The Epic, Pt. 53

The correspondence between the Group and the Conference continued on February 26, 2009.

“Dear [Brother G],

“I have carefully read the response sent by [Sister L] through you. However, while I understand that there may be some confusion as to the existence and interpretations of the two parts, I feel that it is important that we continue to address the issue that was submitted for discussion during our last meeting:

“‘The present governess structure of the Takoma Park SDA church is not in harmony with the church manual. This is notibly reflected in the absence of a church board as stipulated in the church manual.’

“In my view, it is a very simple matter. Pastor DeSilva made a proposal intended to respond to the issue. If you have some objections or concerns to this proposal, you have the right to present them. All that I am asking is for you to submit to me a written outline of your objections to Pastor DeSilvas’s proposal, so that we can continue with this process. I believe this is not only important in any process, but also needed in order to maintain focus on the main issue. I pray that you will reconsider your position and allow this process to continue.

“I wish you a blessed day.

“Jorge A. Ramírez”

The Group responded on March 6, 2009. In this response the Group elaborated on its interpretation of the issue statement, which still did not seem to be clear to the conference.

“Dear Jorge,

“The previous message was not from any single individual. It was composed by group consensus as are all of our communications. We have reviewed your response carefully as a group. Our consensus at this time is that we are not impeding this process.

“Our issue is:

“‘The present governance structure of theTakoma Park SDA 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.’

“Please note the corrected spelling. As you notice the issue is the governance structure of the Takoma Park Church, not only the absence of a church board. The interpretation that is being given to this is becoming an issue.

“We stated that our concern about the present governance structure of the Takoma Park Church is ‘notably reflected in the absence of a church board.’ However there are other governance matters related to the absence of a church board, including: 1) events leading up to this, 2) the interpretation by the church staff, 3)related actions that have been taken by the church, 4) the way the group, who have expressed their concerns to the pastor and the church, have been portrayed, and 5) Conference handling of this matter. Pastor DeSilva's proposal does not resolve the matter of the absence of a church board, nor does it address any of these related matters. There can be no solution to this whole situation if no regard is given to these related governance matters.

“Both the absence of a Church Board and the related governance matters should be given attention. We have provided a written statement outlining what we wish to talk about at the next meeting and have promised to provide additional documentation at the time of the meeting. Please accept this as our agenda and set up a meeting with the additional participants so that this process can continue.

“We, also, request that Pastor DeSilva not recommend action on his proposal at a church business meeting, or any other church forum. This would circumvent the process that is underway.

“Sincerely,

“[Brother G]”

Next: Details

Religious