The Epic, Pt. 59

Below are the corrected minutes of the previous meeting which were prepared by the Group. Like Elder Ramirez’s minutes they have been reformatted because of Blogger’s distaste for tabs. Since Blogger also doesn't do underline or strikethrough words that were added are in green and words that were removed are in red. Content is unaltered.

“Takoma Park Church Defendant Leadership and Small Church Group Takoma Park Church Plaintive Leadership Representatives Special Meeting
“April 16, 2009
“6:00 pm

“Minutes
“Present: [Elder J], [Elder D], Pastor Alan DeSilva, [Elder C], [Brother X], [Brother G] and Jorge Ramirez

“Welcome
“Elder Jorge Ramirez introduced himself and welcomed representatives from both groups. He thanked everyone for being present.

“Devotional
“Elder Ramirez shared a brief devotional from Ellen G. White, Manuscript Releases, vol. 15, pp. 299-301 dealing with division and discord in the church. An appeal was made to both parties to consider in prayer the unity that can only be achieved in Christ.

“Prayer
“Elder Ramirez offered prayer to begin the meeting.

“Summary of last meeting
“Elder Ramirez briefly summarized the contents from last meeting between [Brother G] and Pastor pastor Alan DeSilva. The issue at hand is: 'The present governance structure of the Takoma Park Seventh-day Adventist Church is not in harmony with the Church Manual. This is notably reflected in the absence of a Church Board as stipulated in the Church Manual.' After much discussion between the two parties, Pastor pastor DeSilva submitted in good faith a proposal to [Brother G] to resolve the disagreement. The proposal was: 'To add the support and accountability board as part of the church ministries board, as drawn in a flow chart.' Further, the proposal was subject to the following conditions: (1) Proposal does not in any way suggest that the current governess structure has been outside the boundaries of the church manual, and (2) This proposal is subject to discussion and final approval from the Takoma Park church in business session.

“[Brother G] thanked acknowledged Pastor pastor DeSilva’s for making this proposal, but indicated that as a representative from the group he would have to present such proposal to them for their consideration.

“Process leading to this meeting
“On February 15, 2009 Elder Ramirez received an email from [Brother G], indicating that the group had met and considered Pastor pastor DeSilva’s proposal but had some objections and therefore could not accept it. The Takoma Park Church Plaintiff Leadership Group agreed to meet in another meeting, as originally outlined by the Conference, in order to follow Matthew 18, to the asked that another meeting be scheduled with a larger representation from both sides to further discuss the matter.

“Elder Ramirez responded the same day indicating that the Plaintiff Leadership group agreed request to meet with a larger group. was appropriate. He further asked that the names of the three representatives as well as an outline of their objections be sent send to him in writing before the meeting could take place. He would work on scheduling the meeting date. The requested information was sent in and It was set for the meeting was scheduled for Thursday, April 16 at 7 6 pm.

“Review of process for this meeting
“Elder Ramirez indicated that the Takoma Park Church Plaintiff Leadership Rep’s group would have 20 minutes to introduce their objections to Pastor pastor DeSilva’s proposal with no interruptions. After their presentation, Pastor pastor DeSilva and the Church Defendant Leadership would also have 20 minutes to respond to the objections. After this, the Takoma Park Church Plaintiff Leadership Rep’s group representatives would have an additional 15 minutes to add any further comments, followed by 15 minutes of rebuttal by the Church Defendant Leadership representatives. There was consensus by both parties as to the process to be followed for this meeting.

“Takoma Park Church Plaintiff Leadership’s group rep’s
“[Brother G] explained that a rebuttal document outlining the Takoma Park Plaintiff Leadership Rep’s objections would be read by [Elder C] followed by further clarification from members of the group. Also, he indicated that the terms of reference for the Support and Accountability and Church Ministries Boards were being distributed as supporting evidence that the joining of them would not reinstate the Church Board according to the Church Manual. A chart of three columns comparing the Terms of References was disallowed because no one could explain the asterisks, while it was plainly explained at the bottom of the chart. [Elder C] read the three-page paper outlining the group’s objections.

“(Original paragraph is deleted.)

“Takoma Park Church Defendant Leadership’s group rep’s
“Pastor DeSilva and the rest of the church leadership responded by pointing out areas of concern and disagreement to the Takoma Park Church Leadership Plaintiff group’s objections. Some of their main observations were: (1) Church Manual is a guideline not doctrine, (2) In large churches such as Takoma Park, sometimes there is a need to create certain ministries and reorganize it’s structure in order to become more effective in carrying out the mission of the church. In addition, they reiterated their strong conviction that the present governance structure of the Takoma Park Seventh-day Adventist Church is in harmony with the Church Manual. They requested further clarification on a few items.

“Takoma Park Church Plaintiff Leadership’s group rep’s
“Representatives from the Takoma Park Church Plaintiff Leadership group responded to some of the concerns objections raised by the Takoma Park Church Defendant Leadership group. In addition, it was pointed out that the document that gives direction to this new structure was a document that was promoted created by the Conference Administration. Further, it was made very clear that parts of the Paul Borden Report are is the main issue cause for the lack of a church board. This was a recommendation coming from a Baptist minister.

“Takoma Park Church Defendant Leadership’s group rep’s
“The Takoma Park Church Defendant Leadership group Rep’s once again expressed their concerns objections as to the strong conviction on some of the issues raised. Once again, it was evident that there was overwhelming disagreement as to the nature of the issues.

“Resolution
“After further discussion, both parties felt that it would be useless to continue the meeting since the disagreements between the two parties remained unchanged. Therefore, it was voted to refer this issue to the Potomac Conference Executive Committee for final resolution.

“It was further agreed by both parties that the Conference Executive Committee would be the final stop in this matter and that their decision would be final.”

Next: Confusion

Religious