The Epic, Pt. 71

The next regularly scheduled ministries board meeting took place on July 12, 2009. It was at this meeting that the ministries board was to discuss and vote on the recommendations of the executive committee. As promised, the conference sent a representative to observe—the (then) new conference treasurer Elder Wilson. He was so new that he hadn’t been part of the conference administration a month and a half before when the Group had made its case to the executive committee.

When Pastor DeSilva reached the agenda item of addressing the executive committee’s recommendations he went through them one by one, giving his interpretation of each one. He claimed that there was nothing wrong with the way the accountability board was currently functioning, citing Elder Miller’s statements about the lack of consistency about how local churches manage hiring. He argued that since there was no rule about how the hiring was to be done and the accountability board was the church’s personnel committee, that it was alright for it to continue reporting to the business meeting. (In making this argument he ignored two significant points. First, personnel issues are not the only ones delegated to the accountability board, and even if it were acceptable for personnel issues to be reported directly to the business meeting that would not make it acceptable for the accountability board’s other responsibilities to receive the same treatment. Second, even though the conference pointed out that there was no consistency about handling personnel issues the executive committee had still recommended that, “The Support and Accountability Board…reports to the Church Board.”) Pastor DeSilva went on to assert that Elder Miller had told him the configuration of the accountability board was correct because that was the way the church business meeting had voted it. (Again, for the record, the church business meeting had not actually voted it.)

When Pastor DeSilva got to recommendation C (“The primary role of the Church Board is to discuss and plan the evangelism outreach for the church. The newly renamed Church Board should study pp. 90-92 in the manual to make sure the Board functions as stated”) he announced that there was no reason why the church shouldn’t approve it because the church was already doing it. He went so far as to say, “So far as I’m concerned we’re compliant with C right now.”

When the floor was opened for questions Elder B challenged Pastor DeSilva’s assertion that the current governance was compliant with the Church Manual. He responded by asking what was not in compliance. Elder B pointed out that according to the charts of the current governance the senior pastor was above the ministries board. Pastor DeSilva tried to blow that off by claiming that he had no executive function. Next Elder B pointed out that the accountability board reported to the business meeting rather than the ministries board, which he was claiming to be the church board. Pastor DeSilva replied that the accountability board had always reported to the church board. (Not only was this a lie—up to that point the accountability board had not made a single report to the ministries board—it was also a direct contradiction of what he had said a few minutes earlier in claiming that the accountability board could and would continue reporting directly to the business meeting.) Elder B continued by pointing out that the finance committee didn’t report to the ministries board/church board. Pastor DeSilva responded that, “So far as I’m concerned we’ve had finances every meeting that I’ve had.” Seeing that, as usual, Pastor DeSilva was using lies and misdirection to avoid admitting any wrongdoing Elder B didn’t bother to push the point any further.

Sister L was recognized next. She observed that in light of the discrepancies of perception about how the newly-formed church board functioned a temporary subcommittee ought to be formed to create written terms of reference to bring clarity to what the body did and how it did it. Rather than addressing the suggestion Pastor DeSilva chose to focus on and take issue with Sister L’s description of the church board as “newly-formed,” claiming that there had always been a church board at Takoma Park. Sister L tried to refocus him on the substance of the suggestion, but he didn’t want to let go of his complaint that the church board was not “newly-formed.”

At that point Elder Wilson jumped in, asking Sister L whether the suggestion she was making wasn’t already covered under the executive committee’s recommendation D. Sister L pointed out that the purpose of recommendation D was to achieve interpersonal reconciliation, and that it specifically excluded discussion of any issues during the meetings it recommended. (This interjection by Elder Wilson underscores just how little awareness he had of the issues and substance he had been sent to the meeting to observe. We are not accusing him of wrongdoing—it is no crime to be so new to a job that you do not yet know what is going on around you—but his lack of familiarity with the subject at hand made him ineffectual in the task he had been sent to perform on that occasion. Just to remind everyone, that task was to monitor how Pastor DeSilva addressed the executive committee’s recommendations to see that he didn’t ignore them, gloss over them, or sweep them under the proverbial rug. This is a task he could hardly perform when he wasn't even clear on the substance of the recommendations.)

At this point in the discussion Pastor DeSilva took the floor again to deliver what he claimed was a message from Elder Miller. He said that Elder Miller wanted to clarify that he didn’t feel that the executive committee’s recommendations disagreed with the voted intention of the Takoma Park Church regarding its structure and that he believed that the integrity of the church’s vote was intact. Elder Miller was further represented as having said that he didn’t have the authority, or wouldn’t take the authority, to make a recommendation that was contrary to the voted will of a local church in business session and that the changes they were recommending didn’t affect the direction the church had chosen. Pastor DeSilva concluded by claiming that the executive committee was excited about and endorsed the support and accountability council. (Whether these things were actually said by Elder Miller or were only things Pastor DeSilva wished he had said we can’t be sure. No written documentation was presented in support of this “message.” In any case, we have already substantially disproven this argument of the independence of the local church business meeting in Us and Them and What Has Been Done All Along.)

Elder J was recognized, and he expressed concerns about how follow-through on the recommendations would be accomplished. Pastor DeSilva responded that ensuring that the church board was functioning properly would be the responsibility of the accountability board. At this point Elder B asked whether a corrected chart would be produced to accurately depict the relationships of the various governing bodies. Pastor DeSilva returned to his old argument that charts are never 100% accurate. He went on to defend the charts that had been circulating by claiming that there wasn’t actually anything wrong with them; the problem was that people were just reading them wrong. In support of this statement he argued that things are not always as they appear. (This statement is indisputable, especially when Pastor DeSilva is ignoring stated parameters in order to do whatever he wants.) As Elder B pushed the point she referred to the charts as being Pastor DeSilva’s. He jumped on this and claimed that they weren’t his charts; they were voted by the church. (Another lie; none of the governance charts he produced were ever voted by a church business meeting. See the Epic, Pts. 4, 11, 12, and 26.)

Finally, a vote was taken and the recommendations were approved. As soon as the vote was complete Pastor DeSilva pronounced that the issue was now closed. He informed Elder Wilson that since the issue was now closed he expected a letter from the conference endorsing the Takoma Park Church as being in harmony with the Church Manual. He further announced an intention to include such a letter from the conference with one of his own that he would mail to every member of the congregation.

The other significant issue at this meeting of the ministries board was the merger between the elementary school supported by the Takoma Park Church with another local elementary school. The case was made that both schools had been suffering declining attendance in recent years and were occupying old facilities that needed care. The plan was to move the population from one school into the other facility, sell the vacated facility, and use the money to pay off debts and improve the remaining facility. The plan had already been approved by the other school’s church, and all that remained was approval from Takoma Park’s board and business meetings and a constituency meeting of Takoma Park’s school. The ministries board approved the merger. (This issue will be described in greater depth when we get to the story of the school’s constituency meeting.)

Next: At the Business Meeting

Religious