Executive Council Closing Remarks
February 18, 2011
Download the remarks
We've done good work here in the last three days. We've listened to one another and to leaders doing God's work in the world. We've harnessed the energy bubbling up around the church for change and reform, and we've determined how we can best proceed in a way that ensures the voices of clergy, laypeople and bishops are all heard and respected. In short, we've done the kind of work that people can do when they work within a governance structure that honors their values, their identity, and their desire to respond to the Holy Spirit.
Our success in these last three days demonstrates what I believe: While our governance structures need to be reformed, our governance is not currently broken. There is no reason to think that the bishops, clergy and laypeople who serve on the Standing Commission on the Structure of the Church and the other Commissions, Committees and task forces that are looking at reform are not capable of working together, seeking the guidance of one another and the Holy Spirit and bringing carefully crafted legislation to General Convention. We need to trust one another and trust the structures that have given us gifted, capable leaders we have charged with channeling the energy for reform and using it creatively. I am grateful to all of those leaders and to all of you for taking on this task, and I look forward to the June consultation with the Commissions, Committees and task forces that are involved in this work.
Let us proceed remembering that our governance structures have served us well for more than two centuries. We need to approach their reform with humility, and not expect that we can improve in a matter of days what has evolved over many generations. In our eagerness to reform our governance, we need to be mindful of unintended consequences—particularly of willfully ignoring the long-term consequences that our actions could have for the future of the church. This is what sociologist Robert K. Merton called "the imperious immediacy of interest."
For example, one proposal "in the water" is to reduce the number of deputies from each diocese. But if we stop to think about how many young deputies occupy the third and fourth positions in both the clergy and lay orders, we might realize that reducing the number of deputies could have the unintended consequence of reducing the number of young people involved in the life and leadership of our church. I don't think any of us would seriously make the argument that this would be a good strategy for church growth and vitality.
We need to remember that our governance is grounded in our theology of baptism, which is essential to our identity as Episcopalians. Our church's representative structure, where all of the baptized work together to make decisions and set policy, is a great attraction for people seeking a community of faith where their voices can be heard and those in flight from more authoritarian denominations. In our haste to reform, let us not sacrifice evangelism.
As I said in my opening remarks, as I go around the Church I see extraordinary people who have embraced their baptismal promises, gained strength and affirmation from General Convention resolutions that speak to their particular calls, and then put their words into action in very significant and selfless ways. These people are living testimony to the fact that our governance enables our mission as the people of God. Yesterday we heard about how governance is enabling parishes and dioceses across the church to contribute to mission in Haiti, and how the NetsforLife Inspiration Fund is carrying out General Convention's commitment to the Millennium Development Goals.
These examples, along with many others across the church, show clearly that it is a false choice to suggest that governance that is faithful to our identity as Episcopalians is incompatible with mission. This false choice between governance and mission will not serve us well and, in fact, it devalues the ministry of people who have devoted years to putting General Convention resolutions into meaningful action in their daily lives. I want us to consider governance reform proposals with great respect and humility for the Episcopalians, past and present, whose mission has been possible because of our representative, inclusive governance. And I want us to proceed carefully in making changes that could diminish the mandate and strength of mission around the church.
Finally, as we are thinking about reform, I want to remind us that we need to look comprehensively at our governance structures. While much of the current energy seems to be focused on General Convention reform, we need to remember that General Convention is a small percentage of our budget and has not increased proportionally in the budget for some time. The General Convention approved triennial budget for General Convention related expenses was only 8.3% of the total approve budget for the 2000-2003 triennium. Since then it has slowly declined and for the 2010-2012 triennium the General Convention related budget is 7.6% of budgeted expenses. If we are interested in making our governance more cost-effective across the board, we need to consider how to reform and streamline other structures that cost more and are less transparent.
It is a great honor to serve with all of you. In the coming months, I look forward to continuing our work together with fidelity to one another, to the work that God has called us to do, and to our continued journey to bring the church we love closer to the kingdom of God.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
