Warning – this blog entry concerns an agenda item for the Church of God International General Assembly in Orlando. It most likely will be of little interest to many readers. (-:
As the presenter of the primary motion, I am disappointed with the report. The agenda recommendations from the committee are not germane to the primary motion. In fact, the report does not address the primary motion, but summarily dismisses it as a “mere prequalifier.” Think of that – ten years of pastoral experience is but a “mere prequalifier.”
The report confesses that there are “leadership challenges” associated with the role of the State Overseer. I submit that one of the greatest leadership challenges is the widening gulf between denominational offices and the local church. We have developed a leadership culture – an ecclesiastical bureaucracy – that has very little relationship with, or accountability to, the local church and local church pastor. Our leadership culture has dismissed pastoral ministry as relatively insignificant in the leadership paradigm. If one aspires to the office of administrative bishop serving a long tenure as pastor is not a leadership track. Rather, serving in the denominational or regional offices is the preferred track. Often such persons have little or no experience in the regular preaching and care of the people of God.
The report confesses that the office of administrative bishop “has become a managerial role in many respects.” There is little wonder! If we continue to appoint ecclesiastical bureaucrats they will administrate and manage. But if administrative bishops are appointed who have served as pastors with the proven gifts of administration and leadership, then the office of administrative bishop will reflect the pastor’s heart and will better reflect apostolic vision and passion.
I would have been pleased with a report and recommendations that are germane to the primary motion. The primary motion spoke to qualification, specifically to pastoral experience. A report on the primary motion could have explained why experience as a local church pastor would be helpful to a prospective administrative bishop; or not helpful. I recognize that the committee has “freedom of action” to originate recommendations not specific to the primary motion (Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11th edition, 177). However, I challenge the committee’s decision to dismiss the primary motion by mere allusion in the report, bringing no recommendations to this body as to qualification. According to Robert’s Rules of Order, the purpose of the motion to commit is to allow time for a motion to be studied. The committee is then to offer a report recommending “appropriate amendments for the assembly’s consideration.” The committee’s work should “recast” the primary motion (RONR, 115). The committee may recommend adoption or rejection of the primary motion; or even make no recommendation at all (RONR, 516). Further, the committee may recommend “definite or indefinite postponement” of the primary motion (RONR, 519). The committee may offer a substitute motion, but the substitute motion may be considered only after disposition of the primary motion (RONR, 523, 156-157). However, the committee may not simply dismiss the primary motion, for in doing so the committee assumes authority to dispose of the motion without the vote of the assembly. Any and all recommendations of the committee must be finally considered by the assembly. Only the assembly decides final disposition of motions in question.
There are four ways to dispose of a motion: (1) to lay on the table; (2) the postpone indefinitely; (3) to postpone for a definite period; and (4) to call for previous question. The motion to commit to committee is not disposal of a motion; but an opportunity to study the motion, to recast the motion so that the assembly may ultimately dispose of the motion by vote. The motion to commit to committee means that business is to “be carried over directly from one session to some later regular session.” “When a question is carried over from one session to another… it remains within the control of the assembly as a question that has been temporarily, but not finally disposed of” (RONR, 91). A committee cannot kill or dispose of a motion. Only the assembly can finally dispose of a motion.
I have been informed by parliamentarians that although my points are valid, the committee was within its charge to dispose of the primary motion. Further, that it has been our tradition to dispose of matters in this manner. I profoundly disagree with the parliamentarians’ opinion, with the committee’s handling of the primary motion, and with our tradition of disposing of matters in this manner.
I had planned to seek recognition on the floor of the General Council in order to challenge the report and move that the primary motion be considered. However, I have determined that I could not prevail in good order. Therefore, I will submit the following motions to the motions committee in hopes that they will get a fair hearing.
That we amend S21. STATE OVERSEERS, II. Qualifications, by adding the following as paragraph 6:
6. Must have at least 7 years experience in local church ministry as a credentialed Church of God minister. This motion does not affect those under current appointment.
That we amend S26. STATE YOUTH AND DISCIPLESHIP DIRECTOR, I. Selection, by adding the following as paragraph 4:
4. Candidates for this office must have at least 7 years experience in local church ministry as a credentialed Church of God minister. This motion does not affect those under current appointment.
That we amend S27. STATE EVANGELISM AND MISSIONS DIRECTOR (USA MISSIONS), I. Selection, by adding the following as paragraph 3:
3. Candidates for this office have at least 7 years experience in local church ministry as a credentialed Church of God minister. This motion does not affect those under current appointment.
