home

Nary An Unpublished Thought

sermons

archives

 

biography

 

 

June 4, 2008

DAY 15 ON nFoG WATCH: Nothing new to report.

Committee Survey: Committee 14, Review of GA Permanent Committees.

This should be simple. There is one item of business. One. That's it.

It is not even a particularly interesting item of business. Item 14-01 looks to amend some wording regarding the timing and description of ordination exams. This committee could wrap up business on Sunday night (the first night they meet) if anyone puts any effort into it.

Then, what to do....what to do...what to do....?

This has nothing to do with the business already assigned to Committee 14, but it has everything to do with the business that could be assigned to Committee 14. Remember a few weeks ago when I went on (and on and on and on...) about the Stated Clerk election process? Wouldn't it make sense to use this already existing committee -- that has virtually nothing to do -- and use it as the Stated Clerk Nominating Review Committee or some other such title?

It seems incredible to me that we would be choosing the denomination's most influential officer who has the broadest range of authority using the most restrictive and limited election process possible. Why not suspend the Standing Rules (or amend them -- whichever would allow the change to be made on time) to have this committee review, interview, and make recommendation as to the individual they discern God is calling to serve as Stated Clerk? Where is the down side?

Where is the down side? I do not see one. Changing the election process does not undermine the integrity of the Standing Rules -- there is already a recommendation to suspend the Standing Rules coming to allow "late" business. It is not like the rules are being applied, anyway. The "non-communication" or "non-campaign" rule seems to have gone out the window:

By the way, I think all these posts and publications sare appropriate. However, they are in technical violation of the Standing Rule H.2.b.4 (m) and (n)...(a problem for Stated Clerk candidates looking to be elected to a job with the responsibility of upholding the rules) -- unless the Stated Clerk Nominating Committee (which is the sole determiner of what constitutes compliance with the rules) is picking and choosing which rules to apply and how and to whom.

What could the committee ask these candidates? Here are some questions that should be asked -- but won't, because there is no time:

These would be conversation starters. Good heavens, we have an entire committee devoted to being a think tank regarding youth; would it not be good stewardship to do some thinking about the direction the denomination is going to go between now and the time they will be in leadership positions?