we get ourselves in these pickles? And where did the idea of "in a pickle" come from? It's pretty silly imagery, when you think about it. Bishop Hirschy says we need to clarify who can come to the 2007 national conference and vote. Luke Fetters pointed out that according to the proposal, four Fetterses would be eligible as voting members: his father Paul (retired), himself (a prof at HU), his brother Brooks (a licensed minister not currently serving as a minister), and brother Todd (current UB pastor). Luke didn't think the intent of the original proposal was that all of them would be delegates. And he's right. The original idea was that only active pastors would be eligible. But care wasn't taken in the terminology. Anthony Blair is suggesting some new wording for this paragraph "which could clear it up." He sat down without giving it. Just said that if we vote this down, he's got something in his pocket to solve the problem. They voted, and the amendment failed. Anthony Blair came back. He made a motion to reconsider paragraph 603, which was passed yesterday. Yet another reconsideration. He suggested this: "All United Brethren ministers who are licensed by a United Brethren entity other than that of the local church, and who have not assumed retirement status, are eligible to serve as voting members of the US National Conference." Bishop Hirschy pointed out that we use ministers with retirement status as pastors. For instance, my Dad is one. "Shucks," said Anthony. Todd Palmer suggested this: "All stationed, retired, and specialized ministers are eligible to vote at the US National Conference." Lester Smith said we do station ministers who are licensed by other church bodies--for instance, a United Methodist-licensed minister could be stationed as a supply pastor of one of our churches. Okay, that one won't work, either. But they're gonna chew on it a while longer, trying to make it work. Anthony Blair said this is a case where everyone knows what we want, but we can't come up with the wording as a committee of the whole. Maybe we should let a group work on it over lunch. Tom Brodbeck mentioned that a superintendent, who isn't stationed at a church, wouldn't be eligible. Nor a minister who is between churches, and not currently assigned anywhere. Dennis Miller moved to table the item. It passed. Tom Brodbeck wondered: were we tabling until a specific time? Giving it to anyone to work on? Denny moved that it be assigned to Anthony Blair and Tom Brodbeck to work on and bring back. Maybe someone else was thrown into the mix. Greg Brownell, from Northwest Conference, felt it would be a hardship for the small, struggling churches in the northwest to have to pay to send delegates to the national conference. He just brought that up as a concern. Election of the BishopBishop Hirschy said he wants to move toward electing the bishop. But first, there was one other issue that needed to be cared for. George Kreger (Michindoh clergy) brought a motion that following the election of the new bishop, all headquarters staff who report to the bishop be asked to tender their resignations effective September 30, 2005. He felt the bishop needed to be able to choose his team, and not be hamstrung from the get-go. Okay, this one affects me. I better pay attention. Bishop Hirschy says that everyone in the Headquarters reports to the bishop, so all ten employees would need to submit a resignation letter. Do we all need to "resign" every two years? Bishop Hirschy asked, should staff be asked to leave, so they could talk about it? No, nobody felt that was needed. They moved quickly to a vote, and it passed on a strong voice vote. So, I guess I need to write a resignation letter and start job-hunting, to hedge my bets against a very uncertain future. All of us at the Headquarters need to do that. Sam Quinn is offering a motion on the process for electing the bishop. That all ordained elders be placed on the ballot, and the first vote narrow it down to 10. Then they vote on those 10 to narrow it down to 3. Then the Nominating Comnmittee will meet with those three to determine their willingness to serve, and work that process until they get three persons willing to serve. This would apply to the present election. "The truth is this," said Sam. "I know that when the nominating committee sent out their report on who the nominees will be, I received numerous calls from different parts of the denomination expressing their unhappiness with what was taking place and how it was being done. After arriving here, that number has more than doubled, with people who contacted me and talked to me." He says he senses dissension and tension. "I don't think we want to elect a bishop with that kind of atmosphere around us." George Kreger rose quickly. He's uncomfortable when someone comes to the podium and references numerous people anonymously, and doesn't have those parties go directly to the persons they have problems with. He feels hearsay is unbiblical. "Either we name names and get that stuff out there," and he feels some admonishment is needed. Greg Brownell (Northwest) spoke in support of Sam's motion. He said his delegation is on board with this. Sam Quinn said, "I only did this motion so it would come before the body," and everyone who shared these feelings could speak to it. Brian Hughes, a member of the Nominating Committee, went to the microphone and asked all of the Nominating Committee members to stand. He challenged people, if they have charges against any of those persons, to speak. Ooooh, things are heating up. Dave Rawley is uncomfortable with three people being asked to put their whole calling and future on the line with so little notice, so little chance to pray about it and talk to their families. Denny Miller pointed out the difficulty of doing this in the new set-up, where we could have 500 delegates in 2007. Also, he noted, nominations can occur from the floor. A voice vote was taken, and it lost on a strong voice vote. Sam Quinn returned with this motion, which he again said was to give people a chance to speak openly. He proposed the same motion, but said it would apply only to future elections. They voted, and only one or two people voted in favor. Now Bishop Hirschy asked Denny Miller to come, as chairman of the Nominating Committee, to explain the process they used in preparing the ballot. He named the members. He said they initially discussed the type of person they would nominate, without naming any names. Then they came up with eight qualities they wanted, and developed a list of elders from the denomination fitting their criteria. He said they came up with a "large" number of people, and then a list of about 20 people, and finally a short list of 5-7. Which they boiled down to 3. They decided that if 2 of the 3 said Yes, they would consider it enough. They spent a week in prayer before even contacting those three persons. Feeling good about it, they contacted the three persons. Two said yes. They gave them a couple weeks to pray and think about the issue. And the result is two names:
Anthony Blair asked Denny if he would be willing to give the characteristics they decided they were interested in. He wondered about the leadership style that was desired, and he wanted to be able to hear that. This has been one of the elephants in the room. There are people who....oh, I'm not going to talk about this stuff. Denny Miller presented some things. A person who has the ability to unify us as a denomination. A person with a proven track record of leadership--vision, influence, persuasiveness. A person who is viewed as a spiritual person in his context. A person who can connect with people at the grassroots, something to that effect. Ballots have been distributed. Joe Abu asked that we have a prayer time before making this enormous decision. Bishop Hirschy asked Joe to lead in prayer. That's what he's doing right now. Bishop Hirschy entertained a motion to close nominations, and it was passed. So now they're marking their ballots. Pages are going around, collecting the ballots. The board of tellers are Sandy Burk, Chris Little, and Ruth Ralph. The ballots are being given to Sandy Burk. 12:00 Bishop Hirschy said we'll hear the results after lunch. There were some objections from people who remember that in 2001, we read the ballots publicly, with all of us keeping a running tally. But it's going to the tellers, and we'll wait. I wonder how much appetite Pat and Ron will have, as they wait. Church Multiplication Leadership TeamWe're on material for a new "Church Multiplication Leadership Team." This has been a group working under the Healthy Church Leadership Team, but now it'll be a full-blown leadership team. 12:10. Time for lunch. Never mind. Sandy Burk has the results for bishop. Here they are:
One abstaining, blank vote. A total of 62 votes. Questions were raised as to whether 31 is enough to constitute a majority, when the total votes cast was 62. Does a blank vote count as a ballot? Craig Burkholder ruled that the blank vote doesn't count. In that case, we have an election: 31 out of 61 votes is a majority. And so, Ron Ramsey is the new bishop. "Ron Ramsey, congratulations," said Bishop Hirschy. Ron goes forward. He gives some words. He says he's from the hills of southern Ohio, and has no pretense about being anything else. He loves the United Brethren church, "And I'll do my best with God's help." Paul Hirschy is now praying for Ron. And I'm going up to take a picture. 12:20. Now it's time for lunch. |