Plenary Session Proceedings
Wednesday, April 24: Evening Session

1996 United Methodist General Conference

Wednesday Evening
April 24, 1996

BISHOP MELVIN TALBERT (San Francisco): Thank you very much. Thank you. The conference will be in order. We are prepared for this evening's agenda. And if you would take your places and be quiet, I can announce where we're going. Quickly, delegates take your places and I'll announce where we're going. If the delegates that are standing, will you please take your seats? Delegates, please take your seats. This crew right in the middle, here, you hear me. Please take your seats. The first item on the agenda this evening is covenanting relationships with Spain and West Africa. And I call on Bishop Elias Galvan who will lead us. Bishop Galvan.

BISHOP ELIAS G. GALVAN: Bishop Talbert, members of the General Conference, for our presentation we need to have before you the Service of Recognition, Act of Covenant. And we're not sure that has been distributed.

BISHOP TALBERT: Has it been distributed? All right. I'd like to have a copy, here. Thank you. All right, I think it's out.

BISHOP GALVAN (Phoenix): Thank you. Sisters and brothers in Christ, we have come to another high moment in the life of this General Conference where we have the opportunity to recognize and affirm an act of covenanting with two sister churches: the Evangelical Church of Spain and the West African Methodist Church of Sierra Leone. The Act of Covenanting provides for the recognition of each other's churches as an attempted expression of one, holy, catholic church of Jesus Christ. It means the recognition of our respective baptism as different facets of the one baptism.

In the Act of Covenanting we receive each other's full eucharistic fellowship, and look forward to mutual sharing of the ministry and mission of Christ's Church. It means that we shall care for and pray for each other. The Council of Bishops through its Committee on Affiliated Autonomous Churches over the last three years has engaged in dialogue with these sister churches. We are pleased to report that each of these churches has already approved the Act of Covenanting of the respective legislative bodies. The Council of Bishops submitted to this General Conference petition 21723. This matter was acted upon this morning when you approved Calendar Item 1022 in the Consent Calendar B4.

The West African Methodist Church of Sierra Leone traces its beginning to the year 1821 as part of the British Methodist missionary outreach. This early beginning gave birth to a vital church serving the people in West Africa, primarily among the recaptive slaves who were discriminated upon because of their poor economic conditions. For many years The United Methodist Church through the central conference of Sierra Leone have worked together at the ecumenical levels. There have been pulpit exchanges and other contacts that have enriched both churches. Today, we celebrate our common roots and pilgrimage. I call on Bishop Humper to introduce the representative of the West African Church.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Bishop Humper.

BISHOP JOSEPH CHRISTIAN HUMPER (Sierra Leone): Bishop Talbert and members of Conference. It is my delight and pleasure to introduce to you one of the representatives of one of the bodies with whom we will be in covenant relationship as from tonight; the Rev. Jeremiah Moshoper Pratt who is the General Superintendent of the West African Methodist Church in Sierra Leone. He's been a distinguished servant of God. The history of how that church came into being, and I've always been aware of the many faces of Methodists around the world, I might try to share with you. But I'm delighted to introduce to you one who has had some academic background to equip him for leadership in that part of the continent. The Rev. General Superintendent Pratt attended college in the University of Sierra Leone, the University of Birmingham, and the University of Edinburgh.

He holds a fellowship of the Victoria College of Music in London. He is ecumenically minded, a servant who defies all odds to maintain and uphold the discipline of the Church. He is a resourceful, industrious, dedicated, and committed servant of the Lord. In spite of the many difficulties he's had to encounter, he has been able to hold on the parts with honor and dignity. Delegates, I now present to you the General Superintendent of the West Africa Methodist Church in Sierra Leone, the Reverend Jeremiah Moshoper Pratt. (applause)

GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT JEREMIAH PRATT: My Lord Bishop, Bishops, members of conference, I bring you greetings from the West African Methodist Church of Sierra Leone. I am now the present head of that church. Unfortunately, we do not refer to our head as "bishop." We say "general superintendent." We know it's one and the same thing because it carries the same functions. We have been striving together, The United Methodist Church and the West Africa Methodist Church in Sierra Leone, to walk together for the common good of our people, through the grace of God. The act of covenant which we now enter into today, is to cement that relationship. I hope and pray that we shall continue to foster good relationship for the good of our people and to the praise and glory of God. Once again, I bring you greetings from our church with God's richest blessings. (applause)

BISHOP GALVAN: Our church traces its contacts with the Evangelical Church of Spain to the early 1900s when missionaries were sent out from our church. Schools were established, churches organized in several Spanish cities. However, when General Franco came into power the Protestant churches were persecuted and suppressed. Methodist lay persons and pastors were imprisoned, exiled and some were executed. Properties were confiscated and the church was forced underground. Missionaries were pulled out of Spain and we lost contact with this Church for many years. During these long years of repression, these Methodist congregations joined the Lutherans, the Presbyterians, and the Congregationalists to organize the Evangelical Church of Spain.

It is a joy to claim our historical roots and renew with this courageous church a relationship. I call on Bishop Lloyd Knox to present to you the representative of the Church of Spain.

BISHOP LLOYD KNOX (Atlanta): It's a privilege for me to introduce the Reverend Enrˇque Kapo, the president of the Evangelical Church of Spain, or the United Protestant Church of Spain. As you heard, the Spanish Protestants suffered a great deal during the time of Francisco Franco when he took power in 1937. He held power for 40 years. During that time, there was great persecution of Protestants and Evangelicals. Nevertheless, the church has been courageous and now we have a united church. The Rev. Mr. Kapo has been the pastor in Barcelona. I had the privilege of preaching there three years ago, in Barcelona, and I had known him previously. He and his very wonderful wife hosted us while we were there, and we were impressed with his deep dedication to Jesus Christ. It's my privilege to present to you the Rev. Enrˇque Kapo. (applause)

ENRIQUE KAPO: Just a word of greetings from my church, the Spanish Evangelical Church. We are a very small church. Altogether it would be less than we are here, in all of Spain. We have about 50 congregations, most of them small congregations. I come from a small church in parish in Roman Catholic country, and in very different circumstances, but we are sure that we are one with you in love; one with you in faith; and we have the same Lord. That is what really counts. God bless you. (applause )

BISHOP GALVAN: Will you please turn to our liturgy? And I'm going to ask our song leader to assist us as we begin our liturgical moment.

WILSON-FELDER: Let me invite you to look with me at the sung response you will find in your order of worship. We will play for you the melody all the way through, and then at each time that we sing the response, let me invite you to select the language of your choice. Listen first to the melody.

WILSON-FELDER: Would you sing it with me?

WILSON-FELDER: Each time that you see "sung response" in your order we will sing it. Once again, you may select the language. Now if you will please stand as you are able and join me in singing our hymn of the evening, "Filled with the Spirit's Power."

BISHOP JOE WILSON (Ft. Worth): You may be seated. Our reading from the Scripture is taken from Acts, the second chapter, reading the first through the fourth verses. And the reading will be in English as well as in Spanish. "And when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. Divided tongues as of fire appeared among them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages as the Spirit gave them ability."

BISHOP LLOYD KNOX: Let me remind you that the Bible in Spanish was translated before the Bible in English. There were two Roman Catholic priests, or monks, who did it, Reyna y Valera. They did it about 50 years before the King James Bible was used. And Lancelot Andrews, the chief translator for the King James Bible, used the Reyna y Valera version very heavily because, you see, at least the first five books of the Bible were in Spanish when the Jewish people had gotten to Spain much earlier, probably in the fifth or sixth centuries. And so, they had a Bible in Spanish long before we had a Bible in English. And so, I read to you from the Heavenly Version.

BISHOP WILSON: Let us continue following the order of liturgy in your service of worship. Come, Holy Spirit, renew the whole creation. Send the wind and flame of your transforming life to lift up the church in this day. Give wisdom and faith that we may know the great hope to which we are called.

WILSON-FELDER: (singing) Come, Holy Spirit, renew the whole creation. Come, Holy Spirit, and renew us.

BISHOP WILSON: Giver of life, sustain your creation. Confront us with our greedy consuming of your gifts. Stand before us as we pillage and destroy. Call us forth into new harmonies of care, for all that lives and breathes has its being.

BISHOP WOODIE WHITE (Indiana): On behalf of the United Methodist Church, we now present the certificates and documents of covenanting. (Applause)

BISHOP WILSON: As you remain standing, will you join me as a people of God. (prayer of covenanting) "We celebrate the oneness of the church in these moments and give thanks that we are covenant partners with the Evangelical Church of Spain and the West African Methodist Church of Sierra Leone. We recognize that your baptisms, members and ministries are of the church of Jesus Christ. We know that the Holy Spirit is present in the life of your churches. We believe that God calls us together for the sake of God's mission in our world. We ask that you pray for us as we will do for you. So may God bless us all that across continents, but together with Jesus, we will meet again, and again at his banquet." Let us pray.

BISHOP WILSON: And now let us offer in our own language the prayer our Christ taught us to pray.

BISHOP GALVAN: Will you receive the benediction?

BISHOP TALBERT: What a tremendous moment. We last time took in, made covenant relationships with others, and two more tonight. What a day. Now my sisters and brothers, I believe the moment has arrived that we have all been hoping and praying for, and I believe that moment is now. The moment has arrived for us to welcome our colleague and our dear friend from Liberia. Bishop Kulah is here!

BISHOP ARTHUR F. KULAH (Liberia): Good evening to all. I need not tell you that I am extremely happy to be here this evening. And I bring you greetings from Liberia, from your sisters and brothers who have been devasted for the past six years by a civil war. A war that has left many mothers without children, many fathers without mothers, many husbands without wives, and many wives without husbands.

I bring you greetings from a little country that is so rich in human resources and yet so poor when it comes to human relationship, I bring you greetings from a country that is called a Christian country, that was built upon Christian principles, and yet has allowed itself to be destroyed by greed and selfishness. I bring you greetings this evening, and as I come, my people are asking, "Is there any hope for us?"

"Is there any hope for us?" Even as I raise this question they are very thankful to you, and I am to you, for the prayers you have offered on our behalf, for the support you have given to us for the past few months, the years. I want to thank you for everything you have done to keep us moving as a people. Without your prayers, without your support, without your cooperation, our annual conference wouldn't have been where it is today. My special thanks go to the Council of Bishops, the President of the Council of Bishops, Bishop Skeete, Bishop Mutti, Bishop May, the general secretary Dr. Nugent, and all of us who are here praying for the annual conference. The situation in Liberia is beyond human description. It's beyond human understanding and human reasoning. For the past five years, Liberia has been torn apart by war. I describe this war as senseless war because there is no reason, no matter how big, for brothers and sisters to be killing each other, for homes and institutions to be destroyed as we have done to ourselves. Yet we have faith, and I have faith, and I have hope.

So I came to say to you, do not give up on Liberia, for we have hope. We have hope in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. We believe that in as much as Christ was arrested, ridiculed, mocked, spit upon and dragged, crucified, hung on the cross, dead and resurrected, we too shall rise. (applause) The Liberia Annual Conference shall rise from gloom to glory, shall rise from darkness to light. And we shall have life in us because our life has been given to us by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. People of God, followers of Jesus Christ, continue to pray for us. For with your prayers and your support, the church in Liberia shall rise again. Thank you very much. (applause)

BISHOP TALBERT: My, what a marvelous, miraculous intervention. And what an appropriate time. On the agenda tonight, we're going to be considering next the Study of the Ministry, but we welcome our brother from the fields where he has, on behalf of all of us, been in ministry as a peacemaker. So welcome Bishop and Mrs. Kulah. We now call on the Ministry Study Committee. We will be led in that by Sandra W. Lutz.

SANDRA LUTZ (East Ohio): Bishops. Fellow delegates. At a meeting of the Divisions of Ordained and Diaconal Ministry earlier this quadrennium, Judy Smith told of a meeting where a panel of distinguished persons presented reports that documented, in unrelenting fashion, the terrible condition of the world. After these reports there was silence. Then one woman in the audience raised her hand and said, "I understand how terrible things are. Would it help if I baked a cake?"

We in The United Methodist Church honor and acknowledge that kind of call to be as important in God's sight as those more honored by the world. That is the ministry of all Christians. We speak with respect and kinship with the widow and her mite, with Amos' prophetic call, with the servant ministry of Martha. But all too often our structure does not reflect that commitment. We now have the opportunity to attend to that. It is an honor to present to you tonight the ministry proposal from the Ordained and Diaconal Ministry Legislative Committee.

Just one week ago, the Bishops' Study Committee presented their overview document to you. It looked like this. (she points to the document) They led us through it so that we might understand the totality of their proposal, and not be lost in the hundreds of individual petitions that we must deal with in order to bring a ministry proposal to reality in our church. We examined and reflected upon that document in small groups where we raised concerns, affirmations, and questions to be recorded and transmitted to the Ordained and Diaconal Ministry Legislative Committee. As our legislative committee began its work on the ministry study, we heard additional presentations from the bishops, and also received that summary report of those reflection groups. We found ourselves resonating with that summary report. Our hearts seemed to be one. Your concerns were ours, as were your affirmations.

After considerable discussion, we reached an understanding that we would accept the bishops' proposal as our baseline, but felt called to perfect it in ways to reflect those concerns. As you know, this ministry study could not be dealt with as a single, amendable document. Rather it entailed several hundred discreet changes in the Discipline. Having agreed to use the ministry study legislation as our base, we were then able to work with reasonable consistency across our ten sub-groups that were needed to handle the over 1000 pieces of legislation assigned to our committee.

To help you understand our proposal, we have prepared and distributed a brief summary document that uses the format in sequence that you became familiar with in the bishops' document. We will use that to show you where and how we have affirmed and where we have diverged from their proposal. You will note, that the areas we affirmed and the areas we changed reflect the fact that we were overwhelmingly convinced that, as a denomination, we must move forward in ministry, and that it is more important that our structure honor God's call on all our lives than that we hold to historic patterns which, although once effective, may now interfere with our ability to move ahead.

Would you turn with me to the two-page white document entitled "Ordained and Diaconal Ministry Legislative Committee Ministry Proposal." We created a brief document so that we can read it together. My teacher self tells me that some of us learn better by reading, others by listening, and others by visual images. This should help you understand the framework. Then as we consider the specific petitions later, you'll see how they relate one to the other.

Let's begin with chapter 1. As you can see, just as we sensed in the reflection group, there is affirmation of the understanding of ministry of all Christians as contained in the ministry study, with only minor amendments to clarify and expand the mutual ministry of laity and clergy.

As we looked at chapter 2, the office of lay ministry steward, we too felt we could not affirm that particular piece. We recommended nonconcurrence but with referral to the Board of Discipleship, in hopes that somehow the underlying concern might continue to germinate and perhaps bear different fruit. Our image was of a seed that is still beneath the soil. And somehow the lay ministry steward felt like an artificial flower placed upon a germinating seed. We wanted to keep the germinating seed but to recommend nonconcurrence with the lay ministry steward. This we sensed was the general feeling in the reflection groups.

Chapter 3. The ministry of the ordained. Here you will see four affirmations to affirm the meaning and qualifications for ordination. (You will see as the legislation comes out that we have added a footnote of definition of self-avowed, practicing homosexual), but affirm the ministry study's position--affirm the organization of the ordained ministry into two distinct orders: deacon, which is non-itinerating, and elder, which is itinerating. But both are members of the annual conference in full connection. This seemed to reflect what came out of the reflection groups, that we are at a point where we need to move to two permanent orders.

We affirm joint exploration and candidacy for ordained and licensed persons. Affirming the work that has been done by the two divisions, Ordained and Diaconal Ministry, during the past quadrennium; affirm formal academic, theological education for both orders.

As we looked at the probationary period, we felt it important to redefine that probationary period to provide parallel paths leading to single ordination to each of the two distinct orders. All candidates would be elected to probationary membership and commissioned to servant ministry specific to their call and gifts. And commissioned probationary members in the elders track would be licensed to administer the sacraments while assigned to a particular charge. And commissioned probationary members in the deacon's track and ordained deacons will assist elders in the administration of the sacrament of baptism. We felt it important to clarify the sacramental rites and how they are divided between the two orders.

Now, if you'll look at the back of your sheet and look at this path to ordination...let's walk through that. Where does a person begin? The individual begins with one year of membership in The United Methodist Church before applying for candidacy; then moves to that call to servant leadership and service; which is played out in at least one year as a congregational leader. Then they move to candidacy and there is action by the charge conference, so that each local church begins that process. Whether the person is feeling called to become a deacon, or to become an elder. They become a certified candidate. There is completion of formal academic theological education. They come before the district committee which recommends to the Annual Conference Board of Ordained Ministry for election to probationary membership; and Commissioning to servant ministry.

Those who are called to service, word, sacrament and order will have a three-year probationary period and then be ordained as elders, which will be appointed and itinerating. Those who feel the call to become deacons are elected to probationary membership, and commissioned, and move into a three-year probationary period toward becoming a deacon. They are then ordained as deacons and they are appointed and non-itinerating. On the next page--the deacon in full connection: Here we affirm the understandings outlined in the Ministry Study of call, membership in the annual conference, and a nonitinerating appointive process.

For the elder in full connection, we affirm the understanding of call, membership, status, and itinerating process. The elder will be ordained to service, word, sacrament and order; claiming their service responsibility which was formerly acknowledged through ordination to deacon prior to ordination to elder.

For the local pastor: We affirm the current understandings and the new directions to provide for permanent local pastors as well as a path for those who plan to seek ordination as elder; We have affirmed the evaluation of continuing formation; have affirmed the understandings of changes in conference relationships; and as we looked at transitional provisions you will see that we affirmed the procedure for present diaconal ministers and associate members and those in candidacy to become ordained deacons or, if they choose, to continue as diaconal ministers.

We have amended, to enable a shorter transition time, by assimilating the Conference Board of Diaconal Ministry into a restructured Conference Board of Ordained Ministry, and placing responsibility for the transition and continuing certification of individuals under its purview. We believed it was important to move to a shared responsibility as soon as possible.

Chapter 3. The local church was assigned to the Local Church Legislative Committee. And chapter 4, the superintendency, and chapter 5, we affirmed the understandings as presented in the Ministry Study document, with only minor amendments for clarification.

We have been studying ministry for a very long time. Amazing as it seems to some of us, God's spirit right now seems to be moving among us, gently nudging and encouraging us to take heart, breathing life into the dry bones, and calling us to trust new models and new understandings of ministry. The Bishops' proposal comes out of careful listening, prayerful and thoughtful reflection, and sound crafting. We in the Legislative committee affirm that work, but believe that we have perfected significant parts.

We believe the lay ministry steward would not be a helpful affirmation of lay ministry, and we feel it is important to structure the probationary period to clearly respect and honor the call to two distinct orders.

You will note that the vast majority of our petitions on the Ministry Study appear on one of the consent calendars. In our committee, we have been able to reach rather remarkable consensus around very difficult issues. We have been guided by ten gifted sub-group leaders and by assistance on the executive committee of our secretary, Louise Schock, and the vice-chair, Earl Bledsoe. You will meet them as they present petitions to you as we move through the legislation. Like a good parent, God knows when we are ready to move. We need to remember that when God calls us God also is there to hold our hand on the journey and to receive us in a new place. Let us move ahead to new understandings.

Now, Bishop, we would like to consider legislation. I suspect that you have noticed that the lay ministry steward paragraphs have appeared on the nonconcurrence consent calendar, and no one has removed them. Later in the week, we will bring reference of the concern, but not the form, to the Board of Discipleship for your attention. But we move ahead now with the understanding that there will be no lay ministry steward.

The first calendar item we would like to bring deals with understandings around the probationary period. It is here that the committee made its overwhelming affirmation of single ordination for both deacons and elders. This comes to you from the entire committee with a vote of 92-12 in favor of concurrence. Larry Goodpastor, the sub-group chair, will present that item for your action. Let me move you to the correct location. This is in your blue DCA, page 259. It is Calendar Item 792, and it deals with paragraph 324. That's blue DCA, page 259, Calendar Item 792 dealing with paragraph 324. Now if you'd like to also open your red DCA so you can refer to it, it is found on page 1002. Again, paragraph 324, Petition 21843. And the subject is, "Ministry of an Elder." Larry.

LARRY M. GOODPASTOR (Mississippi): Let me refer you first to the blue document, page 259, Calendar Item 792. There are two editorial corrections that we need to make as we present this calendar item. In the fourth line of the first paragraph, the word "consecrated" needs to be changed to "commissioned." "Those who have been commissioned and served as probationary members." The other editorial change is at the last sentence of that first paragraph, the sentence that begins with the words, "Elders continue their service in responsibility..." Delete that sentence. The Legislative committee had deleted that, and it did not get picked up.

I first want to begin with a word of thanks to those persons who served and worked and shared on our sub-committee that dealt with this material. It was obvious from our first conversations, both in the Legislative committee and as a sub-committee, that we had all, for the most part, given this very careful and prayerful consideration before we arrived in Denver. Many of us had served on area response teams, reading, reflecting, and responding to various pieces of the Ministry Study as the Council of Bishops moved through their process during this last quadrennium. In addition, the input from all of us just one week ago was extremely valuable. Our sub-committee began its work with this petition, which led us into a time of thinking and praying and listening and having conversation about ordination. Our work on this particular petition and on the issue of ordination significantly impacted the rest of our action.

The effect of the amendments as you see them in Calendar Item 792, which our Legislative committee is recommending, is to eliminate the two step ordination sequence for elder's orders. It would create a permanent deacon, as was proposed in the Ministry Study by the Council of Bishops. Several issues emerged in our conversations. Ordination is, as stated in the Ministry Study report, an act of the church which acknowledges God's call according to the talents, gifts, and abilities the person has received.

The act of ordination sets persons apart for various ministries. One of our questions: "Why is it necessary to set persons apart twice?" These amendments will move us from having persons who have willingly responded to God's call and prepared themselves, being ordained at one service, and then realizing that some would have been ordained deacon permanently, while others for only a brief three year period before being ordained again.

Are there two different kinds? Is one incomplete? Does this continue the hierarchical way of ordering our ministry? We arrived at the decision that it was time to move in a new direction in a time when we are seeking to build partnerships and share in a common ministry around a common vision. The legislative committee offers this way of ordering ministry which will maintain and enhance our commitment to service and which will continue to celebrate the ministry of all the baptized. We will continue to identify and authorize persons to a ministry service that is set apart for specific roles and functions, never separate from the ministry of the whole people of God, and never viewing one ordination as a stepping stone to yet another. The legislative committee voted 92 to 12 for this petition that is now listed as Calendar Item 792, which builds on the significant work of our Council of Bishops. We present it to you this evening.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, I recognize the gentleman at microphone 6.

J. LAWRENCE McCLESKEY (Western North Carolina): Bishop Talbert and delegates, I would like to move to amend Calendar Item 792. The amendment I propose is to substitute for that item the wording originally proposed for paragraph 324 in the Council of Bishops' study. That wording, as has been indicated, is found in the yellow sheets for that study on page 20, or in the Advance DCA on page 1002, Petition 21843. If there's a second, I would like to speak to the proposal.

BISHOP TALBERT: It is seconded.

McCLESKEY: It's clear that when this General Conference comes to its conclusion we will have established a new deacon in The United Methodist Church, a new understanding of deacon. I support the new deacon as proposed in both the bishops' study and the report of the legislative committee. My concern is with the effect of the legislative committee's proposal on the elder.

The committee proposes two ordination to either deacon or elders separately. The bishops' proposal places ordination as a deacon in a much more central place in the understanding of ordination. By providing that all ordained persons be first ordained deacons, the bishops' proposal affirms the deacon's ordination to service as the foundation of all ordination in our church. If we adopt the proposal of the committee, we will depart from almost 1700 years of tradition which has characterized most of Christendom, including the Anglo-Catholic tradition out of which Wesley came, as well as the mainstream of American Methodism since Francis Asbury. The sequential pattern of ordination, first as a deacon and then for those called, as an elder began to be required in the church in the early fourth century. It was a practice built on a pattern of deacons, elders and bishops as old as the first century. While it is true that not every branch of Christendom and not every branch of Methodism has followed this pattern, it is equally true that most of Christendom for 1700 years and most of Methodism for over 200 years has followed this sequential pattern of ordination, thus grounding all ordination in a servant ministry. There are several hundred persons in this room tonight whose identity and self- understanding as clergy are rooted in this historic, theological tradition. They have been deacons longer than they have been elders. Their deacon was not a transitional order. They are permanent deacons. This pattern of sequential ordination has also been one of the reasons that Methodism has long been a bridge in the ecumenical world. Traced through Anglicanism and medieval Catholicism to the early church, this pattern has provided a point of relationship in Protestant/Roman Catholic dialogue, which has kept ecumenical lines of communication open and mutual respect and affirmation. The bishops' proposal affirms each of us, whoever we are, and however and wherever we are called to exercise our ministry. And it does so while also affirming historically, ecclesiastically, and theologically, who we have been and who we are as United Methodists.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Your time is up. I recognize Mary Elizabeth Moore at microphone 3.

MARY ELIZABETH MOORE (California-Pacific): I think the question before us tonight is the question of where are we going, and where is God calling us into this future? The theme of journey has been a theme that has been part of our days since the very opening of this General Conference. We've heard stories of trains roaring through town and boats sailing in uncharted waters. We've heard the challenge to march beyond the edge of the map. In ministry studies we have indeed been journeying for a very long time, 30 years or more, depending on how you count. These years have not been wasted. These have been years of learning and growing, challenging ourselves, asking ourselves, "where is God pulling us?" At times, these years have seemed like journeys in the wilderness, especially as we sought to understand what does ministry mean and where're we being called? After the merger in 1968, after the formation of diaconal ministry in 1976, and if you'd like to know how much value we've derived from these studies, just read the Disciplines between 1968 and now.

Quadrennium by quadrennium we have increased our passion for lay ministry. And the bishops have taken us one enormous giant step forward. What the bishops have done, with this document they've offered, is to challenge us to realize that in our baptism we are incorporated into the Body of Christ. We are incorporated into a servant ministry and that is the base of all ministry. The base of our ministry is in baptism not in the diaconate. Through all of these years of study, one of the most wonderful things that we've discovered is that, in fact, the Christian tradition is rich with examples. It's rich with examples of different forms of ministry, different directions and changes over time, as new occasions pull us into new futures.

During this quadrennium when the bishops have been studying they have been praying, they've been reading, they've been calling together listening groups and annual conferences. And alongside the bishops, others have also been praying and reading and listening. We have come to this General Conference with perhaps the best gift of ministry that we've ever had. We've had study team after study team. They have done magnificent work. Almost every time they have brought the recommendation of two distinct ordinations: one to deacon, one to elder. Last time, that particular recommendation came out of legislative committee and was defeated on the floor of this General Conference by two votes. Let me close with just one last word. And that is that if the ministry of the Christian church is grounded in baptism, then the servanthood of all Christians is the ground from which all ministry comes. We don't therefore need to be ordained first as deacons. And we might ask ourselves where is God calling us into the future? What vessels do we need as we journey beyond the edge of the map?

BISHOP TALBERT: Thank you very much. That's a speech against. All right, I recognize the person at microphone 14.

SUZI ROBERTSON (Texas): I want to affirm Dr. McCleskey's passionate account of the history of the deacon and the elder in the United Methodist Church. I want to affirm our Anglican roots and the bridge that United Methodists build between our Anglicanism and our Catholicism. I also want to remind us that the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church did not ordain women. And the United Methodist Church led the way, and I submit to you that if the legislative committee's proposal is adopted at this conference, the United Methodist Church will lead the way once again.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, that's a speech against. That's right, it's against. Anyone speaking for? You are. All right. Microphone 8.

HELMUT NAUSNER (Austria): I'm been involved in ministry studies since 1977. And I just want to share a few insights. I support the proposal of Lawrence McCleskey that asks the conference to follow the report of the bishops. If we depart from tradition, we run ourselves into difficulties. And I'm a little bit astonished that we at this conference have accepted and replaced tradition in the baptism study. We seem to throw tradition very lightly away with this proposal. Tradition keeps us in connection with the Catholic Church. And the United Methodist Church is the only Protestant denomination that holds the three-fold structure of ministry. All the other Protestant denominations who have one ordination have it because they have departed and cut themselves off the church catholic. The consequences I see are these: The proposal of the study of the legislative committee breaks the unity of ministry. It sets up a base for division between the new deacon and the new elder because they are not united and held together in sequential order, and it invites new and unforeseeable problems. We have no experience at all with that new structure. We try, and we will have to rewrite the whole Discipline in many ways anew. And my last impression as an outsider, is that I have the impression that some U.S. annual conferences try to solve problems of salary, benefits, pensions and other more financial questions by changing the structure of ministry, and by doing so, burdening the whole connection. I plead to stay with the proposal of the bishops.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. The gentleman here. Microphone 9.

ARMIN BESSERER (Germany South): Since my Austrian colleague spoke against the legislation committee, I want to speak for the proposal of the legislation committee.

BISHOP TALBERT: Are you speaking for the amendment?

BESSERER: No, I speak against the amendment. I'm from Germany and maybe you know that we have the one ordination in Germany for the last 50 years, and we worked good with this. We understand ordination as an elder including the ordination as a deacon. In our German environment, the Lutheran Church is very huge, and they have also one ordination. And as far as I know, the British Methodist Church has also the two orders, the presbyters and the deacons and so I think when we accept the new order, or the new form, we are just preparing. We are still in order or parallel with the British Methodists. I think this is OK. One problem which I had, but is now no longer the problem is the question of the itinerancy, because elders do itinerate and the deacons not. But since the appointment is just for one year, as I was told, and its an appointment although its not itinerating, I think its still very close that the bishop can say this deacon can have this appointment or not.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. We have three against and two for. I must take one now for. Are you for the amendment? All right. Thirteen.

GEORGE ATKINSON (Texas): My colleagues sometimes ask me what difference theology makes in the practical life of the church. It probably doesn't make a whole lot. I don't know that it would make any difference to my congregation if we kept the present order of the Discipline, or adopted the Bishops'proposal, or took the legislative committee's proposal. Most congregations want caring pastors who are able to preach and people who will help them to grow in the Christian life.

But I can't help but think that changing the way we've done things for so long, that will take so much energy over the next several years to work out, is not the best way to perfect the order of deacon. Certainly we need to work on creating a permanent deacon, a deacon who has a particular work in the world, who is able to embody and witness to the Word, but I don't see that doing that requires that we alter the way we think about elders.

The grounding of ordination is not simply in baptism. There is only one ministry--that's the ministry of Jesus Christ. Baptism allows us to participate in that ministry. The ministry of Jesus Christ, as described in many theologians as being that of prophetic, and priestly and royal work, which is why we have reflected in our own ordination Word and Sacrament and Order. There is one ministry of Jesus Christ. There are not conflicting, separated orders of deacon and elder, not to mention whatever the bishops are. I'm convinced that we would be better off in our understanding if we simply accepted the bishops' proposal rather than the Legislative committee's proposal. Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. According to your rules now, you've had three for and three against. And unless there's a motion to do otherwise, I must turn to the committee to see if there's a last word before we vote.

SANDRA LUTZ (East Ohio): Yes, we have asked Earl Bledsoe, our vice-chair, to give that final word.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, it's before you, and as the, when the light appears--Well, excuse me. Oh, you're going to have the last word?

EARL BLEDSOE: Yes, I was going to give the last word, if it's OK.

BISHOP TALBERT: Oh, I thought that was it.

W. EARL BLEDSOE (Texas): Earl Bledsoe, from the Texas Conference. And George, the bishops are elders, if you didn't know where they stood.

I would urge you to support the Legislative committee's decision on this part of the ministry report and to vote no on the substitute motion for basically two reasons: One is that for a time of reflection and prayer; laity, diaconals, and elders working together; there is common agreement that there is clarity, and that there is a particular focus on our ministry together. Within our petition and our recommendation, the dynamic togetherness of laity, deacons and elders is the basic formation for servant leadership within our church.

Now, if I took the argument of Lawrence and the others who have spoken for the substitution, if it were only elders within the church and we were talking about ministry as being only for the elders, I, too, would probably affirm and say, "Yes, I'm for two ordinations, and sequential, to make sure that the deacon and service is a part of that understanding." We're not the Catholic Church, you all! That's just not who we are. We are The United Methodist Church. And we affirm the ministry of all persons, both laity, deacons and elders working together in ministry. And so, when we look at the model by which we put forth in the amended version of the bishops' study, we find that it has clarity. And it has focus on the ministry of servanthood.

The second thing and reason why I urge your support of our petition and recommendation is that it clears up the perception among those who are in ministry within the church that there is this hierarchy, or that some are more superior, or inferior, to others in our ministry. We should be about the ministry of Jesus Christ in service to all persons, and we ought to be able to utilize the gifts that everyone brings to the table to share the gospel of Jesus Christ to others.

BISHOP TALBERT: You need to finish.

BLEDSOE: So in summary, we listened to you. The committee was very clear on the issue and voted 92 for and 12 against. And I would ask you to vote no on the substitute motion.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, what's before us now is the McCluskey amendment. That's what's before us. And if you are for the amendment, you would vote yes. If you're against the amendment and, thus, prepared to take the recommendation coming from the committee, you will vote no. Will you vote when the light appears? [Results: yes,224; no, 710]

BISHOP TALBERT: All right the motion, the amendment fails. What's before us now is the report from the committee, I recognize the gentleman here. Microphone 7.

MENNO E.GOOD (Eastern Pennsylvania): Bishop, I have a friendly amendment that will clear up a pastoral difficulty in counseling with young and older persons applying for the elder's order. And that is on the, and I'll make us a motion, and then speak to it, if I have a second. It's the 10th line down on 792 and it reads after the comma, "and whose call," I would add "by God" and then continue "to ordination has been confirmed by the church."

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, that's your motion. Is it seconded? It is seconded.

GOODPASTOR: Bishop we'll accept that.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right it's accepted; any objection to that? That is accepted. All right, this is before us. Back here. Microphone 9.

PETER D. WEAVER (Western Pennsylvania): I'd like to also offer an amendment on line 7. After the word "church" in line 7, for the rest of that sentence to read in this order: "found by the church to have the necessary gifts and evidences of God's grace, to be of sound learning and Christian character," and then in line 10 to continue "and whose call to ordination.. etc." If I have a second, I'd like to speak just quickly to it.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Is that seconded? It is.

WEAVER: This essentially, simply changes the order. I debated whether to do this but too many times I have sat in Boards of Ordained Ministry that talked about the matter of learning, the matters of the head, before they talked about the matters of the soul. Seems to me the first question, the entry question, always is the issue of the gifts and evidence of God's grace. I would like us always to be putting that first in the order, that we ask: How is it with your soul before we begin asking how is it with your head?

BISHOP TALBERT: All right is there someone to...

LARRY M. GOODPASTOR: Bishop, we would accept that.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, you be sure to get that up here so we can get it in. All right, I recognize you, sir. Microphone 9.

ARNOLD A. RHODES (Western Pennsylvania): I have a question. If one is ordained as a deacon can that person serve a church as a pastor?

BISHOP TALBERT: You want to speak to that?

GOODPASTOR: According to the way the Bishops' document reads, which we have not changed, the answer to that would be no, unless that person makes that decision and goes through the proper steps.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, over here. Microphone 1.

TERRY L. CLARK (Central Ilinois): I would like to ask if the committee could explain theologically and biblically the difference between consecration, commissioning and ordination. All three of those words are used, and I think it'd be helpful if we had some understanding here in terms of what those are. Again, that's both the biblical and theological understanding of this.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right now, we don't want to stay here all night with a treatise, but I think they could probably speak to that.

SHARON RHODES-WICKETT (California-Pacific): Thank you, Bishop, we don't either. I am bringing, on behalf of the legislative committee, a petition a little bit later where that word is used. One of the difficulties is that in the transmission of materials to your DCA, not all of the changes were picked up. The wording of the legislative committee was chosen to be "commissioning." The subcommittee and the legislative committee spent a significant amount of time debating the meaning of not only the words you've asked about, but about a dozen other words as well. And I don't think we have time, and I know what you've asked for; I don't think we have to time to get into a big treatise of all of those. Let me just mention some of the issues and concerns that were brought up.

Around the word "consecration," some were uncomfortble with the close connection with the concept of ordination. The relationship of consecrating bishops and consecrating persons as they begin their ministry seemed to be confusing. We looked at various biblical passages where commissioning was used, where licensing came in, where consecration came in. And the different words that-and on ordination--and each of the words that we considered had dimensions to them that made sense to us, and there were parts of them that troubled us. And the subsection probably spent about a day to a day and a half wrestling with all of that kind of language; their meanings, the layers of meaning, the theology around it, what is our practice, what are we attempting to do? The word "commissioning" was the one that we finally proposed, as we thought about the biblical notion of sending out for a task, "go therefore." That at the beginning of one's ministry, in a probationary period, they are being commissioned, and it's a time to be in probation before coming back to be ordained, set aside, in a very final sense for that order. Now, is that sufficient to say that the nature of what we've been struggling with?

BISHOP TALBERT: Yes, well I'm going to test it with the gentleman. I think what you're saying is, is that even though the word shows up in various ways, your consistent use of that word is going to be "commissioning"? Is that all right? No?

CLARK: Just one or two sentences. What is consecration? What is commissioning? And what is ordination? One or two sentences for each.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, do you want to say anymore?

RHODES-WICKETT: I'm wondering if we might call on Mary Elizabeth Moore to speak to that. Would that be appropriate? She was a part of the sub-group.

BISHOP TALBERT: Would you want to say something about that? All right, we want to clear this up. I think it's very important. All right, microphone 3.

MARY ELIZABETH MOORE (California-Pacific): The words "consecration" and "ordination" have been used interchangably throughout Christian history. They basically mean, "to be set apart for holy service." And they have been used in many varied ways, but that is the basic dictionary definition that you find in most places. The word "commissioning" has to do sending out together in mission. Com-missioning. And the word "commissioning" has been used in our tradition in terms of commisioning people for short term service, and also commissioning people to life time service, such as we commission missionaries and deaconesses; we commission class leaders; and we commission groups who are going out on a work team. The choice of the legislative committee was a choice for sending people out in mission together with the idea that we might envision the probationary period in a way that we've never been able to envision it before.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, thank you very much. All right this document is before you. I recognize this gentleman right here.

BISHOP TALBERT: Microphone 2.

J.ERIC MCKINNEY (Central Texas): Bishop and members of the conference, I'm an ordained elder and happen to serve as a superintendent at this time, and Larry, I would like to go back to that question about a deacon being able to serve as the pastor of a congregation. To clarify, is it not right that this proposal would allow a process for them to seek license to do that function? In other words, there would not be prohibition universally from deacons being able to seek such license. And there would be provisions for that would be done? Is that not right?

GOODPASTOR: Correct.

MCKINNEY: Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, the gentleman here. Microphone 3.

DAVID BANKS (North Carolina): I would like to address a question to follow up on that, with regard to a deacon who is licensed and serving a church and begins to discern that his or her call is to Word, Order, and Sacrament. What would be the process to become an elder, and would that amount to a double ordination, or an elder who begins to discern that the call goes beyond the bounds of Word, Order, and Sacrament in a service, what would be the process to become a deacon; and would that amount to a double ordination?

GOODPASTOR: One of the problems we faced in presenting the petitions is that we cannot present them all at one time. Some of these questions will be cleared up as other petitions get presented. The answer to that would be in the sense of having to qualify and be licensed for one or the other. One of the questions that we have wrestled with, and in some conversations, we believe if a person had been ordained elder, sensing a call to another order of ministry, that one of the ways for exiting would be to surrender that, qualify for the other, and be ordained to that. Some of those materials will be presented later. There are exiting procedures for both orders. There are ways to be qualified for both orders. There are other educational requirements and qualifications for each one that will be spelled out in other pieces of the legislation as it comes.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. What's before us now is 792, and I think what you're doing is asking questions that will get answered later. So what we need to do is to speak to Calendar Item 792. Person in the middle right here, yes. You put your card down? OK. I recognize you. Microphone 8.

JUNE D. MCCULLOUGH (Southern New Jersey): Bishop, I move to suspend Rule 36 and to vote upon this matter.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, that's seconded. You moved to suspend the rules. If you would suspend the rules, you'll vote when the light appears. All right, you've suspended the rules. [779 approved] All right, I think this document is before us. Is there a word from the committee before we take the vote? Nothing from the committee. Thank you. It's before you. You will vote when the light appears. [769 approved] All right, Calendar Item 792 is adopted. All right, the next item.

LUTZ: I'm sorry to be running. We don't have enough pads up here, and I wanted to vote on that particular thing. Now we will move sequentially through the document.

BISHOP TALBERT: Let me just check this out. I think it's important for you committee members not to be disenfranchised. Maybe you need to think about the order in which you are coming, and those who are going to be a little later can go back to your seats, and then come up as you finish.

LUTZ: Thank you for that advise. We thought there would be enough pads up here.

BISHOP TALBERT: I think you ought to work that out. While you are presenting, the others can think about it.

LUTZ: All right. As you realize, not all items relevant to the Ministry Study are before us. There were twelve items that were available for us to present today. We have dealt with one. The next item we now will go to, a 100 paragraph, that beginning section on the understanding of ministry, and this is an item that was lifted from the Consent Calendar, published on page 390 of your blue book, but the reference that you'll want to look at is the blue DCA, page 211, and it is Item 552, on page 211 in your DCA, and it references paragraph 110. Bishop, there seems to be a question.

BISHOP TALBERT: Yes, she hasn't put anything before us yet.

LUTZ: And that reference is the red DCA, page 983, paragraph 110, Petition 21743. The committee voted concurrence, 91-0. The subject is Ministry of all Christians, and Renae Extrum-Fernandez, who chaired that sub-committee, will present that to you.

RENAE D. EXTRUM-FERNANDEZ (California-Nevada): Thank you, Sandra. Bishop and members of the General Conference, it is my privilege to set before you this particular petition that provides the foundational understanding of our call, our general call, to Christian ministry, which undergirds the whole of the ministry study. Our legislative committee affirmed this foundational piece, without amendment and by unanimous concurrence. The vote count was 91 in concurrence, zero non concurring, and zero abstaining.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Is that it? I recognize the gentleman here. Microphone 3.

DAVID BANKS (North Carolina): I would move to amend the first paragraph of what would become paragraph 110 to read in this fashion: The ministry of all Christians is the continuation of the saving ministry of Jesus Christ who declared to his disciples, "as the Father has sent me, I also send you." This saving ministry is expressed, hopefully, in the prayer that Jesus first taught his disciples, "thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." All Christians, therefore, are to live in active expectancy of the fulfillment of Christ's saving work, faithful in witness to the world regarding the gospel of life in Christ Jesus; faithful in making disciples of all the world's peoples; faithful in service of God and neighbor; faithful in seeking the fulfillment of God's universal love, justice, and peace on earth, as in heaven.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, is that seconded? It is seconded.

BANKS: It seems to me, while the document that's printed in the Advanced DCA is a good document, there is an omission with regard to how the ministry of all Christians is tied specifically to the ministry of Jesus Christ. In The Book of Discipline now there is a statement that says something to the effect that the heart of Christian ministry is the ministry of Christ's outreaching love. In the COCU Consensus, which is the theological foundation document to the covenanting proposal that we approved earlier today, the COCU Consensus says this: "The ministry of the one people of God, with all its diversity, is the continuation of the saving ministry of Jesus Christ." It seems to me that this says everything that currently you have before you, but it more clearly ties the ministry of all Christians into the saving ministry of Jesus.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. That's a speech for. Is there one against this amendment? Is there someone to speak against the amendment? Anyone want to speak at all? All right, Chair. Renae, any word from you before we vote?

EXTRUM-FERNANDEZ: I would direct you perhaps to ..., there are other paragraphs which I do believe relate our orders of ministry, the way we're attempting to order ministry, to the ministry of Jesus Christ. I think, besides paragraph 110, there's also paragraphs 112, 113, and 114, as well as 115, which ground our ministry in Christ's ministry.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, what's before you now is the amendment. If you vote for the amendment, it's a yes; against the amendment, no. Please vote when the light appears. [Results: yes, 297; no, 682]

All right, the amendment does not prevail. The matter before us is item 551. All right, any further discussion? 552, sorry, 552 is before us. Any further discussion? All right, if you would, if you're ready to go with this one, vote yes if you support the committee, no if you do not. Vote when the light appears. [867 approved] All right, you've supported the committee with concurrence

LUTZ: Thank you. The next item was also lifted from the Consent Calendar. It appears in your blue DCA, page 211, Item 554, which deals with paragraph 313. It's in your red DCA, page 996, paragraph 313, Petition 21829. That's page 996, paragraph 313, Petition 21829.

And we concurred as amended, 101 to zero. The subject is membership in an order. And Sharon Rhodes-Wickett, who chaired that subcommittee, will come to speak to that.

SHARON K. RHODES-WICKETT: Thank you. The only amendment that was made to this petition happened to be renumbering, which resulted from the work of the legislative section. And so, in fact, what you have before you in this petition, is exactly as it appears in the Bishop's Ministry Study, and it is before you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, it is before us. Any discussion of it? If not, I think you're ready. If you support the committee you will vote yes. If you do not, vote no. Vote when the light appears. All right, you have supported the committee. The item is adopted. [875 approved]

RHODES-WICKETT: Thank you. The next matter before us is on your Consent Calendar as number 557 on page 212 in your blue DCA. And it refers, in your red book from the Bishops' Study, page 998, Petition 21835. The amendments that you find in this document simply put into motion the earlier action that you took and does then bring into light the language used, where ordination as deacon was eliminated, and the language of commissioning was put into place. And I believe that this particular document is all correct and there are no corrections needed. And so it is before you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, it is before you. Any discussion? If you are ready to vote, I think you know the process. You will vote when the light appears. All right, you have supported the committee, it is adopted. [885 approved]

RHODES-WICKETT: Thank you. The next petition I bring before you, you will find in your blue DCA from the Consent Calendar 556, the same page, 212; referring in your red advance book, number 999, page 999, referring to Petition 21836. And in this case there are some changes that need to be made. There is one place where it still says ordained deacons. It simply needs to say commissioned ministers.

BISHOP TALBERT: Can you show us where it is?

RHODES-WICKETT: No, I don't think I can.! (laughter) The second sentence.

BISHOP TALBERT: That's been changed, I believe.

RHODES-WICKETT: Well, that's the way it looks to me, too. Maybe, maybe it got caught. At any rate, I think at this point it is simply editorial.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Is it before us? All right, it is before us. Any discussion? Are you? All right. Microphone 4.

BRIAN E. BECK (Great Britain): Page 212 in the blue DCA, third column at the top, numbered one. "The commissioned ministers planning to give their lives as deacons." Is that the point they are looking for correction? Or is that word deacons there correct?

RHODES-WICKETT: In my copy that's corrected, and it shows that it would remain deacons. Yes, that is correct, uh huh. Thank you for asking about that.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right now, what is it? Does deacons . . .?

RHODES-WICKETT: It's correct as printed.

BISHOP TALBERT: So deacon comes out and you just say commissioned ministers.

RHODES-WICKETT: That is correct.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Yes. Microphone 4.

DAVID RICHARDSON (California-Pacific): This is a question, actually and I may not need to relate to it, but why is it that there is different treatment for deacons planning to give their lives in full service in number one, and then a different treatment in number two, in terms of half the time of probational period?

RHODES-WICKETT: My recollection is that is how it was presented in the original study, and that we did not change that.

RICHARDSON: It seems unfair. I am not prepared to work on the amendment yet. I have to think about it.

RHODES-WICKETT: I know the feeling.

RICHARDSON: I'm just questioning it first. But if someone else talks I may have time to think about it.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, I see a card over here. Yes. Microphone 3.

J. ERIC MCKINNEY (Central Texas): I think if you work from the blue DCA there is a correction and there is a parallelism between paragraph two and three where the entire period of service is spent in the respective order for both deacon and elder.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, any discussion? Are you ready? If you are ready you will vote when the light appears. All right, you have supported the committee. This item is adopted, number 556. [871 approved]

RHODES-WICKETT: Thank you. The final petition that I'm bringing to you this evening is found on page 211 in your blue book, Calendar Item 555, referring to your red book page 999, Petition 21837. And this is where I do need to just point out the editorial corrections so that it won't be confusing to you. At the beginning we're in the right column on page 211 where it begins "eligibility and rights," the third line down, "ordained deacons who are" is stricken so that it reads "probationary members are on trial." If you would go down to number one at the bottom of the page, the word "deacons or" needs to be inserted in two places, on the second line and on the third line prior to the word "elders."

RHODES-WICKETT: ... so that it would read, "Probationary members who are preparing for deacons or elders orders may be ordained deacons or elders when..." and it continues on over on page 212 in section number four a little more than half way down, with the sentence that begins, "They shall also be assigned a deacon." Cross out the words, "in full connection," so that they shall also be assigned a deacon or elder as mentor." Number four, on the left column about half way down on page 212, crossing out "in full connection." And then, finally...

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, let me just test now, just make sure. You with her? Any questions? Bear with us. OK.

RHODES-WICKETT: Only one more. Toward the end of this section, which is the center column of the page, six sentences down. Six lines down, I should say. Where it talks about surrendering their credentials, the committee preferred the word, "return," so it would read: "permitted to exercise ministerial functions and shall return their credentials to the district superintendent." With these changes which were part of the original motion that the Legislative committee adopted, I put this before you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, this is before us. I recognize the card. Right, that's right, sir. You. Microphone 9.

STEPHEN FOSTER (Wisconsin): Bishop, I would propose an amendment.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right.

FOSTER: It would be in line nine of item four on the left-hand column. The insertion would be these words: "Where possible, probationary members preparing to become elders and deacons should be joined together in covenant groups for ministerial formation."

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Is that seconded? It is seconded. You may speak to it.

FOSTER: The intention is to develop collegiality among those who are in the probationary status in order that they might be colleagues in ordained ministry later on. It's the intention of the study and the committee to maintain the collegiality of deacons and elders, and this would be the formative stage of that collegiality. Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This amendment is before us. That's a speech for it. Is there someone to speak against it? Yes? Microphone 13.

WILLIAM H. WILLIMON (South Carolina): I would speak against it. That's something that the conferences could take various approaches to. Our conference has a program. I think that shouldn't be mandated.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. That's a speech against. Anyone speaking for or against it? I see no further ones. Committee?

RHODES-WICKETT: Well, Bishop, I've been looking. Somewhere in another paragraph in the bishops' document there is reference to covenant groups as part of the process, and I can't find the paragraph quickly where that is...

BISHOP TALBERT: So regarding this one, you are for it or against it? This amendment? What do you have to say about this amendment?

RHODES-WICKETT: Oh, I'm sorry. I would say we'd be against it because I do believe it is covered elsewhere in the document.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This matter is before us. Yes? You want to say more about this one? What's your Point of Order? Come on to microphone 8.

MICHAEL WEAVER (Virginia): Mike Weaver from Virginia. If you check Calendar Item 556, it talks about covenanting groups about ten lines down.

BISHOP TALBERT: So you were pointing out that that's where it's mentioned? All right?

WEAVER: That's correct.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, thank you. All right, this item is before us. That what's before us now is the amendment. Are you clear on the amendment? Do you need it read again? All right. If you support the amendment, if you're for it, you will vote yes. If you're against it, vote no. Vote when the light appears. All right, the amendment is not supported. This document, item number 555, is before us. Any further discussion? Yes? Microphone 9.

ARNOLD A. RHODES (Western Pennsylvania): Arnie Rhodes, Western Pennsylvania Conference. I would like to have an amendment of deletion. On page 212 under paragraph two, would delete a and b. Delete "constitutional amendments" and "b. election of delegates to the General and Jurisdictional or Central Conferences."

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Is that seconded? Do I hear a second? It is seconded. All right. You want to speak to it?

RHODES: Yes I would. My understanding of probationary membership is in regards to effectiveness of ministry of the individuals. And it seems important to me that if a person is appointed to a local charge or a person is already has the right to vote in annual conference that that right should also extend to constitutional amendments and the election of delegates.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Someone speak against this amendment? All right. Gentleman in the center. Microphone 8.

ROGER C. DOWDY (Virginia): Roger Dowdy, Virginia Conference. I would speak in opposition to this amendment. As a diaconal minister, according to this report I have until the year 2000 to determine whether I would choose to be ordained deacon or remain diaconal. If this amendment passed, it sounds as though I would, or let's say if I chose to move towards ordination as deacon and the conference Board or Ordained ministry determined that I was not yet qualified, that I could no longer vote during that probationary period for General Conference delegates, and I've already been voting as a member for a number of years in that way. I think that's very unfair for persons who might be in a transition period from diaconal to ordained deacon. I would vote against that amendment.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Any other discussion on this amendment? Yes? Microphone 14.

HELEN E. POTTER (West Ohio): I have a question. If they were probationary members and were allowed to vote, would they be voting as lay or clergy?

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. The maker of the motion, would you like to respond to that? Microphone 9.

RHODES: My understanding is that they would be voting as...

ARNOLD RHODES: The understanding is that they would be voting as clergy.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This matter's before us, this amendment. Any further discussion? I see none. I now recognize the chair of the committee.

RHODES-WICKETT: We would ask you to oppose the amendment. We understand this would, in fact, be a constitutional amendment to go in this direction, and secondly, we see this probationary period, which is distinct from a transition time for deacons, for current diaconal ministers to decide which way they're going to go--that's, that's a whole nother category. But the probationary time is a time of discernment and a time to try out and explore ministry before the ordination. And we don't think it's appropriate that this would be changed.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, this matter's before you, the amendment. You are now voting on the amendment. Yes, if you support the amendment; no, if you do not. Vote when the light appears. All right, the motion does not prevail. [yes, 108; no, 797]. What's before us now is item number 555. Are you ready on that? OK, if you are ready, you will vote when the light appears. All right, you've sustained the committee. It's adopted, 555. [yes, 877; no 37]

RHODES-WICKETT: These complete my items for tonight. Thank you, Bishop.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, thank you.

SANDRA W. LUTZ (East Ohio): The next was lifted from the Consent Calendar. It is in your blue DCA on page 211, and it is item 553, which deals with paragraph 321. It's found in the red DCA on page 1,000, paragraph 321, petition 21839. We had voted concurrence, 104 to four. It's titled "Ministry Authority and Responsibility of Deacons in Full Connection." And Larry Goodpastor will come back to bring that to you.

BISHOP TALBERT: Oh, he's over here. All right, you want to do it from there? I'm...Wherever you want to do it; it's up to you. All right, microphone 1.

LARRY M. GOODPASTOR (Mississippi): Thank you. I got thrown a curve on that one. I apologize, Bishop. Consent item 553. It was on the Consent Calendar, and we pulled it off so that we could present all of this material tonight. It is before you with the amendment "ordained by a bishop", in line five, "ordained by a bishop to a lifetime ministry of Word and Service".

BISHOP TALBERT: Is that it?

GOODPASTOR: It is before you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, end of discussion of this. All right, if you're ready to--yes? Over here. Microphone 9.

DOROTHY S. MCMAHAN (New England): I'm Dorothy McMahan, New England Conference. I am a diaconal minister, and I would like to add a word to the sentence that reads, "Deacons are persons called by God, authorized by the church, and ordained by a bishop to a lifetime of ministry, of justice, service, and word". The word I would add is "justice."

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, now tell us where you are.

MCMAHAN: I believe it's the second sentence.

BISHOP TALBERT: Second sentence. All right. Can we, can you help us? I'm...

MCMAHAN: Line six.

BISHOP TALBERT: Line six.

MCMAHAN: If I have a second, I'd like to speak to it.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Do it again so I can, so we can make sure we know where you are.

MCMAHAN: All right. The sentence would read "Deacons are persons called by God, authorized by the church and ordained by a bishop to a lifetime ministry of justice, service, and word."

BISHOP TALBERT: I get it. So you are simply adding the word "justice".

MCMAHAN: And reversing "Service" and "Word", I think.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. All right, is that seconded? It is seconded. All right, number nine. She's still speaking to it.

MCMAHAN: OK. The deacon is to be ordained to a ministry which moves out of the congregation out into the community. And when you move out of a congregation and into a community, the issues of justice become uppermost. I envision deacons, as diaconal ministers do, working outside of the church setting in many venues of ministry where justice is the uppermost issue.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, this amendment is before us. I recognize the--yes? Microphone 7.

DEBORAH G. PITNEY (Oregon-Idaho): Debbie Pitney, Oregon-Idaho. I think if you read a few sentences further, you will find the words, "in the world, the deacon seeks to express a ministry of compassion and justice".

BISHOP TALBERT: So you're speaking against this amendment? All right. Someone else to speak on this topic? The amendment? The committee?

GOODPASTOR: Yes, we would speak against it. We were picking up the words that were used throughout the document from the Council of Bishops that deacons were "ordained to ministry of 20word and service".

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This amendment is before us. If you will support the amendment, you will vote "yes"; if you're against it, vote "no". Vote when the light appears. The amendment is defeated. [yes, 145; no, 760] This item 553 is before us. Any further discussion? If you are ready, you will vote when the light appears. All right, 553 is supported; it's adopted. [781 approved] Next?

LUTZ: Bless you. [laughter] Goodness.

BISHOP TALBERT: Bless you. [laughter]

LUTZ: The next item is in the blue DCA, page 259.

BISHOP TALBERT: 259.

LUTZ: And it is item 791, and it references paragraph 408. It is in the red DCA on page 1,008, paragraph 408, and it's petition 21863. And we voted concurrence 89, 9. The subject is, "Categories of Local Pastor," and Deborah Pritz will present that.

DEBORAH L. PRITTS (North Central New York): Thank you. We bring this petition to you with the unanimous concurrence of our subcommittee and with the vote of our full Legislative committee as was just reported to you by our chairperson. We bring it with no amendments in the text of the petition as it was brought to us by the Council of Bishops. You will note that the document accords clergy status to both full and part-time local pastors. You will note that student local-pastors retain their current status within the annual conference. And point number five in the original petition delineates the voting rights for local pastors.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, this is before us. Yes, gentleman, here. No. That's right. Yes. Microphone 4.

EDWARD A. KAIL (Iowa): I rise to propose an amendment. It would be with reference to the red DCA, page 1008, in point five, to delete the words, "except the Board of Ordained Ministry and the District Committee on Ministry; and also deleting the words, "to vote on or." The sentence would then read, "Local pastors, except student local-pastors, may serve on any board, commission, or committee with voice and vote, except on matters of clergy character, qualifications, status, and ordination. They shall not be eligible to serve as delegates to the General, Jurisdictional, or Central Conference." I would like to speak to that.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Is it seconded? It is.

KAIL: The purpose of this change would be to allow local pastors to serve on both the Board of Ordained Ministry and District Committee on Ordained Ministry, but without vote on matters of clergy character qualifications, status and ordination. Over the last quadrennium, laypersons have been observers on these boards and committees and are being recommended at this General Conference to be full voting members of both the Board of Ordained Ministry and District Committee. For too long, the local pastor has had no representation and no input into the workings of this board or these committees. This change also opens the door for local pastors to have a say in the affairs of the general church. Since local pastors serve over 23 percent of our charges and 35 percent of our churches, a change would need to be made to the Constitution in paragraph 38 in order for them to vote for clergy delegates.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, that's for it. Is there someone to speak against? All right, here. Microphone 8.

HERCHEL S. SHEETS (North Georgia): I oppose this amendment. You would have local pastors serving as members of the very bodies, which examine them and make recommendations of them to continue as local pastors, or to become probationary members, and deacons, and elders.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, is there someone to speak for the amendment? Yes, over here. Microphone 10.

GLENN B. KOHLHEPP (Western Pennsylvania): Bishop, I'd like to make another amendment, please.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right.

GLENN B. KOHLHEPP: In paragraph 5....

BISHOP TALBERT: Is that, is that an amendment to the amendment?

GLENN B. KOHLHEPP: No, it's not.

BISHOP TALBERT: Then you're out of order. You'll have to wait until we dispense with this amendment.

GLENN B. KOHLKEPP: Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, what's before us is this amendment. Yes? Number 9. Microphone 9.

SHARON A. HAUSMAN (West Ohio): I guess basically I have a question. Isn't there a way that a local pastor can stay a local pastor and never go through the ordination process?

BISHOP TALBERT: Is this on the amendment, the amendment is...

SHARON A. HAUSMAN: That's a question on that, before I talk for it or against it.

BISHOP TALBERT: You want, you want the person who made that motion to respond to you then on that?

HAUSMAN: Yes.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, if you could, can you respond to that, sir? Microphone 4.

KAIL: My understanding of the proposal is that there is provision for local pastors to remain local pastors.

HAUSMAN: And that is for the committee also. I'd like to speak to it because if they are not going through the process, they still...we're talking 23 percent of the pastors in the conferences, 35 percent of the churches served. They still should have an ability to have some input into what makes for good pastoring, what makes for a good pastor. At least to have a voice in that. I think we do that in most of our clergy sessions at annual conference now. And we would just like to be able to see that there could be one that could at least have a voice, even if they don't have a vote. Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, any further discussion on this topic? Yes? Microphone 7.

BARBARA DAY (North Georgia): I just want to reiterate what Herchel Sheets clarified. Local pastors have to appear before the board annually for renewal of their credentials. So, whether or not they are going ahead for ordination, they would be appearing before the same board that they might hold membership on. So, I would speak against the amendment.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, any further discussion on this? Yes? Microphone 3.

LAVADA S. REDDING (Rocky Mountain): Many small urban, as well as remote and rural churches are served most effectively by local pastors. Their spiritual guidance, their pastoral skills and administrative abilities make them most effective in their setting. Yet, they're neither clergy or laity in many cases. It's a vital concern to them, in the life of the church, and yet often they cannot be participating. I would urge support of this amendment to include these most worthy servants in Christ's ministry.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, any further discussion? Yes? We've had three for, and see...you speaking against? All right, OK. Number 8, microphone 8.

THOMAS R. BOLLER (Yellowstone): Bishop, it occurs to me, as I read through this particular paragraph, that when you give local pastors membership on a Board of Ordained Ministry or District Committee, but you say that they cannot deal with matters of character, qualifications, status or ordination, all you're saying is they can sit around and watch, but they aren't going to be able to do anything once they get there anyway.

I'm a district superintendent. I've got some good local pastors serving in the churches that I supervise. In fact, I would recommend some of them for the superintendency. And I would nominate some of them for the...to be bishop. They're that good. I don't question their qualifications as pastors or their ability to work. But it seems to me that this amendment to strike that phrase just doesn't make any sense.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, do we have this before us now, three and three? Yes? This is the end of debate, so you, you have a question of clarification, or anything? Microphone 6.

JIM C. GILLAND (Western North Carolina): Would the maker of the motion accept the phrase, "with the exception of the Board of Ordained Ministry?" I think that would clarify what we've been talking about for the last little bit.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, what you are doing is, is you are.....

GILLAND: I'm inquiring of the motion maker, sir.

BISHOP TALBERT: Let me see. Yes.

KAIL: I'm sorry, I'm not sure what the question is.

BISHOP TALBERT: He said, he asked you if you..would you state that question again, let him hear it?

GILLAND: Yes, I will. I agree with everything except local pastors serving on the Board of Ordained Ministry. I wonder if the maker of the motion would accept that one exception?

KAIL: I believe I'd like the amendment to stand as proposed.

BISHOP TALBERT: You'd like it to stand like it's...all right, committee?

DEBORAH PRITTS (North Central New York): We believe that many of the reasons that have been articulated around the room tonight for retaining the language as it was originally proposed by the committee and the Council of Bishops are sound. We believe that it is appropriate and, indeed, we celebrate the ability, if you pass this petition, of full and part-time local pastors to be able to participate in the life of the annual conference in ways that they have not been able to up until this point in time.

However, keeping in mind that local pastors need to appear before the District Committee on an annual basis for reapproval of their license, and keeping in mind the statements in the constitution of our church, we believe that the bishops are on target in recommending the provisions as they appear in point 5 of the original petition.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, the amendment is before us. If you support the amendment, yes. If you do not, no. Vote when the light appears. [Results: yes, 170; no, 744] The amendment is lost. All right, this item is before us. Yes...What's the question? Hold it a minute, sir. You may go on to the microphone. Yes, question.

DON W. MENDENHALL (Iowa): I do have a question for the committee.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right.

MENDENHALL: It has to do with this study. My sense is that the bishops and the committee did very, very well in the area of clergy responsibilities and who they are in their distinctions of ministry. When it really gets down to the laity, it gets thin real fast. Here's my question: In one area, for example, the idea of laity pastoring a local church. For example, in other parts of the world, maybe not so much in the United States, they do use lay evangels or lay persons that they train to be at preaching points. My question, then, is how does the study allow lay people to be involved under the supervision of a ordained elder to pastor local churches? Does it answer that question?

BISHOP TALBERT: All right.

MENDENHALL: I may have a motion, depending on the answer.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, you're speaking to calendar item...

MENDENHALL: The reason I chose this is that the local pastor concept is very, very close to the use of a lay person in a part-time pastoring position. That's why I chose to ask the question now.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. You want to respond to that?

PRITTS: I'll try. I don't believe that that falls under the purview of what we were discussing in terms of the Ministry Study. I don't believe that that topic was considered directly by the Ministry Study. I do believe that one of the other legislative committees during this previous week considered the question of lay preachers, and it may be that they will be bringing some legislation to us at another point in time.

MENDENHALL: All right. Then I do have a motion.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, I think you need to...you raised to get the floor on a question, and I had recognized this gentleman, so I need to try to get back to you. All right, over here.

ALBERT SHULER (North Carolina): Bishop, on page 1008, at the top of that page regarding this petition, where it states, "The local pastor shall complete two courses per year." I think that's an error, is it not? Should that be four courses?

PRITTS: Yes. There is another petition that our legislative committee has voted that catches that error and changes the disciplinary language to reflect four courses a year, which is the expectation of the Course of Study outline. Thank you.

SHULER: Thank you very much.

BISHOP TALBERT: OK. All right, over here. Yes. Microphone 10.

GLENN B. KOHLHEPP (Western Pennsylvania): I would like to amend item five by the deletion of the words, "except student local pastors."

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, that's in the heavy, bold words, "except student local pastors." Is it seconded? I think it's seconded. All right.

KOHLHEPP: I serve as a pastor in Western Pennsylvania Conference and as a mentor to three student local pastors who are studying at Waynesburg College and serving charges in the Washington District. It seems to me if we were to extend these kinds of privileges to those who are part-time local pastors in the Course of Study and full-time local pastors in a Course of Study, that we ought to extend the same privileges to student local pastors who are also studying for ministry.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Yes. Microphone 3.

J.ERIC MCKINNEY (Central Texas): Bishop, I would oppose this amendment. The reality is that for annual conferences that have seminaries in close proximity or within their bounds many, many student local pastors serve in those annual conferences who have no connection at all with those annual conferences, serve those appointments on the weekend, intend fully from the day they take that appointment to return to their home conference. I see no parallel between a student local pastor and a part-time local pastor who is invested in longevity of appointment, grounded in the community long-term where he or she will serve, and does, in fact, have an ongoing relationship with the same annual conference.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Any further discussion of this? Yes. Back here. Microphone 13. No, microphone 8.

JOAN G. LABARR (North Texas): I have a question regarding the Course of Study for part-time local pastors.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. What we have before us is this motion to delete. Is this on the motion to delete?

LABARR: I heard a few moments ago the statement that the Course of Study requirement was being changed to four courses.

BISHOP TALBERT: No. What is before us now is the motion to delete "except student local pastor." That's what we need to be talking about.

LABARR: Okay. Could we come back to that question?

BISHOP TALBERT: I'll try to get to you.

LABARR: Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. What's before us now is this motion to delete. Yes. Microphone 8.

SUSAN W.N. RUACH (South Indiana): I speak against the amendment because some student local pastors have probationary membership in conferences where they are not serving because they're in seminary. And you can't have voting rights in two annual conferences.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Any further discussion on this? Yes. Microphone 4.

BRUCE R. OUGH (Iowa): I would support the amendment to delete this. Even in those conferences that have a lot of student local pastors we expect those student local pastors to perform the same duties as full-time and part-time local pastors. We expect them to raise apportionments, we expect them to disciple our people, they're under supervision of a district superintendent, and they're held accountable for all the same responsibilities. Let's let them vote.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Any further discussion? Committee.

DEBORAH L. PRITTS: We have recognized that there are many questions that surround the status of student local pastors. We felt that the questions were significant enough that they deserve further attention from the Division of Ordained Ministry of the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry, and we feel that it is important for them to be given a time for further dialogue with annual conferences about this issue, and would therefore ask that you not support this amendment.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This amendment is before us. If you will support the amendment, vote "yes"; if you do not, vote "no". Vote when the light appears. [736 approved] All right, the amendment is not supported. It's lost. The calendar item is before us. In the rear. All right. Number 8.

LABARR: My concern relates to the statement that part-time local pastors would be required to have four, not two, courses under the Course of Study per year. We have a program of bi-vocational ministry, which is basically part-time local pastors. The two courses a year is a very, very large commitment for them, and to increase that to four for part-time local pastors would be very problematic.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, you want to speak to that?

PRITTS: Yes, I believe that the--I took the original question to refer to paragraph number one, which refers to full-time local pastors. The expectation has been, and will continue to be for full-time local pastors that they take four courses per year. The expectation for part-time local pastors in point two, will not change from two courses a year.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Yes. Microphone 4.

DON W. MENDENHALL (Iowa): I'd like to ask the committee, I do have a motion regarding the lay pastoring concept. Will the lay steward, even though it was nonconcurred, will that come up? That may be a better time for this motion than right now.

PRITTS: My understanding, from the chair of our legislative committee, is that it will come up as a motion of referral later in our work.

BISHOP TALBERT: And a motion of referral is debatable, so if you have something you will have a chance.

MENDENHALL: I think it would be better if I waited until that time. Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: Thank you. Thank you. In the rear. Number 12.

JOHN A. MASON (West Virginia): In part two in the red DCA, page 1008, the last sentence of part two seems to me to suggest that a part-time local pastor may be appointed only to small membership churches which are grouped together. Therefore, I move, if I may, to change the "are" in the next to the last line to "may be."

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Is that seconded? Did someone second that? It is seconded. All right. Do you want to say anything more about it?

MASON: The only thing I have more to say about it is that in our annual conference many part-time local pastors are appointed to very small single church appointments.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This is before us. Yes. Over here.

PRITTS: I don't believe that our committee would have an objection.

BISHOP TALBERT: Oh. So, you are accepting it?

PRITTS: We'd be willing to accept that.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Over here. All right. Number 2.

BRADLEY F. WATKINS (Central Illinois): I have a question about that same sentence because I was confused about whether that sentence, if we adopt that, would that limit the use of a part-time local pastor only to this kind of specification? We have part-time local pastors serving in many other kind of appointments, and I wonder why you specified that and did not identify the other uses and appointments that part-time local pastors currently are being used for.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Do you want to respond to that?

PRITTS: Well this is language that we did not change from the original ministry study that the Council of Bishops brought to us. As we read it, we did not understand it to be restrictive in any way but merely being permissive in pointing out another option for configuring of appointments.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, are you ready. Yes, over here. The gentleman, yes. He's going to yield to you? All right.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I'm going to yield to Joel Garrett, Western Pennsylvania. I'm going to yield to him because we're both doing the same thing.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, let's do that.

CHRIS WHITE (Western Pennsylvania): Would it be in order to move the previous question?

BISHOP TALBERT: If you say so. [laughter and applause]

WHITE: I move the previous question, of all that's before us.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. If you are prepared now to close debate, will you vote "yes," if you are not, vote "no." Vote when the light appears. All right, you're ready to go. Any word from the committee? No word. Item 791 is before us. Any discussion. If you are supportive, you will vote "yes," no, you will vote "no." Vote when the light appears. It is supported. [841 approved] Calendar Item 791 is adopted.

SANDRA W. LUTZ (East Ohio): The next item to come before you is in the blue DCA, page 389. It is Item 1700 and deals with paragraph 451. That's page 389, Item 1700, and that reference is to the red DCA, page 1011, paragraph 451, Petition 21880. The committee's recommendation was nonconcurrence, 55 to 26. The subject is disability leave. And Wee-Li Tan will speak to that.

WEE-LI TAN (New England): Thank you, Sandy. This petition before us right now attempts to combine two issues which really are distinct and separate. The issue of leave, which is an appointment issue, and that of eligibility for pension and health benefits.

Leave should be identified by categories of relationships to the annual conference rather than by categories of eligibility for benefits, which are secondary. And, since we believe the provisions in our current Discipline are adequate, we recommend nonconcurrence.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, this is before you. Any discussion. If you are ready to vote, you will vote "yes" if you support the recommendation of the committee, "no" if you do not. Vote when the light appears. [855 approved] You have sustained the committee, the nonconcurrence is supported.

LUTZ: The next item is in the blue DCA, page 389, Item 1699, which deals with paragraph 509.1. That reference is the red DCA, page 1076, paragraph 509.1, and it is petition 21255. Committee voted nonconcurrence, 61 to 41, on this mandatory retirement item. And Ruth Daugherty will speak to that. She is going to speak from the floor.

RUTH DAUGHERTY (Easter Pennsylvania): Bishop, may I speak from the floor? The legislative committee recommends nonconcurrence with this petition. The vote was 61 for nonconcurrence and 41 for concurrence. The majority of the members of the legislative committee felt that the present provisions are adequate; that the retirement provisions should not be changed to lengthen the terms of bishops. This was also in the context of quite a number of other petitions which we had, which came to us asking for the limitation of terms or for tenure for bishops. Those were voted nonconcurrence and that was one of the reasons given for this vote.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, this is before you. Any discussion of this petition? All right it is before you. If you would support the committee you would vote "yes," if you do not, vote "no." It's before you. Vote when the light appears. [801 approved] All right, you've sustained the committee and the nonconcurrence prevails.

LUTZ: The next item is in the blue DCA page 389. It is Item Number 1698, and deals with paragraph 516.3. It is in the red DCA page 1079, paragraph 516.3 and it is Petition 21340. The committee voted concurrence as amended, 82 to 12. And this deals with working with ordained and diaconal ministers and commission personnel. Bill Crouch will bring that to you.

WILLIAM CROUCH (North Texas): As you can see, the item is Calendar Item 1698, blue DCA, 389. The petition in the red DCA at 1079, paragraph 516, deals with the duties of bishop. It is not a part of the ministry study, and the rationale is as follows. There are small items being considered here. One is to move home missionaries up into a place that we think is more appropriate, in the place where it belongs in the sequence.

The other is to remind you there will be a continuation of diaconal ministers who need to be appointed, and so diaconal ministers are not deleted.

The change that brought the 12 negative votes has to do with the fact that we are changing the phrase from "read" to "announce." That comes from another petition that was brought to us, and we thought that we would like to make both of them and make them consistent.

There's not a great deal of difference between "read" and "announce," but the majority believe that since there is very little difference, and since many bishops have long since abandoned "reading" of the appointments, that we would prefer to bring our legislation into conformity with our practice. The 12 voted, I think, to leave "read" rather than "announce," because they like the more traditional word "read." But, the committee moves concurrence as amended.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, this is before us. Any discussion? Yes? All right. Microphone 8.

DUANE V. SARAZIN (Minnesota): Duane Sarazin, Minnesota Conference. Just a question, please, Bishop. Are we going to run into any difficulty with the constitutionality or the appropriateness of the word "appointment" as it relates to lay persons in service or any of the other categories, as opposed to a word like assigned?

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, do you want to respond to that?

WILLIAM C. CROUCH (North Texas): All that we have changed is what you can see before you in this petition, and therefore, appointment has to do; we are not adding anything to all of this with respect to the appointment of lay persons in service with the General Board of Global Ministries.

BISHOP TALBERT: In other words, you're saying that the word "lay person" was already there and is not an addition.

CROUCH: Yes.

SARAZIN: Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This is before us. Any discussion? Any last words from the committee?

CROUCH: No.

BISHOP TALBERT: Think you're ready for us to vote on it?

CROUCH: Ready.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This calendar item is before us, Calendar Item 1698. If you are ready to vote, vote when the light appears. [891 approved] All right, the committee is sustained. You voted concurrence. All right.

CROUCH: The next item is Calendar Item 1701 found in the blue book at page 389. Now we would need for you to turn to the white book, page 1483. And here we're looking at paragraph, in the Discipline, 733, having to do with the Conference Board of Ordained Ministry, and it is petition 22094. The right-hand column, the second paragraph there, if you're looking, or the second petition.

The petition asks that we include in the responsibilities of the Board of Ordained Ministry for enlistment for men and women of all races, ethnic origins, inclusive of those with disabilities. We recommended nonconcurrence, and I think that this is before you as a calendar item because of the number of persons who voted against nonconcurrence. We certainly believe that persons with disabilities ought to be welcomed and recruited. We believe that this a category, however, that is different from the others in terms of men and women and ethnic persons; it is covered in other categories; and that we should not imply that this paragraph ought to multiply all the categories in an attempt to be exhaustive of all those that ought to be recruited for ministry. And therefore, we moved, and ask for nonconcurrence.

BISHOP TALBERT: It is before you. Any discussion? I see none. If you will support the committee, you will vote yes; if you do not, you will vote no. Vote when the light appears. [838 approved] All right. You've sustained the committee, and you've voted nonconcurrence. Calendar Item 1701.

SANDRA LUTZ: Bishop, that concludes the items that are available to us for action today.

BISHOP TALBERT: Thank you very much. (applause) I recognize the person here, microphone 8.

JUANITA BASS WRIGHT (Tennessee): I have a question, Bishop, and I'm not sure what we have done. Paragraph 434 in the 1992 Discipline states, "that a deacon is an ordained minister who has been received by the annual conference either as a probationary member or as an associate member and has been ordained deacon." Under the transitional provisions in this white document from the Legislative committee, it says, "affirm procedure for present diaconal members--ministers and associate members and those in candidacy to become ordained deacons." I want to know if we are saying that those who are presently associate members would have their deacon's orders invalidated.

LUTZ: No. People who are currently in positions have options. They may remain where they are and under the 1992 Discipline, or they can transition into the deacon position. Does that answer the question? They have the option of staying where they are. OK?

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, I recognize the gentleman over here. Yes. Goldschmidt.

VICTOR GOLDSCHMIDT (North Indiana): A very simple motion to be sure we don't get into a problem with conflicts. It reads as follows: "Parts of Consent Calendar items in conflict with the actions voted upon by plenary session shall be superceded by the corresponding plenary session action."

BISHOP TALBERT: Is there a second?

GOLDSCHMIDT: What this means, Mr. Bishop, and I can give some examples, but I won't.

BISHOP TALBERT: Let me test this. Don't we have a rule governing what takes precedence?

GOLDSCHMIDT: I've searched for the rule. I've not found it. Even the rule of the two and four courses is more folklore than true.

BISHOP TALBERT: I can't cite the rule, but somewhere I thought we said the item that takes precedence is the one last voted.

GOLDSCHMIDT: Mr. Bishop, in some cases, we may vote on the Consent Calendar after it was already listed, and we had an action in plenary that contradicted what was in the Consent Calendar but not yet approved as a Consent Calendar. So the definition of what was last voted becomes a little bit delicate.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, let me see.

LUTZ: I know that the issues of language are confusing in this, but we were told that any floor action takes precedence over a Consent Calendar item.

BISHOP TALBERT: That's what I thought--we had a rule saying that.

GOLDSCHMIDT: I was not only addressing that issue. I'd like to see that rule, but irrespective of that, what I'm saying is tomorrow we may be approving a Consent Calendar which was listed today. But we may have voted since it was listing another item that contradicted what is in the Consent Calendar and not yet approved.

BISHOP TALBERT: Victor, I would suggest, if you wouldn't mind doing it, would you give the people a chance to find that rule, and then, if that is not satisfactory, then we will see if your motion is one that we can deal with.

GOLDSCHMIDT: Sure. Fair enough. Thank you.

BISHOP TALBERT: Thank you. Let's move then...

GOLDSCHMIDT: I see two bishops at work, and it's a pleasure to see that.

BISHOP TALBERT: I want to move to the other calendar items if you'll let me. Yes, what do you want. We're not at the privilege place, we got business before us tonight.

RANDALL F. ROBINSON (Central Illinois): Bishop, I have a question regarding the bound services of ordinatian of deacons and elders that appear in our 1992 Book of Worship. It seems to me that with the new understanding of ministry that we have adopted tonight, we're going to need new services of commissioning and ordination. And I'd like to know if the legislative committee provided for that to happen.

BISHOP TALBERT: Isn't something coming on that, I believe?

SANDRA W. LUTZ: Yes, there is a reference to the Board of Discipleship.

BISHOP TALBERT: There is something coming on that. All right, I'm ready for the next calendar item, Financial Administration, I believe.

CASHAR EVANS (North Carolina): Page 387 of the blue DCA, Calendar Item 1683, page 362 of the red DCA, right column, third of the way down, Petition 20499. Subject, shared salary plan option. Committee recommendation, nonconcurrence, vote 62 for, 16 against, 2 abstentions. I would move the committee's recommendation.

BISHOP TALBERT: It is before us, any discussion? Yes, in the rear. Microphone 11.

SUE C. JARRETT (West Virginia): I stand to speak against the vote of nonconcurrence. Often we form opinions based primarily on our own frames of reference. This leads us not only to myopic vision, but limited understanding. I ask you to consider the small-membership churches across this land and this globe. This petition only asks for permission for each annual conference to decide whether or not it wishes to consider and practice appointment-making and salary-setting in more flexible consultative ways.

To vote against nonconcurrence will strengthen churches and the church, offering to those thousands of churches, with little resources and even less voice in this great connection of ours, an opportunity to explore clustering of appointments and other configurations, which will offer hope and new life to churches, by making possible strong effective informed leadership, which the church at all levels so desperately needs.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Any further discussion of this calendar item? Yes, right in front here. Go to microphone 9.

SUSAN DAVIES, (Nebraska): I, too, would like to speak against the committee's recommendation. I served on the subcommittee that considered this item. And we put forth a substitution that incorporated several of the items that came from the different conferences, cabinets, rural fellowship, and others to address this issue.

And I would like us to seriously consider the ways in which we might be flexible at this time, that we might put this back into the opportunity of the conference to look at its own situation. And that this is certainly a time when our conference is looking at flexibility and things that are close to each individual setting's appropriateness. We could present at this time a motion for substitution of the item that we presented in our subcommittee and was supported by that subcommittee. If that's proper, I would do so.

BISHOP TALBERT: Well, you've spoken against this one, I think you need to make your motion before you speak. So I'll have to move on to the next person. Microphone 14.

DONALD R. HOUSE (Texas): I was on that subcommittee, as well, and we discussed the merits of this. The points that came out of our discussion really mainly were two. One is that we would like to retain the rights of the local church to determine the compensation of the minister. There are several reasons behind that, the main one is, we believe that the local church is in the standing that is best to determine that compensation.

The second point is that we don't believe that the conference is in a position to make that determination of any kind of salary scale. If you look at the resolution it indicates that the salary scale could be determined on the basis of the number of dependents, the amount of education, cost of living, and a variety of other factors. These things, we don't believe, necessarily might be related to the compensation of the minister. We believe that in the judgment of the local church those things that are most important to the church should be weighed, and not those things that might appear on a resume. So we are urging you to accept the recommendation of the committee, which is nonconcurrence.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, thank you. Microphone 7.

JEAN-PIERRE DUNCAN (Wyoming): I'd like to ask a question, and then speak against nonconcurrence, if I may. The question is, is this petition that we're dealing with now the only chance that we will get to discuss shared salary of plenary?

BISHOP TALBERT: Can you answer that?

EVANS JR. (North Carolina): I don't have any others to discuss at this evening.

DUNCAN: Well, then, I might take this opportunity to speak against nonconcurrence. The issue of shared salary has been before the General Conference since 1972. It has been a part of our polity prior to that time, and a significant number of our annual conferences have been in support of such a plan. It is high time that we would give our annual conferences the option to care for making appointments to churches based, not upon salary structures, but rather upon the quality of the pastoral care needed for a particular church.

Too many times, churches which need pastors with particular skills, are not able to have such persons appointed to them because those persons are considered to be a little higher on the salary scale. Allowing annual conferences the option of standardizing salaries appropriately could enable conferences to care for such churches.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Are you ready? OK, over here. Number 4.

CHARLES E. LIPPSE (Holston): I'd like to speak in support of nonconcurrence. It's a similar argument to the other one put forward, but I'd like to underscore even more that it is the Charge Conference that sets the salary, and we've talked about connection. That's when the superintendent is present. I think some similarities to the issue that was before us at the last General Conference when we, as a General Conference, initially made health care mandatory for all the annual conferences.

Now, we're about to suggest that the annual conference can make mandatory the salary of the pastor. I believe that that's moving in the wrong direction, and the power of the Charge Conference in the local church needs to be protected.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Are we ready? We have three and three here now, and according to your rules, I think we need to turn to the committee. Is there something other than debate? All right, a motion to substitute. Let's try. I'm recognizing microphone 8.

THOMAS R. BOLLER (Yellowstone): I want you to know, there's nobody in this room more exhausted than I am tonight. But I'm not sure that this issue is going to come up again. I move to substitute petition 20499 with the following, beginning of paragraph 722 would read, "equitable commission/shared salary option plan therefore shall be in each annual conference, an equitable compensation plan or a shared salary plan."

The paragraph then will continue as it exists adding a new sub-paragraph after 11, and begin with 12. You can turn on page 362 in your red DCA and that, where it says 12.a you would strike the "a" and it would read, "an annual conference by two-thirds majority vote at any regular session may adopt a shared salary plan for the support of its active itinerant clergy and local pastors."

Then, point "b" would become "a." It would read, "the shared salary plan may allow for differences in years of service, educational levels, and other variables such as actual differences in living costs, as the annual conference may approve." "C" would become "b." "The amounts due from the pastoral charges shall be paid to a conference treasury established for that purpose, and all shared salaries due shall be paid from that treasury. The shared salary provided for each clergy under the plan shall constitute his/her entire cash compensation."

Point "d" becomes "c," and would read, "The Equitable Salary Commission shall administer the shared salary plan and the conference treasurer/ director of administrative services shall be responsible for collecting and dispersing the funds." Point "e" would become "d," "An annual conference which has elected to pay its salaries according to a shared salary plan as herein provided, may terminate the plan by a two-thirds majority vote of the annual conference at any regular session." Point "f" would become "e," and it would read, "If adopted by an annual conference, this plan would constitute an exception to the authority granted in paragraphs 248.13, 257.3.f, 722.1 through 722.11, and the comparably related divisions of paragraph 270.2.f.4.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, is that seconded. It is seconded. Anything further you want to say on it?

BOLLER: Bishop, there have, in the subcommittee, sub-subcommittee that we worked on this particular reading of this proposal, we dealt with about 15 different petitions on shared salaries. The committee worked hard to take the best out of each of those, to try to use language that would be faithful with the needs of annual conferences. We consulted with representatives from the General Board of Pensions to check and see if the language would be such that it could be workable within the pension plans, and we tried to give as much leniency and openness to the proposal that annual conferences would have a great deal of control over the design; it would take two-thirds vote for them to adopt it, and two-thirds vote for them to end it. It seems to me that, if we have that many folks that would like to try it, we don't have to make it mandatory, but we can sure give them permission to try.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. This is before us. Right here. Microphone 7.

MARVIN H. MCCALLUM (Detroit): Bishop, on a similar matter, yesterday, we moved that this be referred until we could have it printed in the DCA. I would move the same for this, and if it's in order to make a second motion, I would move that we close debate on all that's before us.

BISHOP TALBERT: You can't do the second part. If you're going to refer this, it takes with this, until this whole matter is dealt with. All right, we'll take your first one, and if the body refers it, then that's it on this one until it's printed, and then it comes back before the body. Is that your motion, to refer it?

MCCALLUM (Detroit): Yes sir.

BISHOP TALBERT: Is that seconded? Yes. On the referral. It's too late to get it in tomorrow's DCA, you need to understand that. All right. Number 8.

JERRY J. SMITH (Southwest Texas): Bishop, I speak against referral. I was on the legislative committee, and I voted for this proposal that my friend, Tom, just brought. It was defeated. It seems to me strange for us to try to do the work of a legislative committee on this floor. If we could not get it past the legislative committee, we ought to vote nonconcurrence. That's the reason I'm against referral. I think we ought to handle the thing tonight.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, the motion of reference is before us. Yes, on the reference. When I get this one done, I want us to get out of here. All right, number 9.

SUSAN P. DAVIES (Nebraska): Bishop, I understand what Jerry is saying about this. However, I think we're in a different situation since both the Legislative Committee on Local Church and also on Conferences have put forth legislation that would support this idea of the shared salary plan. So I think it is worthy of the full body considering it.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, over here. Microphone 5.

AL GWINN (Kentucky): Bishop, I move that we suspend Rule 36 in order that we might vote on all that is before us.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, that motion is before you. If you would cut off debate, that's what that rule is, I believe, you would vote "yes." If you would not, vote "no." Vote when the light appears. [817 approved]

You're ready to cut off debate, so what's before us is the substitute, no, the referral. Sorry. The referral. If you will vote to refer this, vote "yes;" if not, vote "no." Vote when the light appears. [Results: yes, 290; no, 621] Substitute does not prevail.

What's before us now is Item 1683. If you will support it, you'll vote yes; if you do not, vote no. Vote when the light appears. [Results: yes, 676; no, 226] All right, you've sustained the committee, and you have voted nonconcurrence.

This is it for calendar items. We turn now to the secretary to do a couple things. First of all, I want her to read the rule regarding the Goldschmidt request earlier. Could you share that with us, secretary?

CAROLYN MARSHALL: In the rules of the conference, VIII.A.2.b. reads: "To assure that when a calendar item approved on the Consent Calendar or under an omnibus vote is found to be in conflict with parts of another calendar item discussed and voted upon at a plenary session, the item discussed and voted shall prevail."

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, I think that takes care of that. All right. We're ready now for the Committee on Presiding Officers and the Committee on Agenda and Calendar.

C. REX BEVINS (Nebraska): Bishop and members of the conference, the presiding officers for Thursday, April 25th are as follows: Thursday morning, Bishop Joseph Yeakel of the Washington Area; Thursday afternoon, Bishop William Oden of the Louisiana Area; Thursday evening, Bishop C.P. Minnick of the Raleigh Area.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right. Calendar and Agenda.

SARAH S. MILLER (Wyoming): Thank you, Bishop. When we first came to conference, we heard about Bishop Alfred Ndoricimpa, who was denied a visa to come and join us. He's in Burundi. We've arranged for a telephone conversation with him 10 minutes tomorrow, right after worship. Hope you'll all be here and in your places for that. Also tomorrow morning, we'll consider the General Board of Global Ministries Site Location.

In the afternoon, there'll be presentations by the directors of the General Council on Finance and Administration, followed by presentation of the budget. We'll elect members of the University Senate, and alternates for the Judicial Council, and many more calendar items. We have a graph to show us how far we are now. We're coming along.

BISHOP TALBERT: All right, I saw this card. What is it now? We've finished our business for tonight. What is your privilege? Number 2.

KEITH M. LADD (Eastern Pennsylvania): We know that friends of Charles Yrigoyen will be interested in knowing and saddened to hear that Chuck has had to leave this conference. Chuck's son is gravely ill, and has been taken back to the hospital with an undiagnosed illness. We know that you will hold Chuck, his son, and Jean in your prayers as they go through this trying time.

BISHOP TALBERT: Thank you very much. All right, announcements. Yes, what is this? Over here. Number 5.

WILLIAM LUX (Iowa): Bishop, as we look at those tired, haggard faces staring at the words concessions, men and women, the only things that we aspire to in the episcopacy, are those cool pitchers of water that we don't have access to. I'd recommend, Bishop, that we be able to bring bottles of water tomorrow and place them on the floor, if we can't place them on the tables. And if we can't do that, hide your pitchers of water up there, so we can't see them. [laughter, applause]

BISHOP TALBERT: They heard you. Secretary.

MARSHALL: Perhaps the place to start with announcements tonight would be to reply to that one. I have been advised that, as a result of a note which has been passed up here during the evening about water, that we had planned to have water stations available; they were to have been set up today, and obviously, that did not happen. At this point, they're promising us that they will be set up tomorrow.

Now for a couple of announcements of committees that need to meet yet tonight. I note your enthusiasm. [laughter] The General and Judicial Administration Committee must meet briefly this evening. They will meet in room A207, A207 for the General and Judicial Administration legislative committee.

One other meeting, Ordained and Diaconal Ministry leadership team will meet immediately following adjournment in room A106. Bishop, that completes the announcements. All right, Bishop Kelly, will you come now and dismiss us for the evening.

BISHOP LEONTINE T.C. KELLY: [prayer]

BISHOP TALBERT: Thank you. Until tomorrow.

General Conference Webmaster: Susan Brumbaugh
PETS Creator: John Brawn