How Accurate a Record are the Official Minutes of the GC Session?
By Dennis Hokama, August 17, 2015: Those who have only the official minutes of the 12th Business Meeting of the 60th General Conference session in San Antonio, Texas, as recorded in the July 10, 2015, General Conference Bulletin, will not get a view of the intensity and acrimony of the debate that actually took place over women’s ordination. The flashpoint of the session was when former Dr. Jan Paulsen, a former GC president, made a plea for a “Yes” vote half way through the afternoon session. This was followed by a parade of no less than eight points of order, six of which were made by delegates from the global south protesting against Paulsen’s advocacy.
Of these eight points of order, only the last one, a request for prayer to calm tensions by Lisa Burrow, a delegate from North America, has been preserved in the official record. In the GC Bulletin, published by the Adventist Review, they appear immediately after Paulsen’s speech. The seven points of order that preceded it are deleted. Without that context, her words come across like a non-sequitur.
Here are Paulsen’s words followed by Burrows words just as they appear in the official minutes:
Paulsen: I appeal to my brothers and sisters to vote “yes” on the motion before us. A “no” vote will cause rupture and serious damage to our global church.
Let me say this: I have served our church in ministry for 55 years. Most of these years have been in senior leadership roles. I’ve lived and served the church, from Africa, in Europe, and the global church for our world headquarters here in North America. And just for the record, let me say that the spirit that guided me during the years I provided leadership for the church did not leave me when I left office.
I believe that I know this church, this global church, well. I know what it is that holds us together. I know also many of the tension points when cultures meet that cause difficulties for us. But we as a church can overcome these things.
I’ll be clear about it. It has been stressed by several speakers what we are really voting on today. It is not the question of who has won the argument for ordination or not ordination. This is a question of trust.
We have leadership established around the world in every one of the 13 divisions. They work in counsel together. They also work in close counsel with General Conference leadership. They pray, they search the scriptures, they seek the Spirit’s guidance, and the Spirit is guiding them. Do we trust them enough, under the guidance of the Spirit, to know what is good for the church in their particular part of the world?
Let me say to you, my brothers and sisters from Africa: Do you trust your leaders, elected leaders, from Africa to give the best leadership for the life and mission of the church in Africa? If you do, vote “yes.”
I say to you, my brothers and sisters from South America: Do you trust your elected leaders to provide reliable, good, Spirit-driven, Spirit-inspired leadership to the live and witness of our church in South America? Then vote “yes.”
The same applies to North America and to Europe. We need to trust each other to get together and to vote “yes” on this motion.
Voting “no” will damage the church. I am fearful of what will happen if we do not allow the church to go forward on this. So I say to you, please do not let delegates from major segments of our church return to their fields bruised and bleeding and confused and disenfranchised because they were being driven by this community live a life somehow judged by this community not to be worthy of the responsibility that they have.
It is important, I think, that we empower our delegates, allow them to go back home and know that they have the right and the empowerment of this body to respond under the Spirit’s guidance to God as to how they can best lead the church.
We are struggling in some parts of the world. We are struggling badly to try to hold the church together, to engage young and old, men and women, in the mission and ministry of the church. We need everybody’s involvement.
We are bleeding in many ways. We’ve got to stop this. We are losing so many of our youth and young professionals. They have problems the moral integrity of the church, and they say, “Why is the church having problems with this matter? The public does not. It’s not a problem to the public. Why should it be to the church?”
And there is no biblical injunction that stops us. We have to fix this one.
Please, brothers and sisters, I believe that it is the will of God that we should enable the church in every part of the world to make the decisions that are best applicable in the part where they live without being a violation of the will of God. Thank you.
Lisa Burrow: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can sense, as you can, that the tension has risen in the room. And I’m wondering if this would be an appropriate time to pause for prayer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [Excerpt from page 51 of the July 10, 2015 General Conference Bulletin]
The Hole in the Record
There is a gap of several minutes between Paulson’s last word and Burrow’s first words because seven embarrassing points of order have simply been deleted. While Adventist Today does not have a recording of the session, a paraphrase of each point of order that was deleted from the minutes immediately following Paulsen’s comments was made at the time by an observer: (The Ryan in this dialog is Dr. Michael Ryan, a GC vice president who chaired the business meeting.)
Point of Order 1; K. Frank from IAD: Mr. Chairman, the person who has a reserved slot should be neutral!
Ryan: The chair has the privilege of reserving a slot for a person to make statements as they see fit. I stand on that privilege.
Point of Order 2; Gillett from IAD: Mr. Chairman, the insertion of President Paulsen changes the order of presenters that has been established.
Point of Order 3; Prince Nqandu from SID: Mr. Chairman, President Paulsen’s appealing to African and South American division delegates was inappropriate! (clapping)
Point of Order 4; J. Diaz from IAD: Mr. Chairman, Former President Paulsen had to be neutral!
Point of Order 5; Berit Elkjael from TED: Mr. Chairman, if the applause from the audience continues, then all the observers should be expelled and the session should continue with only the delegates present.
Point of Order 6; J. Perez from IAD: Mr. Chairman, President Paulsen should not be allowed to influence the body!
Point of Order 7; Ikeqwuonu from WAD: Mr. Chairman, I call the question!
Ryan: You are not allowed to make a motion on a point of order.
Point of Order 8; Lisa Burrow from NAD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can sense, as you can, that the tension has risen in the room. And I’m wondering if this would be an appropriate time to pause for prayer. …
Ryan: Thank you. And I think that is something very, very advisable. I would like for everybody to pray silently. And we will pause for a period of time.
Some of the statements make reference to numerous outbreaks of cheering and applause every time Paulsen’s comments were condemned. This continued despite numerous attempts by Ryan in the chair to stop it, and this is what finally prompted Burrows to ask for prayer, and for Ryan to eagerly accept her suggestion.
Gillett was complaining that Paulsen upset the alternating sequence of pro and con speakers that had been established by the chair. Gillett was apparently confused about the sequence up to that point because of intrusive points of order. Notes taken by an Adventist Today reporter at the time indicate that the previous speaker (omitting points of order) was Pastor Louis Torres who advocated a “no” vote.
Gillett’s complaint did anticipate the violation of sequence that occurred following Paulsen’s comments. According to notes taken by an Adventist Today reporter at the time, the next speaker following the prayer break was G. Townsend from SPD who recommended a “Yes” vote on the basis that “we should remain united in mission” and do not need to dictate methods. But the GC Bulletin minutes fix this sequence problem by simply deleting Townsend’s comments entirely. According to the minutes in the GC Bulletin, the first speaker after prayer is Sam Larmie who advocated a “no” vote. (See page 51 of the July 10 GC Bulletin.)
Even prior to Paulsen’s speech, Adventist Today reporters counted 21 additional points of order that are omitted from the minutes of that meeting. Adventist Today has not made any study of past documentation, nor is it even clear that the archives would contain sufficient documentation to prove the point, but the question comes to mind: Are these the most heavily redacted minutes of GC Session in the modern era? Or, is this typical of the record of previous sessions. And, if the record has so many deletions is it a reliable representation of the discussion that was carried on at the Session?
Withholding information is a form of deception for the reader. And for those present, it becomes very obvious when reading the report. Should the name be changed to Seventh-day Deceptionists?
Thank you for highlighting this omission in the official record. Transparency? Trust? Which GC entity is tasked with keeping accurate minutes?
One thing is certain, leadership has rendered itself impotent to lead on any level of administration. If you refuse to discipline for decades, you can’t simply begin to do it now. They had one last chance to do something dynamic, and fell flat on their face.
The desire for unity now transcends any other motive to drive the church and its identity and mission. Simply put, the bible has been abandon for political expediency. When you spend two years examining some issue, and still can not make a definitive statement about the issue, you are simply admitting you are not qualified to lead either by way of ignorance, or a lack of conviction to do what is right. In this case, it may well be both.
We love ourselves more than Jesus and the church has now taken the place of loyalty to Christ and His word.
Dennis Hokama is to be congratulated for uncovering a serious problem that goes to the heart of credibility in how the Adventist denomination under the current GC administration reported events and decisions at the San Antonio General Conference session. This is why the Adventist church needs an independent Adventist press. Rely on the Adventist Review? I am afraid that is now exposed as a unreliable source of accurate information. We can wonder what else they are leaving out of the “official” minutes.
Ervin,
The introduction to the section labeled “Proceedings/Actions” in Bulletin 2 dated July 5 states that “the record provided in the pages of the Adventist Review is that supplied by the official record-keeping office of the church, the General Conference Secretariat, and is published without abridgement by the Adventist Review.” (p. 38). The omissions pointed out by Dennis may be those of the Secretariat, not of the Adventist Review.
It might be significant that what is published in the Review is not referred to as “minutes,” but as “Proceedings/Actions.” It is presented as a verbatim transcript, which make the omissions puzzling and concerning, as Dennis has pointed out. My understanding is that the official minutes need not have the detailed commentary of who said what, but rather the motions proposed and how they were disposed — voted up or down.
As a member of the church in Australia I am outraged that one of my representatives, namely Glen Townend, should be treated as if he was an irksome fly on the wall, a voice not worth recording.
Paulsen’s comments strike me as patently wise. The fact that some “no vote” speakers were cheered as they opposed Paulsen forces me to question, “Was the Holy Spirit really there for the vote?” Did those who cheered understand basic Christian civility, respect and tolerance? I would hazard a guess that this is the first time such shameful conduct has happened at a GC session.
The deletion of Glen Townsend’s argument was ironic, since I thought his argument was one of the best of the afternoon:
“we should remain united in mission, but do not need to dictate methods.”
Its just a small technical point, but my understanding of ‘minutes’ of a meeting are not the same as a transcript of who said what and when. Minutes can be as brief as a copy of the question discussed, and the resolution of the meeting in regards to it.
Seems folks would prefer a full transcript to the more brief form of ‘minutes’ provided. Hasn’t anyone realised, even in churches, the victor gets to write the history?
When Andreason challenged the church and demanded a hearing, they finally agreed. He stated that he assumed he would get a copy of the record of the meeting. They did not respond. So again requested confirmation that he would get a copy of the meeting.
They finally stated that they would have someone write up the conclusions of the meeting and he would get a copy. And this is when he wrote “Letters to the churches”.
He called it a kangaroo court where he was to be tried with no evidence to affirm or confirm what took place in the meetings.
The church duplicity was so obvious that it created the real challenge to the book “Questions on Doctrine” that Andreason was complaining about. The poor man suffered considerable mental strain about the whole situation. He could not believe what was happening and he died in a state of confusion. They took his credentials, but after his death returned them.
Ever since then, the church’s self identity has been warped and it simply continues on and on. The process of self destruction has increased. Adventism is an off shoot of Protestantism and never could really define itself or final and ultimate mission.
The bible has always been obscure concerning law and gospel in the SDA community. All we know is the 7th day is the Sabbath and the state of the dead. We are rapidly becoming a non-Christian cult that can not really define who we are or any definitive message of salvation. Novices control the church.
Bill,
Thank you for remembering Andreason. The great truth seems to be we never care to study or learn from our history and will continue to make the same mistakes over and over again.
Serge, it is not a “small” point!
This $40 million effort on behalf of so many deserves an authentic record of what happened. This is travesty of reality!
Serge, does that make the rest of us 42% losers?
Sad that we can’t all be winners!
From travesty this has now become tragic!?
UGH!!
The SDA Church is not a “FREEDOM” organization. The GC posits itself as a hierarchy freely elected by its membership, where as in actual practice it has become a dictatorship with absolute authority. “IT HANDLES THE MONEY”. A small group of elderly men, perhaps less than 30, formulate what is “POLICY”, What are the “CHURCH BELIEFS, CREED”, which it continually keeps fine honing. The very few at a 5 year meeting, less than several hundred, determine who the the HEAD HONCHO for the next 5 years will be. “ALREADY DETERMINED BEFORE THE CONSTITUENCY ARRIVES FOR THE SESSION”, already determined in advance, “before the “RUBBER STAMP”, of only 3000 (representatives for 18,000,000) specially selected voters. And they demand to be “GOD’S personally selected, HOLY SPIRIT’S CHOICE” to
be the “SDA’S VICAR OF CHRIST ON EARTH”. How are SDA’S any different than “the HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH”??????????
Folks, this several BILLION $$$$ MEMBERSHIP is in the hands of a few old men who “HANDLE THE MONEY”. MONEY ALWAYS CORRUPTS AS, IT IS LOVED. The power control of the treasury corrupts, same as politics in Government. The tail wags the dog, and demands obedience. “Is it not time, now, to question if the “GENERAL CONFERENCE”, OF THE SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST ORGANIZATION has become totally incapable of directing this culturally diverse church, and
has become an appendage no longer viable???? (CONTINUED)
(continued)
In the past, i became aware of the Church’s firm hold on employees (at the conference level), by “Fear”. Fear of losing a many year employment and benefits. “Booted out by not supporting the hierarchy”. And many happen to be constituents at all extra called meetings to vote for their perceived “masters”, on penalty, of course. HMMM, Alas, the voters encounter this hierarchical overview at each level of Church bureaucracy. Interesting, HMMM, that at this years GC SESSIONS, in a half century of ELECTRONIC EXCELLENCE, THAT THE PRIVATE VOTING MACHINES FAILED AND COULDN’T BE REPAIRED. As is known in the executive suite of every organization at the general level, where the “heads” must guard their backs with loyal lieutenants. This top group and supporting “Ivory Tower” bureaucrats are definitely expendible. The Church led by the culturally diverse UNIONS, can then move forward with greater agility and greater success in sharing the Gospel message of JESUS LOVE, without the monolithic cost of an obsolescent system that once every 5 years tells the gerrymandered constituency what is best for them. Our Master, Jesus Christ permits the CHURCH to be ignorant and foolhardy. Which puts HIS people, to wander another 40 years in the wilderness of 5 year episodes, who are not willing to move forward in faith, propelled by wisdom, available from the HOLY SPIRIT. The CHURCH, which is the people, not the GC talking heads, are called to act.
Earl,
I think you are hitting our (SDA) history on the head. Two books which are even more pointed even though written in the 1930’s are: Exodus and Advent Movements, In Type and Antitype, by Elder Taylor G. Bunch and The Seven Epistles of Christ also by Elder Taylor G. Bunch shows our history as being repeated again and again.
History from 1854 through and including 2015.
A special thank you to Atoday for setting the record straight.
The omissions clearly are not just shortening to summarize (or to protect certain people), but to manipulate impressions. This is not just unprofessional, but highly unethical. Whereas the records are legal documents, one even would have to wonder about that particular aspect. Quite outrageous.
As to the event itself. Please remember that Jan Paulsen had been invited by the current president to speak. At least looking back on the events and the reporting, it should be obvious that this was not a courtesy, but a setup. Quite outrageous as well.
I was there that Wednesday in the Alamodome. However, I did not take notes. Yet I clearly remember Jan Paulsen’s speech and the fact that a number of “points of order” were raised mainly to attack Jan Paulsen and his right t speak.
I clearly remember that there were almost as many points of order raised throughout the day as there were comments purporting to address the issue. (I felt that most did not address the issue because they opposed women’s ordination, rather than addressing whether or not the divisions should decide on a course appropriate in their area of the world.)
The session was extremely disillusioning for me. The wrangling over the use of electronic devices demonstrated the unwillingness of a portion of the delegates to use the electronic devices. Ted Wilson essentially gave them their wish when he said that “after one more test,” the devices would not be used if the test should fail. The way forward for those not wanting to use the devices was clear: Don’t press the button, and the devices will be scrapped. That set the stage for voting by show of cards which ensured that some delegates would not vote according to their true sentiments for fear of repercussions back in the field. The request to test the devices division by division – which was reasonable and would likely have been enlightening – was denied. There may not have been a conspiracy, but the *appearance* of a conspiracy was certainly there.
All of this is a crock. Did Jan Paulsen have a right to get up and seek to waylay the minds of the delegates simply because he was a former president who was responsible for all sorts of non-biblical madness during his tenure, including WO? He and many of the underhand crew seemed to assume that the Southern brethren are children without discernment. I saw the whole thing and realised that Ryan, Paulsen and the brass from NAD cared little about anything but getting their own way and I wonder why. Have they sold the church out to the Vatican? Thhat is what it seems like to me. They were running scared when they realise that the Third World delegates also went to school and cannot be fooled. All that prayer stuff was just ploys. Dishonesty held sway, especially on the part of those trying to force a yes. And they lost. So all the devilish tactics still being played out are evident, EVEN IN THE ACTIONS OF THIS MAGAZINE. I WONDER IF THE EDITOR HAS THE COURAGE OR THE HONESTY TO PRINT THIS.
HMMMM, don’t you sound like you are full of God’s loving Holy Spirit? Mocking, evil surmisings…. God records all, precious one. Prayers for you and this beleaguered denomination.
The tone and nuances of this good sister I’m sure add persuasiveness to her views. The emotional intelligence of many opposed to women’s ordination at the Session did much to advance the ascendancy of the “Yes” vote in the final days, and had the final vote been held at the very end of the week, and had it been conducted entirely by reliable electronic means, I believe the split of the ballots would have been near-even. Those opposed to women’s ordination paradoxically seemed to be determined to say precisely the words and express just the thoughts that most rapidly raised questions about the spirit that guided their increasingly histrionic comments.
Patricia, Your charges against the NAD and Jan Paulsen are unfounded and unjust. Jan was asked to speak by Ten Wilson. And the methods the delegates used to render the voting machines worthless was what was unethical. That so many voted against the freedom of the Divisions to do what is right in their area is what is more like the Vatican. What kind of power do we think we in NAD should have over the members in Africa? or England for that matter. The location where you live should be led by godly people in that location who know the customs. You, Patricia, need to pray about your attitude. Something sinister and evil happened to the Adventist Church in July and God is not pleased with some of our decisions. Jesus is a “loving” “fair” “Just” God who for 6,000 years has given the human race freedom. When he comes to claim His own, He asks that we have served the needs of others, not that we took away the freedom of others.
Patricia Harvey: Here we go again with the “Vatican, Catholic” rant. Does anyone realize how often this happens with SDA comments? How insecure can people get?
“And just for the record, let me say that the spirit that guided me during the years I provided leadership for the church did not leave me when I left office.” Jan Paulsen
Is this hubris?
The censoring of the GC session minutes (a legal document) if not technically illegal (I don’t know) is most certainly unethical and gives the appearance of somebody or some group controlling the session to their advantage.
And yet I hear appeals to an Ellen White statement that the GC in session “highest authority that God has upon the earth.” In light of the way this last GC session was conducted, I believe that to be almost blasphemy. And I believe Ellen White would concur since she wrote this in 1901:
“Yet we hear that the voice of the conference is the voice of God. Every time I have heard this, I have thought that it was almost blasphemy. The voice of the conference ought to be the voice of God, but it is not, because some in connection with it are not men of faith and prayer; they are not men of elevated principle. There is not a seeking of God with the whole heart; there is not a realization of the terrible responsibility that rests upon those in this institution to mold and fashion minds after the divine similitude. —Ms 37, 1901 (MR 900.61) {2SAT 159.6}”
Please go back and read the context. Ellen called for re-organization, which happened. It resulted in the formation of unions which were to have a certain degree of independence, and Ellen White was pleased with that. However, lately the church has moved in a direction to undo the independence of the unions, beginning with the formation of divisions.
I believe it is time for another re-organization.
Whew!!! Don’t you sound like you have God the loving Holy Spirit in your heart and words?!!! Prayers for you, and this devil – beleaguered denomination.
I do not agree whatsoever that the GC in session is God’s highest authority on earth as EGW stated in 1901. Who did she think she was making such an authoritative statement like that??? The SDA church has no Pope, but it appears that some have elevated EGW to that status.
I agree with Inge’s sentiments completely and wonder why a commenters thinks otherwise? I’m thankful for the spirit of God who speaks to our hearts and helps us to know His kind, loving, helpful spirit. It is this loving heavenly judge to whom I pledge my allegiance. I no longer accept the judgements of humans unless they agree with the judgement of my God. The voice of erring humans will never be His.
As Elder Wilsonstated later, church policy remains unchanged after the July 8 vote on women’s ordination. No action of the church has ever changed the policy on women’s ordination. In 1901-1902 the world church added unions to our organization and required conferences to get union approval for ordinations. We had ordained women ministers present at that meeting, including Ellen White.
The policy of the world church remains: people can be ordained when chosen by their local conference and approved by their union. The official policy of our church regarding ordaining women is exactly the same as our official policy regarding ordaining left-handed people,- no official policy.
David Patterson
9328 Houston Lane
Ooltewah, TN 37363
dpatterson9328@comcast.net
423 485 8425
Member Chattanooga First SdA Church
Member of SdA Church since September 10, 1949
“We had ordained women ministers present at that meeting, including Ellen White.” D Patterson.
Untrue with respect to EGW which has been proven over and over. Please cite exactly where your allegation can be found.
Interested Friend,
Would you kindly cite “proof” for your previous statement? (Statement shown below.)
“Untrue with respect to EGW which has been proven over and over.”
I’m sure the minutes and comments were edited. My local pastor was a delegate to the 2015 GC Session. He made some comments on women’s ordination. I couldn’t find my pastor’s comments anywhere in the published notes. As Mondale quoted from the early eighties advertisement, “Where’s the beef?” I don’t agree with everything that was voted on at the session. The one thing I do agree with Elder Wilson and others. We have a job to do. That is to spread the good news of our salvation to the world. Let’s not be like the disciples who spent three years arguing about who would be the greatest in Christ’s Kingdom. When they finally got their act together, the good news was spread to much of the world.
I hope that someone from the GC will comment on the allegations made by Dennis Hokama; if true omissions are certainly not compatible with the “transparency” EGW spoke about.
While Paulsen has obviously found favor with certain observers. I have read what he said and it was not genteel for him to take advantage of his invitation to pontificate on a very controversial issue before the delegates.
Really? Everyone knows what went on at the GC Do you have to keep alive picking apart things that are of no eternal consequence. Let it go and move forward with the World Vote as it stands and let’s try to maintain unity about an issue that is not doctrinal.
I think the point has been well established that minutes are not a transcript of the meeting. There is not a conspiracy behind every corner.
I was also watching and listening to the debates on WO at GC Session. My only criticism of Dennis’s report is that he only referred to a few of the excessive points of order that were recognized by Mike Ryan after Paulson finished his speech.
One of the more egregious of those not mentioned was the fact that Wilso asked for the mike immediately after Paulson finished, and delivered his very brief “orders of the day” as to what his followers should vote.
There were many more … and much more lengthy… speeches made under the disguise of “point of order”… including the reading of the Policy manual… as requested by none other than Mike Ryan himself. The idea that he made efforts to be fair and equitable to those who wished to speak to the actual topic would be a hilarious joke… as to be completely unbelievable if one was not actually a witness to what happened. Unfortunately… with the brain washing that is going on as to what “really happened”… this is precisely what will happen in the not so distant future.
“One of the more egregious of those not mentioned was the fact that Wilson asked for the mike immediately after Paulson finished, and delivered his very brief “orders of the day” as to what his followers should vote.”
That is an absolutely false assertion. What happened “immediately” after Paulsen’s statement were the points of order just as described in this article. Nothing was omitted.
The appropriateness of recording points of order in the minutes is in doubt. While Robert’s Rules of Order call for such recording, the SDA Church has never officially adopted RRO as a guideline for its meetings. In many organizations, points of order are not recorded in the minutes.
The SDA Church has a very brief “General Conference Rules of Order” pamphlet that makes no mention whatsoever what is required in the minutes. The Church Manual states only that board minutes should “report all actions taken.” Obviously, a point of order not upheld by the chair would not rise to the definition of an action taken. (Perhaps the suggestion for prayer — which likely really does not constitute a real point of order in the first place — was recorded since it was in fact an action taken.)
The article seems to insinuate that a departure from protocol has occurred without demonstrating a precedence that obtuse and inane points of order were recorded in minutes of previous General Conference sessions or referencing any authority that requires such recording.
One wonders where to begin a response to the “women’s ordination” issue in San Antonio or even whether to begin. The following are random thoughts, in no special order. Speaking of “order”: there was much talk during the Wednesday business session in San Antonio on “points of order”. Whose “order”? Certainly not “Roberts’ Rules of Order” since we understand they are not followed by the GC. Another random thought: church leadership — at the GC, DIvision, Union, local conference and congregational levels — has been abusing one of Roberts‘ rules for generations — the one of “calling ‘Question‘ on a motion. If one person calls ‘Question‘ on any motion, the chair almost always immediately stops discussion and calls for the vote on that motion. Such abuse is ridiculously undemocratic. What Roberts‘ Rules is trying to accomplish when the chairperson correctly uses the words “Are you ready for the Question?” is simply to determine whether the body wants to stop discussion and take a vote. In its correct application, THE CHAIRPERSON MUST THEN WAIT AS LONG AS HE/SHE FEELS
FAIR TO DETERMINE WHETHER ANY OTHERS WANT TO SPEAK TO THE MOTION, BEFORE THEN CALLING FOR THE VOTE.
Roberts’ Rules were designed to maintain trust in the way business is conducted in order to level the playing field for all.
For years we have been abusing them in the few instances when we stumble along trying to use them.
Another random thought: the concept of “women’s…
I continue to be astounded at the virtual first-words on that fateful Wednesday: the scripture reading from Revelation 17 and 18, wherein ‘the woman’ is portrayed as synonymous with the devil. TW also referenced the same passage in his closing remarks of the day.
Forgive my lack of interpretation expertise, but the bookending of this Biblical passage in the most important (however brief) decision faced in my generation was – in my estimation – completely out of context and totally inappropriate. That that reading had the ‘stamp of approval’ by all sub-committees pre-gc acknowledges that this most erroneous perspective of those in power are NOT representing God’s church but a corrupt facsimile hell-bent (and headed) on milking members hard-earned and dedicated tithes/offerings to fund their own agenda. In all likelihood, the spirit that did/continues to be with Elder Paulson has left the building.
I believe every change that has ever taken place in this world has taken much time for opinions to change. I just watched a movie about Florance Nightengale and the things she went through trying to get women involved in nursing to help the British wounded in battle. She worked very hard to get changes made and endured much hardship from the military leadership at the time.
This church would maybe not exist with out the work of James and Ellen White. I’m not sure why we are even having this issue. God will and has always chosen whom He will and I fully expect Him to continue.
I also believe all the words spoken at these meetings should be recorded the same as at any other trial. How else can we remember what has taken place? Some of those not recorded may indeed have been led to speak by Gods leading. Only the future will tell but if it’s not recorded then those that spoke will be forgotten.
Ethical and accurate meeting minutes in all of our church meetings have four major purposes.
• Meeting minutes are communication tools for the dissemination of important information, such as the decisions made by committees and the persons assembled to carry ou the business of the church.Meeting minutes can be used to verify compliance with policies, rules, regulations, or other requirements.
• Church Administrators, Pastors, and local church officials use meeting minutes to help identify who’s going to do what and when, creating a great opportunity for follow-up on issues and problems. Minutes guide managers’ decision making related to future meetings and needed agenda items.
• Minutes are also important tools for planning and for future project management, moving projects forward with the aid of well-written reports of progress and commitments. These publicly stated commitments facilitate members’ accountability and responsibility for the committee’s work and purpose.
• As historic documents, meeting minutes help new and current participants remember what has and hasn’t already been accomplished.
Any lapses or bias in the minutes undermine the work of the church.
The minutes even left out part of Dr. Paulsen’s speech. For the whole thing, with video, see http://EqualOrdination.com/san-antonio-address/
I’ve listened to the video and am not impressed with Paulsen’s arguments. Nor did I hear any of the alleged noisy reaction to his speech by certain delegates.
I was in the Alamodome that day, and while it is debatable whether the content of Elder Paulsen’s speech was impressive or not, what is not debatable is the reaction of certain delegates and spectators which was simply deplorable. It may not be noticeable on a video, but it was that day in the dome.
So commenters are criticizing Jan Paulsen for expressing his recommendation on WO, but don’t criticize Ted Wilson for announcing his. Interesting.
Does anyone know how one can obtain the official minutes from the sessions? We were not delegates but would like a copy.
Seeker,
The Review posted the official minutes online. It shouldn’t be a difficult search.