This new series of posts is based on the premise that you cannot find a solution until you have clearly identified the problem. As the Group moved from attempting to address Takoma Park's issues through direct dialogue with the pastors to seeking a remedy through the conference we found that the matter was compounded by the attitudes and behaviors of the conference officials we dealt with. It became clear to us as the interaction progressed that the goal of the conference was not to facilitate resolution through fair and efficient process, but to silence dissent. The following is a listing of the inappropriate behaviors the conference engaged in toward this end.
When we presented Elder Miller with an account of events he responded by accusing us of "misunderstandings, inaccuracies, and information that has been used that is misleading."(1) Despite repeated requests for a specific list so that we could either make correction or defense he refused to be any more specific. Since he was not present for the events described he had no first-hand knowledge of whether what we had said was true or not. Therefore,
A) Elder Miller wronged us by assuming guilt without evidence.
B) Elder Miller wronged us by making accusations without detail so that we couldn't respond.
(1) Letter to Elder B dated July 14, 2008
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
The Epic, Pt.29
Elder Miller’s next letter was as insulting as his first. He completely ignored all the questions put to him and maintained his accusations without substantiating them.
“July 14, 2008
“Dear [Elder B]:
“Thank you for your letter and your explanations. You have been tenacious in your analysis. However, as stated before, there are some misunderstandings, inaccuracies, and information that has been used that is misleading.
“We, in the Potomac Conference Administration, are willing, as stated before, to work with the Takoma Park Church in processing through this situation in following the principles of Matthew 18. Therefore, it will be necessary for you, [Elder B] or designee of the disaffected party, to make contact with Jorge Ramirez and work with him and follow an agreed outlined process of Matthew 18.
“Jorge will look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
“A fellow disciple on the journey,
“William K. Miller
“President”
Elder Miller was clearly choosing to ignore the fact that the Group had already met with conference administration and was within its rights to proceed to the Executive Committee without further delay. However, the Group decided to go the extra mile and have the additional meeting Elder Miller had indicated was necessary. The Group selected a small spokesgroup to attend this meeting and designated Brother H to call Jorge Ramirez as Elder Miller had specified to arrange it.
Brother H called Elder Ramirez on July 22, 2008 and stated that he would like to arrange a meeting with Elder Ramirez and three members of the spokesgroup, to be held in the Washington area. Elder Ramirez was fine with this and suggested three possible dates for the meeting. They agreed to be in touch a little later to finalize the date.
Next: Changing the Rules
Religious
“July 14, 2008
“Dear [Elder B]:
“Thank you for your letter and your explanations. You have been tenacious in your analysis. However, as stated before, there are some misunderstandings, inaccuracies, and information that has been used that is misleading.
“We, in the Potomac Conference Administration, are willing, as stated before, to work with the Takoma Park Church in processing through this situation in following the principles of Matthew 18. Therefore, it will be necessary for you, [Elder B] or designee of the disaffected party, to make contact with Jorge Ramirez and work with him and follow an agreed outlined process of Matthew 18.
“Jorge will look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
“A fellow disciple on the journey,
“William K. Miller
“President”
Elder Miller was clearly choosing to ignore the fact that the Group had already met with conference administration and was within its rights to proceed to the Executive Committee without further delay. However, the Group decided to go the extra mile and have the additional meeting Elder Miller had indicated was necessary. The Group selected a small spokesgroup to attend this meeting and designated Brother H to call Jorge Ramirez as Elder Miller had specified to arrange it.
Brother H called Elder Ramirez on July 22, 2008 and stated that he would like to arrange a meeting with Elder Ramirez and three members of the spokesgroup, to be held in the Washington area. Elder Ramirez was fine with this and suggested three possible dates for the meeting. They agreed to be in touch a little later to finalize the date.
Next: Changing the Rules
Religious
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Ball of Confusion
Some years ago there was a popular song entitled, "Ball of Confusion." This song was performed, aptly enough, by a group called the Temptations. The song was topical, dealing with social and moral crises faced by America in the late 1960s: war, poverty, race relations, political strife. Strangely, everything the Temptations sang about in the song plague America today. Today, sadly, the title "Ball of Confusion" talks to everything our Church has experienced with the Healthy Church Initiative.
If you doubt that, let's take a moment and examine with word "confusion." Confusion could be defined as the state of being confused. Disorder. Upheaval. Disorientation. Bewilderment. Confusion can also be defined as a lack of clearness or distinctness. So if we agree, that these are definitions of "confusion," then let do the analysis.
In the case of Takoma Park, we were told that we needed to vote in favor of Paul Borden's Staff Lead Church, "so we can win people from the neighborhood." Yet there was never a plan to do this. Sounds like confusion to me. But let's put it to the test. How many people who actually live, or work in the greater Takoma Park neighborhood have actually joined the Takoma Park Church? To date, none.
In fact let's talk about church growth in light of the Growing Healthy Church Initiative. We've seen the usual baptisms, i.e., kids graduating from John Nevins Andrews School and capping off the experience with a baptism. Dedicating one's life to Christ is important at any age. I, for one, am always glad to see anyone baptized. But where are these kids, or anyone else, once they've been baptized? It's like once they've been baptized, they disappear.
This brings to mind the idea of "Net Baptisms." Do the math. Look at the people that have come in versus the people that are leaving, or who have left. The net growth is in negative numbers. It's become so bad, Takoma Park won't even print transfers in and out in the church bulletin. Yet the pastors at the Takoma Park say the church is growing.
Sounds like confusion.
But all this raises another question. God is not the author of confusion. If this not-so-new change in structure, that was supposed to grow the church, isn't, then who or what is really behind it?
Like I said, God is not the author of confusion...
If you doubt that, let's take a moment and examine with word "confusion." Confusion could be defined as the state of being confused. Disorder. Upheaval. Disorientation. Bewilderment. Confusion can also be defined as a lack of clearness or distinctness. So if we agree, that these are definitions of "confusion," then let do the analysis.
In the case of Takoma Park, we were told that we needed to vote in favor of Paul Borden's Staff Lead Church, "so we can win people from the neighborhood." Yet there was never a plan to do this. Sounds like confusion to me. But let's put it to the test. How many people who actually live, or work in the greater Takoma Park neighborhood have actually joined the Takoma Park Church? To date, none.
In fact let's talk about church growth in light of the Growing Healthy Church Initiative. We've seen the usual baptisms, i.e., kids graduating from John Nevins Andrews School and capping off the experience with a baptism. Dedicating one's life to Christ is important at any age. I, for one, am always glad to see anyone baptized. But where are these kids, or anyone else, once they've been baptized? It's like once they've been baptized, they disappear.
This brings to mind the idea of "Net Baptisms." Do the math. Look at the people that have come in versus the people that are leaving, or who have left. The net growth is in negative numbers. It's become so bad, Takoma Park won't even print transfers in and out in the church bulletin. Yet the pastors at the Takoma Park say the church is growing.
Sounds like confusion.
But all this raises another question. God is not the author of confusion. If this not-so-new change in structure, that was supposed to grow the church, isn't, then who or what is really behind it?
Like I said, God is not the author of confusion...
Friday, September 25, 2009
Advice from the Spirit of Prophesy, Pt 14
"An infinite sacrifice has been made for man, and made in vain for every soul who will not accept of salvation. How important, then, that the one who presents the truth shall do so under a full sense of the responsibility resting upon him! How tender, pitiful, and courteous should be all his conduct in dealing with the souls of men, when the Redeemer of the world has shown that he values them so highly! The question is asked by Christ, "Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household?" [MATT. 24:45.] Jesus asks, "Who?" and every minister of the gospel should repeat the question to his own heart. As he views the solemn truths, and his mind beholds the picture drawn of the faithful and wise steward, his soul should be stirred to the very depths" (Gospel Workers (1892), p. 15).
"Again: those who do accept the truth naturally expect that the one who presents it to them is right in his ideas of general principles and of what constitutes Christian character. When associated with him, they incline to do as he does. If his practices are wrong, they almost imperceptibly become partakers of the evil. His defects are reproduced in their religious experience. Often, through their love and reverence for him, some objectionable feature of his character is even copied by them as a virtue. If the one who is thus misrepresenting Christ could know what harm has been wrought by the faults of character which he has excused and cherished, he would be filled with horror" (Review and Herald, April 12, 1892, par. 5).
"All who reject the sacred message regarding the requirements of the law of God, reject truth. God's obedient people are to hold fast to truth in every line. This is the only hope of the soul when Satan seeks to take control of heart and mind.
"The resistance of truth leaves men captive to the will of Satan. Those who today hold fast to erroneous ideas, and feel satisfied with popular errors, rejecting a plain "Thus saith the Lord," reveal that had they lived in the days of Christ, they would have helped to swell the cry of the murderous mob, "Crucify Him! Crucify Him!" (The Paulson Collection of Ellen G. White Letters, p.3).
"Again: those who do accept the truth naturally expect that the one who presents it to them is right in his ideas of general principles and of what constitutes Christian character. When associated with him, they incline to do as he does. If his practices are wrong, they almost imperceptibly become partakers of the evil. His defects are reproduced in their religious experience. Often, through their love and reverence for him, some objectionable feature of his character is even copied by them as a virtue. If the one who is thus misrepresenting Christ could know what harm has been wrought by the faults of character which he has excused and cherished, he would be filled with horror" (Review and Herald, April 12, 1892, par. 5).
"All who reject the sacred message regarding the requirements of the law of God, reject truth. God's obedient people are to hold fast to truth in every line. This is the only hope of the soul when Satan seeks to take control of heart and mind.
"The resistance of truth leaves men captive to the will of Satan. Those who today hold fast to erroneous ideas, and feel satisfied with popular errors, rejecting a plain "Thus saith the Lord," reveal that had they lived in the days of Christ, they would have helped to swell the cry of the murderous mob, "Crucify Him! Crucify Him!" (The Paulson Collection of Ellen G. White Letters, p.3).
Thursday, September 24, 2009
The Epic, Pt. 28
The Group lost no time composing a message to respond to Elder Miller’s unwarranted accusations and formalize a request to appear before the Executive Committee. Elder Miller’s letter had stated that conference administration must be contacted about the dispute before a request could be made to appear before the Executive Committee, but to our minds that requirement had already been fulfilled by the meeting with Elder Miller and Dr. Pichette which had occurred back in December of 2007. We figured, therefore, that we were well within the parameters Elder Miller had set forth to ask for the promised meeting with the Executive Committee. This letter was dated June 26, but not actually mailed until July 1.
“June 26, 2008
“Dear Elder Miller:
“In the first part of this letter, I am personally responding to your letter dated June 17, 2008, and in the second part the “we” response is made and signed by those who have had and continue to make contributions to the correspondence which have appeared since the beginning of the deviations of the Takoma Park Church from adherence to the Church Manual. I signed because of the difficulty in obtaining many signatures of individuals not living in close proximity to one another.
“I begin by quoting a sentence from your letter: “As I have had two “unofficial” discussions with you and a group of 10, the information you chose to highlight in your letter, in my understanding, is inaccurate and misleading.” In this sentence there are three words to which I take exception: “unofficial,” “inaccurate,” and “misleading.”
“I recall two separate times during which I had any type of conversation with you. The first was a requested meeting with a delegation of concerned individuals. You agreed, provided there would be no more than eight persons in the delegation. Present with you was Dr. Raymond Pichette, Assistant to the President. In our minds, this was an official meeting, as it was duly requested through your secretary, planned, and time and place agreed upon. The second meeting took place in the home of Pastor Halverson. This was not a planned meeting, rather an unexpected encounter when I came to his home. I simply took the opportunity to express again to you my concerns about the Takoma Park Church. It was very brief, and, I agree with you, “unofficial.” However, the first meeting was a deliberately planned meeting which I and certain of the Takoma Park delegation understood to have been “official.” This meeting was for the express purpose of seeking help, guidance and verification of a statement repeatedly made by Pastor DeSilva that the “staff-led structure” (Paul D. Borden Report) was recommended by the Potomac Conference Administration. Following our appeal for conference administrative assistance regarding the then recent action by the church, approving the “staff-led church,” your response was that you would not oppose the action taken by the Takoma Park Church in its Business Meeting. When I and the others displayed our dismay and said to the effect that there was every possibility of losing many members, you replied, “I’ve seen where a church has gone down to twenty members before turning around.” We were appalled by what we heard. We felt betrayed. Process had been aborted. Whether the meeting was “official” or “unofficial” your statement to us barred the way to resolution. It also gave Pastor DeSilva free reign to move ahead. In addition, we departed from our meeting without your response as to whether the “Paul D. Borden Report” (staff-led church) was or was not recommended by the Potomac Conference Administration. We perceived that we had to resolve this issue ourselves, and we felt we had no one to help us.
“The words “inaccurate” and “misleading” grieved me greatly. I am baffled by your observation for it is so broad and far-reaching that I respectfully request that you pinpoint the inaccuracies and misleading statements that I or the group may have made. I and the others are not aware of any inaccurate or misleading statements. If there are, I am willing to communicate to all concerned a correction of the “inaccurate” and “misleading” statements.
“Part II
“Our grievance and that of many members (close to 40%) in the Takoma Park Church is the disregard of the authority of the Church Manual. The Takoma Park Church, in an unusual business meeting, voted to approve the “Paul D. Borden Report” of which the “staff-led structure” was an integral component and that component is totally contrary to the Church Manual. We are enclosing a copy of the “Paul D. Borden Report.” On the last page we have circled the offending Paragraph 3. This is the principle issue before us. Please note the last sentence of this paragraph strongly suggests that the “staff-led structure” is promoted by the Potomac Conference. At the bottom of the page are the names of Paul D. Borden, a Baptist Consultant, and the names of two Potomac Conference personnel, Ray Pichette, Assistant to the President and Glen Altermatt, Development. This also seems to suggest that Conference Administration is actively promoting change in the local church structure contrary to the Church Manual. The first two pages promote evangelism which we support wholeheartedly; however, is not paragraph 3 an integral part of the whole? Does not the new evangelism emphasis depend on a “staff-led structure?” We have difficulty believing that the Potomac Conference is promoting activity contrary to the Church Manual. Yet, published materials strongly suggest this is the case. (See enclosed Borden Report.)
“However, we need to be clear. As of this date, Takoma Park Church has not implemented a “staff-led structure.” Rather Pastor DeSilva, under pretext of the above action and without any additional authorization, implemented a different structure which has been characterized and announced publicly to the church by certain leading members, in the presence of Pastor DeSilva, as a “Pastor/CEO-led church” and is functioning as we write. This structure is as wrong as the “staff-led structure.” The present situation is (1) The Takoma Park Church approved a “staff-led structure.” (2) Pastor DeSilva introduced and is presently operating a “Pastor/CEO-led structure.” Thus we have a compounding of the original wrong with a second one—the assuming of authority by the pastor to change and operate a church governance structure on his own—both contrary to the Church Manual. The above points may be succinctly described: There is no duly elected representative church board functioning in the Takoma Park Church as stipulated in the Church Manual. We ask the question to ourselves and respectfully to you: Do we follow the Church Manual or follow any whim of governance we wish?
“Pastor DeSilva had repeatedly stated that the new form of staff-led church governance came from the Potomac Conference Administration. Later, when he introduced an organizational paper with a Ministries and Accountability Boards concept, he stated that the North American Division Policies supported this new structure. Furthermore, he announced that it was forbidden for any member of these new boards to discuss the issue of structure with any other church member. He was adamant that there be no discussion or gatherings to discuss the issues. We, then, sent the documents to the NAD secretary for verification. (These issues were clearly delineated in letters and documents you have already received.) Unfortunately, Pastor DeSilva refused to place this issue on any agenda and has declared that it has been voted and thus final.
“Soon thereafter we received letters from Elders Bediako, Parmenter, and Howard. All have clearly indicated that the action taken by the church is contrary to the Church Manual. Thus we again ask: “Where does the Potomac Conference Administration stand?”
“Referring to paragraph four of your letter, you stated you understood that we made a request to the board of elders on April 23, to refer this back to the church in business session and it was denied. Not so. What took place on April 23 was a private meeting with Pastor DeSilva. Previously, our group had discussed how to communicate the letters received from NAD and the GC in order to be in harmony with Matthew 18. Many had been the times we talked to Pastor DeSilva in regard to the new governance structure, but because of this new information, we decided to present the letters to him alone, rather than at a public meeting and embarrass him. So following Matthew 18, a few of us, including the head elder, met with Pastor DeSilva on April 23, 2008. However, the head elder insisted that all the elders attend. It was done. We read the letters received from the GC and NAD to Pastor DeSilva and then distributed copies to all present. After a brief discussion, Pastor DeSilva unilaterally refused our request to have this issue placed on the agenda of the next business meeting to be held April 27, 2008. We then concluded that we had the Scriptural authority to inform the church.
“Because Pastor DeSilva is receiving a copy of this letter, he thus has “full knowledge” of the group’s request as put forth in the following paragraph. If by “full knowledge of the pastor and board of elders” as stated in your letter were to infer that we should obtain their permission in order to make our appeal (which is not stipulated in the Church Manual), it is tantamount to requiring the chickens to request permission from the fox to tell the farmer that there is a problem in the chicken coup.
“We hereby request to appear before the Potomac Conference Executive Committee to resolve this issue. In your response to this letter, signed by you as President of the Potomac Conference, please state whether the Potomac Conference approves or disapproves of the Takoma Park Church, led by Pastor DeSilva, of not having a church board as defined by the Church Manual.
“We love our church and want to see if fulfill its grand mission. Let us do it in a manner as sanctioned by the World Church in its General Session and published in the Church Manual.
“Yours for unity in the church,
“[Elder B and 18 other signatures]”
Next: Elephants in the Room
Religious
“June 26, 2008
“Dear Elder Miller:
“In the first part of this letter, I am personally responding to your letter dated June 17, 2008, and in the second part the “we” response is made and signed by those who have had and continue to make contributions to the correspondence which have appeared since the beginning of the deviations of the Takoma Park Church from adherence to the Church Manual. I signed because of the difficulty in obtaining many signatures of individuals not living in close proximity to one another.
“I begin by quoting a sentence from your letter: “As I have had two “unofficial” discussions with you and a group of 10, the information you chose to highlight in your letter, in my understanding, is inaccurate and misleading.” In this sentence there are three words to which I take exception: “unofficial,” “inaccurate,” and “misleading.”
“I recall two separate times during which I had any type of conversation with you. The first was a requested meeting with a delegation of concerned individuals. You agreed, provided there would be no more than eight persons in the delegation. Present with you was Dr. Raymond Pichette, Assistant to the President. In our minds, this was an official meeting, as it was duly requested through your secretary, planned, and time and place agreed upon. The second meeting took place in the home of Pastor Halverson. This was not a planned meeting, rather an unexpected encounter when I came to his home. I simply took the opportunity to express again to you my concerns about the Takoma Park Church. It was very brief, and, I agree with you, “unofficial.” However, the first meeting was a deliberately planned meeting which I and certain of the Takoma Park delegation understood to have been “official.” This meeting was for the express purpose of seeking help, guidance and verification of a statement repeatedly made by Pastor DeSilva that the “staff-led structure” (Paul D. Borden Report) was recommended by the Potomac Conference Administration. Following our appeal for conference administrative assistance regarding the then recent action by the church, approving the “staff-led church,” your response was that you would not oppose the action taken by the Takoma Park Church in its Business Meeting. When I and the others displayed our dismay and said to the effect that there was every possibility of losing many members, you replied, “I’ve seen where a church has gone down to twenty members before turning around.” We were appalled by what we heard. We felt betrayed. Process had been aborted. Whether the meeting was “official” or “unofficial” your statement to us barred the way to resolution. It also gave Pastor DeSilva free reign to move ahead. In addition, we departed from our meeting without your response as to whether the “Paul D. Borden Report” (staff-led church) was or was not recommended by the Potomac Conference Administration. We perceived that we had to resolve this issue ourselves, and we felt we had no one to help us.
“The words “inaccurate” and “misleading” grieved me greatly. I am baffled by your observation for it is so broad and far-reaching that I respectfully request that you pinpoint the inaccuracies and misleading statements that I or the group may have made. I and the others are not aware of any inaccurate or misleading statements. If there are, I am willing to communicate to all concerned a correction of the “inaccurate” and “misleading” statements.
“Part II
“Our grievance and that of many members (close to 40%) in the Takoma Park Church is the disregard of the authority of the Church Manual. The Takoma Park Church, in an unusual business meeting, voted to approve the “Paul D. Borden Report” of which the “staff-led structure” was an integral component and that component is totally contrary to the Church Manual. We are enclosing a copy of the “Paul D. Borden Report.” On the last page we have circled the offending Paragraph 3. This is the principle issue before us. Please note the last sentence of this paragraph strongly suggests that the “staff-led structure” is promoted by the Potomac Conference. At the bottom of the page are the names of Paul D. Borden, a Baptist Consultant, and the names of two Potomac Conference personnel, Ray Pichette, Assistant to the President and Glen Altermatt, Development. This also seems to suggest that Conference Administration is actively promoting change in the local church structure contrary to the Church Manual. The first two pages promote evangelism which we support wholeheartedly; however, is not paragraph 3 an integral part of the whole? Does not the new evangelism emphasis depend on a “staff-led structure?” We have difficulty believing that the Potomac Conference is promoting activity contrary to the Church Manual. Yet, published materials strongly suggest this is the case. (See enclosed Borden Report.)
“However, we need to be clear. As of this date, Takoma Park Church has not implemented a “staff-led structure.” Rather Pastor DeSilva, under pretext of the above action and without any additional authorization, implemented a different structure which has been characterized and announced publicly to the church by certain leading members, in the presence of Pastor DeSilva, as a “Pastor/CEO-led church” and is functioning as we write. This structure is as wrong as the “staff-led structure.” The present situation is (1) The Takoma Park Church approved a “staff-led structure.” (2) Pastor DeSilva introduced and is presently operating a “Pastor/CEO-led structure.” Thus we have a compounding of the original wrong with a second one—the assuming of authority by the pastor to change and operate a church governance structure on his own—both contrary to the Church Manual. The above points may be succinctly described: There is no duly elected representative church board functioning in the Takoma Park Church as stipulated in the Church Manual. We ask the question to ourselves and respectfully to you: Do we follow the Church Manual or follow any whim of governance we wish?
“Pastor DeSilva had repeatedly stated that the new form of staff-led church governance came from the Potomac Conference Administration. Later, when he introduced an organizational paper with a Ministries and Accountability Boards concept, he stated that the North American Division Policies supported this new structure. Furthermore, he announced that it was forbidden for any member of these new boards to discuss the issue of structure with any other church member. He was adamant that there be no discussion or gatherings to discuss the issues. We, then, sent the documents to the NAD secretary for verification. (These issues were clearly delineated in letters and documents you have already received.) Unfortunately, Pastor DeSilva refused to place this issue on any agenda and has declared that it has been voted and thus final.
“Soon thereafter we received letters from Elders Bediako, Parmenter, and Howard. All have clearly indicated that the action taken by the church is contrary to the Church Manual. Thus we again ask: “Where does the Potomac Conference Administration stand?”
“Referring to paragraph four of your letter, you stated you understood that we made a request to the board of elders on April 23, to refer this back to the church in business session and it was denied. Not so. What took place on April 23 was a private meeting with Pastor DeSilva. Previously, our group had discussed how to communicate the letters received from NAD and the GC in order to be in harmony with Matthew 18. Many had been the times we talked to Pastor DeSilva in regard to the new governance structure, but because of this new information, we decided to present the letters to him alone, rather than at a public meeting and embarrass him. So following Matthew 18, a few of us, including the head elder, met with Pastor DeSilva on April 23, 2008. However, the head elder insisted that all the elders attend. It was done. We read the letters received from the GC and NAD to Pastor DeSilva and then distributed copies to all present. After a brief discussion, Pastor DeSilva unilaterally refused our request to have this issue placed on the agenda of the next business meeting to be held April 27, 2008. We then concluded that we had the Scriptural authority to inform the church.
“Because Pastor DeSilva is receiving a copy of this letter, he thus has “full knowledge” of the group’s request as put forth in the following paragraph. If by “full knowledge of the pastor and board of elders” as stated in your letter were to infer that we should obtain their permission in order to make our appeal (which is not stipulated in the Church Manual), it is tantamount to requiring the chickens to request permission from the fox to tell the farmer that there is a problem in the chicken coup.
“We hereby request to appear before the Potomac Conference Executive Committee to resolve this issue. In your response to this letter, signed by you as President of the Potomac Conference, please state whether the Potomac Conference approves or disapproves of the Takoma Park Church, led by Pastor DeSilva, of not having a church board as defined by the Church Manual.
“We love our church and want to see if fulfill its grand mission. Let us do it in a manner as sanctioned by the World Church in its General Session and published in the Church Manual.
“Yours for unity in the church,
“[Elder B and 18 other signatures]”
Next: Elephants in the Room
Religious
Monday, September 21, 2009
The Epic, Pt. 27
With the arrival of the letter from Elder Bediako the Group was once again confronted with the question of how best to present it. There were some who figured that the many private attempts to reason with Pastor DeSilva combined with the effort to privately present the first two letters had more than used up Pastor DeSilva’s quota of Matthew 18 consideration. There were others, however, who continued to assert that the respectful and minimally embarrassing course of action would be to present this new evidence in a quiet manner which would allow Pastor DeSilva to save face by acting on it without its having been publicized first. The Group finally decided to use this letter as one more opportunity to try to reason privately with Pastor DeSilva. Ironically, this discussion about the best way to honor the intent of Matthew 18 occurred before we had received Elder Miller’s letter accusing us of not following the verse.
Having seen from the first two letters that trying to present such evidence in person had a way of ballooning into a much bigger and more confrontational meeting than was intended, it was decided that a copy of the letter from Elder Bediako should be hand-delivered to Pastor DeSilva along with a cover letter reiterating our request that this matter be reconsidered at a business meeting. It occurred to us that if Pastor DeSilva felt backed into a corner he might be willing to agree to such a request and then just continue coming up with excuses for why it couldn’t happen promptly, so we decided to put a time frame on the request. The two letters were delivered together in a sealed envelope on Monday morning, June 30, 2008, by two members of the Group who simply handed it to Pastor DeSilva and walked out of the office. They did not stick around to get any reaction or response from him, but it was later reported by other church members who happened to be in the church office at the time that Pastor DeSilva’s reaction included language that would have made a sailor blush. The content of the cover letter is included below.
“June 30, 2008
“Pastor DeSilva,
“The changes to the Takoma Park SDA Church’s governance structure which you have been championing these last few months are wrong and completely unnecessary in order to accomplish evangelism (which we wholeheartedly support). The SDA Church Manual clearly stipulates that local congregations are to be governed by a single church board, which is to handle all decisions not reserved to the business meeting of the congregation. Following the Church Manual is mandatory, not optional, and an integral part of the nature of being a Seventh-day Adventist congregation. Therefore, what this congregation has done by adopting a form of governance contrary to the Church Manual is declare that it is no longer a part of the worldwide SDA church. This situation must be remedied immediately by returning to the form of governance dictated in the Manual.
“We are not alone in holding this position. Already the written testimony of Elders Howard and Parmenter have been provided to you, both of which strongly condemn these changes. Now Elder Bediako has added his voice in support of the Church Manual and the letter written by Elder Parmenter (see enclosed).
“There is no uncertainty, no room for alternate interpretation. Our church has erred, and we must correct that error at once. We urge you to call for and support a vote to rescind the change in structure at a business meeting to be held no later than 60 days after the date of this letter and announced no later than 20 days after receiving this letter.
“Your brothers and sisters in Christ,
“[21 signatures]”
Next: Mounting a Defense
Religious
Having seen from the first two letters that trying to present such evidence in person had a way of ballooning into a much bigger and more confrontational meeting than was intended, it was decided that a copy of the letter from Elder Bediako should be hand-delivered to Pastor DeSilva along with a cover letter reiterating our request that this matter be reconsidered at a business meeting. It occurred to us that if Pastor DeSilva felt backed into a corner he might be willing to agree to such a request and then just continue coming up with excuses for why it couldn’t happen promptly, so we decided to put a time frame on the request. The two letters were delivered together in a sealed envelope on Monday morning, June 30, 2008, by two members of the Group who simply handed it to Pastor DeSilva and walked out of the office. They did not stick around to get any reaction or response from him, but it was later reported by other church members who happened to be in the church office at the time that Pastor DeSilva’s reaction included language that would have made a sailor blush. The content of the cover letter is included below.
“June 30, 2008
“Pastor DeSilva,
“The changes to the Takoma Park SDA Church’s governance structure which you have been championing these last few months are wrong and completely unnecessary in order to accomplish evangelism (which we wholeheartedly support). The SDA Church Manual clearly stipulates that local congregations are to be governed by a single church board, which is to handle all decisions not reserved to the business meeting of the congregation. Following the Church Manual is mandatory, not optional, and an integral part of the nature of being a Seventh-day Adventist congregation. Therefore, what this congregation has done by adopting a form of governance contrary to the Church Manual is declare that it is no longer a part of the worldwide SDA church. This situation must be remedied immediately by returning to the form of governance dictated in the Manual.
“We are not alone in holding this position. Already the written testimony of Elders Howard and Parmenter have been provided to you, both of which strongly condemn these changes. Now Elder Bediako has added his voice in support of the Church Manual and the letter written by Elder Parmenter (see enclosed).
“There is no uncertainty, no room for alternate interpretation. Our church has erred, and we must correct that error at once. We urge you to call for and support a vote to rescind the change in structure at a business meeting to be held no later than 60 days after the date of this letter and announced no later than 20 days after receiving this letter.
“Your brothers and sisters in Christ,
“[21 signatures]”
Next: Mounting a Defense
Religious
Friday, September 18, 2009
The New Chart
Just to remind everyone of what the organizational chart looked like previously, here again is the chart that was issued on January 28, 2008:
And here is the one that superceded the January chart on June 29, having been introduced as just a little "tweaking:"
These are the differences between the charts:
1) The Accountability Board is shifted to the side and the Ministries Board moved up so that both report directly to the business meeting. Previously, the Ministries Board reported to the Accountability Board.
2) Men's and Women's Ministries now reported to Family Ministries. Previously they had reported to the Boards of Deacons and Deaconnesses respectively.
3) Personal Ministries Leader was retitled "Outreach Leader."
4) Grief Ministry was added to the responsibilities of the Outreach Leader.
5) Sabbath School Classes was removed from the responsibilities of the Sabbath School Leader.
6) The Accountability Board was given "Ad Hoc Committees."
The most significant of these changes is the alteration of the relative positions of the Accountability and Ministries Boards. The Church Manual requires a single church board with a specific minimum membership which reports directly to the business meeting and handles all executive functions. Neither of these two Boards meets the membership criteria to be a church board, but the Ministries Board comes far closer than the Accountability Board. By moving the Accountability Board so that it no longer stood between the Ministries Board and the business meeting, an objection against the Ministries Board qualifying as a church board was removed. Of course, this does not resolve the membership difficulties or the problem of their being two competing boards splitting the executive power.
Reorganizing which ministries report to which leader would not be a big deal except 1) several ministries which these charts put under the administration of other ministries are supposed to have direct representation on the church board, and 2) to the best of our knowledge the ministries affected by these changes were not directly informed of the changes, making for administrative chaos. The leaders of men's and women's ministries, for example, are supposed to be church board members, but under this new chart they must instead report to the family ministries leader in order to reach the Ministries Board. (This also demonstrates a lack of understanding on the pastors' part of the intended nature of family ministries. This ministry is supposed to address the spiritual issues unique to family dynamics, not supervise ministries that address the different gender dynamics, but I digress.) This particular example is further complicated by the fact that at the time this new chart was issued the post of family ministries leader had still not been filled by the standing nominating committee, so there was no actual person for these other ministries to report to even if they had happened to notice that they were supposed to. The net result of all this is that men's and women's ministries have functioned as independant bodies that didn't report to anyone besides themselves within the Takoma Park Church.
What the pastors intended by giving the Accountability Board "Ad Hoc Committees" remains a mystery. To the best of our knowledge none have ever actually been formed.
The incredibly disturbing part of all this is that the pastors could make such significant changes to the governance organization simply by announcing them (and not really even doing that). If, without question, the pastors can alter the dynamics of the new governance structure to bring it slightly closer to the Church Manual, what is there to prevent them from later taking steps further away from the Manual, also without allowing anyone to challenge the decision? Throughout this struggle we have repeatedly attempted to point out to both the congregation and the conference leadership that the pastors were exercising dictatorial powers. Every time we have made a statement along these lines Pastor DeSilva has responded in his most wounded voice that he has never acted as a dictator and that every change that has occurred has been voted on by the congregation. This is a blatant falsehood. None of the charts which Pastor DeSilva has used to define this new governance structure have ever been voted by a business meeting. By making, issuing, and changing them at will without the congregation's formal input and approval Pastor DeSilva has definitely constituted himself a dictator.
And here is the one that superceded the January chart on June 29, having been introduced as just a little "tweaking:"
These are the differences between the charts:
1) The Accountability Board is shifted to the side and the Ministries Board moved up so that both report directly to the business meeting. Previously, the Ministries Board reported to the Accountability Board.
2) Men's and Women's Ministries now reported to Family Ministries. Previously they had reported to the Boards of Deacons and Deaconnesses respectively.
3) Personal Ministries Leader was retitled "Outreach Leader."
4) Grief Ministry was added to the responsibilities of the Outreach Leader.
5) Sabbath School Classes was removed from the responsibilities of the Sabbath School Leader.
6) The Accountability Board was given "Ad Hoc Committees."
The most significant of these changes is the alteration of the relative positions of the Accountability and Ministries Boards. The Church Manual requires a single church board with a specific minimum membership which reports directly to the business meeting and handles all executive functions. Neither of these two Boards meets the membership criteria to be a church board, but the Ministries Board comes far closer than the Accountability Board. By moving the Accountability Board so that it no longer stood between the Ministries Board and the business meeting, an objection against the Ministries Board qualifying as a church board was removed. Of course, this does not resolve the membership difficulties or the problem of their being two competing boards splitting the executive power.
Reorganizing which ministries report to which leader would not be a big deal except 1) several ministries which these charts put under the administration of other ministries are supposed to have direct representation on the church board, and 2) to the best of our knowledge the ministries affected by these changes were not directly informed of the changes, making for administrative chaos. The leaders of men's and women's ministries, for example, are supposed to be church board members, but under this new chart they must instead report to the family ministries leader in order to reach the Ministries Board. (This also demonstrates a lack of understanding on the pastors' part of the intended nature of family ministries. This ministry is supposed to address the spiritual issues unique to family dynamics, not supervise ministries that address the different gender dynamics, but I digress.) This particular example is further complicated by the fact that at the time this new chart was issued the post of family ministries leader had still not been filled by the standing nominating committee, so there was no actual person for these other ministries to report to even if they had happened to notice that they were supposed to. The net result of all this is that men's and women's ministries have functioned as independant bodies that didn't report to anyone besides themselves within the Takoma Park Church.
What the pastors intended by giving the Accountability Board "Ad Hoc Committees" remains a mystery. To the best of our knowledge none have ever actually been formed.
The incredibly disturbing part of all this is that the pastors could make such significant changes to the governance organization simply by announcing them (and not really even doing that). If, without question, the pastors can alter the dynamics of the new governance structure to bring it slightly closer to the Church Manual, what is there to prevent them from later taking steps further away from the Manual, also without allowing anyone to challenge the decision? Throughout this struggle we have repeatedly attempted to point out to both the congregation and the conference leadership that the pastors were exercising dictatorial powers. Every time we have made a statement along these lines Pastor DeSilva has responded in his most wounded voice that he has never acted as a dictator and that every change that has occurred has been voted on by the congregation. This is a blatant falsehood. None of the charts which Pastor DeSilva has used to define this new governance structure have ever been voted by a business meeting. By making, issuing, and changing them at will without the congregation's formal input and approval Pastor DeSilva has definitely constituted himself a dictator.
The Epic, Pt.26
Another business meeting was held on Sunday, June 29, 2008. The day before had been significant for the fact that the air conditioning for the main church building had given out rather dramatically during services. (As in accompanied by smoke someone thought worthy of calling the fire department over.) Not surprisingly, the costs and labor involved in the system replacement were a primary topic of discussion. The finance committee chairman announced in this context that the finance committee had decided to create a subcommittee of itself called the building committee to deal with matters of this nature. These two events will become significant to the matter of Takoma Park’s governance somewhat later in the Epic.
In this meeting Pastor DeSilva announced that there was a new organization chart. He described the alterations as just a little “tweaking.” He did not even bother to pass out copies during the meeting, but rather announced that they could be picked up from the front table after the meeting if anyone wanted a copy. The matter didn’t even manage a mention in the official minutes of the meeting, much less receive official approval by the congregation in a vote. This is a shame because one of the “tweaks” was actually rather significant. (It will be explained in detail in the accompanying post, “The New Chart.”) The new chart is included below. (The writing on this copy of the chart was done by Pastor DeSilva. He was trying to "explain" it to a member of the Group because he was convinced that the only reason she objected to it was because she didn't understand it. For the record, the explanation didn't change her mind.)
The final item of significance in this business meeting was what Pastor DeSilva introduced as being the “final word” on the dispute over the appropriateness of the new governance structure. He claimed to have a letter from Elder Miller which settled the matter once and for all and that he was going to read the letter and then the issue would be forever closed. He read a document. He did not offer to distribute it or give any opportunity for anyone to ask for it.
For the sake of convenience we will fast-forward several months and give you the rest of this letter’s story now. At the next business meeting a member of the Group asked as part of matters arising from the minutes that the letter be included as part of the minutes of the June meeting. Pastor DeSilva agreed to this. By the following meeting, however, it still had not been done. The Group member continued to ask at each successive business meeting and each time it was promised but not delivered. Finally, at the business meeting held on May 17, 2009, Pastor DeSilva declared that the letter had been read as part of the devotion in the June 29, 2008 meeting, and so didn’t really belong in the minutes. (This was yet another lie. The official minutes of this meeting put out by the church list the reading of this letter as the seventh item of business discussed—which was in no way connected to the devotion.) He further declared that it wasn’t actually a letter; it was an email and was privileged communication that he couldn’t release without the permission of Elder Miller. He did state, as a magnanimous concession, that if the Group member wished to see it the office manager had a copy which she could review. The Group member lost no time securing the offered copy from the office manager.
It is the opinion of the Group that Pastor DeSilva placed this message in the public domain when he presented it to the congregation as evidence. We are decidedly less than convinced that it constitutes the final word on the subject, but since it was presented as such we believe that it ought to be included in this chronicle of events for the sake of having a complete record. The one disclaimer we ought to offer is that there was enough of a time lapse between the original hearing of the message and when it came into our possession that we cannot absolutely guarantee that it is the same thing as was presented in the June 2008 meeting, and there are some among us to whom it doesn’t seem quite right. In any case, this is what was given to us.
“Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 3:23 PM
“Alan:
“Good afternoon. Been praying for your meeting coming up Sunday morning that my understanding is a business meeting to continue the process of casting vision for what God truly wants for the Takoma Park Congregation.
“As you and I have talked on many occasions as to the direction that God has called this body, I want to affirm the direction that I understand that you are taking.
“1. You are maintaining a strong commitment to a representative form of church governance within the latitude that the church manual allows
“2. Your understanding of staff lead congregation does not in anyway imply control or manipulation. Staff led congregation is that the role of the pastor and the staff are to equip, empower, cast vision, encourage, and “come along side” those actively engaged in ministry and those who need encouragement in ministry
“3. That your understanding of accountability is not dictatorial in nature, not controlling in nature, nor manipulative in nature, but rather an agreed upon direction of strategic planning that engages ministry to be focused on your community (majority of time) and congregation (minority), recognizing that the best form of congregational nurture is reaching out to others. You will evaluate and address issues as needed in a Christ like manner, so that the mission of the church can move forward
“4. That you will follow the mission that God has called you, the church to do--“Go make disciples.” (Church Manual p.90-92). Also as the church manual quotes from the Pen of Inspiration-- “Everyone who has received Christ is called to work for the salvation of his fellow men.” AA121 And also from the DA “There are many who need the ministration of loving Christian hearts. Many have gone down to ruin who might have been saved if their neighbors, common men and women, had put forth personal effort for them. Many are waiting to be personally addressed. In the very family, the neighborhood, the town, where we live, there is work for us to do as missionaries for Christ. If we are Christians, this work will be our delight. No sooner is one converted than there is born within him a desire to make known to others what a precious friend he has found in Jesus. The saving and sanctifying truth cannot be shut up in his heart. {DA 141.3}
“Alan, I look forward to working with the Takoma Park Church. We will rally whatever resources we might be able to, to assist you in reaching your community for eternity. We all believe that Jesus is coming soon and we want to be both faithful and fruitful stewards of His vineyard.
“A fellow disciple on the journey…
“Bill Miller
“President Potomac Conference”
In this meeting Pastor DeSilva announced that there was a new organization chart. He described the alterations as just a little “tweaking.” He did not even bother to pass out copies during the meeting, but rather announced that they could be picked up from the front table after the meeting if anyone wanted a copy. The matter didn’t even manage a mention in the official minutes of the meeting, much less receive official approval by the congregation in a vote. This is a shame because one of the “tweaks” was actually rather significant. (It will be explained in detail in the accompanying post, “The New Chart.”) The new chart is included below. (The writing on this copy of the chart was done by Pastor DeSilva. He was trying to "explain" it to a member of the Group because he was convinced that the only reason she objected to it was because she didn't understand it. For the record, the explanation didn't change her mind.)
The final item of significance in this business meeting was what Pastor DeSilva introduced as being the “final word” on the dispute over the appropriateness of the new governance structure. He claimed to have a letter from Elder Miller which settled the matter once and for all and that he was going to read the letter and then the issue would be forever closed. He read a document. He did not offer to distribute it or give any opportunity for anyone to ask for it.
For the sake of convenience we will fast-forward several months and give you the rest of this letter’s story now. At the next business meeting a member of the Group asked as part of matters arising from the minutes that the letter be included as part of the minutes of the June meeting. Pastor DeSilva agreed to this. By the following meeting, however, it still had not been done. The Group member continued to ask at each successive business meeting and each time it was promised but not delivered. Finally, at the business meeting held on May 17, 2009, Pastor DeSilva declared that the letter had been read as part of the devotion in the June 29, 2008 meeting, and so didn’t really belong in the minutes. (This was yet another lie. The official minutes of this meeting put out by the church list the reading of this letter as the seventh item of business discussed—which was in no way connected to the devotion.) He further declared that it wasn’t actually a letter; it was an email and was privileged communication that he couldn’t release without the permission of Elder Miller. He did state, as a magnanimous concession, that if the Group member wished to see it the office manager had a copy which she could review. The Group member lost no time securing the offered copy from the office manager.
It is the opinion of the Group that Pastor DeSilva placed this message in the public domain when he presented it to the congregation as evidence. We are decidedly less than convinced that it constitutes the final word on the subject, but since it was presented as such we believe that it ought to be included in this chronicle of events for the sake of having a complete record. The one disclaimer we ought to offer is that there was enough of a time lapse between the original hearing of the message and when it came into our possession that we cannot absolutely guarantee that it is the same thing as was presented in the June 2008 meeting, and there are some among us to whom it doesn’t seem quite right. In any case, this is what was given to us.
“Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 3:23 PM
“Alan:
“Good afternoon. Been praying for your meeting coming up Sunday morning that my understanding is a business meeting to continue the process of casting vision for what God truly wants for the Takoma Park Congregation.
“As you and I have talked on many occasions as to the direction that God has called this body, I want to affirm the direction that I understand that you are taking.
“1. You are maintaining a strong commitment to a representative form of church governance within the latitude that the church manual allows
“2. Your understanding of staff lead congregation does not in anyway imply control or manipulation. Staff led congregation is that the role of the pastor and the staff are to equip, empower, cast vision, encourage, and “come along side” those actively engaged in ministry and those who need encouragement in ministry
“3. That your understanding of accountability is not dictatorial in nature, not controlling in nature, nor manipulative in nature, but rather an agreed upon direction of strategic planning that engages ministry to be focused on your community (majority of time) and congregation (minority), recognizing that the best form of congregational nurture is reaching out to others. You will evaluate and address issues as needed in a Christ like manner, so that the mission of the church can move forward
“4. That you will follow the mission that God has called you, the church to do--“Go make disciples.” (Church Manual p.90-92). Also as the church manual quotes from the Pen of Inspiration-- “Everyone who has received Christ is called to work for the salvation of his fellow men.” AA121 And also from the DA “There are many who need the ministration of loving Christian hearts. Many have gone down to ruin who might have been saved if their neighbors, common men and women, had put forth personal effort for them. Many are waiting to be personally addressed. In the very family, the neighborhood, the town, where we live, there is work for us to do as missionaries for Christ. If we are Christians, this work will be our delight. No sooner is one converted than there is born within him a desire to make known to others what a precious friend he has found in Jesus. The saving and sanctifying truth cannot be shut up in his heart. {DA 141.3}
“Alan, I look forward to working with the Takoma Park Church. We will rally whatever resources we might be able to, to assist you in reaching your community for eternity. We all believe that Jesus is coming soon and we want to be both faithful and fruitful stewards of His vineyard.
“A fellow disciple on the journey…
“Bill Miller
“President Potomac Conference”
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The Epic, Pt. 25
A week and a half after our second letter to Elder Miller we finally received a response:
“June 17, 2008
"Dear [Elder B]:
“I am responding to your letter of May 15, 2008. I appreciate your willingness to want to resolve this issue that you have.
“As I have read through your letter I am not certain the best way to respond. As I have had two “unofficial” discussions with you and a group of 10, the information you chose to highlight in your letter, in my understanding, is inaccurate and misleading.
“What I am aware of is that a biblical protocol has not been followed. I believe the best process to follow are the principles found in Matthew 18.
“I understand that you did take a request to the board of elders, on April 23, to refer this back to the church in Business session. This was denied. The next appropriate step would have been to then contact the conference administration with your dispute, with the full knowledge of the Pastor and board of elders to contact the conference in an official capacity and request a meeting. If the decision then made would not have met your group’s approval it would then be referred to the Executive Committee. After the Executive Committee the manual states:
“Churches should look to the local conference for advice pertaining to the operating of the church or on questions arising from the Church Manual. If mutual understanding or agreement is not reached, the matter should be referred to the union for clarification.” xxii Church Manual 2005 edition.
“We will be glad to work a process as understood in principle by Matthew 18 and as outlined in the Church Manual.
“I appreciate you prayers on this matter. As you are aware the purpose of prayer is to soften hearts to be in tune with God’s agenda, not push personal agendas. God’s agenda clearly stated in the Scriptures and in the church manual is that each individual member will be used by Him to bring lost people to a knowledge of Jesus. If this is your reason for continuing this discussion, this is the right reason.
“If you have any questions feel free to contact Jorge Ramirez, our VP for administration. He will help guide this process.
“Sincerely,
“William K. Miller
“President”
Elder Miller’s accusations would be rebutted in the next letter we sent him so we won’t bother with that task here. See also “If Your Brother Sins Against You, posted 3-20-09, which further rebuts the Matthew 18 accusation.
The arrogant and dismissive nature of this letter notwithstanding, it was useful in one thing: it pointed us to an appearance before the conference’s Executive Committee as the next step in our appeal process. Without this recommendation our efforts might have died here for lack of ideas as to an appropriate next step. The Group took this new goal and ran with it, as will be seen in the subsequent correspondence. (Thanks, Elder Miller, for opening the door!)
Next: Funny Business
Religious
“June 17, 2008
"Dear [Elder B]:
“I am responding to your letter of May 15, 2008. I appreciate your willingness to want to resolve this issue that you have.
“As I have read through your letter I am not certain the best way to respond. As I have had two “unofficial” discussions with you and a group of 10, the information you chose to highlight in your letter, in my understanding, is inaccurate and misleading.
“What I am aware of is that a biblical protocol has not been followed. I believe the best process to follow are the principles found in Matthew 18.
“I understand that you did take a request to the board of elders, on April 23, to refer this back to the church in Business session. This was denied. The next appropriate step would have been to then contact the conference administration with your dispute, with the full knowledge of the Pastor and board of elders to contact the conference in an official capacity and request a meeting. If the decision then made would not have met your group’s approval it would then be referred to the Executive Committee. After the Executive Committee the manual states:
“Churches should look to the local conference for advice pertaining to the operating of the church or on questions arising from the Church Manual. If mutual understanding or agreement is not reached, the matter should be referred to the union for clarification.” xxii Church Manual 2005 edition.
“We will be glad to work a process as understood in principle by Matthew 18 and as outlined in the Church Manual.
“I appreciate you prayers on this matter. As you are aware the purpose of prayer is to soften hearts to be in tune with God’s agenda, not push personal agendas. God’s agenda clearly stated in the Scriptures and in the church manual is that each individual member will be used by Him to bring lost people to a knowledge of Jesus. If this is your reason for continuing this discussion, this is the right reason.
“If you have any questions feel free to contact Jorge Ramirez, our VP for administration. He will help guide this process.
“Sincerely,
“William K. Miller
“President”
Elder Miller’s accusations would be rebutted in the next letter we sent him so we won’t bother with that task here. See also “If Your Brother Sins Against You, posted 3-20-09, which further rebuts the Matthew 18 accusation.
The arrogant and dismissive nature of this letter notwithstanding, it was useful in one thing: it pointed us to an appearance before the conference’s Executive Committee as the next step in our appeal process. Without this recommendation our efforts might have died here for lack of ideas as to an appropriate next step. The Group took this new goal and ran with it, as will be seen in the subsequent correspondence. (Thanks, Elder Miller, for opening the door!)
Next: Funny Business
Religious
Friday, September 11, 2009
The Epic, Pt. 24
After several weeks of fruitless waiting for a response to our letter to Elder Miller (and even longer since Pastor DeSilva had promised that the conference president would come and straighten the whole matter out) we decided to write a second letter putting a somewhat finer point on the matter and specifically requesting a response.
“June 6, 2008
“Dear Elder Miller:
“On May 14, 2008, I sent you a chronological resume of the disruptive events now taking place in the Takoma Park Church vis-à-vis adherence to the Church Manual in the local church governance or to following the new present Pastor/CEO structure. We are most desirous of having these issues resolved in harmony with God’s will.
“Because my letter did not specifically request a response from you, I am now humbly requesting a response so that these issues may be resolved.
“The Takoma Park Church members have not officially heard from Potomac Conference leadership. Our request is that we wish to know the Potomac Conference leadership’s official position regarding the eradication of the Church Board and the establishment of a new structure, Pastor/CEO, which was announced at the Business Meeting, Sunday April 27, 2008. We oppose this type of governance because it is contrary to SDA Church polity, policies, and the Church Manual. However, if we are incorrect in our position, we want Conference leadership to so inform us in written correspondence so that we can communicate that message without equivocation or misunderstanding. Should we not be mistaken in our interpretation, we would want to be sustained by the Conference in our position for the sake of unity. Written communication is needed so that the message will be clear and remove any doubt as to what is the correct position for the entire church’s edification.
“Because Pastor Alan DeSilva repeatedly said that the present Takoma Park governance system is approved and came for the NAD, we inquired and received letters from the North American Division and the General Conference indicating that his assertions are not correct. The letters were denounced by the Pastor. Consequently, many Takoma Park members are still afraid to voice their concerns. Therefore, you intervention in this matter is highly desirous and welcomed. If we are wrong in our conclusions, inform us in writing. If, however, we are correct in our opposition to the present Takoma Park Church governance, we would appreciate your informing us by letter. By so doing, we all shall avoid misunderstanding and misquoting one another’s oral assertions.
“Sincerely,
“[Elder B]
“Designated Communicator”
Next: A New Door
Religious
“June 6, 2008
“Dear Elder Miller:
“On May 14, 2008, I sent you a chronological resume of the disruptive events now taking place in the Takoma Park Church vis-à-vis adherence to the Church Manual in the local church governance or to following the new present Pastor/CEO structure. We are most desirous of having these issues resolved in harmony with God’s will.
“Because my letter did not specifically request a response from you, I am now humbly requesting a response so that these issues may be resolved.
“The Takoma Park Church members have not officially heard from Potomac Conference leadership. Our request is that we wish to know the Potomac Conference leadership’s official position regarding the eradication of the Church Board and the establishment of a new structure, Pastor/CEO, which was announced at the Business Meeting, Sunday April 27, 2008. We oppose this type of governance because it is contrary to SDA Church polity, policies, and the Church Manual. However, if we are incorrect in our position, we want Conference leadership to so inform us in written correspondence so that we can communicate that message without equivocation or misunderstanding. Should we not be mistaken in our interpretation, we would want to be sustained by the Conference in our position for the sake of unity. Written communication is needed so that the message will be clear and remove any doubt as to what is the correct position for the entire church’s edification.
“Because Pastor Alan DeSilva repeatedly said that the present Takoma Park governance system is approved and came for the NAD, we inquired and received letters from the North American Division and the General Conference indicating that his assertions are not correct. The letters were denounced by the Pastor. Consequently, many Takoma Park members are still afraid to voice their concerns. Therefore, you intervention in this matter is highly desirous and welcomed. If we are wrong in our conclusions, inform us in writing. If, however, we are correct in our opposition to the present Takoma Park Church governance, we would appreciate your informing us by letter. By so doing, we all shall avoid misunderstanding and misquoting one another’s oral assertions.
“Sincerely,
“[Elder B]
“Designated Communicator”
Next: A New Door
Religious
Advice from the Spirit of Prophesy, Pt 13
"The principles of heaven are to be carried out in every family, in the discipline of every church, in every establishment, in every institution, in every school, and in everything that shall be managed. You have no right to manage, unless you manage in God's order. Are you under the control of God? Do you see your responsibility to him? If you do realize this responsibility, you will realize that you are to mold and fashion minds after the divine similitude; and then those in the different institutions here, who are being trained and educated to become workers, will work for God, to hold up the standard of righteousness" (General Conference Bulletin, April 3, 1901 par. 24).
"The same danger exists today among the people who profess to be the depositaries of God's law. They are too apt to flatter themselves that the regard in which they hold the commandments will preserve them from the power of divine justice. They refuse to be reproved for evil, and charge God's servants with being too zealous in putting sin out of the camp. A sin-hating God calls upon those who profess to keep His law to depart from all iniquity. Neglect to repent and obey His word will bring as serious consequences upon God's people today as did the same sin upon ancient Israel. There is a limit beyond which He will no longer delay His judgments" (Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 4, pp. 166, 167).
"There is a most fearful, fatal deception upon human minds. Because men are in positions of trust, connected with the work of God, they are exalted in their own estimation, and do not discern that other souls, fully as precious in the sight of God as their own, are neglected, and handled roughly, and bruised, and wounded, and left to die" (Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 357, 358).
"The same danger exists today among the people who profess to be the depositaries of God's law. They are too apt to flatter themselves that the regard in which they hold the commandments will preserve them from the power of divine justice. They refuse to be reproved for evil, and charge God's servants with being too zealous in putting sin out of the camp. A sin-hating God calls upon those who profess to keep His law to depart from all iniquity. Neglect to repent and obey His word will bring as serious consequences upon God's people today as did the same sin upon ancient Israel. There is a limit beyond which He will no longer delay His judgments" (Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 4, pp. 166, 167).
"There is a most fearful, fatal deception upon human minds. Because men are in positions of trust, connected with the work of God, they are exalted in their own estimation, and do not discern that other souls, fully as precious in the sight of God as their own, are neglected, and handled roughly, and bruised, and wounded, and left to die" (Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 357, 358).
Monday, September 7, 2009
The Epic, Pt. 23
Takoma Park has a celebrity member. I don’t mean a Hollywood type or a professional athlete. This is a church celebrity—Elder Matthew Bediako, Secretary of the General Conference. (For anyone reading this who might not know, that makes him the number two most powerful person in the Seventh-day Adventist World Church.)
Up to this point in the dispute Elder Bediako had not made any public statements one way or the other and Pastor DeSilva had claimed that his silence was a token of support. This argument was having a lot of sway with many in the church, and the Group became concerned about the way Elder Bediako’s influence was being used for him, particularly since we had heard privately from reliable sources (such as his wife) that he was very troubled by the changes. It occurred to the Group that given his busy travel schedule word might not have caught up with Elder Bediako that Pastor DeSilva was claiming to have his endorsement, so the Group wrote him the following letter asking that he publicly declare his position one way or the other and end the confusion about his stand.
“May 16, 2008
“Dear Elder Bediako,
“We are writing to you regarding the present disturbance at the Takoma Park Church over the recent change in organizational structure. As you know, this change is contrary to the form of local church governance mandated by the Church Manual. The fact that this change has been successfully muscled through sets a terrible precedent at a time when the entire conference is being pushed by conference leadership to make whatever changes they might deem necessary to achieve church growth—specifically by concentrating authority with the pastors so they can “lead more effectively” and by abolishing the church board.
“What you may not know is that over the last few months you have been described by the pastoral staff and their supporters both publicly and privately, directly and by insinuation, as being wholly in favor of this change. It has been our understanding that you have not publicly spoken against this because you did not wish to improperly use your influence as a General Conference officer, not because you were in favor of the change. While we respect this concern the unfortunate reality is that by choosing not to actively use your influence you have inadvertently allowed others to use it for their own purposes.
“If we correctly understand your position on this matter, we respectfully submit that the time has come to declare your position publicly either for or against the changes now occurring in the Takoma Park Church. Whether you do so as Secretary of the General Conference, a local elder, or simply as a rank-and-file member, we beg you to make a very clear public declaration of your position on this change in church structure. We suggest that one way to make a public declaration of your position is to call for a meeting of all the officers of the church and state your position to them.”
When the completed letter was delivered to Elder Bediako it carried about two dozen signatures. This was his reply:
“May 28, 2008
“Fellow Members:
“Thank you for your letter. The situation at the Takoma Park Church is very unfortunate and very disturbing. I have not made any public statement to any group because I have not been around to know the details of what has taken place so far.
“I need to let the Church know that my role will be for reconciliation so there could be peace in the Church in order to do the work that has been assigned to us as a Church. I want to appeal to all parties—both the pastoral staff and those who are unhappy about what has happened—to exercise restraint and work together to find a solution.
“Pastor Vernon Parmenter, my Associate Secretary, and one who has been assigned to be responsible for the Church Manual and its application, has already written a letter addressed to the Takoma Park Church, pointing out statements from the Church Manual. This is a document that the whole world Church has voted and it is applied all over the world. As one of your elders, I am in full support of the Church Manual.
“Whatever I can do to bring peace will be the way I will approach the whole situation at the Takoma Park Church.
“Thank you for letting me know exactly what has taken place in the Church.
“Sincerely,
“Matthew A Bediako
“Executive Secretary
“General Conference of SDA”
Elder Bediako, clearly, is a politician who doesn’t relish sticking his neck out. The third paragraph, however, said all that needed saying regarding his position. He pointed us back to the letter written by Elder Parmenter—which Pastor DeSilva had dismissed as out-of-line, misinformed, and irrelevant—and not only stood behind that letter but declared that his personal support was for the Church Manual, which must be followed.
Next: A Finer Point
Religious
Up to this point in the dispute Elder Bediako had not made any public statements one way or the other and Pastor DeSilva had claimed that his silence was a token of support. This argument was having a lot of sway with many in the church, and the Group became concerned about the way Elder Bediako’s influence was being used for him, particularly since we had heard privately from reliable sources (such as his wife) that he was very troubled by the changes. It occurred to the Group that given his busy travel schedule word might not have caught up with Elder Bediako that Pastor DeSilva was claiming to have his endorsement, so the Group wrote him the following letter asking that he publicly declare his position one way or the other and end the confusion about his stand.
“May 16, 2008
“Dear Elder Bediako,
“We are writing to you regarding the present disturbance at the Takoma Park Church over the recent change in organizational structure. As you know, this change is contrary to the form of local church governance mandated by the Church Manual. The fact that this change has been successfully muscled through sets a terrible precedent at a time when the entire conference is being pushed by conference leadership to make whatever changes they might deem necessary to achieve church growth—specifically by concentrating authority with the pastors so they can “lead more effectively” and by abolishing the church board.
“What you may not know is that over the last few months you have been described by the pastoral staff and their supporters both publicly and privately, directly and by insinuation, as being wholly in favor of this change. It has been our understanding that you have not publicly spoken against this because you did not wish to improperly use your influence as a General Conference officer, not because you were in favor of the change. While we respect this concern the unfortunate reality is that by choosing not to actively use your influence you have inadvertently allowed others to use it for their own purposes.
“If we correctly understand your position on this matter, we respectfully submit that the time has come to declare your position publicly either for or against the changes now occurring in the Takoma Park Church. Whether you do so as Secretary of the General Conference, a local elder, or simply as a rank-and-file member, we beg you to make a very clear public declaration of your position on this change in church structure. We suggest that one way to make a public declaration of your position is to call for a meeting of all the officers of the church and state your position to them.”
When the completed letter was delivered to Elder Bediako it carried about two dozen signatures. This was his reply:
“May 28, 2008
“Fellow Members:
“Thank you for your letter. The situation at the Takoma Park Church is very unfortunate and very disturbing. I have not made any public statement to any group because I have not been around to know the details of what has taken place so far.
“I need to let the Church know that my role will be for reconciliation so there could be peace in the Church in order to do the work that has been assigned to us as a Church. I want to appeal to all parties—both the pastoral staff and those who are unhappy about what has happened—to exercise restraint and work together to find a solution.
“Pastor Vernon Parmenter, my Associate Secretary, and one who has been assigned to be responsible for the Church Manual and its application, has already written a letter addressed to the Takoma Park Church, pointing out statements from the Church Manual. This is a document that the whole world Church has voted and it is applied all over the world. As one of your elders, I am in full support of the Church Manual.
“Whatever I can do to bring peace will be the way I will approach the whole situation at the Takoma Park Church.
“Thank you for letting me know exactly what has taken place in the Church.
“Sincerely,
“Matthew A Bediako
“Executive Secretary
“General Conference of SDA”
Elder Bediako, clearly, is a politician who doesn’t relish sticking his neck out. The third paragraph, however, said all that needed saying regarding his position. He pointed us back to the letter written by Elder Parmenter—which Pastor DeSilva had dismissed as out-of-line, misinformed, and irrelevant—and not only stood behind that letter but declared that his personal support was for the Church Manual, which must be followed.
Next: A Finer Point
Religious
Friday, September 4, 2009
The Epic, Pt. 22
The letter sent out by the Group did not escape the notice of those in the Potomac Conference and Columbia Union. About two weeks after it was sent out Elder B received a phone call from Elder Weigley, the Columbia Union president. He had just gotten home from an extended trip and hadn’t yet read the letter for himself, but he had heard about it from others and the content of the gossip about it had made him rather unhappy with the Group. Elder B urged him to actually read the letter for himself before he passed judgment and explained why the Group had felt a need to take such action. They agreed to talk again after Elder Weigley had seen the letter for himself.
Elder Weigley was much less disturbed about the letter during the second conversation a few days later. He urged Elder B to communicate to Elder Miller the same explanation he had received about why the Group had felt such an action was necessary. Elder B was skeptical that such a communication would make any impact with Elder Miller given the dismal results of the December meeting with him, but she eventually agreed to write the following letter with the requested explanation.
“May 14, 2008
“Dear Elder Miller:
“I am writing to you to explain why a group of Takoma Park members took it upon themselves to send materials to the Takoma Park Church membership about the new organizational structure proposed by Pastor DeSilva relative to the governance of the local church.
“You will recall when eight of us met with you on Wednesday, December 12, 2007, we appealed to you for help in regard to the action taken at the Worship Hour, November 17, 2007, regarding the Paul Borden document which was to be accepted in its entirety or rejected completely. It was approved—121 in favor and 82 against. We felt also that the vote was unfair and inappropriate, because it was taken during the Sabbath Worship Hour without discussion. At that time, we felt you were not concerned over the matter.
“On March 3, 2008, Pastor DeSilva proposed a document to be approved by the members of the newly formed Church Ministry Board. At that meeting the leading officers of the church were present. Various questions were posed. It was stated by Pastor DeSilva that this document, which proposed the following two boards: (1) the Support and Accountability Board; and (2) the Church Ministry Board (and which had been already organized) was in harmony with the North American Division (NAD). I could not conceive that to be true. (Therefore, later, I sent Pastor DeSilva’s document to the NAD Secretary, Elder Roscoe Howard for verification. He responded by a letter which revealed that Pastor DeSilva’s proposal was not in harmony with NAD policies.) Because there was much concern and confusion, Pastor DeSilva tabled the proposal until the next meeting of the Church Ministry Board, which met on April 13, 2008. Before the vote on that day, we asked again, “Where did this document come from?” Pastor DeSilva again stated “From the North American Division.” He also indicated that he could go and get the document and prove that it came from NAD. Two members requested that he do that. He has yet to do so. There is a discrepancy between what Pastor DeSilva has said publicly on many occasions that the new governance structure suggested by him for the Takoma Park Church was in harmony with the policies of the North American Division and what are the facts.
“A former member of Takoma Park Church, presently working at the General Conference, heard about the issues confronting the membership, and, on her own initiative, decided to contact Elder Parmenter, Associate Secretary of the General Conference and Secretary of the Church Manual Committee, about the matter. Upon learning more fully regarding the issues, he also wrote a letter stating that what was proposed of having no duly elected church board was contrary to established church governance policies.
“Because of the two letters I had received, I thought it necessary to present them to Pastor DeSilva first. I called the Head Elder and requested a meeting with Pastor DeSilva, including a few others. The Head Elder insisted that the entire Board of Elders be included. A meeting was held on April 23, 2008, during which we requested, due to the new information received from the GC and NAD, that it be presented at the next business meeting which was to be held on Sunday, April 27, 2008. Pastor DeSilva categorically refused saying, “These men have no business writing any such letters. They are misinformed and out of place. I do not have a staff-led church. There will be no more discussion of this matter. I will not permit any more discussion of this issue.” Because he was so vehemently opposed to any revelation of these letters to the membership, we decided it was crucial to inform the church membership.
“In essence, the members were under a cloud of deception by the continuous insistence of Pastor DeSilva that what he was doing had the full endorsement of the higher organizations of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He would not permit any additional revelations or discussions of this issue. We regret Pastor DeSilva’s unwillingness to heed the counsel of higher church entities, and to follow the policies of the Church Manual. This is why we sent the letter.
“We are praying that this matter will be resolved according to the Church Manual.
“If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me (my telephone numbers and E-mail address are listed at the top of the first page of this letter).
“Sincerely,
“[Elder B]”
There are a few minor points that ought to be clarified about the content of this letter before this post concludes. It is the only letter sent out on behalf of the Group which had only one author. After this one, the Group adopted the informal policy that all communications were reviewed/fact-checked by at least one other Group member, if not the entire Group, no matter whose name was formally listed as the sender. This was because there were a couple of factual nuances in this letter which did not affect the main points that were not quite as clear as we might have wished.
The first of these occurs in paragraph three. When Pastor DeSilva handed out the “Code of Ethics” in the first Ministry Board meeting there were two additional papers stapled to it. They contained the lists of duties he had prepared for the Accountability Board and the Ministries Board. He rolled through these in that meeting as simply an announcement of fact, but it is easy to see how some might have thought that they were part of what Pastor DeSilva wanted a vote on. In any case, when Elder B sent the materials to Elder Howard for his evaluation she included not just the “Code of Ethics” itself, but also the other two pages that were stapled to it. It was, therefore, all three documents that Elder Howard reviewed in rendering his decision that Takoma Park was operating outside the boundaries of the Church Manual. It is also worth noting that although Elder B wrote in the first person in paragraph five she was actually describing actions and decisions made by the Group in regard to the two letters, as described previously in the Epic.
Next: Celebrity Endorsement
Religious
Elder Weigley was much less disturbed about the letter during the second conversation a few days later. He urged Elder B to communicate to Elder Miller the same explanation he had received about why the Group had felt such an action was necessary. Elder B was skeptical that such a communication would make any impact with Elder Miller given the dismal results of the December meeting with him, but she eventually agreed to write the following letter with the requested explanation.
“May 14, 2008
“Dear Elder Miller:
“I am writing to you to explain why a group of Takoma Park members took it upon themselves to send materials to the Takoma Park Church membership about the new organizational structure proposed by Pastor DeSilva relative to the governance of the local church.
“You will recall when eight of us met with you on Wednesday, December 12, 2007, we appealed to you for help in regard to the action taken at the Worship Hour, November 17, 2007, regarding the Paul Borden document which was to be accepted in its entirety or rejected completely. It was approved—121 in favor and 82 against. We felt also that the vote was unfair and inappropriate, because it was taken during the Sabbath Worship Hour without discussion. At that time, we felt you were not concerned over the matter.
“On March 3, 2008, Pastor DeSilva proposed a document to be approved by the members of the newly formed Church Ministry Board. At that meeting the leading officers of the church were present. Various questions were posed. It was stated by Pastor DeSilva that this document, which proposed the following two boards: (1) the Support and Accountability Board; and (2) the Church Ministry Board (and which had been already organized) was in harmony with the North American Division (NAD). I could not conceive that to be true. (Therefore, later, I sent Pastor DeSilva’s document to the NAD Secretary, Elder Roscoe Howard for verification. He responded by a letter which revealed that Pastor DeSilva’s proposal was not in harmony with NAD policies.) Because there was much concern and confusion, Pastor DeSilva tabled the proposal until the next meeting of the Church Ministry Board, which met on April 13, 2008. Before the vote on that day, we asked again, “Where did this document come from?” Pastor DeSilva again stated “From the North American Division.” He also indicated that he could go and get the document and prove that it came from NAD. Two members requested that he do that. He has yet to do so. There is a discrepancy between what Pastor DeSilva has said publicly on many occasions that the new governance structure suggested by him for the Takoma Park Church was in harmony with the policies of the North American Division and what are the facts.
“A former member of Takoma Park Church, presently working at the General Conference, heard about the issues confronting the membership, and, on her own initiative, decided to contact Elder Parmenter, Associate Secretary of the General Conference and Secretary of the Church Manual Committee, about the matter. Upon learning more fully regarding the issues, he also wrote a letter stating that what was proposed of having no duly elected church board was contrary to established church governance policies.
“Because of the two letters I had received, I thought it necessary to present them to Pastor DeSilva first. I called the Head Elder and requested a meeting with Pastor DeSilva, including a few others. The Head Elder insisted that the entire Board of Elders be included. A meeting was held on April 23, 2008, during which we requested, due to the new information received from the GC and NAD, that it be presented at the next business meeting which was to be held on Sunday, April 27, 2008. Pastor DeSilva categorically refused saying, “These men have no business writing any such letters. They are misinformed and out of place. I do not have a staff-led church. There will be no more discussion of this matter. I will not permit any more discussion of this issue.” Because he was so vehemently opposed to any revelation of these letters to the membership, we decided it was crucial to inform the church membership.
“In essence, the members were under a cloud of deception by the continuous insistence of Pastor DeSilva that what he was doing had the full endorsement of the higher organizations of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He would not permit any additional revelations or discussions of this issue. We regret Pastor DeSilva’s unwillingness to heed the counsel of higher church entities, and to follow the policies of the Church Manual. This is why we sent the letter.
“We are praying that this matter will be resolved according to the Church Manual.
“If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me (my telephone numbers and E-mail address are listed at the top of the first page of this letter).
“Sincerely,
“[Elder B]”
There are a few minor points that ought to be clarified about the content of this letter before this post concludes. It is the only letter sent out on behalf of the Group which had only one author. After this one, the Group adopted the informal policy that all communications were reviewed/fact-checked by at least one other Group member, if not the entire Group, no matter whose name was formally listed as the sender. This was because there were a couple of factual nuances in this letter which did not affect the main points that were not quite as clear as we might have wished.
The first of these occurs in paragraph three. When Pastor DeSilva handed out the “Code of Ethics” in the first Ministry Board meeting there were two additional papers stapled to it. They contained the lists of duties he had prepared for the Accountability Board and the Ministries Board. He rolled through these in that meeting as simply an announcement of fact, but it is easy to see how some might have thought that they were part of what Pastor DeSilva wanted a vote on. In any case, when Elder B sent the materials to Elder Howard for his evaluation she included not just the “Code of Ethics” itself, but also the other two pages that were stapled to it. It was, therefore, all three documents that Elder Howard reviewed in rendering his decision that Takoma Park was operating outside the boundaries of the Church Manual. It is also worth noting that although Elder B wrote in the first person in paragraph five she was actually describing actions and decisions made by the Group in regard to the two letters, as described previously in the Epic.
Next: Celebrity Endorsement
Religious
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
The Epic, Pt. 21
The business meeting on April 27, 2008 was better-attended than any other business meeting in years (as in 2-3 times normal attendance). It was evident that the letter to the congregation had done its work and the bump in attendance was from people who wanted to discuss the matter. Pastor DeSilva had other ideas. His first action once the meeting had begun was to appoint the head deacon as parliamentarian. There was no specification of which rules of order he was enforcing, nor any indication that he had any knowledge of any particular set of rules of order. His parliamentary activity consisted of calling, “Out of order!” any time someone the pastor didn’t want to hear from tried to speak up. (Clearly, he had never heard of the parliamentary principle of “business from the floor.”) It should be noted that this was an executive appointment, not a task to which the head deacon was elected.
The next item of business on the agenda was the treasurer’s report, which was followed by the finance committee report. Both were given by the same man, the chair of the finance committee. The controversy began in earnest over the final item he presented. He wanted to change the churches’ financial policy to require two signatures on all checks greater than $500. In order to make this feasible he also proposed bringing the number of signatories to four, including the senior pastor. (We should mention here that Pastor DeSilva had made no secret of the fact that he thought that he ought to have signatory power. In his words, Takoma Park is the only church he has pastored where he didn’t have signatory power.) The finance committee chair made a substantial pitch for the senior pastor being a signatory. As he put it, the senior pastor is the “CEO” of the church and ought to have control.
This effort was squashed when one of the Group members was recognized to speak and took the opportunity to read an open memo sent out by the conference treasurer in 2004. The memo stated unequivocally that pastors were absolutely not to be granted signatory power. It was obvious to anyone looking at him that Pastor DeSilva was fuming at this setback. What he said, however, was that he had never wanted or asked for signatory power (another lie) and that “we” would “look into” the matter of whether or not pastors were permitted to be signatories. That particular matter was left that the fourth signatory would be unspecified for the time being.
The meeting moved on to other matters (including the resignation of an elder who had decided that he could not in good conscience continue to serve under the current governance structure), closely guarded against unscheduled topics by the head deacon. There was an attempt to bring up the change in governance, but it was shouted down by the pastor and head deacon. Contrary to his promise the previous day of “complete open disclosure,” Pastor DeSilva closed the meeting without permitting any consideration of the matter.
Next: An Explanation
Religious
The next item of business on the agenda was the treasurer’s report, which was followed by the finance committee report. Both were given by the same man, the chair of the finance committee. The controversy began in earnest over the final item he presented. He wanted to change the churches’ financial policy to require two signatures on all checks greater than $500. In order to make this feasible he also proposed bringing the number of signatories to four, including the senior pastor. (We should mention here that Pastor DeSilva had made no secret of the fact that he thought that he ought to have signatory power. In his words, Takoma Park is the only church he has pastored where he didn’t have signatory power.) The finance committee chair made a substantial pitch for the senior pastor being a signatory. As he put it, the senior pastor is the “CEO” of the church and ought to have control.
This effort was squashed when one of the Group members was recognized to speak and took the opportunity to read an open memo sent out by the conference treasurer in 2004. The memo stated unequivocally that pastors were absolutely not to be granted signatory power. It was obvious to anyone looking at him that Pastor DeSilva was fuming at this setback. What he said, however, was that he had never wanted or asked for signatory power (another lie) and that “we” would “look into” the matter of whether or not pastors were permitted to be signatories. That particular matter was left that the fourth signatory would be unspecified for the time being.
The meeting moved on to other matters (including the resignation of an elder who had decided that he could not in good conscience continue to serve under the current governance structure), closely guarded against unscheduled topics by the head deacon. There was an attempt to bring up the change in governance, but it was shouted down by the pastor and head deacon. Contrary to his promise the previous day of “complete open disclosure,” Pastor DeSilva closed the meeting without permitting any consideration of the matter.
Next: An Explanation
Religious
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)