tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17154648.post114539406600089554..comments2023-10-11T04:34:56.433-07:00Comments on His Barking Dog: "A Vision for the Future of the ABCUSA National Shared Table " - Draft Proposal Being CirculatedDennis E. McFaddenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07580173031351978626noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17154648.post-1155894608958513332006-08-18T02:50:00.000-07:002006-08-18T02:50:00.000-07:00Some counterpoints:"Our current financial situatio...Some counterpoints:<BR/>"Our current financial situation, one of declining support for United Mission, is an expression of how local churches feel about the state of the national body and the mission priorities they wish to fund. Giving trends indicate increasing designated giving toward regional work and special projects, and away from UM."<BR/><BR/>If BLM is right about a lack of access, knowledge, and enfranchisement at local levels, declining UM support likely has nothing to do with anyone's dissatisfaction with National. Our contention continues to be that lay members on the ground don't know enough about our present strife to vote with their pocketbooks one way or the other. Consider also that the average Christian (including a majority of evangelicals and others who are wont to raise the banner of Scriptural Authority in other matters) only give 3 percent of their income to any kind of church work. Consider the drop in giving experienced by many, many charities as Americans turned or attention to relief efforts for the Tsunami and Katrina victims in a time of economic uncertainty.<BR/>The relationship between drops in UM giving and supposed local dissatisfaction with National is purely anecdotal.<BR/><BR/>"We need to strengthen regional identity as a key ABC representational entity."<BR/><BR/>Did anyone not see this coming after Parchment Valley? According to McFadden, the PVA and Lancaster groups are largely the same but not identical.<BR/><BR/><BR/>"We wish to affirm the autonomy of the local church and regions to follow Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. We do not wish to continue a process of fighting over resolutions and statements of concern. We also wish to emphasize the historic Baptist commitment to the associational principle, in which we act responsibly in order to strengthen the life of all the partners within our fellowship. We seek a way to minimize future divisiveness."<BR/><BR/>This is good if local autonomy means lay access. In this spirit, this document should be vetted by all interested members of all member churches in the regions represented.<BR/><BR/>"We are all absolutely committed to our heritage of racial, ethnic and cultural inclusiveness."<BR/><BR/>This is just a question: Who was in charge of distributing the GEC Surveys? Whoever it was at whatever level missed this point entirely.<BR/><BR/>"It is an outline, intended to be a pro-active and creative entreaty to all of our ABC constituency."<BR/><BR/>Glorious transparency!<BR/><BR/>"The Embracing of Increased Local Church and Regional Autonomy: Local churches hold regional membership, which can be geographical, or affinity based- the local church decides where it affiliates (it can still also be disciplined by an association and/or region). Regions determine standards for admitting and dismissing churches, ordination standards and reciprocity."<BR/><BR/>Is IN/KY party to this?<BR/><BR/>"ABCUSA Belongs to its People: Biennial meetings (or variations, like virtual meetings) would serve as custodians of the ABCUSA constitution and by-laws. This is where ultimately lay people and local church pastors retain ownership of ABCUSA. The National Table'’s Secretary could also have her/his call affirmed by the Biennial gathering."<BR/><BR/>But really, power would reside with the REMC.<BR/><BR/>"These Shared Values characterize, we believe, the deeply held convictions of the vast majority of lay people, pastors, churches and regions in our American Baptist family. When we gather at the national common table, partners will live out, abide by and respect the values, norms and rules of the Shared Table. For the sake of the whole, they would not send to the National Table people who do not subscribe to these values."<BR/><BR/>That dog won't hunt. First of all, Shared Value #5 includes the IN/KY statement on human sexuality. Consequently, no gay delegates (or dissenting heterosexuals) will be involved at the "National Table" which seems outlandish given what this document says it's trying to accomplish. I affirm the 2005 "We Are American Baptists," but doesn't this proposal seem like a de facto excommunication of many, many people? Utterly unbaptist.<BR/><BR/>"If statements are made in the name of the entire Fellowship at the Shared Table level, the threshold for acceptance should be very high."<BR/><BR/>Define "high." Consensus isn't enough. The views of a group of powerful regions isn't enough. Committing to excluding anyone from the National Table who doesn't subscribe to all the values makes it sound like this threshold is already set.<BR/><BR/>God help us.administratorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17563065338597279210noreply@blogger.com