Plenary Session Proceedings
Tuesday, April 23: Afternoon Session

1996 United Methodist General Conference

Tuesday Afternoon Session
April 23, 1996

BISHOP DAVID LAWSON (Illinois area): And now delegates to the General Conference, this session is in order. The only person who has a right to speak is the person speaking at this moment. Will you please be seated quickly so we can do our work. Thank you for moving quickly to your seats. Thank you guests for taking your seats as an example to those who were supposed to be out here. We are going to begin with some music. Thank you for leading us.

CYNTHIA WILSON-FELDER: If you have a hymnal, you will look with me at number 191 in your hymnal. We'll do "Jesus Loves Me," in the English and then we'll do the Cherokee and then the German.

BISHOP LAWSON: We turn now to the General Judicial Administration report. We are calling on David Severe to give us leadership at this point. David.

DAVID L. SEVERE: (Oklahoma): Bishop and members of the conference, the members of the Judicial and General Administration legislative committee wish to express their deep gratitude for the excellent report submitted to the General Conference by the bishops and their study on the global nature of the church. As our spiritual and temporal leaders they have set a direction before us that is visionary, challenging, and sensitive to God's leading spirit in our time. We are profoundly grateful to them and are eager to lean into that future which they are discerning. We also wish to thank the members of the General Council on Ministries and the Connectional Issues Task Force, which has fulfilled the mandate of the General Conference to lead us all in a time of discernment and reflection as we seek God's new direction for the United Methodist Church into the 21st century. We commend them that they have not rushed to a judgment shaped by a change-for-change-sake attitude, nor have they under the pressure of providing a done-deal kind of package provided us with a cut and paste proposal which simply moves the blocks around, lops off a section here or there and lets it go. Rather they have offered to us an interactive process by which and through which we may all join together to discern God's stirrings in our times at all levels of our great church, from the local, the district, the conference, and the general arenas of the church. The legislative committee's report is found on page 235 of your blue DCA. It is calendar item 764. There is one correction that we need to make that is an error in the printing. If you will turn to page 253, the last four paragraphs of that page on the right hand side were to have been omitted and were so voted by the legislative committee and inadvertently were included again in the printing when it was finally done. We apologize for that, but that is not material that is before us because the substance of these paragraphs have already been incorporated in recommendations 1 and 2 from the legislative committee. They are not a part of what we are to deal with now. Using the interactive method which the CIS study describes, the sub-committee which dealt with the report took up the task of reviewing and ultimately refining the four recommendations with which they concluded that report. With great appreciation for the work of GCOM, the legislative committee voted 90 to 2 with no abstentions to receive the report. It is my pleasure to introduce Dr. Rex Bevins, the chair of the sub-committee on the Connectional Issues Study for the legislative committee, who will lead us in the presentation of the recommendations that they are making. Dr. Bevins.

REX BEVINS (Nebraska): Thank you David. Bishop and members of the conference, we now come to a crucial time of decision making regarding one of the critical issues facing this General Conference. Please note that I said, "one;" there are a number of critical issues. And as we approach this decision, we confront two major questions, I think. Can we be open to the leading of the Holy Spirit as we reshape this church that we all know and love? And in the reshaping of the church, can we create structures that are open and flexible enough to deal with the enormous changes that are taking place all around us?

I came to this General Conference skeptical about the Connectional Issues Study and its recommendations. But, I resolved to come with a commitment to lend my efforts to creating a process that would make a difference in the life of our church and to keep an open mind. And, I must say that in the discussions in our legislative committee and in the comments around the edges, my mind has been changed.

I think what we have in the Bishops' Report on the Global Nature of the Church, and also in the Connectional Issues Study are two tributaries that come together now to create a flowing stream which provides the basis for moving forward in the church and shaping it in a way that it can be relevant to the future and bring us into the 21st century with strength and vitality. In our legislative committee, we divided into three legislative groups.

I want to name the officers of the legislative committee. I served as the chair of that subcommittee, Sandra Ferguson as the vice chair, and John Cooke as the secretary. We divided then into three subcommittees, one on the Connectional Issues Study and the Global Nature of the Church, Carl Schenck chaired that committee and the vice chair was Barbara Wendland, and the secretary John Cooke. We had a subcommittee also on membership of general agencies the chair of that committee was Marcus Fang, the vice chair was Jim Holsinger, along with Anna Workman and Kathi Austin Mahle and the secretary was Elaine Stanovsky. Then, a third subcommittee was at work and some of their work is figured into this too. It was the committee on the future of the GCOM and its work, and it was chaired by Patricia Farris, the vice chair was Conrad Page, the secretary was Stan Sager.

C. REX BEVINS (Nebraska): I've chaired a few legislative committees at General Conference, and rarely have I found a legislative committee that has applied itself to, I think a very complex and difficult task, with such commitment and energy and effort. Our recommendations start on page 235; but really, much of that material has already been presented to us, so I call your attention to page 251 in the DCA. And I'll call upon Carl Schenck now, the chair of the Connectional Issues and Global Natures Subcommittee to come and lead us through recommendations one and two.

CARL L. SCHENCK (Missouri East): Thank you, Rex, Bishop, and delegates. It is with real pride and pleasure that I stand before you to present the work of the sub-subcommittee that dealt with recommendations one, two, and four of the Connectional Issues Study. Those recommendations are found in your blue DCA, beginning on page 251. The entire Connectional Issues report is before us. As we deal with this report, we deal in some very profound ways with the future of our church in the next millennium.

You will find on 251 that your legislative committee has amended recommendation one; and the amended recommendation begins in the second column on page 252. This has been before you, and I would like to simply highlight a few things in recommendations one and two. You will notice that recommendation one calls for the creation of a Connectional Process Team whose work shall be limited to the 1996-2000 quadrennium; and its general task is to manage, guide, and promote the transformation of the church. That transformation comes as it manages the two streams that Rex spoke of from the Bishops' Study of the Global Nature and of the Connectional Issues Study.

Its specific purposes are listed under paragraph "A," and that is to receive the data from those two great quadrennial studies which we have before us. In point two, also, to consider all those things that have come before this General Conference. There are many petitions from many parts of the church, most particularly a great number from the Western North Carolina Conference, that touch on the work of this report and this proposed Process Team. If you adopt this report, it will commend all of that material to the Process Team as it establishes itself and does its work across the quadrennium.

On point six of "A" you will notice that its mode is to be an interactive organizational process to clarify the mission of the general boards and agencies for their work in supporting and resourcing the church, and to seek ways to develop the most faithful structure for our denomination and its witness for the century ahead. In point eight, you will notice again that it calls upon development of structural forms and, in point nine, leans upon the regional and Global Nature of the Church. In point ten, then, there's a call for affiliate and autonomous churches to dialogue with us. And one of my great hopes and dreams would be that, perhaps through this effort, our church would become global in such a way that many of our brothers and sisters in Christ who did not have the freedom to develop Wesleyan structures and styles appropriate to their own context within our current Discipline would find in a new form the opportunity once again to be a part of one broad United Methodist Church across the globe.

Section "B" has to do with the proposed membership of the CPT. It will have 31 members plus up to seven additional members for inclusion and expertise. The 24 basic members will come from the five geographical jurisdictions in the U.S. and from the five continents around the world where our church is heavily represented. There will be in sub-paragraph two, as I said, up to seven additional. There will be six bishops, half from the U.S., half from the central conferences; a person linking to GCFA; and in paragraph five of section "B" the requirements for inclusiveness, including the requirement that the majority of the members shall be lay.

All of these folks, if you adopt the report, will be nominated by us here during this week by the Council of Bishops and will be elected by the General Conference. And the CPT will belong to the General Conference. It will not belong to any board or agency. It will be elected by you, and it will belong to this house until it reports at the next General Conference. Paragraphs "C" through "G" address various ways in which the group will organize for its work, and I won't review them. And those paragraphs then end recommendation one.

Bishop, should we look at recommendation two and on through? How do you wish to do this?

BISHOP LAWSON: It is my understanding that we have a minority report attached to your report. It would seem, then, that what you would need to do is to present your entire recommendation and follow that by the minority report, and then we'll drop into normal process.

SCHENCK: Thank you. I will present, also, recommendation two on page 253. You will note it also was substantially amended by your legislative committee; and in the bold print in the middle of the second column, you will see that it calls on this conference to approve in principle the interactive organizational process for mission and ministry. This is a principle that lifts up words that are becoming dear to us. Words like flexible, responsive, local and global, interactive, collaborative, and accountable. This is an overview of recommendations one and two.

Now I will yield to Jim Holsinger of our legislative committee who will present recommendation three. As you have heard, recommendation four was deleted by the legislative committee.

BISHOP LAWSON: Do those two recommendations represent the total of your recommendations? They do not. Jim.

JIM HOLSINGER (Kentucky): Bishop, members of the Conference, if you will look at recommendation number three as it's been amended. The major issue before us in this recommendation is that this will reduce the number of individuals serving on general boards and agencies of this denomination to a maximum of 640 members. As our sub-subcommittee under the leadership of Marcus Fang worked hard on this particular recommendation, we did it with a small team that consisted of myself and Anna Workman and several individuals from the staff of the General Council on Ministries who had previously worked on this material for the Connectional Issues Task Force. Now while I am beginning this presentation, I would like for our pages to hand out white sheet number one to all the members of the General Conference.

As we worked on this particular piece, we knew that it would be impossible for us to be able to cramp this number that is recommended here and have it approved either by our legislative committee or by this body without presenting to the group the data that it took us to come to that number. If you will look on page 310 in your blue DCA, item number 856 deals with paragraph 805. This is the implementing legislation that will implement this number of 640 that is in recommendation three.

In addition, there are petitions that will implement by each general board and agency the number that will come to 640. I would add that both paragraph 805 and all the implementing legislation will be found in either today or succeeding days' consent calendars. Our work together as a task force on this sub-subcommittee was a lot of fun and a lot of hard work. We burned a lot of not just midnight oil, but 2 a.m. to 4 a.m. oil in an attempt to do this. In addition, as a sub-subcommittee, we worked very carefully together. We never took a vote on this issue. We did this by consensus, and since I am no longer a federal employee, but now am an academic, I would use the term collegial, but interactive is the style of what we are talking about today in this General Conference.

The first issue that was before us was how to size the particular pool of individuals that would come, under paragraph 805, to the general boards and agencies of the denomination.

You will see on the white page labeled number 1, we have amended 805 to be able to have four different categories, which have up to 75,000-member conferences; those annual conferences of 75,000 to 150,000; those from 150,000 to 225; and those that are over 225. And each conference is guaranteed five conference members who would be on one of the 13 general agencies of the church. Those with 75 to 150,000 would have an additional individual that could serve. Those with 150 to 225,000 would have two. And those with over 225,000 would have three additional over that base eight.

If you will turn the sheet over, you will see the impact of this upon the central conferences. All seven central conferences, including the new central conference of Zaire, will have five individuals, as indicated here. Those annual conferences in the central conferences with 75 to 150,000 would have one additional; those with 150 to 225,000, two additional; and the single one, North Shaba, with more than 225,000 would have three members.

We've used exactly the same numbers as we have used for the U.S. annual conferences. Now with those numbers, we were able to come up with the fact that this would increase the base number that was originally presented by the Connectional Issues Task Force by 20. We were able to spread those 20--three of which were in central conferences, 17 within the jurisdictional conferences--to arrive at a number of 420 that will appear on the next page.

And if the pages would please hand out the buff-colored page titled number 2. As we worked on developing the specific target number of individuals per board and agency of this church in a variety of different categories, those categories are found in paragraph 805. They provide us with jurisdictional and central conference, basic and supplemental members, as you will see when you receive this sheet.

On the first line, it includes individuals from the central conferences. On the second line, those are basic members from the central conferences. In the case of the General Council on Ministries, there is a specific category of youth and young adults. Then there is a category in the implementing petitions of additional members. As you will recall we will continue to have members from the autonomous church in Puerto Rico during this next quadrennium. It includes the bishops, and for the total that you see at the bottom of that page for each general agency of the church.

As we worked on this and spread these numbers, we were able to provide this particular composite and arrive at a number of 632. Within the 640 that we are recommending that we not exceed in the third recommendation, in the Connectional Issue Study recommendations. I will indicate to you where there are some things that may make it interesting to try to figure out exactly what we did. But, for example, the Women's Division of the General Board of Global Ministries includes 30 members elected by the Women's Division through their process. The General Board of Discipleship includes five jurisdictional United Methodist Men's presidents. And we have five jurisdictional presidents of archives and history in the 14 base members that you see there.

And in the case of the Board of Pension, those 22 include 16 from the jurisdictions and six that are elected by the General Conference. In the case of the central conferences, as you know, seven central conferences times five base members each, should reach to a number of 35. You see 30 in that far right-hand column. If you come down in the General Board of Global Ministries under additional members there are five central conference members of that 35 that are found in addition to the General Board of Global Ministries.

As you continue to come on down, in the case of youth and young adults, the enabling legislation in 805 recommends that 10 percent of each general board and agency be youth and young adults, split as equally as possible between the two groups. In the case of the five youth and young adults in the General Council on Ministries, those are split, I think it is in the legislation, two youth and three young adults.

That 10 percent figure would carry off across the entire page, and would represent about 56, at a minimum, youth and young adults, depending upon how one rounds down odd numbers, or rounds them up. It could be obviously much beyond that.

In the case of two boards, publications and pensions, both of their young adult or youth members would be young adults because these are corporate boards that require individuals being over age 18 to serve.

Additional members, are as you see in front of you, seven members from the Puerto Rico autonomous church. There are 51 bishops assigned to these 13 boards. We reached that number by working very hard to make sure that we were looking at the oversight responsibilities of our episcopal leaders. In the case, for example, of the General Council on Ministries, there would be one bishop from each of the five jurisdictions and one from the central conference.

In the case of the General Board of Global Ministries, there would be one from each of the five U.S. jurisdictions plus three central conferences. And then for the other three large program boards, Church and Society, Higher Education and Ministry, and Discipleship, we would expect that the bishops would elect five from the United States and the legislation reads at least one from the central conferences.

The rest of those then remained as they were initially presented by the legislation from ...

BISHOP LAWSON: I just got a signal from the translators that they're having trouble moving at your rate with these numbers. If you could speak just a tad slower, that would help.

HOLSINGER: I'll slow up. I was trying to help move this along. But I can be happy to slow up.

If the pages would pass out gray sheet number 3. The number 632 that comes from that total of board membership that you see on the bottom row of page number 2, the buff-colored, we worked diligently to try to maintain equity and fairness across the five jurisdictions. And if you look at the number of 420 at the top of the page, those 420 are basically spread across the five jurisdictions by the particular agencies you see on page number three, the gray piece of paper. Now, lest you all think that we did not have an adequate calculator, the bottom totals do not add to 420. And there is a reason for that. And the reason for that is that in order to take care of some of the nominations that had already been proposed by the Council of Bishops, for example, three of the members that would normally have appeared on that row, for example, show up in the nine additional members at GCFA, to make sure that all of those individuals are able to serve.

We also have three Women's Division elected individuals that show up in the General Commission on Status and Role of Women. There are a variety of other places within this overall chart where the additional few people show up to make this come to 420. In the case of each one of the five jurisdictions, it ranges from one to three individuals more in the total number, that would be called for in paragraph 805, than you see in this particular chart.

The result of this was that we had a vote to approve 805 with only one negative vote, as you can see on page 311. That was 87 for, one against. In the 10 petitions handled by our legislative committee, there was a unanimous vote on each one of those for the particular agency involved. In the case of the three that came through the Financial Administration Legislative Committee, if I remember correctly, all three will appear on the Consent Calendar as well.

I would like to tell you that at the time that we met as a legislative committee to adopt this, I threatened mayhem and other types of difficulties should anyone wish to amend this proposal. There are ungodly numbers of human hours in this vote before it arrived at the General Conference and since we have worked to try to perfect it. It is not perfect. But we have, we believe, gone a long ways to perfecting this particular report.

Every piece interdigitates. That's why there are multiple charts that arrive at the place where we are. The result of which, though, is as I said we had great unanimity among a very diverse group of our membership in this General Conference who served on this legislative committee. Thank you, Bishop.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you and now we. Yes?

BISHOP WILLIAM DEW: I want to give you some information. The General Council on Ministry--which has the right to give its' report to you for action--has accepted the legislative committee's report on these matters of the Connectional Issues Study and the membership size of general agencies.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for that clarification, that's most helpful. We now turn to the presentation of our minority report. Mr. Langford, are you the spokesperson?

THOMAS A. LANGFORD, III (Western North Carolina): Bishop, I present to this General Conference the minority report which is found on pages 254 and 255. They serve as a substitute. And the material that is found on pages 252 and 253 with the exception of the fine report just given by Jim Holsinger on the membership of general agencies. That was felt very good, but it serves as a substitute for the material on pages 252 and 254.

BISHOP LAWSON: And may we assume that your name is Andy Langford and you're from Western North Carolina.

LANGFORD: Now as I understand I want to be very brief, and give it back to the chair. What you see on the bottom of page 255, the first column down at the bottom is what we perceive as five major differences between the minority report and majority report. I'd say of those, the two critical ones are numbers one and five. The first one in the minority report tries to emphasize the value, the function, the locus of ministry in the local congregation. While much is said in the connection of issues study about that, if you look on pages 252 and 253 the local church, we believe, has not yet been strongly enough affirmed. You also see on item number five, a third of the way down in the middle column. The second major issue is that the majority report refuses to address concretely the budget implications of its' work, and specifically refuses to name whether the report in the year 2000 will reduce the size of the general church or the number of general agencies. The specificity of that is found in the minority report, and, Bishop, at this point I'll turn it over to you, and then I'll save my time to speak at the end.

BISHOP LAWSON: May I ask you, Andy, please for the benefit of the chair, and maybe others, if you would state once again what your minority report intends to take the place of, the substitute for in the other report.

LANGFORD: This is a substitute for the materials found on pages 252 and 254.

BISHOP LAWSON: All right, thank you. That's clear, and now our procedures are, as you remember, that we'll continue then our work by perfecting the majority report, and that is open for us when we begin that perfection process. And if completed to our satisfaction we'll turn our attention to perfecting the minority report. When that is done to our satisfaction, then we'll vote first on the minority report depending on what happens to that, we'll take our second vote. So the floor is open for perfection now of the majority report, and I see a woman standing up coming to microphone 9.

AMY TWIGG (Western Pennsylvania): Thank you Bishop. I would move to amend the provision of the Connectional Process Team; DCA volume three, page 252, column 2 in order to insert three new paragraphs under section "A" before the present paragraph one, so that they would read as follows: "The purpose of the CPT is to: one, enable the United Methodist Church more faithfully to carry out its' mission to make disciples of Jesus Christ (see paragraph 101)." Then item two: Support local congregations as the primary locus of mission and ministry within the United Methodist Church. And finally paragraph three: To reinvent the organization, mission and ministry of general agencies including an overall reduction in both the number of general agencies and their budgets, and if there is a second I'm prepared to speak to it.

BISHOP LAWSON: It is seconded? It is seconded. Please go ahead.

TWIGG: In the midst of all the wonder of United Methodist diversity stands a need, I believe, to refocus ourselves together from time to time. This is one of those moments. Already this great conference has adopted a mission statement for paragraph 101 which is succinctly quoted as being "to make disciples of Jesus Christ." My amendment and what would be number one reaffirms and refocuses us around this statement. And as United Methodists we understand disciples to be made as the good news of God's grace is proclaimed throughout the world, and as the fulfillment of God's reign and realm is sought within our world. The vision which the scriptures hold before us. Our local churches have always been the centers out from which we reach and preach, go and give, love and live into our mission and ministry as United Methodists. And, of course, to continue to work with our structure was a main finding of the Connectional Issues Study. Such continued labor needs to find its' focus upon our mission and its wide and expansive movement. So, I would urge your addition of this amendment to the connectional process team's purpose. And this would mean, Bishop, that paragraph one on page 252 would then be numbered paragraph four, paragraph two would be paragraph five and so forth.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you. Would you please stay there for a moment? For our general help, since that's three paragraphs, please read them for us again so we have a clear fix on what you're proposing.

TWIGG: DCA volume three, page 252, column two in order to insert three new paragraphs; they are very brief. Under section A, first of all, paragraph one. Enable the United Methodist Church more faithfully to carry out its mission, "to make disciples of Jesus Christ" (see paragraph 101). Two, support local congregations as the primary locus of mission and ministry within the United Methodist Church. And finally paragraph three, reinvent the organization, mission, and ministry of general agencies including an overall reduction in both the number of general agencies and their budgets.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for doing that. We have now an amendment to the majority report. You've heard that said twice. The floor is open for any comments you'd like to make about that. Yes ma'am. Coming this way, and forward to microphone 3 please.

LIZ ST. CLAIR (Peninsula-Delaware): I need some help in understanding some terms. Would someone explain to me the difference between the statement "the local church is the primary base for mission and ministry," and "the local church is the locus of ministry?"

BISHOP LAWSON: I hear your question. I'm sure the mover of the motion would be glad to respond to that.

TWIGG: I believe, indeed, they are the same, and I would accept a friendly amendment to be attached to mine.

BISHOP LAWSON: That was a question for information. I think it was not a friendly amendment. The interpretation is that they are the same. Same meaning, same connotation. The floor is open would anybody care to speak?

BISHOP LAWSON: As in the back, center section, you're come out turning left and going to microphone 13. Down to microphone 13, please.

STEPHEN E. DRACHLER (Central Pennsylvania): Bishop, I would ask to amend or divide the amendment, please.

BISHOP LAWSON: What is your request for division?

DRACHLER: I would request, sir, would move that we consider paragraph number three separately. If I have a second, I would speak to that.

BISHOP LAWSON: Your request for division, is there any dissent to that? Is it all right to divide this? I hear no dissent. Shall we consider the matter divided? And you're asking for that to be considered separately? And so, consequently, we will consider the first two. When we are ready to consider three, I'll call upon you for your statement.

DRACHLER: Thank you sir.

BISHOP LAWSON: You're welcome. The first two are now before us. Floor is still open. I see no green cards. Does that mean you're ready to vote on the first two? Yes, all right, over here.

REX BEVINS (Nebraska): The committee is willing to accept one and two.

BISHOP LAWSON: Excuse me Rex, my apologies, but someone has asked for the floor. Microphone 7.

PHILIP WOGAMAN (Baltimore-Washington): I have a couple of questions I'd like to ask. There is some background to these questions relating to the adoption of a statement of mission.

Two of the legislative committees have been involved in interacting over that. In mine, which was Discipleship, there was a concern that the statement of mission be more broadly gauged than the statement simply that the "purpose of the church is to make disciples," though of course that is a part, a very important and central part of our mission. But my question is where in this line-up would there be place for the work of UMCOR, for instance? In reaching out to the world to serve in areas of disaster and need around the world, where would there be place in this for the advocacy work of the denomination on Capitol Hill and in state capitols and in various other places where we are attempting to impact the world. It seems to me these are very important things, and I wonder if these are sufficiently encompassed in the proposal that is now before us.

BISHOP LAWSON: That approaches a statement against. Would the person who made the motion want to respond to this? Microphone 9.

TWIGG: It is true, as Phil Wogaman has said, we have been working with both the Local Church and the Discipleship committees to bring our focus together. I believe, indeed, there is a place for the work of UMCOR and other lobbying kinds of efforts because, as the love of Jesus Christ is born into the world, it is born through those who are disciples.

BISHOP LAWSON: Now are you ready to, after we hear from majority movers, decide this matter? Are you? Are you? We're calling to you. Do you want to speak to these two?

DAVID SEVERE (Oklahoma): We are very happy with those two. It's up to the house.

BISHOP LAWSON: Are you ready to vote? Are you ready to vote? If you would, vote when you see the light. The first two, amendment--point one and point two of the amendment, pass. [Results: yes, 652; no, 230] We now have before us the third of these points. And I call upon you, sir, to finish your statement, microphone 13.

STEVE DRACHLER (Central Pennsylvania): My concern is that we are going into a study, but we are preordaining the results. I certainly have a lot of sympathy and understanding and, I'm sure, some agreement with the intent of those who offer this proposal. But I don't think it is wise, Bishop, that we should go into a study and research and tell the committee what result to bring back. That is often times dangerous, nonproductive, and may not serve the ultimate goal of our great denomination. Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you. That's a speech against this amendment. Somebody care to speak for it? I see no one requesting the floor speaking in favor of this. Someone care to speak against it? Yes. Microphone 4.

JAMES L. LAWSON JR. (California-Pacific): I just want to make three points that partially represents, perhaps, my own ambiguity but also some sense of some of the questions that we need to ask, answer, or talk about.

Number one, since 1960 this church has been involved in restructuring, reorganizing itself, re-phrasing its creeds and theological task, and the rest of it. In those same years we've also had droopy morale, primarily aimed at the point of membership. I just raise the question, with all the talk about the presence of the Holy Spirit, is this yet another exercise of housekeeping that keeps us away from, perhaps, the mainstream?

Secondly, all of the churches, almost all the United Methodist churches today, are consequences of grace. I pastored Centenary United Methodist Church, organized by a missionary in the Centenary Movement of the last century. I pastor at a church now that the Department of Negro Work helped to establish. Almost all our local congregations are consequences of clergy, circuit riders, district conferences, bishops, annual conferences, and the rest. I think there need to be questions about the local church as the primary locus of mission and ministry. I think the church's dimension is vaster than that and larger than that. And, maybe that needs to be amended in some fashion.

And thirdly, I question the whole business of being in the mood that our nation is in for downsizing. Should The United Methodist Church follow the lead of the nation? Should The United Methodist Church, maybe, want to find ways that we can "grace size" ourselves, that we can maybe "right size" ourselves. I am not sure that the issue is the size of the agencies. Too much of what I hear is related more to the kind of "we" and "they" philosophy rather than all of us being baptized people of the kingdom, and, therefore, this being an "us" issue. I don't know if downsizing the boards and agencies is related to the work of the Holy Spirit or related, rather, to the 24 years of intense criticism of all the boards and agencies that was located more in that animus towards government, animus towards the national church rather than a recognition of the unity of the body of church that is the UMC.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you, a speech against this piece of the amendment. Back here. You're coming out.

Turn right, microphone 13.

SCOTT J. JONES (North Texas): Bishop, I would like to speak for the amendment. I am deeply committed to the mission and ministry of our church, and want to see it protected and expanded for the next century. I think this study is an important effort in that direction, but I also think that the connection depends upon a new way of our general agencies being organized, funded, and related to the rest of the church. We will be doing the Connectional Process Team a favor by setting, not particular conclusions, but a broad general direction to guide their thinking. Toward that end, this amendment helps focus their work. I urge you to pass it.

BISHOP LAWSON: Now the question before us at every point in a discussion like this, is have we shared the insight, the wisdom, the questions that need to be shared to prepare us to make a decision? It is never, how long can we talk, and so the question is, at some point I'll be watching, listening to what you say, and wondering whether or not we have said enough to allow us to vote. The floor is still open. Yes. What will be your position, sir? You're coming out to microphone 9. To which side are you speaking?

FRANK DORSEY (Kansas East): Against. I would not want to vote for this amendment, because of the actions that are before us in the majority report. We are a connectional church, and our boards and agencies of the church are an expression of that connection that enhance our mission and ministry to the world. I would rather take time to begin to study very carefully where those boards and agencies fit, and how they might best serve us in the new millennium. I would rather do that than to react in a knee-jerk way as this substitute does.

BISHOP LAWSON: Now that there's a desire, there's a space for somebody to speak for this, or perhaps you're ready to make a decision. Are you ready? Could you hear it again? I'm sure you could. Yes, a little secret about relating to the...why don't you just hold your card up. You see me scanning around this room, and I'll try very hard to find you. OK. You want the floor. You're coming to speak, on what side, sir? You can only speak in favor. Microphone 5.

DALE JONES (Kentucky): Correct. I bear no blood relationship to Scott Jones. I just wish to point out that the General Council on Ministries in the Connectional Issue Study, you can find it in your Advance DCA or on page 240 of today's. The one we're looking at today has already concluded the size of the general church organization needs to be reduced. That's finding number 14. So I don't see anything knee-jerk or reactionary or fearful in this amendment, and I would urge us to favor it, because it supports the conclusion that the GCOM has already come to in their Connectional Issues Study. Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for your statement. We must now vote. I turn now to the person, we're going to come in a minute to you, but let's turn first of all for clarification. And we're asking the mover of the motion to state again what this item is, so everybody's clear about what's before us.

AIMEE W. TWIGG (Western Pennsylvania): Item 3 would then read, "Reinvent the organization, mission, and ministry of general agencies, including an overall reduction in both the number of general agencies and their budgets."

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you. Sir?

DAVID L. SEVERE (Oklahoma): We would oppose this, because we believe that the process that we are entering into, should be free from any attempt to conclude what is going to happen. It is entirely possible that there will be reductions, but we believe, at this point, that we should not even hint that that should be necessary though we expect it may happen. We would be against the motion.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for you comment. You are now ready to vote. You've heard the matter clarified. Please vote when you see the light. [Results: yes, 410; no, 514] Number 3 is defeated. We are now back to the main body of the majority report. The floor is open. Yes, over here.

DALE SEGREST (Alabama-West Florida): I have a question concerning the CPT committee and its selection. As I understand it, there will be 31 nominations from the bishops, and then we will elect those same people that the bishops have nominated. And this seems to give us some possessory interest in the election process. But actually that sounds a great deal like elections used to be held in Russia where only a certain number are nominated and I'd like clarification. I might arise to raise a question.

BISHOP LAWSON: I understand your question. Did you hear the question on the desk?

GORDON C. GOODGAME (Holston): I will try not to respond to the analogy. What we're seeking to do is in the same conversational manner, to trust a group to put together an inclusive, representational, broadly experienced team. It will come back to the house. If the house does not want to accept it, it can send it back. But it is very difficult when you're working across a global church, to bring the kind of team that will give us broad perspective unless we have an nominating committee. Nominating committees are not out of the norm in our situation. I respect your concern, and we hope there will be fairness and equity, and broad, broad inclusiveness of every reasonable type. But we do feel this is an appropriate way to handle such an issue.

BISHOP LAWSON: All right. Right here in the center. Both of you. I'm calling now on the lady now standing. Microphone 9.

HOLLY S. MCCRAY (Oklahoma): I propose to amend by deletion. I propose to delete all of recommendation number 3 beginning with the second paragraph of that recommendation on page 253. If I have a second, I would like to speak to that.

BISHOP LAWSON: You have a second. Identify it further on page 253, center column, bottom of the page, recommendation 3. You're moving to delete. Do we understand you correctly?

MCCRAY: Beginning with the second paragraph through the rest of recommendation 3.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you. That is before us. It has been seconded. You would like to make a statement?

MCCRAY: Yes, sir. I welcome and embrace the flexibility and the visioning in this study. The Connectional Issues Study calls us to affirm the local church as our primary base for mission and ministry. The study declares, effective communication is needed throughout this denomination to knit this body of Christ together, and to energize its ministries. We must move beyond "them versus us," I believe. We are the local church and the general level. I believe we can be better financial stewards in other, more practical, ways and paragraph 1 of recommendation 3 lists this clearly. I also understand that in the budgeting process, the proposed reduction in membership was not of significant impact. I believe to cut membership, to cut more than 300 of our voices, would weaken the communication we need, impact our inclusiveness, cause a heavier reliance on staff than we already have. I do not believe that reducing our voice is the best approach to enhance communication and the responsiveness that this study cries out for at the general level. This is about the power of our collective voice, gathered from each annual conference. Thus, I support this amendment.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you. A statement in favor of your amendment. Do we have someone to speak against it? Over here.

PORTER J. WOMELDORFF (Central Illinois): Bishop, I would like to ask a question, not speak either for or against. The question is this: this amendment affects both the white and the gray sheets that we were handed, and I have the question that if my arithmetic is correct, the numbers on the white sheet for at least three of the five jurisdictions add up to a larger total than the total at the bottom of the gray sheet for those same jurisdiction.

JIM HOLSINGER: Porter, that's absolutely correct. If you will recall that at the time I made my presentation, I so announced that. And I indicated at that time that they ranged. I believe I may not have said exactly what they ranged, but they range from three to one different. That's because with the way there are spread of individuals from this pool, three of them show up in the nine additional members in GCFA's number. They were originally proposed to have only six members. The bishops have nominated nine. We placed three of them in that location, in order to not have to have those individuals removed from that list. There are three under COSROW that are elected by the Women's Division that come from within this number, and there are others within the whole pattern of this that come through that process, a different process than the straight forward nominating process. So the upshot of that is that there are ten fewer than show up, as I have added correctly on the spur of the moment. But we knew that at the time. We also cannot guarantee, if you look at that gray sheet where it shows General Board of Global Ministries, there is a number that says seven plus seven, seven plus five, and so on. Those are the plus--whatever the number is with the first asterisk showing--are the women's, the individuals that will be elected by the Women's Division. We cannot guarantee that they will come in that location, because of the process under which the Women's Division elects. But they are covered within this total number. We believe that we have done the best we possibly can to effectively spread these in a fair way across the jurisdictions within the confines of the election process that is included under paragraph 805.

WOMELDORFF: Could I continue my question just this much further? Then what you are suggesting is that if there are people previously elected, for example, to GCFA or to COSROW, from a particular annual conference, that will be deducted from the number that is on the white sheet?

HOLSINGER: No. The white sheet provides the base numbers from each annual conference by jurisdiction that will go to the jurisdictional nominating committees to nominate for, and for the jurisdictional committees, jurisdictional conferences to elect. What happens is though that as you recall, the secretary of the General Conference will provide the specific number once we know how these other individuals are actually elected by this body when they are elected by the General Conference in other locations. We will then know how exactly how many each nominating committee will have to elect.

WOMELDORFF: Then you are saying that a nominating committee may have less than the five, six, seven or eight shown on the white sheet for a particular annual conference?

HOLSINGER: No, I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that they appear within the buff sheet in other locations than on the first line. We had to do that in order to take care of things that were proposed in the variety of the individual board or agencies' proposals for how they would elect. There will be...the total that is called for within the gray sheet will show up somewhere within the total. The other ten, that are not on this bottom columns when you add them, are in other locations on the buff sheet.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you very much for your response to that inquiry. Yes, you who are coming out. Forward to microphone 2.

ANNA WORKMAN (North Carolina): May I try to help answer this gentleman's question? As we understand it, it's one of the ones we worked on, this proposal. The difference is in the numbers guaranteed to the conferences will show up in the at-large members. I can give you the totals by each of those jurisdictions if they would like to have those.

BISHOP LAWSON: Is there a request for that? I do not hear one.

WORKMAN: OK. And may I speak against the amendment on the floor?

BISHOP LAWSON: Excuse me?

WORKMAN: May I speak against the amendment?

BISHOP LAWSON: Yes, you may.

WORKMAN: I spent a lot of hours working on this with the folks in our committee and sub-committee because I came with one message from folks at home. And that is that we do need to be very accountable in the manpower and in the dollars that we are spending as a general church. This recommendation is only for one quadrennium, after which time we hope that whatever process we use to come up with restructuring or to determine to stay the same will be there. But I can go home a whole lot better, with a lot better conscience, if we address some of the issues that I think probably all of us are hearing in our local churches. Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Is there someone who would like to speak in favor of the amendment? Yes, sir. Right here. You're doing well. Please go out and turn right to microphone 9.

ROBERT D. PIERSON (Oklahoma): The concern for reducing budgets is a concern that all of us have, and we want to respond to the people back home in terms of that. But I'm concerned that by reducing the size by one-third the net effect is that we have less representation all across the church, in our annual conferences, in the central conferences. What we're looking for is more participation, more responsiveness of our general agencies to the people back home. And the way you accomplish that is not by cutting the representation. Now I appreciate all the work that was done in preparing these charts, but the bottom line still is we reduce representation by one-third, and I'd like to support leaving the amount, the number of representation as it is in the 900's than reducing it. So I'm in favor of this.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you very much. You remember we're on page 253, the right hand column, the second full paragraph, which begins, "it is further recommended." The motion is to delete. There is, we are getting close to the time when we want to express ourselves by vote. And, sir, you're...please come forward, and tell us who you are. Microphone 3.

PAT STROMAN (Central Texas): If we vote to leave them the same, how much money would--how much difference in budget will there be in terms of cost for meetings and so forth if we cut back to 600?

DAVID SEVERE (Oklahoma): GCFA would have to answer that question. We do not know exactly, but it would be a significant savings. It's a pretty good figure, but we don't have an exact figure because they have not yet supplied it.

STROMAN: David, you don't even have a ballpark?

SEVERE: Not right now I don't.

BISHOP LAWSON: OK, thank you. We're getting really close to the time when you're going to want to express yourself in vote. So think about this a little bit. Back here, there's a gentleman standing up now. You're going out to microphone 7.

STEVEN LETT (Western Michigan): I'm speaking against the amendment. Thank you. I speak against the amendment for two reasons. Number one, to answer the gentleman's question about the cost, obviously if you have a third less people, you have a third less cost. Number two, we seem to think that representative government, which is what we have here, would be better with more representatives. If that were the case, then we should have a general conference every year and let everybody come. I think we have to have faith in the people that we elect, appoint, or nominate to represent us. And I think that we, as United Methodists, have that faith, and that they can do the job right, and I speak against the amendment.

BISHOP LAWSON: Now we have room for only someone to speak in favor of the amendment. And ma'am, you're sitting right back there, and you're coming out to microphone 8. And then we will vote.

MARY SILVA (Rio Grande): We were told on the first day to stay at the table, but now some chairs have been removed from that table, and fairness and equality is not on the menu. I would like to recommend that the language conferences be considered to be represented on all boards.

BISHOP LAWSON: All right. Thank you. You now are ready to vote. Our discussion is full at this point. You know what's before us, page 253, right hand column, first full paragraph. The motion is to delete. If you would delete this paragraph...

SEVERE: Bishop?

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for the reminder.

SEVERE: We would hope you would defeat this amendment because we believe that we are moving in the right direction. We remind you again, this is a one quadrennium trial. We may discover in this period of time that we need to change this figure. But we think that we can demonstrate to ourselves as well as to those back home and to the spirit of what we are doing here that we can reduce the number at this time and can provide a vital church.

BISHOP LAWSON: All right, thank you. If you would delete, you'll be voting yes. No, if you would not. Please vote when you see the light. And you've not supported the amendment. [Results: yes, 289; no, 640 ] The full report is before us. Yes. Over here. Microphone 5.

VICTOR ORTIZ VIDAL (Puerto Rico): I move to amend, on page 252, letter B, in which says, "plus three voting members from affiliated autonomous churches," to add, "elected by the 1996 General Conference."

BISHOP LAWSON: Is there a second? It is seconded. And your amendment is, please, what?

ORTIZ VIDAL: To add at the end of the parentheses, "plus three non-voting members from affiliated and autonomous churches," to add, "elected by the 1996 General Conference."

BISHOP LAWSON: All right, that amendment is before you. Do you have something you'd like to say, sir?

ORTIZ VIDAL: Yes. I think that it is important to define the method in which these three non-voting members will be elected. I think that this General Conference is the adequate party to elect that persons. We have a big representation from the affiliated autonomous churches and the autonomous churches here, so I think that this body could be the proper place to make that decision.

BISHOP LAWSON: All right. You understand that the proposal before us in this amendment, page 252, the right hand column, just a couple or three paragraphs down, capital "B," following the parentheses, this amendment is added. Anybody care to speak against it? Anybody care to speak for it? Then please vote.

DAVID SEVERE: Bishop?

BISHOP LAWSON: Yes, excuse me, I will remember you. I promise this. Some day--tomorrow. I apologize.

SEVERE: It's all right. It's all right. The struggle we would see in this proposal is being able to make that process work in a short period of time. We find that the process of making sure that we have included a broad spectrum of the central conference people, that we need a little more time to be able to make that a fair process. We would rather it be done after the General Conference and in consultation with the leadership of the central conferences.

BISHOP LAWSON: You now are ready to express yourself. When the light appears, please vote.

BISHOP LAWSON: It does not prevail. The whole report is before you? Yes, microphone 3. Go ahead. They're playing back there. [laughter]

TIMOTHY RUSSELL (Central Texas): On page 249, the blue DCA, far left column, two-thirds down the column, the item "Elect Bishops." I would like to move an amendment to change the wording to "determine the process to elect bishops." Do I have a second, I'd like to speak to that?

BISHOP LAWSON: Second?

RUSSELL: If you look on page 215, second paragraph, on the left column, you will see that each regional conference has the option to establish sub-regions. I believe this amendment will be more internally consistent. I believe it will allow more creativity in the discerning process for selecting our leadership in the church and will allow us to keep the election of our bishops as close to the people as possible.

BISHOP LAWSON: Sir, your point has been heard and your motion has been received and seconded, but it is the chair's judgment that what is before us is the matter--this is preliminary material, or introduction to the report--and what is before us are the specific recommendations. So I reluctantly must call your motion out of order, but the people have heard you speak, and your point I think is probably made.

RUSSELL: Question? Is there a time when it would be in order?

BISHOP LAWSON: My understanding is not. This is what you would call introductory or prelude material to the recommendations that are before you, and the recommendations are before you at this point. I must call your motion out of order.

RUSSELL: Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Now in the back there is a gentleman standing next to the aisle. You're coming forward, are you? At microphone 8.

PAUL R. DIRDAK (California-Nevada): Bishop, I'm at the top of page 252, the right hand corner of that page, it is the sentence number 9, and I would like to suggest an amendment. I would amend the sentence by replacing it with the following language: "Consider the advisability of regional and global conferences and propose and further elaborate upon their nature, work and composition." Following a second I would say a word.

BISHOP LAWSON: Will someone provide a second? It is seconded.

DIRDAK: Thank you. I know that a small group of us has spent considerable time working on the question of regional conferences. However, it occurs to me that there are huge numbers of questions implicated here that have yet to be fully discussed. And it seems to me that the nature of the sentence, as it appears in the text, would presume that regional conferences will exist in some form when this next quadrennium's work is over.

I think we need to consider that more carefully. I would be happy to spend the quadrennium doing it. It occurs to me that there are some significant dangers in our face if, in fact, we move ahead with regional conferences; but the course of the quadrennium could prove me quite incorrect. The dangers which I fear are these: We, in the General Board of Global Ministries, where I am privileged to be president of its National Division, have spent these last years learning that the globe is one place. It needs no National and World Division separation any longer. That is a revolutionary idea for many of us. The globe could become one.

It concerns me very much that regional conferences could impose boundaries which do not exist at precisely the time when we are trying to eliminate boundaries under which we have suffered for years and years.

So, it occurs to me that the study which is conducted should consider regional conferences rather than assume them. Therefore my amendment. Bishop.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for that clarification.

DAVID SEVERE: The committee is willing to accept that. We think that was very well stated. We'd be happy to accept it.

DIRDAK: Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: The chair is interested in accepting that. No one take exception to that? Are you taking exception to the acceptance? All right. Thank you. Then we'll consider that amendment as part of the definition of the majority report, and the floor is now again open, and we're coming right here, yes. Microphone 4.

CHARLIE O. DUNDAS (Minnesota): I consider myself a broad-stroke person. I am not into a lot of detail. I stand to support this, the recommendations of the committee. Because I believe that this is one small step for Methodist-kind. It is only a beginning. We are putting in place, in my judgment, a process over the next four years, which we hope and pray will lead us into the 21st century. We will be kidding ourselves immensely if we think that we are putting in place, even at that time, structures or organization which will last for many years.

Our present structure has been in place for some 20 years. I submit that the pace of change in the world and the need for the church to communicate the gospel will require us to have a dynamic, flexible process always in place. And we will need to revisit again and again the way we do ministry in this rapidly changing world. I would hope that we would support this and get on with the process. And that we would trust those who are nominated and put in place by the church to work on this in a helpful and meaningful and powerful way.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for your statement. I call the house's attention that we are right now in the process of perfecting the majority report. I'm looking in the far corner near microphone 11. There's a person standing up there. Microphone 11.

DEBORAH CRONIN (Western New York): First of all, Bishop, on behalf of short people sitting in a back left corner, I thank you. [laughter] Secondly, I would like to offer a friendly amendment that any place in the GCOM report and related legislation where the terms "outreach, nurture, and witness," occur, that they be rearranged to read "nurture, outreach, and witness." If I get a second, I'll speak to that. Yes, in the last quadrennium the Strengthening the Small Church Task Force worked very diligently with these three words to organize them into a structure for our churches with small membership. We are gratified that they have been picked up in this quadrennium, and used to project a ministry outline for all of our churches as well as our denomination. We chose the model "nurture, outreach, witness," the arrangement of those words in that form, because they give to us an acronym. The acronym is NOW. There are many persons across the denomination now, that are used to that term, that speak very frequently of the NOW model. It will be helpful for us in interpreting it throughout the denomination. Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: All right, that is before you. Yes, you don't want to speak to that. Anybody care to speak to that? You all care on the committee to speak to this?

DAVID SEVERE: That is in the report, and we're not sure that that's an area we need to be messing with. We understand the concern, however, that model does exist, and we felt, at this point, we were not, would not want to use just exactly what that was. It does have some slight differences in some places, but I believe that's in the report, not in the recommendations.

BISHOP LAWSON: Well, I think your point is well taken. The chair unfortunately, and with apologies to you, will call that out of order and now, it's my responsibility to share with you that we are still working on General and Judicial Administration report and the hour is now 3:30. We have following us the Africa University report, the Africa University choir, the Independent Commissions, Financial Administration, Discipleship and Church and Society calendar items. We'll all need to take responsibility for managing the floor. Are there amendments for the majority report? I'm sorry, but what you do when my attention, just stand or hold up your card. That will get you more success. Over here on this side. Microphone 9.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Bishop, I move the previous question and all that is before us.

BISHOP LAWSON: We are in the middle of perfecting a majority report. We must hear the perfection of the minority report before I can receive that motion. Thank you. Now over here, somebody was wanting the floor. Don't want the floor. Yes. Microphone 7.

JOHN S. McCABE (Northern Illinois): A question: in the legislative section, was there any comment on paragraph C on page 253 with the inclusion of GCOM in the reporting process, and in paragraph E in that same column, with GCOM providing the staffing?

BISHOP LAWSON: I'm not sure what the question is. Would you say what is the question with that, sir.

McCABE: The question was, was there any discussion around the inclusion of GCOM at those two points, the reporting as well as the staffing?

SEVERE: Yes, it was discussed. That is where we felt it would be the best way to provide the staffing.

McCABE: All right. I'd like to make a motion, if I could, Bishop. I'd like to eliminate--in paragraph C, of page 253, in the left hand column, second sentence, I'd like to eliminate GCOM from that sentence, second line. And then referring to paragraph E, I'd like to substitute COB or Council of Bishops instead of GCOM to provide for the staffing. If there is a second, I'd like to speak to that.

BISHOP LAWSON: Is it seconded? It is.

McCABE: The reason I'd like to see this is I think one of the scenarios for reorganization of the church might be the elimination of the General Council on Ministries, and so to prevent the fox in the hen house problems here, I think it's appropriate that GCOM not be one of the reporting bodies during the course of this study, and also even though staff may come out of GCOM at the direction of the bishops or staff from other general agencies, as appropriate, I think it's proper for the staffing to be by the Council of Bishops as they see fit. Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: All right sir, thank you. This matter is now before us. In the center a woman is standing. You're coming out and forward to microphone 8.

BETTY T. TRUMBLE (Nebraska): I would argue that we should keep the General Council on Ministries. The reporting process without the General Council on Ministries, would be to the Council of Bishops and the Council of Finance and Administration. I think the church is better represented in the Council on Ministries than in the Council on Finance and Administration, and there is laity in the Council on Ministries, but not in the Council of Bishops. As to the bishops providing staffing, the bishops as I understand it, do not have staff. Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for that. Speech against this amendment. Someone want to speak for it? For it? Yes, right here.

MARVIN H. McCALLUM (Detroit): I move that we close debate on this item and the majority report.

BISHOP LAWSON: Is it so obvious when I stop and think, or so rare, perhaps? (laughter) I have a motion that we cease the perfection of this report and go on to the minority report. That is probably in order. Is it seconded? It is variously seconded. If you would move us on toward the minority report, would you please vote yes when you see the light. [852 approved] There was a person who yelled, "Yea." I presume that this means that this passed, and so then...

Did I miss a motion on the floor? Thank you very much. As interesting as that last motion was, we do have this amendment before us, page 253, left hand column, items C, D, and E. Thank you for helping the chair at that point. Is there anything else to be said about that amendment? Thank you. If I said right, I meant left. It is in the left hand column, page 253. Those adjustments you know about. Are you ready to decide this? All right.

SEVERE: May I speak?

BISHOP LAWSON: Yes, you may.

SEVERE: We hope you will not agree to this amendment. We believe that the three councils are very much involved in this process and are very helpful in their guidance. The GCOM is an appropriate place for staffing to be done, both by experience and expertise. We have in almost every situation affirmed that, and we would prefer that we continue with that. We would ask that you defeat this motion.

BISHOP LAWSON: If you would delete from the staffing process the GCOM and if you would, in item E, change the GCOM to the Council of Bishops, you would be voting yes. Will you please vote when the light appears? [Results: yes, 247; no, 670]

BISHOP LAWSON: And you do not agree with that amendment. Now, are you still of mind to move onto the minority report? All right. Now we are at 3:35. Some of you are beginning to look a little blurry-eyed. I'm wondering if you would benefit from a 15 minute break. [applause] Your applause means that you pledge before God that you will be back in your seat and quiet at 10 minutes until four. [laughter]

Now, please do not leave for a minute. What we've had here is an offer. I think the answer to the question, however, is not in the chair. It's in you. The mover of the minority report has said that he would be willing not to have his report perfected, but simply make a closing statement about it and allow us to move ahead and vote on that minority report without the perfection process. My response to that is that really the question is in your hands. Are you willing to receive the minority report without the opportunity to perfect it? [applause] It sounds like you are. Does anyone take exception to this? Yes, microphone 3.

BECKY HAASE (California-Pacific): I feel it is appropriate for us to spend some time on that. I would appreciate it after the break, myself. But I think that if this is presumed to become a main motion, that would then be the main motion that has not had any opportunity for amendment. And I feel it is not appropriate.

BISHOP LAWSON: Your point is well taken. We are in recess.

BISHOP LAWSON: Back in the corners of this place is a crowd of people, everyone of whom, promised before God, you'd be in your seats right now. We are going to start with Cynthia, is going to help us to sing. By the time we are first versing it, you are going to be back in your seats.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for taking your seats, that's very thoughtful of you to do that. Thank you for stopping the conversation now. That's even more thoughtful. There are a few people in the room, but not many who haven't figured out that every sentence has a period at the end, and when you come to a period, you stop talking. OK? [laughter] Now we're ready to go. Forgive me for looking around. I thought we had an arrangement here. But I think we don't. So we'll turn our attention...

All right, ladies and gentlemen, we are going to listen to the presentation of the minority report. Just to let you know what the staffing up here was about. We had hoped to create a situation where the African choir could sing for us at this juncture, and there's a confusion in the arrangements, and that doesn't seem to be working just real easily, so we'll move ahead with the minority report.

I think I share with you a sense of DIS-EASE that these good brothers and sisters from a very long distance have come to sing for us, and we've held them for a long time. But that doesn't seem to be fixable at the moment, and so rather than try to do that publicly, now and use time up, let's encourage ourselves to face the minority report. To perfect that and prepare to report, to vote on all of this matter.

We turn to Andy Langford. All right, he does not want to speak to us on this; doesn't need to, he says, and so the minority report is before us for perfection. I see there has been a little revolt in the house. We now have orange cards. That is nice. And I'm turning...there is a woman standing back right here. I have a point of order. OK. Microphone 9.

PETER WEAVER (Western Pennsylvania): Last night the body voted to ask the Rules Committee to report to us on the Hassinger Amendment to Rule 36. Some of us who are interested in that have waited patiently for that report. It was to be reported back this morning. I understood it was going to be reported at the beginning of this session. And would request the chair ask for that report.

BISHOP LAWSON: For your information, Pete, that report is ready and is on standby for at the end of this particular report, which we are dealing with now.

WEAVER: Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: You will, perhaps, allow a little flexibility around that if we find that the choir can come, but right about that period of time.

WEAVER: I would hope it would come before we enter into the debate concerning this matter, so that that might be a tool if the body chooses for discernment.

BISHOP LAWSON: Before we consider what matter, Pete?

WEAVER: After the perfecting of the minority report, before we enter into the debate concerning the minority report and the majority report.

BISHOP LAWSON: I think that would be most awkward for us, parliamentarily speaking, but it will come to the floor as soon as possible, and I thank you for your question. Now before us, we have the minority report. It's available for perfection as you did, in fact, request. Does anybody care to work on it?

Yes, there's a woman right here. These new orange cards are just remarkably helpful.

SHARON ADAIR (North Texas): Bishop, I believe you gave me permission. I'm on microphone 13.

BISHOP LAWSON: I'm sorry, but I called on the lady walking across here. And you're coming up here to microphone 2.

ADAIR: You gave me permission before Pete spoke.

BISHOP LAWSON: I'm very sorry, but the lady up here. Ma'am, you just stay in the precinct back there, and we'll come to you. All right, number 2.

GWEN HENDERSON (North Carolina): I have a point of information or clarification regarding the minority report, page 255, subsection 9, left column. It reads, "Further be it resolved that the GCORR" and I won't read the rest of it. But the question that I have is, does implementation mean GCORR will monitor the composition of CRC and CPT?

THOMAS (ANDY) A. LANGFORD, III (Western North Carolina): The answer is, I understand, this writing to be precisely what was in the majority report. And so the minority report uses language CRC, whereas the majority report uses language CPT. It's exactly the same.

HENDERSON: CRC?

LANGFORD: Just to be different. Sorry. So yes. So it means the Commission on Religion and Race and COSROW will evaluate both processes, whichever way is done.

HENDERSON: Will monitor the composition of?

LANGFORD: I assume so, yes.

HENDERSON: Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you very much. Now microphone 13.

ADAIR: I want to speak against the minority report by speaking in favor of the majority report.

BISHOP LAWSON: At this particular point we're perfecting the minority report. That is to say, I'm receiving motions that might perfect it. There'll come a moment in time when your statement will be most appropriate.

ADAIR: Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you very much. Does anybody want to make an amendment to the minority report? Yes ma'am. You're coming out and coming forward to microphone 3.

LAVADA REDDING (Rocky Mountain): In last night's procedures, it was decided that we would abstain from using the acronyms, so to better allow the central jurisdiction people to be with us in this process. But we seem to have gone back to that today.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you for your reminder to us. It's such a habit. It's in our genes, I think. Over here in this section. I think that person must not want the floor. Must be fanning with the orange fan. Over here by number 8.

THOMAS BOLLER (Yellowstone): I have a point of inquiry. Will either the minority or the majority report, if they are approved, discourage or encourage or permit churches outside the United States belonging to central conferences the option on autonomous relationship or to join up with churches to form a united church in their particular country? What kind of effect does this have on that proposal that will be coming before us?

LANGFORD: I simply have not thought through that. I assume this is absolutely neutral regarding that.

BISHOP LAWSON: There are current provisions in our polity allowing for those possibilities if anybody wants to exercise them. It is consensus of the people around me that there is nothing in this that would prevent that during the period of this study.

BOLLER: Thank you. BISHOP LAWSON: You're very welcome. Now does anybody have an amendment they want to make to the report. I'm coming over here. Coming forward to microphone 10.

ROLF LINDELL (Sweden): I would like to amend the minority report, on the middle column, in the bottom, starting with number 116 persons unto the end of number 2 from the right-hand column, to delete these two paragraphs; and instead of that, put what is on the majority report, page 252, on the right-hand column, point B1 reading, "24 persons nominated," and so on.

BISHOP LAWSON: Is it seconded? It is seconded. The chair understands that you're substituting on page 254 the center column, the second and third paragraphs, all the way down to the bottom of that column and the top of the column on the right-hand side down to 2. And you're substituting the material on page 252, Item B1. Do I understand you correctly?

LINDELL: Yes sir.

BISHOP LAWSON: Would you like to speak to that?

LINDELL: Well, I have a very short comment to that, and that is that in dealing with global church I find it extremely important that the central conferences are represented, not only by the 20 percent, but a little bit more as I then have suggested.

BISHOP LAWSON: All right. Thank you. You understand that this is a substitution of the material on page 252 substituted for the material on page 254. It's before you. Anybody care to speak against it? I see no one caring to speak against it. Andy, would you like to say anything before we act on it?

LANGFORD: The minority report simply reflects, I believe, more accurately the regional and global representation of this denomination. The global conferences of the central conferences, which are a vital part of this church today, constitute 12 percent of our membership. It seemed the position of the minority report that because this is a global committee, the 20 percent was fair, in fact, very fair to have that voice heard. I'd urge defeat of the amendment.

BISHOP LAWSON: Now if you would support substituting the material on page 252, B1. If you would place that material over on page 254, if you would do that as a substitute would you please vote "yes." If you would not, "no." When you see the light would you please vote? [Results: yes, 324; no, 565] No, you would not make that substitution and so the minority report is not amended. Anybody else care to speak to it or amend it in any way? Are you ready to vote on the minority report? You seem to be ready to vote. Andy, do you have anything you'd like to say? Andy is first.

LANGFORD: First of all, I give thanks for this General Conference for the way in which you have dealt with the issue this afternoon. You have noted the major differences between the two reports. You've discussed them well. You have debated them well. And I congratulate you.

I come this day as a person who loves The United Methodist Church. I'm a child of this church. I'm a servant of this church. I'm a student of its theology. I love its history. I celebrate its diversity. But I fear deeply for this, our denomination. We're searching for theological integrity. We're struggling with how to speak to rapidly changing cultures. And we are flawed structurally.

The number one organizational flaw of this denomination, as we have had in place since 1968, is that in our United Methodist system, our organization, especially the general agencies, have been like masters. And the local congregations have been treated like unwilling servants. Local churches, I believe, have been captives of a bureaucratic organization, which have hindered both local ministry and the global ministry of our denomination. In 1992, I stood in a similar place before the General Conference, and presented to you a United Methodist Book of Worship, with the intent to reform the worship life of our denomination.

On this day, I present to you a minority report, which gives us the hope of also reforming our structure. I had high hopes for the Connectional Issues Study. It was led by exceptionally competent people and staff. They had a big task in front of them, and I had high hopes, that as they worked hard, that what they came out with would really help us re-shape this denomination. But when I saw the report, as you have it in your Advanced DCA, your DCA, it appears, at least to me, that it has an unclear vision. It has a limited affirmation of the local church. There is no substantial critique of our general agencies. It appears to me cautious and business- as-usual.

In our own legislative committee, we have worked hard this last week, and the document is better than it was a week ago. But in essence, I would contend that it asks us to maintain the status quo for another four years. We have changed the membership of the general agencies, the voting membership, but that is not substantial. In this report, there are very few measurable goals. Especially regarding the relationship between the general agencies and the local congregations they are designed to serve.

BISHOP LAWSON: Andy, you must come to a conclusion.

LANGFORD: Yes, sir. In the town in which I live, there's a train track that goes through the middle. You can see, every day, locomotives going down that train track. And there are engineers in it, blowing whistles, following wherever that train track leads. On this day, my sense of this General Conference, is that we are riding that train, that locomotive, blowing the whistle, taking us wherever that track is leading. I want us to engage in laying some new tracks, some new rails, to take the church in another direction.

When we go home, our friends and neighbors will ask us, "Did you, in the tradition of the Wesleys, reform The United Methodist Church?" If you vote for the majority report, you're going to say "no." We came, we saw, we talked. We put off major decisions for four years. If you vote for the minority report, you'll be saying, "We began to lay some new tracks, to take this church forward." I urge you to vote for the minority report. Thank you, Bishop.

BISHOP LAWSON: I call now on the maker of the majority report. Point of Order, yes.

BECKY HAASE (California-Pacific): Would you clarify for me, bishop, are we actually coming to the vote now, because I don't believe we've had any debate? We were perfecting the minority report, is that correct?

BISHOP LAWSON: The procedures that we have and our rules bring us to the point of where we have perfected both. We complete our work by doing so, and then the matter is put to a vote after the speakers speak.

HAASE: And we do not have actual debate on the issue after it's perfected?

BISHOP LAWSON: That is in keeping with our rules, yes.

HAASE: Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Please?

DAVID SEVERE (Oklahoma): Thank you. The legislative committee urges you to defeat the minority report. There are a number of flaws in it that we will not take time to go into. There are things in it that would really be, in fact, business-as-usual, because it would represent the way we have been. We would have representation that would exclude many of our central conference brothers and sisters.

It would go back to a formula based on an old paradigm that is passing out of existence. They would have only three central conference representatives, while the majority report would call for nine, as we begin to feel our way forward to this new church that is before us. The minority report calls for no particular staff relationship, forgetting the rule that says, "everybody's business is nobody's business." They offer a nebulous suggestion that staffing could be done by all of the general agencies. Does that mean that every agency must pry loose precious staff time for the process team? We believe the GCOM is well-suited by preparation, experience, and job description to adequately staff the needs that we have.

Finally, we note that the minority report wishes that what they would call the CRC to deliberate all that it wants, but it prescribes what it must decide with regard to reduction of agencies and budgets. Theirs is a current-reality, budget-driven approach, and this process is truncated by a preset mandate.

We, too, believe that reductions may be what is in the future, but we wish to see the CPT allowed to have a vision-pulled reality and the opportunity to discern a compelling, unifying vision for the entire church into the 21st century.

I used to have a recurring dream when I was a child. Andy reminded me of it when he talked about the train track. My dream was that the track, the train had jumped the track, and it was coming up the street, and it was going to get me. I think that the minority report is scary like that. I would suggest to you that let us not seek to control the spirit and order the future out of our fears, our angers, or our frustrations.

Let us trust the spirit in the process which the majority report asks us to do. Let us be open to where the spirit might lead, even if we're a little giddy at the thought we don't have to know the answer before we get there. Let us be confident that it is not up to us and us alone to guard God's future from breaking in upon us. I encourage you to vote this minority report down, and make it possible for us to receive the gift of a new church, which God wishes to bestow upon us. I move the defeat of the minority report.

BISHOP LAWSON: Now the floor is open for the debate you hoped for. Yes, and this is not amendment time. We're just talking about the proposals. You will have to decide as we go along, at what point in time do you think we've heard the kind of statements we need to hear to help us to vote. And that, of course, will be a lot less than what you might guess. Think a little bit about when we've had enough. Yes, ma'am. Microphone 2.

MONTY STABLER (North Alabama): Bishop, I'm speaking for the minority report. We heard the challenge this morning from Bishop Hoyt to dream beyond our maps. My dream is a united church that has its hands on the local and national levels together. I dream of a denomination that embraces diversity in the spirit of love. I dream of a denomination that has confidence in its local church enough to believe that it's worthy enough to act responsibly on mission without being told what to do at every point.

Seventy percent of us have concerns about the structure of the denomination. Most of us have our concerns, but take little action to these concerns. Andy Langford has gone further. Rather than being negative about the past, he offers a solution that provides hope for the future. This minority report is visionary, positive, and a great solution. I urge that you give it your prayerful and sincere consideration.

BISHOP LAWSON: Now I want to acknowledge to myself that there's a person at microphone 13. Are you speaking against the minority report?

SHARON ADAIR (North Texas): I have a point of order, please.

BISHOP LAWSON: Yes, ma'am.

ADAIR: Are we speaking against or for the minority report? And will we have a chance to debate the main motion after this vote?

BISHOP LAWSON: We will decide what the main motion is, and then we will speak to it.

ADAIR: Well, may I speak now against the minority report?

BISHOP LAWSON: Yes.

ADAIR: I want to speak against. I want to speak against the minority report by speaking in favor of the majority report.

I feel the majority report is adequate. It needs no changes. We could discuss detail changes all day. I was on the initial General Council on Ministries Task Force when it began in 1988. This is a change in our church that we must approve. We are now a global church and we need to look like one.

Like someone said yesterday, let's get in front of the parade. I watched the central conference delegates in my legislative committee and saw how many times they voted "abstain," because an issue just did not relate to them. We must move past our patronizing attitude towards central conferences and give them the power, through the regional conferences, that they need to move ahead with their own unique growing ministries. This study is critical. I urge you to vote against the minority report in favor of the majority report. Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: Someone care to speak in favor of the minority report? In favor? You're standing, Sir. Would you go to microphone 14?

ROBERT E. HAYS, JR. (Texas): Bishop, the voice of the local church is crying in the wilderness. And that voice has not been heard in many years. And if we don't heed the voice of the local church, I'm afraid that the voice will not be there in the years to come. What this legislation does, the majority report, is to prescribe to a hurting and dying church, an aspirin of mediocrity that is clothed in $200 words like "interactive," "affirming," "discerning;" $200 words that won't mean two cents to the people who are struggling to catch the vision in the local church.

Indeed, the church needs many things, but it does not need yet another concept which asks us to go back to the local church to do away with most of what we already have been working on hard and diligently. But, to bring in now, confusing, frustrating terms will take people to resignation. This legislation does not fix the broken pieces of our faith and of our denomination. If we take this aspirin of mediocrity, I'm afraid that when we wake up in the morning, the great physician will not even be there to answer our call. I urge you to vote in behalf of the minority report.

BISHOP LAWSON: There's room for someone to speak against the minority report. And back in the corner, microphone 11.

THOMAS J. BICKERTON (West Virginia): Most days when I wake up I fool myself into believing that I'm about this much smarter than God. I think my way is best. That is, until I think beyond myself through interacting with other people, through earnest prayer, and faithful study. I believe that some of the most important words inserted into this amended report are found on page 252 in the second column where the report mandates the Connectional Process Team to review and consider other pertinent studies and responses beyond the Connectional Issues Study in order to discern God's will.

The majority report openly acknowledges the hard work, and in many cases good work, of varieties of groups and peoples working independently of one another in formulating a vision and a plan of implementation for our church's future. The majority report does more than just receive other proposals, as is recommended in the minority report. It reviews and considers them through an interactive model of mutual dialogue and discovery, in order to reach common understanding of God's vision for the church and how that vision can be implemented across the connection.

BISHOP LAWSON: Three minutes, sir.

BICKERTON: The minority report states that the Connectional Issues Study recommendations are not sensitive to the local church. I disagree. Recommendation 3 provides for communication and training in how to develop flexible, interactive models. Recommendation 4 recommends feedback from the local church. Recommendation 7 provides listening sessions. Friends, as we journey through this transitional period in our church's life, we are sailing in uncharted waters. And if those waters are uncharted, I believe we need to have as much input and support as is possible, and remain open and flexible in our process so that we can discern God's direction lest we think that our own agenda is best. I urge the passage of the majority report's proposal.

BISHOP LAWSON: I recognize there are persons with waving cards. I need to imply a question. The question continues to be, at what point do you have enough wisdom and enough insight to vote. Are you of a mind to vote? It is the sense of the chair that you are of a mind to vote with recognition that there are persons who would say other things if they could. If you are of a mind to vote, the question before us is, "Will you support the minority report?" And if you want to do that then you will vote "yes" and if you do not you will vote "no." Please vote when the light appears. [Results: yes, 374; no, 567;]

No, you do not affirm the minority report and that means now that the principal motion before us is the majority report. And I call your attention to that and the floor is open for persons who would care to speak beyond what we've heard now. Who would speak? It is a wonderful chorus. If there were sopranos and basses and tenors, you could sound beautiful by the way you do it. But, that doesn't really help me very much. As I understand our situation, the floor in fact is open for statements if there are persons who desire to make any. And so I see in the center section in the back, going to microphone 14.

ARDITH ALLREAD (California-Nevada): Bishop, I move that we vote on all that is before us.

BISHOP LAWSON: We have a motion for the question. I think that motion is in fact in order at this point in time. Is it seconded? I think the various groans were seconds of one kind or another. [laughter] This is going to take a two-thirds vote. If you would close debate--remember this is not an insignificant thing to do, you're asking the house to stop the conversation--it takes two-thirds of you to do that. If you would close debate, would you please vote when the light appears. [826 approved]

There is some sense that you probably want to vote. [laughter] If you would. You are ready now? You are ready now.

DAVID SEVERE: Bishop? May we have the closing statement please? You don't want to hear Minerva? [laughter] Oh, all right. Thank you.

BISHOP LAWSON: I was raised along the railroad tracks, but they don't seem to want to hear our railroad stories [laughter]. And so, if you would support the majority report, you're going to vote "yes." If no, "no." When the light appears, you will vote. [720 approved] Yes, you do support the majority report. That action is complete.

I would like to suggest to you that we have a pending action from this morning, and if you will turn your attention now to Jerome Del Pino. Let me say to you that as soon as this is handled, which will surely be in just a moment, we will then turn to the Africa University report, and we'll entertain our guests from Zimbabwe. Jerome, are you on the precincts?

JEROME K. DEL PINO (New England): Bishop, after due consideration and the urging of this body last evening, the Committee on the Plan of Organization and Rules of Order has developed a response, which we feel is appropriate to the request made by this body.

BISHOP LAWSON: Jerome, a reference point. You're talking about Rule 36?

DEL PINO: I'm referencing, Bishop, Rule 36 of our Standing Rules of Order, and also the motion that was made and is located in the Daily Christian Advocate, volume 3, number 2, page 54.

To refresh the body's memory, it would be important for us to just simply indicate that on the first day of our coming together we were presented a motion that was received by the presenter of the Plan of Organization and Rules of Order for that session. As was indicated last night, by the maker of the motion, calling for the committee to respond to you today, there was strong implication that it would be responded to.

As a result, the committee then, last night, chose to meet with the original maker of the motion to amend Rule 36 by adding a new number 4, which would be on...the motion is on page 54, as I already indicated of your DCA. We did meet with the maker of the motion and gave opportunity to for her to expand further upon her conception of what the committee has already prior to that motion last night affirmed, in principle, as an appropriate approach for this body to make in succeeding General Conferences. Subsequent to discussion by the committee, the following motion was made, and I now present to you.

Whereas the Plan of Organization and Rules of Order adopted by the 1996 General Conference already provides for ways to suspend the rules to accomplish the objectives of the Hassinger motion; and whereas, the Committee on Plan of Organization and Rules of Order believes that the Hassinger motion deserves careful consideration over the upcoming quadrennium; therefore, the committee affirms the current rules until such time as it can give the Hassinger proposal due consideration. That is the committee's response, Bishop.

BISHOP LAWSON: I assume this takes the form of a motion of affirmation of the current rules? And that is from your committee and doesn't require a second. The floor is open. You're ready to vote? If you would affirm the current Rule 36, would you please vote when you see the light. [748 approved] And you do so affirm.

Let me tell you where we are, please. Thank you Jerome. We are now preparing to receive the Africa University report with this wonderful choir as a part of that report. It has been recommended to us that we complete this report and that we take our two hour evening break from the time this report is completed until two hours have elapsed. Is that a satisfactory arrangement with you? Any problems with it anywhere? All right. Ken, you wanting the floor for...microphone 4.

KENNETH CHALKER (East Ohio): Bishop, I would like to move for suspension of Rule 12, on page 35 of the blue book. Regarding distribution to the desks of delegates for the purpose for facilitating a matter of privilege. I apologize for my shaky voice. The altitude of this conference is affecting me. The Committee on Agenda has granted Bishop Edwin Boulton time on the Friday agenda for the purpose of cordially inviting the General Conference to Cleveland, Ohio. And specifically, to the wonderfully renewed city of Cleveland, indeed, in the year 2000 and the East Ohio Annual Conference.

We would like to have distributed at each delegate's desk, a formal written invitation, in preparation for Bishop Boulton's appearance at the podium on Friday. I respectfully request suspension of Rule 12 to allow for the distribution of this invitation.

BISHOP LAWSON: Motion to suspend that rule for this purpose. If you would, is that seconded? It is seconded. Would you consent to raise hands just now? If you would suspend the rule, would you please raise your hand? Thank you, if you would not, would you raise your hand. The rule is suspended. And now you're moving that you would like to have permission to distribute this material. Do I understand you correctly? Is that motion seconded? All right. It is before you. Would you give consent for the distribution of this material? If you would, would you raise your hand? Thank you. If you would not, would you raise your hand? (Passed)

Let me use this as an occasion to say to you that, however, there has been other material circulated in the course of this particular session for which permission was not gained. And we simply take this occasion to remind us all that that is not appropriate. There is, as I understand, around here no mood to be punitive toward anyone, but simply to ask us all to be sensitive to the guidelines of the General Conference. Now it is really important that we go to the Africa University report. Do have something pretty critical for us here, Sir? Microphone 9.

DALE FOOSHEE (Kansas East): I request for a very short personal privilege so that we may get this in this afternoon.

BISHOP LAWSON: Personal privilege is recognized.

FOOSHEE: As a member of the Kansas East delegation, it is my privilege and joy to sit with Rev. H. Sharon Howell, one of the ten clergy women in full connection elected to the 1976 General Conference. The 1976 General Conference marked the first time when women with full clergy rights were seated at the General Conference of the United Methodist Church.

Granting women full clergy rights was made possible by the action of the 1956 General Conference of the Methodist Church, and affirmed at the 1968 uniting conference. Today, 40 years after that action, Sharon sits as one of over 100 clergy women in full connection, together with 200 lay women delegates in this General Conference. I move that this conference of the United Methodist Church affirm and celebrate full clergy rights for women, and also invite the General Conference to express commendation and thanksgiving for the profound and faithful ministry of thousands of clergy women who serve Christ in the church within our United Methodist connection. Thank you. (applause)

Thank you for that, and I'd like to suggest to you that we ask these clergy women to stand, if they will, please. Because of my failure to be clear, I think, in the instructions, we had some clergy women standing and who looked for all the world like men. [laughter]. Calling on Janice Huie for a matter.

JANICE HUIE (Southwest Texas): This is a technical motion to help us later in the week. Bishop Lawson, I move that we suspend the rules for the purpose of lifting Calendar Item 195 from the Consent Calendar and reconsidering it with the Local Church report. We harmonized our version from Local Church with the Committee on Discipleship, and this will help us bring one report to the conference.

PAUL ERVIN (North Carolina): Paul Irvin, chair of the Legislative Committee on Discipleship, and we confirm that this is the case.

BISHOP LAWSON: We have a motion to suspend the rules in order that--please state it again so we'll all understand it.

HUIE: In order that we may reconsider Calendar Item 195. It's currently on the Consent Calendar. We'll need to lift it from the Consent Calendar, and it will be reconsidered with the Local Church report.

BISHOP LAWSON: Thank you. You could certainly use hands again. If you would suspend the rules for this purpose, would you please raise your hand? Thank you. If you would not? And they are suspended, and that is effective. Thank you very much. We turn now to the Africa University report. Roger Ireson.

ROGER IRESON: (General Secretary of the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry) Thank you, Bishop Lawson. At the conclusion of our report, after the choir has sung its last song, we'll ask the marshalls and the pages to distribute this printed report. Ladies and gentleman of the General Conference, it is time to celebrate.

In St. Louis, eight years ago, we came to you with a dream of the African people for a university, and at that time, we had an empty field. Shortly thereafter, at a meeting in Harare, in a moment of inspiration, in the middle of the night, Bishop David Lawson woke up and penned the mission statement for the faculty of theology that has now become incorporated in the mission statement of Africa University. And that mission statement has guided us throughout these years.

Four years ago in Louisville, we had acquired government legislation for a private, church-related university in a country that had never had private, church-related universities, along with three buildings renovated by the volunteer-in-mission teams, and two faculties functioning: agriculture and theology.

Today, in Denver, in 1996, we have nine buildings, four faculties (agriculture, theology, management, and education, which is opening in August of this year); and a humanities core teaching staff; $9.5 million in the endowment fund providing scholarships to students from 17 African countries. We hope to have five faculties by the turn of the century and 1000 students by the year 2000 thousand.

However, the best way to understand Africa University is to meet the students. So we have brought the Africa University choir and two recent graduates who are now at work in their home countries, to meet you at the General Conference during this presentation. I know that you will want to know that a CD of the choir and tapes are on sale in the bookstore. And they've been provided graciously by the Board of Global Ministries. We're all cooperating in this great project. And all the proceeds go to Africa University.

It is my pleasure now to introduce to a man who has given great leadership and commitment to this project, the president of the Board of Higher Education and Ministry, Bishop Calvin D. McConnell. [applause]

BISHOP CALVIN D. McCONNELL (Seattle Area): It has been eight years now since Bishop Leontine Kelly swung her gavel down confirming the vote that was made by the General Conference for global United Methodism to establish at last, again, in our long heritage, a new univeristy, this time in sub-Saharan Africa. Zimbabwe was the place that was chosen to establish this university. The Zimbabwe Conference than donated land next to the Hartzell school in old, Mutare, on a beautiful hillside that was covered with brush and grass and yam fields.

And now we have a campus there. Eight years, and we have done it. We United Methodists from across the world have accomplished an awesome challenge of giving birth to a new full-fledged, four-year university in the kind of days and times in which we live. It is a university for African students, with an African administration, African faculty, for the most part, an international board of trustees, the majority of whom are Africans, an enrollment of 300, our first graduating class in December of 1994, a campus of beautiful and functional buildings which continues to grow. And here's our opportunity as a general church. (applause)

To the students, we welcome you with our hearts overflowing with love for you, and with the expression of gratitude to each other here, for our faithful witness that has made it possible for these students to be here. And always with our hearts filled with gratitude to the grace of God, which has made this all possible. Now we want you to see a brief video. And then, following this video, we will ask the first chancellor of the university, Bishop De Carvalho, to speak to us and to introduce the students.

BISHOP EMILIO de CARVALHO: Africa University stands today as a concrete commitment of The United Methodist Church in helping to eradicate ignorance and to train the present and the future generations of African leaders. The development of the university comes from an action of 1988 General Conference, implemented by a group of committed women and men, and will continue to create a universal forum for the youth of our countries, moving them toward intellectual maturity through university training.

Being the only officially United Methodist-related university in Africa, please note, the only officially United Methodist-related university in the whole continent of Africa. Coming from an action of this General Conference, Africa University stands today as the sole United Methodist institution of higher learning on the continent of Africa, directly established by this United Methodist Church.

This time we bring to this General Conference, some of the outstanding first fruits of its endeavors, who are already engaged in applying what they have learned in their own countries. They are a part of a group of 29 graduates, and are here to help us, all of us, to re-catch the vision and to join the United Methodist Church in this major project, by dedicating, again, anew, our prayers and the material resources to the growth and development of such an educational undertaking.

It is with a great joy that I introduce to you, Mr. Paulo Filipe Bunga, a graduate in agriculture and natural resources from Angola, and the Rev. Tsitsi Moyo, a graduate in theology from Zimbabwe. Let's welcome them here. (applause)

PAULO FILIPE BUNGA (Angola): Thank you. In March 1992, 28 seeds were planted at a place called Africa University in Zimbabwe. And on 17 December 1994, 28 learned minds were harvested from Africa University. (applause) And I bring to you special greetings from the 28 students that graduated from Africa University in 1994. My name is Paulo Filipe Bunga from Angola, a 1994 graduate from the faculty of agriculture and natural resources. After graduation I was employed as an agricultural base project manager by the United Nations Development Program in Mozambique, where we took the challenge of changing an ex-soldier into a farmer in order to increase food production. I'm presently employed by the World Food Program of the United Nations in Angola as a food aid monitor. My responsibilities range from monitoring and coordinating food assistance and insuring over-all food security in my region of assignment. My activities go around in four essential areas:

First, I have to organize food distribution to communities in need. I do that through surveys where I identify areas of critical food shortage and I have to negotiate with the government and other non-governmental organizations in order to provide food, and I distribute it.

Second, I make a general assessment of the marketing system and the marketing conditions in my region.

Third, I create food-for-work programs whereby I motivate farmers to participate in other rural development projects. And they are paid or given food in return, instead of money.

Fourth, my food security activities involve measuring the farmers' food stock for a period of six months. And, if I find a family which is food-insecure, I have to try my best to provide the food. I'd like to stress the fact that my intellectual and professional capabilities are fruits of the high standard of education that Africa University provided, along with a strong Christian foundation. (applause)

Finally, on behalf of Africa University "alpha class" I take this opportunity to thank you all for the great support you gave us through graduation and you continue to give to Africa University. (applause)

TSITSI MOYO: Bishops, pastors, lay delegates, I feel greatly honored and privileged to be invited to this General Conference. My name is Tsitsi Moyo. I am married and I am a mother of four beautiful girls. I was born in 1965 in an extra big family of 10, comprising of eight boys and two girls. When I was a young girl, I had to drop out from school to let the boys continue with their education. This was quite a blow to me. I always wanted to go to university, and it seemed as if my dream would never be realized.

I was married very young, but my zeal for education kept on growing. After 10 years of marriage, and being a mother of four, my husband, who is a pastor also, allowed me to study. It was not easy, being a wife, a mother and a student all at the same time, but the good Lord saw me through and I finally qualified to go to university.

The building of Africa University was right on time. It was an answer to my prayers. To me, Africa University was built especially for me. (applause) If it had been opened a year earlier or a year later maybe I could not have made it. It was God's perfect timing. With the help of my church, I managed to secure a place there. At Africa University, I learned so many things. When I graduated, I was a whole new person. I learned my duties and responsibilities as a pastor. I was helped to realize my identity and my strength.

I learned self-control which is vital for a pastor. I also learned how to deal with opposition and criticism. Now I am leading a church with a membership of more than 1,500. When I was appointed there, (that is less than two years ago), it had a membership of 700, comprised mainly of elders, males for that matter. I being the first woman clergy to be sent to them, surely opposition and criticisms were not to be exempted. My opposers had done a good job. They had exercised my spiritual muscles. Instead of falling, I stood up. Instead of crying and frowning as I used to do, I smiled. Most of all, at Africa University I learned to praise God in everything, in every situation whether good or bad. (applause)

My church is in Harare and it is known by the name of St. Andrew's United Methodist Church. I preach, teach, do counselling, do house-to-house visitations. I visit prisons and preach to prisoners. I visit hospitals and share the good news with the sick and preach to the hospital staff during lunch time. Pastoring is very interesting; it is full of challenges. Each day is different from the previous one. I enjoy my work. I am thankful to the Lord who called me, and to Africa University for the preparation and training and to you all for your support. Thank you. (applause)

JIM SALLEY (South Carolina): Bishop Lawson, members of the General Conference, we greet you in the name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. I'm Jim Salley, a lay delegate from South Carolina and the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Development for Africa University. From offices in Nashville, Tennessee, at the Board of Education and Ministry, it's our responsibility to advance Africa University to the United Methodist Church, and the world. We bring you greetings on behalf of Dr. J. W. Z. Kurewa, the chancellor and president of your Africa University, the administration, faculty, staff, and students, and say, thank you, thank you to this General Conference and the United Methodist Church for your support, your gifts and your prayers. Africa University was founded on a dream or a vision that can be traced back to 1897 and a Methodist Missionary from the Central Illinois Annual Conference by the name of Bishop Joseph Crane Hartzell.

We believe that Africa University is a gift from God, and we thank all of you for being Africa University partners and helping to make the dream a reality. Dr. Benjamin E. Mays, the great African-American educator from South Carolina, said, "It's a sin to have low aim." He also said, "It's a worse sin to have no aim at all." At Africa University, we have high aim; we aim high. We dream big dreams, and we see visions. At Africa University we know that dreams do come true, because we see God's work as it manifests through the Holy Spirit every day.

We invite you to catch the vision and be a partner in one of the most important mission projects of the United Methodist Church in this century. In the 36th chapter of the Book of Exodus, verse 7, you find these words, "For the stuff they had, was sufficient to do all the work and more."

Well, at Africa University, we don't have enough stuff yet. But we believe, that within the United Methodist Church, within Methodism worldwide, we have enough stuff to do all the work and more for Africa University. Let's finish what we've started. Bishop Lawson, members of the General Conference, thank you for your support and your prayers for Africa University. Now, Mr. Patrick Matsikenyiri and the Africa University Choir singing, "The Dream is Alive." (applause)

ROGER IRESON: Bishop Lawson, this concludes the report of the Africa University.

BISHOP LAWSON: I recognize Dick Reeves. Microphone 1.

DICK REEVES (Central Illinois): As has already been said, Bishop Hartzell came from our conference and was elected a bishop a hundred years ago this year in New Orleans. I also serve on the Africa University Board of Directors, and I'm chairman of its Building and Grounds Committee. Bishop Sondu Kim, directing pastor of Kwanlin Methodist Church in Seoul, Korea, is here among us. This is the church that has given Africa University $1 million U.S. dollars to build the chapel on the campus. The working drawings are now in process. We go out for tenders in August. We hope to start building in September of this year. I'd like to ask permission for Bishop Kim to address us briefly. Anyone who gives Africa University $1 million ought to be permitted, I think, to say a word. [applause]

BISHOP SONDU KIM: Thank you very much, Bishop Lawson, and delegates of conference. It is my great privilege to express my testimony to you, what God has done to our church. One hundred and ten years ago, American missionaries came over to Korea. They served the gospel. They planted the churches and they established the universities, colleges and seminaries. Now we have 1,035,000 Methodists spreading the gospel to all of the world. Now, by the millennium it will be open, new future. This is the time of cooperation for the organization of the gospel. Now Korean church eagerly wanted to help the globalization of the gospel. We are not a rich church. We are a poor church, as you know. But we eagerly wanted to cooperate with you for the mission all over the world.

Still we have the tension between North Korea and South Korea. Probably you noticed or you heard about the tension between the North and the South just a few weeks ago. However, you prayed for us. You encouraged all of us. God will help us with reconciliation and unification in the future. So last Easter Sunday morning, we offered them the money to send to North Korea. They are starting to die spiritually and physically. We are going to help them to resurrect them to be as a child of God. Now, I eagerly request for you to pray for us, Korean people. We eagerly wanted to help, to cooperate with you, into mission for all the world. Thank you for prayer. Thank you for your encouragement. God bless you. Thank you very much. [applause]

BISHOP LAWSON: Now we come to the time of our adjournment. It is my understanding that you will be back here at 7:30 to do business. During the time after adjournment, if any of you want to stay, this good choir will continue our concert for us. I think that it's appropriate to repeat the experience of prayer. We are aware here in the United States that across Oklahoma, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, large numbers of persons have become the victims of tornadoes. Significant numbers of churches have been destroyed, lives have been lost, and untold numbers of homes have been left beyond the possibility of being used. June Goldman, I think you'll understand and I'd like to suggest this evening sometime that your motion might come forward instead of at this particular moment. I'd like to invite you all to be in prayer with me, and with that prayer, we are adjourned.

CAROLYN MARSHALL (South Indiana): It is almost anti--can you hold for a moment? It seems anticlimatic after this to have to make some announcements, yet there are three that do need to come before us. The first one being that the presiding officers need to meet immediately near the steps here at the front of the platform. The Leadership Team for Ordained and Diaconal Ministry will meet very briefly at the conclusion of this evening's session in A106, and the Discipleship Legislative Committee is to meet immediately for approximately ten minutes in rooms A108, 110. Thank you.

General Conference Webmaster: Susan Brumbaugh
PETS Creator: John Brawn