A Wonderful and most unanticipated outcome to refer the document back for further work! It should never have been brought to the meeting in the form it was! This was quite a margin - 184 to 114. Truly a gift of the Spirit’s working! Thanks to the 80 - 90% of Committee Members and Invitees that pointed out the deficiencies of the document! It must be said that most seemed to have a sense that some compliance mechanisms were needed!
Many Paul’s spoke today withstanding the half-baked gospel principles of the “Procedures for Reconciliation and Adherence to Church Governance Document” in the face of the Peter’s who authored the document.
Here is my list of Paul’s!
- Dr Lowell Cooper - very reasoned rejection of this document
- Randy Roberts - very pointed questions to the chair
- John Thomas, GC Associate Secretary - document disenfranchises young people and women. Drives toward legalism.
- Thomas Muller, President of Danish Union
- Norbert Zens, Inter-European Division - “This goes to far.”
- Dean Coridon, NAD - "This document moves away from [both Protestantism and a representative form of Government].
- Bobby Showlunder, President of the Swedish Union
- Larry Moore, SW Union, NAD - Document far too long.
- Tom Evans - “McCarthyism may have arrived in the church.”
- Jan Paulsen - “We are making the Spirit’s task more difficult to bring unity … I do not see the hand of God in this document and it should not be voted.”
- Dan Jackson - 5 warning signals - “I have a little problem with being called a Joseph Conradi if I disagree with this document.”
- Rafat Kamal, TED President.
- Maveni Kaufononga, President, Trans-Pacific Union President, SPD - gentle and subtle.
- Michael Kominski, Euro-Asia Division President - “If the Holy Spirit shows another way, I’m sure we’ll follow.”
- Suranjeen Pallipamula, Northern Indian Union, Southern Asia Division layperson
- Lisa Beadsley-Hardy - “banning advocacy infringes on freedom of speech.”
- Richard McEdwards, MENA - "[the wording of the document] continues to restrict dialogue."
18 Bill Knott - “advocacy is a prized right … even Ellen White critiqued GC policies.”
- Jiri Moskala - “If we can’t trust our leaders and their word, there is a big problem. Trust problems can’t be fixed by signatures.”
- Dave Weigley, President CUC, moved the original motion to refer to the GC Constitution and Bylaws committee because of rea questions as to the constitutionality of some provisions of the document.
- David Trim - “The Adventist way is to work it through committees. Let’s improve it.”
- Bob Folkenberg, Jnr , China Union - "I have a major concern with requirements for a signature. Trust is pivotal in any organization. Signatures don’t build trust. It creates more opportunity for conflict.
The individual who called question on the motion to refer the document back to the 'Unity in Mission Oversight Committee was Kepsie Elodo, Papua New Guinea Union President.
Interestingly, 3 of the 4 Union Presidents of the South Pacific Division had pivitol roles in the proceedings. First, Brad Kemp, New Zealand Pacific Union President pushed the constitutionality questions about the document. Second, Maveni Kaufononga, Trans-Pacific Union President made a gentle but subtle speech questioning whether the document will bring unity and answers no. Third, Kepsie Elodo, Papua New Guinea President was the person who called question on the motion to refer the document back to the committee. The SPD Division Officers seemed to be very quiet as did the Australian Union President. But then, so was the Pacific Union President.