Unity Oversight Committee Survey Results

Spectrum Website
#1

Results from a worldwide survey were presented to the members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s General Conference (GC) Unity Oversight Committee on March 20, 2018, during a scheduled meeting held at the world headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland.

The six-question survey was designed and administered by the church’s Office of Archives, Statistics, and Research (ASTR). The survey addressed issues relating to compliance with voted actions of the General Conference Session, the church’s highest decision-making body, and its Executive Committee, which meets annually between the quinquennial sessions of the General Conference.

Following the process adopted by the Unity Oversight Committee in December 2017, the survey provides quantitative data, allowing the committee “to more accurately judge where the world Church leaders and members stand on these issues,” according to Mike Ryan, chair of the committee. “This information will serve as a guide to the Unity Oversight Committee in defining consequences for unions who have not complied with votes of the GC Session and of the GC Executive Committee,” he added.

The report, presented to the committee by the Director of ASTR, David Trim, featured survey data gathered from the presidents of the Church’s 13 world divisions, as well as the Middle East North Africa Union, an attached field of the GC. In addition, the survey was sent to the 137 presidents of unions around the world.

“The union presidents answer directly to a grassroots constituency,” said Ryan. Additionally, union presidents are members of the GC Executive Committee with an overview of global church events and actions. Unions comprise the constituency of the GC.

Survey Results

In his report, Trim stated that union and division presidents were requested to answer the six survey questions according to “what they believe is the view of the majority of members in their territory, as opposed to their personal opinion.”

Trim noted that 100 percent of the surveys, sent out on January 18, 2018, had been received by March 4. He then presented each question, along with the data received, including 1) number and percentages of “votes” received; 2) number and percentages of Union president “votes,”; 3) Percentage of Union membership living in the territories represented by each vote.

Following are the questions and responses presented to the committee:

Question 1: “Should the General Conference Unity Oversight Committee appoint a team to listen sensitively, counsel and pray with the presidents of unions not in compliance with voted actions of GC Sessions and of the GC Executive Committee?”

Response:

  • “Yes” — 139 total votes (92%); 126 union president votes (92%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 90.56%.
  • “No” — 10 total votes (7%); 9 union president votes (7%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 6.28%.
  • Not answered — 2 total (1%); 2 union presidents; percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 3.16%.

Question 2: “Should there be further organizational consequences for unions that do not comply with voted actions of GC Sessions and of the GC Executive Committee?”

Response:

  • “Yes” — 108 total votes (72%); 97 union president votes (71%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 83.93%.
  • “No” — 34 total votes (22%); 31 union president votes (23%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 12.17%.
  • Not answered — 9 total votes (6%); 9 union presidents (6%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 3.9%.

Question 3: “Should church leaders be asked to sign a document saying that they will follow voted actions of GC Sessions and of the GC Executive Committee?”

Response:

  • “Yes” — 72 total votes (47.7%); 65 union president votes (47.4%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 60.6%.
  • “No” — 77 total votes (51%); 70 union president votes (51.1%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 36%.
  • Not answered — 2 total (1.3 %); 2 union presidents (1.5%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 3.4%.

Question 4: “Should presidents of unions not in compliance with voted actions of GC Sessions and of the GC Executive Committee be allowed to speak (i.e. have voice) at meetings of the GC Executive Committee?”

Response:

  • “Yes” — 76 total votes (50.3%); 67 union president votes (48.9%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 34.3%.
  • “No” — 67 total votes (44.4%); 63 union president votes (46%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 60.9%.
  • Not answered — 8 total (5.3%); 7 union presidents (5.1%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 4.9%.

Question 5: “Should presidents of unions not in compliance with voted actions of GC Sessions and of the GC Executive Committee be allowed to vote in meetings of the GC Executive Committee?”

Response:

  • “Yes” — 56 total votes (37.1%); 50 union president votes (36.5%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 26.8%.
  • “No” — 86 total votes (57%); 79 union president votes (57.7%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 67.9%.
  • Not answered — 9 total (6%); 8 union presidents (5.8%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 5.3%.

Question 6: “Should presidents of unions not in compliance with voted actions of GC Sessions and of the GC Executive Committee be allowed to serve on standing committees or ad hoc subcommittees of the GC Executive Committee?

Response:

  • “Yes” — 40 total votes (26.5%); 36 union president votes (26.3%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 15.5%.
  • “No” — 100 total votes (66.2%); 91 union president (66.4%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 79.1%.
  • Not answered — 11 total (7.3%); 10 union presidents (7.3%); percentage of world membership residing in those unions: 5.4%.

Conclusions Drawn

The following conclusions were drawn from the collected data:

  • There is overwhelming support for a GC team to meet with presidents of unions not in compliance, “to listen sensitively, counsel and pray.”
  • There is strong support for some kind of consequences for non-compliance.
  • There is also strong support for not allowing presidents of non-compliant unions to serve on standing or ad hoc committees of the GC Executive Committee.
  • There is pronounced support for not allowing presidents of unions not in compliance with voted actions of GC Sessions and of the GC Executive Committee to vote in meetings of the GC Executive Committee.
  • A majority of Church leaders oppose removing “voice” as well as vote from non-compliant union presidents.
  • Most Church leaders also oppose requiring union presidents to sign a document promising to abide by GC Session and Executive Committee actions.

Qualitative Data Gathering Continues

A preliminary report on qualitative data gathering was given by Hensley Moorooven, secretary of the Unity Oversight Committee. Moorooven reported that qualitative data is continuing to be gathered through personal visits and dialogues with division and union leaders worldwide. Qualitative data is also being gathered from GC institutions and the GC Leadership Council, composed of GC officers and departmental leaders.

So far, 11 such dialogues have taken place, according to Moorooven, with many more scheduled for the near future.

“Of the dialogues that have taken place,” added Ryan, “there appears to be a positive correlation between the quantitative and qualitative data.”

Ryan pointed out, however, that in the end, “data is a guide. It can be empirical, but not necessarily infallible, information. It’s a guide, not an absolute. But we will be informed by the data in crafting what is brought to the Executive Committee during Annual Council 2018.”

This article originally appeared on the Adventist New Network. Image courtesy of ANN.

Further Reading: General Conference Re-asks the Questions of 2017 Unity Oversight Committee Releases Statement Regarding Way Forward Unity Oversight Committee Continues to Gather Data

We invite you to join our community through conversation by commenting below. We ask that you engage in courteous and respectful discourse. You can view our full commenting policy by clicking here.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at http://spectrummagazine.org/node/8646
#2

The question that presents itself with this survey once again rests in the purpose of policy. Is the policy for compliance enhancing the mission of the church. Does the so called non-conformity to the policy limit or diminish the mission of the church? Along with this survey is the administration also studying the those so called non-compliant unions as to whether they are meeting the mission of the church spiritually, evangelically, financially. It seems to me that the emphasis is beyond simply compliance. It appears to have more to do with power, authority and control; paraphrasing the EGW quote …“of being the highest authority on earth…” There seems to be an obsession for power, control, and punishment rather that dynamic flexibility in the administration of a world church. What is the stated goal or outcome of conformity beyond the upholding of antiquated, exploited traditions of patriarchy and headship in the 21st century. Our research and studies have shown that the conformity demanded in neither biblical or doctrinal. What is really the issue? Policy by its own purpose is to to be dynamic for the administration of the organization and when policy does not enhance the ongoing needs of the organization it needs to modified or changed by responsible leadership. In the absence of responsible leadership it is the responsibility of of membership to chance that leadership. Leadership works at the behest of the body that places their thrust in that leadership. It appears at present that has been reversed.

13 Likes
#3

We have been told that most, and perhaps even all, unions are noncompliant in some way or another. I wish the GC would clarify whether this is true by issuing a report that discloses all noncompliance, if any, of each and every union.

14 Likes
#4

It seems to me yet another con-job. Any survey can be designed to provide the answers required by the boss. What a farse. The GC should have asked an unbiased group to frame the questions. What a waste of time and money. Jim

17 Likes
#6

With respect. The GC started the process with the end in mind, designed it to achieve that end and then will say “it’s the will of God”, or “the will of the people”. Then they are hurt, when the people that they designed this action against don’t accept the results as valid.

This action is about several things. The immediate thing is women’s ordination. The larger issue is that the church is diverging on liberal versus conservative ideas, and the GC in it’s current leadership intends to force the liberal dissenters to conform.

This “survey” was not done in the spirit of Christian love and understanding. When you know that the bulk of church leaders in the non-Western countries want the SDA church to support a conservative vision and you write a survey that leads to that result, it’s not about learning the information, it’s about justifying the outcome.

If in San Antonio, the GC vote had been to allow individual unions to make a decision about allowing women’s ordination in their unions, the non-Western churches would be threatening to leave the church (even though the vote didn’t require them to make the change), and you can bet that the current GC leadership wouldn’t be doing a survey like this to use it as a whip to bring the non-Western churches to heel.

Frankly, it’s hard to see how the end result isn’t a split between liberal and conservative factions of the SDA denomination. Apparently we really are no different than the Catholic and the Greek Orthodox.

13 Likes
#7
9 Likes
#8

This is a continuation of the General Conference trying to grab more power than it has been given. Who defines what it means to be out of compliance?

10 Likes
#9

Asking a relatively small handful of leaders to speculate on what their constituencies think about a select number of predetermined options is NOT research, it is simply speculation. Why not give those same Union leaders the tools to conduct scientifically valid surveys of their constituencies, along with some focus groups, and then compile the results? I couldn’t agree with Michael Wortman more–this is garbage in, garbage out. Perhaps David Trim Mike Ryan would like to give a defense of their “methodology?”

16 Likes
#10

This survey neither addresses the role of union constituencies or how a union president is to act should the constituency, functioning within its legal bylaws, disagrees with the “world church” or even the union president. The survey seems to invite crisis within unions. How can a constituency be in “rebellion” when functioning within its legal bylaws? I’m sad to say I can see no harmony coming from this.

14 Likes
#11

Disgusting!!
there is NO WAY that every member in every union had an opportunity to tell their Union
President which way to vote!!!
I would venture that MOST were like the priests in John 12:42 – “fearing that the [GC Leader–
ship of that day] would fire them and they would lose their jobs. Because they loved praise
from men more than praise of God.”

7 Likes
#12

Perfect example of how a question is chosen to fit an answer that has been cast in stone.

13 Likes
#13

these survey results pretty much confirm what i’ve been thinking…there has to be some consequence for non-compliance with a GC vote, or else there’s no point in being a world church, or voting on any kind of policy as a world church…but any consequence has to measured, so as not to permanently cripple our unity or mission…and it has to be commensurate, which dismantling noncompliant unions definitely would not be…it is true that union presidents aren’t necessarily noncompliant or personally responsible for their union’s noncompliance, but it is the case that stripping their votes at annual council, and removing any ability to serve on standing committees of GC EXCOM, sends a message to their constituents who are…

i believe that elements of these survey results were questioned on constitutional grounds at annual council 2017…but a vote on them at AC2018 will likely be successful, in light of this survey…i think GC lawyers must have formulated an amendment to address constitutional concerns, and that we will see penalties imposed on noncompliant union presidents as our formal response to noncompliance with a featured GC vote in the future…it will probably be a bit more touchy if and when an entire division is out of compliance…

i think all of this is an example of shrewd governance and leadership on the part of TW, at least for the time being…it shows an intent and willingness to do what it takes to uphold the institution of the world church without being autocratic or autolytic…perhaps it’s laying the groundwork for a re-election bid at Indianapolis 2020…i think most people want to see strong and consistent leadership that consults its membership in some way…

2 Likes
#15

Anybody who thinks this issue can be resolved by six loaded questions does not understand the problem or alternatively leadership already knows the answer they want. The most telling statistic in this survey is the membership percentage. Fortunately, all Unions are answerable to God in the first instance.

The current rift in the Seventh-day Adventist church will not heal until there is complete trust from the General Conference and between Unions that individual Unions are divinely inspired to make the best decisions for the constituencies under their care.

14 Likes
#16

After years of attempts to achieve a world-wide decision on WO, I believe a wise leader today would seek ways to achieve harmony. You’re a musician, so you know that a unison melody is often not considered as interesting as music with skillfully composed harmony. I do not see Ted Wilson seeking to promote harmony. Instead, I see him taking the church near the edge of a crisis that will do far more harm than good. He himself has suggested that he may have a calling to create a shaking.

What he personally believes on this matter should not matter in his leadership. And pandering to parts of the world where societal and cultural differences are not ready to accept WO in no way promotes harmony.

Sadly, I expect he will be seen in Adventist history as stalling, if not fracturing the work of the SDA denomination.

16 Likes
#17

“Wrong again” as our good friend @kevindpaulson is fond of saying. Everyone makes a mistake. Everyone. And my impression is WO was a huge mistake when it was referred to the whole church for voting. An effective and fair leader would have unhinged that decision without consequences. This is “dime a dozen” in family clinics where parents constantly make mistakes. I counsel those parents to look their children in the eye and apologize. No need to pretend parents are always right. No need to pretend all decisions made during the GC in session are always right. No need to penalize anyone because of the leaders’ mistakes.

12 Likes
#18

One of the many tragic legacies of the Ted Wilson era is his dramatic weakening of the GC.

If any member of the GC Executive Committee were to be denied voice or vote in meetings of the Committee, then all resulting voted actions would be illegitimate per se. The justification for noncompliance with a voted action is heightened if such voted action is illegitimate. Ironically, Wilson’s attempt to coerce compliance by denying voice and vote to certain Committee members would exacerbate and further justify noncompliance that is already occurring. In other words, this effort of his to strengthen the GC would ironically result in a further weakening of the GC.

Disallowing presidents of noncompliant unions to serve on standing or ad hoc committees does not render voted actions illegitimate. The Committee could punish noncompliant unions in this way. But this power to punish, as it were, already exists. The Committee already possesses the power to choose who should serve on standing or ad hoc committees; the Committee already possesses the power to reject presidents of noncompliant unions for service on standing or ad hoc committees.

Expulsion does not remedy noncompliance if the president of the noncompliant union did not cause the noncompliance. For example, expulsion of certain union presidents will not cause millions of Seventh-day Adventists who favor women’s ordination to recant and change union policy or practice.

Wilson is reaping what he has sown. He could have chosen to unite rather than divide in San Antonio. He bears responsibility for the dramatic weakening of the GC that has occurred during his presidency. His successor will be left with the task of repair, restoration, and the cultivation of church unity.

12 Likes
#19

The answer was—Ilike my job and intend to keep it. The church is reliving Neal Wilson and F.D. Nichols. we will have an investigative judgment if we have to set it up our selves.

8 Likes
#20

OK, I am absolutely NOT surprised by the results of this fake survey. Why? Because I predicted exactly these results somewhere in the LougeGate when the so-called “survey” was first announced.

What takes me the most with the way the GC deals with these issues is that they talk to us, Church members, assuming that we are all “mere idiots, maybe retarder people,” who will not notice their malice and ill intent. Which I take personally as very offensive and condescending. Though, apparently some people applaud that evil administrative technique.

They call it “a survey?” Balony! This is a fraudulent maneuver (not to misspell it as “manure”) intended to deceive the chuuch membership around the world by from now on proclaiming, “The Church has spoken.” How do they dare to lie so blatantly to us, the members?

If they wanted a real survey, why didn’t they hire a third party, uh? Well,… that would be IF they wanted a true survey. But it is obvious that they had the wanted results written beforehand and created a tool that would produce those exact results. Which reminds me of the Glacier View verdict, right @gford1? The verdict was written, ready to condemn Des Ford’s biblical position even before any presentation was made, or votes taken. That was Neil Wilson in action.

Now we have Ted Wilson in action. I wonder how will he feel after he leaves the GC and looks back at his main accomplishment, i.e., splitting the Church! He is almost there, soon he will be able to proclaim, “Mission accomplished!”

And the “mere idiots, maybe retarder people,” will say, “Amen!”…

8 Likes
#21

“…with the task of” … I say, repealing and replacing the current manipulative and malign actions taken based on personal biases, well known politics, ill maneuvers, and fake surveys.

It is, indeed, time to repeal and replace … someone…

4 Likes
#22

This God-given talent you have of being able to predict the future, are these waves from extraterrestrial origin that your brain is able to snare as Jeremy @vandieman claims EGW had with her visions or is this a result of understanding the forces of behavior and personality? You have been on the mark and still have to miss a prediction. Impressive. I bet $1.00 TW shudders whenever he reads your posts.

5 Likes