Plan B is Enforcing Plan A



Comments (3)

Comment Feed

Pelham 1-2-3 analogy

Jeremy has it right to a point, but the true analogy should be between Plan B and the MFSA plan, both of which alter the current reality only in dimension. The IOT/CT plan would significantly alter the current structure to eliminate the competition between the current program agencies for money and mandates, while the other two plans would continue that dynamic tension, for better or worse. The current board structure is not truly a "governance" model, because the boards have become sounding boards for the strategies developed by staff rather than strategic think tanks for plotting the future of the denomination. Our general church staff is VERY good, and have served us well in many ways. The IOT/CT plan will continue the staff while removing the multiple boards which have been competing all these years.

Dr. Albert Outler, the late professor at Perkins Seminary usually described as the leading Methodist Theologian of the 20th century, pointed out that this approach (multiple boards/agencies) would disseminate the power of the denomination too much and inevitably weaken us. You can look up his testimony on the proposed structure to the General Conference in 1968. If we narrow the focus of our executive efforts as proposed by the IOT/CT plan, we can then turn our efforts to reforming our outmoded budget process at the General Church level, which now has us beginning to plan budget expenses and revenues SIX (yes, 6) years before the last dollar will be collected and spent. Anybody want to try that in their local church or home?
I welcome your prayers and suggestions as we head to Tampa. Jay Brim, SWTX Conf. Lay Leader and CT Legislative Task Force Chair

Jay Brim more than 10 years ago

Bottom up

I'd be in favor of doing away with bishops entirely. Bishops are merely figurehead politicians who get paid goo gobs of money to jet around the globe on our dime and do little else. And yet they cry their jobs are so hard they need a set-aside bishop to carry the load.

I fail to see why more people aren't suspicious of a plan the bishops support which asks great sacrifice and cost of clergy and the general church, while offering no sacrifice on their part. Would you elect a politician who's policies reflected such a philosophy?

Mack more than 10 years ago

Top Down


It seems to me that, given your logic and philosophy (which you articulate very well), we should do away with bishops - in an episcopal form of government, we necessarily ARE top-down.

What should the role of bishop be? Overseer? Or denominational executive? Or something else?



Sky McCracken more than 10 years ago