Haruo wrote:Yeah, perhaps I should have posted them in the general forum. I'm interested in reactions, even indifference if openly stated. Even reflections on the Wesleyan experience in bringing diverse voices out of the woodwork to the table (since largely what Evergreen is about is overcoming the old-white-men legacy of Robert's Rules of Order, which most of our (Eurocaucus) churches have followed as if it were close to Canonical
Gene Scarborough wrote:Is there ever the possibility with a divisive issue----to make no formal decision and give it time to find its own place in society?
Tim Bonney wrote:Gene Scarborough wrote:Is there ever the possibility with a divisive issue----to make no formal decision and give it time to find its own place in society?
I guess it depends on the issue Gene and what the polity is of your church. In the ABC or CBF where local churches decide their own rules for issues of marriage, ordination, and church membership the denomination/fellowship can choose not to be involved.
Where those decisions are national in scope it is harder to not be involved in making decisions about issues that the denomination has rules which effect all the Church.
Tim Bonney wrote:Haruo, I watched both of the videos. It was nice to see a few familar faces. I served on a committee with Yosh when he was VP of the ABC.
I like the consensus model and, in principle, I like the caucus idea. But I wonder how it works if you get people in your association that don't fit one of the three caucuses? And does every decision have a Euro, Asian, and Black element? Maybe I'd know the answer to those questions if I understood the system better. I just know the overview of the video.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest