|
Friday needed to make no apology at all for itself: glorious, the sun was out, sky was blue and mostly cloudless, temperature quite comfortable — prompting Frisbee throwing on the green, swimmers in the outdoor pool, and thoughts of defecting to the Pacific Northwest.
Reference and Counsel Session Two
There are a series of motions coming before the national convention, placed by various congregations, spaced over the next couple of days. The motions themselves were distributed to the convention as submitted. On a separate piece of paper, Ref and Counsel (R & C) distributed their recommendation, No Action, with no rationale as to why. It was stated several times that the R & C rationale would be given at the time the motion was brought to the floor. Several questions were posed to the chair (Bishop) about the propriety of Ref and Counsel making any recommendation at all, about making a No Action (cutting off debate before it even started) recommendation, and about the purported right of a congregation to send a motion to the floor of the convention without hindrance or filter.
A direct attack on Ref and Counsel making a No Action recommendation was launched through a Point of Order: No Action is a negative motion; motions must be positive. It was explained that the No Action served only to give the convention the option to hear the motion or not. So, it was not negative.
Chair ruled the No Action recommendation in order.
Appealed.
Vote Cards: Green Yes ruled (upholding the chair)
Division of the House called for
Yes 215, No 115
A second motion had been made at the same time, stating, in essence, that the Right of Congregation to Petition the Convention should not be interfered with by R & C
Chair ruled the No Action recommendation was in order
R & C motion 1.1 Nominations and Elections from Faith Lutheran, Sundre, Alberta
In essence this motion would disallow the practice of having National Church Council submit nominations for the Nominating Committee, and replace that system with one that had the nominations for that committee being made directly from the floor by the convention delegates. R & C has recommended that the nominations for the committee still come from the National Convention, but that there can be nominations from the floor of the convention. Motion was given the required 24 hour notice for action, will be taken up on Saturday.
In a Bible Study by Bishop Dr Munib A Younan, Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land, he said, "Our strength comes not from our numbers; our strength comes from our witness." This seemed to have many more applications that just the topic of Israel-Palestine it was said about.
Report of Elections
National Church Council Elections
British Columbia Synod Lay — Jeanie Stann 115 Alvin Settle 97, Loris Martin 96
Alberta Synod Lay — Barb Stolee 133, Keith Overgaard 92, Margaret Sadler 91.
Alberta Synod Ordained — Trish Schmermund 149, Philip Gagnon 110, Thomas Peterson 63
Saskatchewan Lay — Heidi Hesselink 147, Karen Johanson 109, Patricia Leatherdale 59
Eastern Synod Ordained — Douglas Reble 144, Peter Banker 97, James Brown 79
In all of the above, no winner was declared; there will be a second ballot containing only the names of the two who received the highest number of votes. (Apologies if any of the names are misspelled.)
The Eastern Synod Lay 1 and Lay 2 candidates on the first ballot had errors and the vote will have to be re-done.
Manitoba/Northern Ontario Synod Ordained — Mark Koenker 211, Laurel Seyfert 81 — Koenker elected.
ELCIC Group Services Elections
< p> Ordained — Douglas Kramer 191, Guenter Dahle 137 — Kramer elected.
Lay 1 — Jackie Dojack 197, Hans Lung 116 — Dojack elected.
Lay 2 — George Sawatzky 168, Erik Peters 150 — Sawatzky elected.
Court of Adjudication Elections
Ordained — Stephen Kristenson 193, William Huras 132 — Kristenson elected.
Lay 1 — Roger Kingsley 204, Wayne Throndsn 123 — Kingsley elected.
Lay 2 — Martin Bergbusch 189, Darlene Johnson 123 — Bergbusch elected.
Second ballot for NCC was held.
NCC report on the Holy Land Motion
Resolution in section F of the Bulletin of Reports, found on the ELCIC website. Debate on this motion went way over time.
A Point of Order — Order of the Day was raised
Bishop ruled the time is extended
Speaker challenged the ruling
Cards Vote Chair upheld
R & C Motion 1.2 Regarding ELCIC Conflict of Interest Policy, Ascension Lutheran Church, Calgary, Alberta
Said: That any member of any ELCIC decision-making body only be permitted to vote on a motion "if they do not have a direct or indirect interest in the outcome of the motion".
R & C recommended No Action.
R & C stated it had three concerns: first, that the National Church Council and synods already had conflict of interest policies in place, making this redundant. Secondly, the vagueness of direct or indirect interest. We all have direct or indirect interest in the matters coming before this church, so at some point no one could vote on anything coming before a decision-making body. And thirdly there were jurisdictional concerns depending on interpretation of "direct or indirect matters" that could lead to delving into legitimate synodical matters.
Question: is this a recommendation or a motion by R & C?
Answer: a motion
Challenge the ruling
Out of order, was decided earlier, then was the appropriate time to challenge.
Debate on No Action Recommendation (debates will be summarized, not verbatim, to give the flavor of the discussion, not a transcript)
Against no action — we can amend that which is proposed on the floor but not that that goes away and is never debated.
Favor no action — while we are in favor of doing away with conflict of interest this motion is not clear enough to become policy
Against no action — RC should have clarified vagueness before it got here; and parishes should be able to bring things to the floor without hindrance
Against no action — this No Action buries the issues, not fixes
Against no action — delegates and congregations should be able to bring motions to the floor
Favor no action — policies are already in place — redundant
Against no action — this discussion is not about the motion itself but on the motion of no action
Vote: No Action Passed on Cards
R & C Motion 1.3 To Preserve and Protect A Congregation's Ownership and Control of its Assets from Calvary Evangelical Lutheran church, Edmonton, Alberta
R & C recommends No action
R & C said that constitutions and bylaws already provide for the protections asked for… This is redundant
Against No Action — There appear to have been 2 attempts to take actions to seize the property of congregations
Vote: Cards, No Action Passed
R & C motion 1.4 Regarding ELCIC Human and Financial Resources from Trinity Lutheran Church, Ponoka, Alberta
"No financial or human resources of the ELCIC, at either the National or Synod levels, are to be expended in relation to any initiatives supporting same-sex blessings, same-sex marriage, or the ordination of practicing homosexuals. National Church Council, Division employees, Department employees, Synod employees, Synod councils, National Bishop, Synod Bishops and Synod committees, Synod Offices and Synod employees must cease any further action related to enabling members of the Roster of Ordained Clergy of this church or any congregation from performing or participating in any capacity in the blessing or marriage of same-sex couples or same-sex groups of people or the ordination of practicing homosexuals. Action includes, but is not limited to, discussion, analysis, review, policy formulation and motion preparation relating to any aspect of Pastors of the ELCIC performing same-sex blessings, same-sex marriage or ordination of practicing homosexuals."
R & C recommends No Action
R & C said no authority exists to undertake or enforce such a broad sweeping restriction, and to try would run the risk of restricting legitimate synodical authority over the uses of synod resources.
Debate
Against No Action — This motion asks for the discernment of the convention, not of 8 people on the R & C committee
For No Action — This motion is a sign of despair, not a sign of hope. [Chided for speaking to the motion itself and not the No Action recommendation]
Against No Action — This should motion should get to the floor of the convention for debate
Against No Action — This issue should be allowed to come up.
Against No Action — We are Lutherans, Congregationalists, we have a right to bring up subjects
[It was explained again that the No Action recommendation in fact is not quashing debate, but actually a motion that causes the convention to decide for itself, one way or another, whether it will take up the motion, as was being demonstrated right now.]
Vote: Cards ruled Green, No Action Passed
Division of the House called for
Chair ruled Out of Order, saying it was clear that Green had won
Chair challenged
Division of the House
Yes 204, No 114
No Action Passed
Worship service was held.
Following worship, Lutherans Concerned in Canada held a hospitality suite reception in the Student Union Building attended by close to 70 people.
Tomorrow brings more resolutions submitted by congregations. |
