bulgaria romania map
By Made by Bogdan., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=112897
The Bulgaria-Romania Provisional Annual Conference, by the unanimous vote of its delegates at its annual conference session on April 1, 2022, acted to withdraw from The United Methodist Church and unite with the Global Methodist Church effective May 1, 2022 (see April 1, 2022 Minutes reproduced at the end of this response). When the annual conference acted, they did so in accordance with The United Methodist Church’s Book of Discipline and several decisions of the Judicial Council (see Decisions 1366, 1424, and 1425). Members of the annual conference had engaged in dialogue with the resident bishop, Patrick Streiff, for weeks before the annual conference session about this matter.
The annual conference chose not to proceed to become an autonomous church because that was not their desire or intent. Rather, effective May 1, they withdrew from The United Methodist Church while simultaneously uniting with a new Wesleyan body, the Global Methodist Church.
The Wesleyan Covenant Association (WCA) supports the action of the Bulgaria-Romania Provisional Annual Conference precisely because it is in accordance with the Discipline. We commend the delegates who were in dialogue with Bishop Streiff in the weeks prior to the annual conference session for the respectful way in which they shared their intended actions with Bishop Streiff.
While the WCA continues to work for the adoption of the Protocol for Reconciliation and Grace through Separation, it has not been adopted at this time. As a result, it is not surprising that those who wish to be free from the ongoing conflict in the church would avail themselves of alternative paths. That is the prerogative of individuals, local churches, and annual conferences. We regret the actions of some who would seek to control what is not theirs to control.
The WCA continues to encourage individuals, local churches, and annual conferences to be transparent in their actions and to be respectful to those with whom they share community. One does not have to agree with the position of others to be respectful. We believe that the delegates to the session of the Bulgaria-Romania Provisional Annual Conference were transparent, having shared their intended action prior to the convening of the session, and respectful, having had numerous conversations with Bishop Streiff prior to April 1.
We continue to pray for Bishops Christian Alsted, Harald Ruckert, and Patrick Streiff, and for all members of The United Methodist Church in Europe in this season.
Wesleyan Covenant Association
Annual Conference for Bulgaria and Romania
Meeting Minutes
01 April 2022
I. Our Way Forward – discussion and voting on the Resolution of the Annual Conference for Bulgaria and Romania for Withdrawal from the United Methodist Church
Bishop Patrick Streifff called the meeting to order opening with the following statement:
According to the agenda, the first item for consideration today is to vote on a resolution for Bulgaria and Romania to leave the United Methodist Church. First, I would like to ask the Superintendent to read the full text of the resolution.
Daniel Topalski read the full text of the resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE ANNUAL CONFERENCE FOR BULGARIA AND ROMANIA FOR WITHDRAWAL
FROM THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
In light of the current crisis in The United Methodist Church, the Annual Conference for Bulgaria and Romania enacts the following resolution:
1. The Annual Conference for Bulgaria and Romania (registered as the Evangelical Methodist Episcopal Church in Bulgaria and the various legal entities in Romania) withdraws from and severs all ties, legal or otherwise, with The United Methodist Church as of 01 May 2022 and immediately becomes an annual conference of the Global Methodist Church, a Wesleyan Christian church that upholds the authority of Scripture and seeks to live in obedience to the Lord’s commands, as we understand them. From henceforth, this annual conference commits itself to live under the doctrinal standards and polity of the Global Methodist Church, as stipulated in its Transitional Book of Doctrines and Discipline and the Book of Doctrines and Discipline as hereafter adopted by its General Conference. This resolution is not made on the basis of Article 572 of the Discipline of the United Methodist Church.
2. The Annual Conference for Bulgaria and Romania (registered as the Evangelical Methodist Episcopal Church in Bulgaria and the various legal entities in Romania) shall operate under the bishop or president pro tempore assigned by the Transitional Leadership Council of The Global Methodist Church, on the date at which this resolution becomes effective. The annual conference will assume responsibility for all salary, social and health benefits and operating expenses of such office. The Annual Conference for Bulgaria and Romania releases any claim on the Episcopal Fund of The United Methodist Church effective upon the date of its withdrawal from The United Methodist Church.
3. The national leadership cabinet of the Evangelical Methodist Episcopal Church in Bulgaria and the superintendent of the Romanian part of the Annual Conference are directed and empowered to take all actions necessary to effectuate this resolution for withdrawal from The United Methodist Church and joining with the Global Methodist Church. The first step in relation to this will be for the Annual Conference to amend the Articles of Incorporation of the Evangelical Methodist Episcopal Church in Bulgaria according to the Laws for Religious Institutions and the present resolution.
4. The Evangelical Methodist Episcopal Church in Bulgaria and the various legal entities in Romania retain the entirety of their tangible and intangible property.
5. Immediately after the adoption of this resolution, the clergy of this Annual Conference shall meet in an executive session, with each clergy member having the opportunity to sign a declaration of intent to surrender their credentials in The United Methodist Church, affirming their commitment to the Transitional Book of Doctrines and Discipline of the Global Methodist Church, and requesting issuance of credentials from the Global Methodist Church. Clergy members of the Annual Conference who have signed such a declaration shall thereafter be entitled to a vote as clergy in the Annual Conference. Upon receiving the declaration, the Board of Ministry of the Annual Conference shall issue ordination credentials to persons signing the declaration recognizing their status in the Global Methodist Church. Persons who do not sign the declaration shall have no vote in the Annual Conference and their failure to sign the declaration shall constitute a resignation from any board, agency, or leadership position in the Annual Conference. The same rule applies to all local pastors who sign the declaration continue their ministry in the Global Methodist church.
6. Any clergy member of the Annual Conference who desires to remain part of The United Methodist Church shall apply for transfer to an annual conference of The United Methodist Church in accordance with its Book of Discipline.
7. Any lay members of the Annual Conference who intend to remain members of The United Methodist Church after the adoption of this resolution shall recuse themselves from any Annual Conference boards, agencies, and leadership positions and shall abstain from all votes on business of the Annual Conference after the adoption of this resolution.
8. Any congregation of the Evangelical Methodist Episcopal Church in Bulgaria and in the Romanian part of the Annual Conference that desires to remain part of The United Methodist Church may do so by a simple majority vote of all professing members present and voting at a regular or called church conference. Such action must occur within one calendar year of this resolution becoming effective.
9. The Annual Conference for Romania and Bulgaria commits itself to allow the free flow of information to clergy and congregations, so that they may make an informed decision for their future without intimidation or the withholding of information.
Bishop Streiff: The resolution that is under consideration has been brought before the Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church. As such, we are under the jurisdiction of the Discipline of the United Methodist Church. In the discussions that were had prior to this session after I received this resolution, I shared with your superintendents that I do not see a legal basis in the Discipline for the acceptance of such a resolution. I shared with them that the only legal grounds that I see for an Annual Conference to leave the United Methodist Church are found in Article 572 of the Discipline. This is the only legal possibility for leaving the United Methodist Church. And because this is the only option, I have to rule that this decision is out of order.
When a bishop determines that something is out of order because it is a violation of the Discipline, it cannot be considered by the Annual Conference. Then those who have submitted such a resolution have the right and opportunity to declare on what grounds they have brought their resolution. Then it becomes a question of law. I declare this resolution to be out of order because it violates the Discipline. You are free to challenge it and say on what grounds you oppose it.
Daniel Topalski: I appeal the decision of the bishop that this resolution is out of order, on the basis that this is a question not of law but of parliamentary procedure. Despite the bishop’s admonition that the resolution has no legal grounds in the Discipline and that is a question of law, we are not asking for a ruling on a question of law. I exercise my right to appeal the “out of order” ruling and call upon the Annual Conference to move forward and vote on this matter.
Tsvetan Iliev: I second the motion.
Daniel Topalski: The procedure states, as upheld by the Judicial Council, that when the bishop declares an item as “out of order”, the appeal can be made by the Annual Conference and still be voted upon. The Judicial Council does not rule on these issues and this is not a question of law. We are simply challenging the “out of order” ruling and I call upon the Annual Conference to decide whether or not they will uphold the bishop’s ruling. This is in accordance with the Discipline.
Patrick Streiff: I would like to hear the legal basis for your resolution.
Daniel Topalski: As we have stated in the resolution, we do not believe that Article 572 applies to us. That article speaks only about autonomous, affiliated and semi-affiliated churches that maintain some kind of relationship with the United Methodist Church. This is not our aim. The resolution clearly states that we do not want to become a church as is delineated in Article 572. We want to join the Global Methodist Church effective 01 May 2022 and not to remain an affiliated church with the United Methodist Church.
The legal grounds on which we propose this resolution are in accordance with Decision #1366 of the Judicial Council, a ruling that was made in preparation for the Special General Conference held in 2019. In that ruling the Judicial Council was considering the different constitutional plans being proposed to the Special GC and the Judicial Council determined that an Annual Conference has a fundamental and basic right to choose to withdraw from the UMC as a body. This is not explicitly found in the Discipline and it should be. But the General Conference has been inactive on this issue and has remained silent on it.
This does not mean, however, that we have no right to act. The fundamental rights of the acting bodies of the United Methodist Church cannot depend on the inaction of the General Conference. If there are no other rulings that specifically relate to our resolution, we can act in accordance with the general procedures and therefore, we can call for a vote on this resolution.
With this clarification of our legal grounds, I reiterate that we have the right to vote on whether or not to accept the decision of the presiding bishop who has ruled the resolution to be “out of order”. I urge the Annual Conference to vote on whether or not this item will be a part of our agenda. What matters are actions, not intentions - a basic legal position. The annual conference can and should vote. If the bishop does not wish to put the matter to a vote, I will move to suspend the rules and remove the presiding bishop so that a new chair be appointed during the consideration of this matter.
Patrick Streiff: Do you refer to the Judicial council?
Daniel Topalski: No, I don't.
Patrick Streiff: The legal basis you mention is Decision 1366 of the Judicial Council. For your information as regards the Annual Conference, I would like to share that the Council of Bishops have asked for an interpretative decision on this Decision 1366 as to whether an Annual Conference in the United States can leave the United Methodist Church or if there are other elements in the Discipline that restrict voting on such a matter. This question is being considered by the Judicial Council. We hope that by April the Judicial Council will issue a ruling and clarify the issue. When we vote on what Daniel Topalski has proposed in appealing my decision, this is a question of law. You may have a different opinion about this, but it will be a question of law that I will refer to the Judicial Council. This is my duty.
Questions of law can become effective once the Judicial Council has ruled on them. I understand the urgency you see for the resolution that has been presented. I promise you that if and when the Judicial Council decides that this is a legal course of action, I will immediately call for a special session of the Annual Conference within 10-14 days of such a decision. You can then vote on this resolution. I do not intend to prevent your departure from the UMC if it has a legal basis.
Daniel Topalski: And what about my motion?
Tsvetan Iliev: The issue at hand is not legal but procedural. Before us is the proposal of Daniel Topalski to decide whether or not we will accept the decision of the bishop that this agenda item is out of order. I call on the Annual Conference to vote.
Jessica Morris-Ivanova: According to Robert’s Rules of Order – 11th Edition, p. 255-260, when something is determined to be out of order and then appealed, we, as an Annual Conference, can vote as to whether or not we want to proceed and consider the matter. It is our right to vote on this resolution. I support the opinion that Article 572 does not apply to us. We do not want to become an affiliated church, but to leave the United Methodist Church. With all due respect to the bishop, this Article says that the Annual Conference has the right to express its desire to leave. It is our right to express this desire by voting on the resolution.
Krasimir Madjarov: I reject the resolution made by the bishop. You have heard that the Annual Conference has the right to decide for itself. You have heard also that Article 572 is not for us. We do not want to be an affiliated church. Now is the time for the Annual Conference to vote on the resolution to leave the United Methodist Church.
Mariela Mihailova: I support the vote on the resolution. It is democratic to be able to do so. Otherwise, we would be lost. I have witnessed how slow and cumbersome church procedures can be and there is a danger that the voice of a church community will not be heard. I consider it to be a waste of time for us to continue to debate the issue of inclusiveness. We have more important work to do – namely, the mission of God and the church.
Patrick Streiff: Let me read a short paragraph from Decision 1366. “An annual conference has the right to vote to withdraw from The United Methodist Church. This reserved right, however, is not absolute but must be counterbalanced by the General Conference’s power to “define and fix the powers and duties of annual conferences” in par. 16.3. The last sentence in par. 33 reaffirms this authority by stating that the annual conference “shall discharge such duties and exercise such powers as the General Conference under the Constitution may determine.”
This means that the Annual Conference has rights and powers, but not absolute ones, and they are granted by what the General Conference has determined. This is the reason that the issue before us is a question of law. You can vote that my ruling is incorrect and that you see grounds for your resolution, based on the constitutional Article 33, but this is a question of law.
Daniel Topalski: The procedures state that whoever makes a motion should insist upon its action. There is a motion before the Annual Conference to rule on the bishop's ruling that our resolution is out of order. This regards an issue that has already been debated in the Judicial Council. I do not agree that this resolution be considered a question of law and in such a way we could lose our opportunity to vote. I challenge the bishop's ruling that it is out of order, and I propose that the Annual Conference reject this. If the bishop does not want this vote to take place, I propose that the chair of this meeting be suspended and another be elected to allow us to vote. No one can take away our right to vote.
Tsvetan Iliev: I second this and call on the Annual Conference to vote on the bishop's declaring this “out of order”.
Krasimir Madjarov: I second it as well.
Patrick Streiff: Then let's vote - I have determined this to be out of order, because there is no legal basis in the Discipline for this resolution. Those who disagree with my decision can raise their hand.
Vote to refute the “out of order” ruling of the bishop and to proceed with consideration of the resolution for withdrawal.
For - 35, against - 0, abstained - 0.
Patrick Streiff: I will report this to the Judicial Council, because it is a question of law in my opinion. If the answer of the Judicial Council is that there is a legal basis, I will convene an extraordinary session of the Annual Conference within 10-14 days. This would allow the resolution to be voted on by the Annual Conference.
Daniel Topalski: I have a different understanding of the situation. The bishop ruled that our resolution was out of order. We voted and decided that the resolution was not out of order. The following step is therefore obvious and should be immediate. If the bishop wants to, he can refer our decision to the Judicial Council if we adopt the resolution. We are not bound by the awaiting decisions of the Judicial Council as to whether or not we can exercise our rights and instead just accept the opinion of the bishop. The logic is infinitely simple. Let's not overturn the rules.
Patrick Streiff: At this point, as bishop of the United Methodist Church I will close the debate. If you want to continue this, you will be able to do so with another chair. But it will not be as a part of the Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church.
(At this point Bishop Streiff stood from his place at the table as chair and went and sat in the congregation.)
Daniel Topalski: If every bishop could hinder the work of the Annual Conference, we would not be a Methodist church. I propose that we remove the bishop as chair and proceed to elect an interim president.
Vote of confirmation for the election of an interim president.
For – 35, against – 0, abstained - 0
Daniel Topalski: I recommend that the secretary of the Annual Conference lead the proceedings for the election of a presiding chair for dealing with this agenda item.
Tsvetan Iliev: I will accept nominations for the chair.
Vladimir Zhelezov: I propose the outgoing superintendent, Daniel Topalski.
Tsvetan Iliev: Are there any other nominations?
(There were none.) Then I call for us to elect the temporary chair.
Vote to appoint Daniel Topalski as temporary chair for the consideration of the matter of the resolution.
For - 35, against - 0 and abstained - 0.
Daniel Topalski: I hold this position temporarily and prefer to stand instead of sitting in the place of the bishop. You have the resolution before you. It has come a long way. Discussions and debates were a part of its creation as we considered what our future would be. We have a basis on which to make such a decision. I was told that Decision 1366 is balanced by the rights of the General Conference. The General Conference has not exercised them because it did not find it to be necessary. The right to life, personal dignity and conscience are fundamental rights. А void in the law even in the church should not be a hinderance. You have the resolution before you. I open the floor for comments and discussion before voting.
Bedros Altunian: I didn't think that I would speak. There are only a few of us here today who were present at the founding Annual Conference after the 47 year absence of a bishop. It was like a holiday for us. We received the bishop with great love. Our bishops were respected. We have always had the same attitude towards Bishop Patrick Streiff. He has supported the Annual Conference in Bulgaria so far. Today we are forced to be part of such an Annual Conference. The young people have a new vision and this crisis situation has united them all. Never has the pastoral college been so united and strong as it is today. Fire always purifies. We are experiencing such a moment. If there is a value to be proud of, it is tolerance. We, the older generation of pastors, see that everything is done with love and understanding. This has been going on for two years or more. And to comment on whether we will separate or not already sounds absurd. Whatever happens, we must do it with love. We are grateful that the Central Conference helped restore the church. In my opinion, nothing should change in our attitude towards the Central Conference. We are talking about a difference in culture here. What is normal in America is not normal here. The church has the right to not compromise its views on theological issues. I believe that we must reach a solution for the future in peace. I would not to be in the bishop’s position, but he is accountable to both the Central Conference and the Council of Bishops. The decision to separate as a church requires a very clear position. I think we need to calm down and think about the future. I believe that the new generation will do more than we were able to.
Daniel Topalski: Are there other statements? There are none? Okay? You have seen that along with the resolution there is a motion to amend the Bulgarian church constitution. We are not making significant changes. What we are proposing is a change in the preamble. All other changes deal with whether or not we will have an appointed bishop or interim president in the new church and are an attempt to anticipate the situation to some extent. It states “the annual conference with the consent of the bishop or the interim president, etc ...” We will not change the title of the church as a legal entity as it is registered now as "EMETS in Bulgaria". There are some new requirements that the laws for religious institutions mandate. The current constitution does not comply with those new laws. In case of any legal problems in Bulgaria it is the Bulgarian law that is the deciding factor and not the Book of Discipline. This is something our American friends cannot understand. We live in sovereign countries with their own legislation. Methodists may think that this does not apply to us, but this is not the case.
Margarita Todorova: As painful as the issue is, I think everyone has gone through their own struggle to get to this moment. We have considered the options with a sense of responsibility. I don't like conflicts and I grew up in this church. It hurts me. I recently came across a story that is very appropriate for our situation. They put a few frogs in a pot of cold water and began to heat the water. The frogs didn't jump out. Their bodies began to adjust to the temperature. However, the temperature continued to rise and the frog began to adapt to compensate for the change. However, when the time came that it could no longer adapt and it wanted to jump out, the frog has no strength with which to do that. All of this has happened rapidly here at the end and the question that I ask is whether or not we have the strength to adapt? If we wait too long, we will not have the strength. If we continue to compromise, we will have no strength. As much as it hurts me and I don't want the church to split, we've reached a moment of decision. I don't want to be like those frogs.
Jessica Morris-Ivanova: I support this resolution. I also acknowledge that we are the church serving in Bulgaria and Romania. I would like to hear the voice of the Romanians. We, Bulgarians, are in the majority and are very noisy. Romanians, would you like to share?
Rares Calugar: I had raised my hand, but no one noticed me. We have been faithful to the process so far and we have been patient. Even after the General Conference was postponed twice, we hoped that it would take place in 2022, that the Protocol would be accepted and that there would be a peaceful way to exit. We want a peaceful outcome. I also want to see the difference between the man who is Patrick Streiff and the bishop who has that same name. He is trying to fulfill his duty, but since we are in a democratic church, we can vote. It might be that others will later on decide that what we decided today was done correctly or even incorrectly. But I told my colleagues and the bishop yesterday that it was immoral for me to go to the Special Session of the Central Conference and vote for a bishop who will not be our bishop. So, why are we in such a hurry? Because I do not want to be part of the meetings with the other Central Conference superintendents and talk about a future of which we will not be part. I feel like a hostage in a place with people who talk about a common future, but without us. It’s not because they don't want us to be part of this future but because we want to continue in another denomination. We want to be part of a church in which people are our brothers and sisters from all over the world, with whom we work together, with the same heart, led by the same Spirit. We are not against the United Methodist Church, and by leaving we do not want to say that they are not the Church of Jesus Christ. But we want to continue our journey with people who understand the mission as we do and have the same understanding of an issue that is foundational for us. We need to be with those with whom we are in agreement about our commonly shared foundation and with whom we can build on the same. This year, if there had been a General Conference, we would have waited and we would not have made such a resolution. The other thing that motivates us to do it now is because the new church is about to launch and we don't want anyone else to decide for us. We want to be partners with them, to participate in the decisions, to build the new church and for our brothers to take us into account. We do not want to be pressed into a place where we will be dependent on the Central Conference and unable to take care of our future. Why should we not be interested in our future? It makes sense to me for us to do that now. Because we want to make our own decisions. Because others are making plans for the future of the United Methodist Church and why should we not do the same? I want to be part of the decision making for the future of my church in Romania. I am in favor of this resolution and I have nothing personal against Patrick Streiff. There are people in Romania who will regret deeply if our relationship with Patrick Streiff is severed over this.
Daniel Topalski: If there are no other statements, I would like to insert a personal note. In this I turned out to be the main protagonist, and I don't want you to think that this is my personal battle with the bishop. You, yourself, have witnessed that we did not oppose the bishop - the decision for superintendent was made. I have not pursued my own career. I could have done so outside the church, but everyone makes their own choices. I have no personal disagreements with the bishop. I have acted on my own convictions. Do not think that my behavior is a personal war. I am motivated by my convictions.
Tsvetan Iliev: Each of the pastors in the pastoral college has expressed their position in support of leaving the United Methodist Church. Personally, I did not feel influenced by this. I acted out of my own conviction. I believe that if we are part of a church that ordains and marries people from the entire spectrum of LGBTQIA +, this would not only send us to the periphery of evangelical life in Bulgaria, it would mean complete annihilation. We could not accomplish any mission. It would look like a ritual suicide in the center of our cities, after which there will be no one to cry for us. I see no other option than to vote on the decision to leave the United Methodist Church and join the Global Methodist Church.
Krasimir Madjarov: With this discussion and the decision we will make, we clearly express our inner convictions. This is a clear and precise statement of our faith. This is our choice. Conscience, the voice of God, speaks within us, and it is good to hear that voice every time. I confirm the words of Rares Calugar that, as superintendent, I see no point in participating in the sessions of the Central Conference. I personally have nothing against the bishop, but I do not want to participate in discussions that do not make sense.
Daniel Topalski: The voice of human conscience can be the voice of God only through God's grace.
Nerses Ketikian: And for me as a pastor of a small church, it is important that this decision is voted on. You do not know Rev. Topalski if you think he aims to influence. He is a man of truth and puts everything on the table, letting everyone decide for themselves. Long ago these discussions began. For years we have been accustomed to living under a Western dictatorship, where some people sitting in an office somewhere decided for others and called it democracy. We have to decide - not some people sitting in an office far away. I affirm this resolution, as a part of the Evangelical Methodist Episcopal Church and the Armenian community in the Evangelical Methodist Episcopal Church. Today we are creating a new beginning. Bulgaria will not be the caboose on the train but the locomotive. And we will show that in a true democracy, the community decides, not the people in the offices. My encouragement to all of you is to vote for the acceptance of this resolution and work for God. When we do our part, God will do His part.
Cristian Istrate: It's hard to speak, but I understand that everything we do is out of love, and love doesn't force anyone. I am tired from the depths of my soul and heart of apologizing for the United Methodist Church. I've been doing it for 11 years. I have done it in front of other evangelical organizations. I have apologized to historical churches such as the Byzantine Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church when it came to different ways of perceiving sexuality in our church. I want to be part of a church where I will not apologize anymore. I keep saying they think so, but we don't. I want to be in a place where people think alike, have one goal and one mission. I want to be happy in such a place, to share with everyone that this is us. Faithful Wesleyans - loving God and neighbor. But without this ongoing war. This is a long-term war, and I know that countries like ours have been held hostage for many years. There have been cases and places where I have not felt significant – like in the presence of Methodist theologians, who see us as second-hand intellectuals just because we think differently from them. I believe that the Church must hold fast to the truth and recontextualize the Gospel. The cross of Christ is still the cross of Christ. He has not become anything else and he is still bloody. Christ was still beaten. On the cross He has not become anything else. He rose to be a witness to His resurrection. I believe in progress only as a return to the cross.
Daniel Topalski: If there are no other statements, I call for us to vote on the resolution for withdrawal. We will vote on the resolution and the church constitution update separately.
Vote for acceptance or refusal of the resolution for withdrawal from the UMC
For - 35, against - 0, abstentions - 0
II. Actualization of the Bulgarian church constitution
Daniel Topalski: Before you is the proposal for the changes to the Bulgarian church constitution. You can see additions in bold and the texts for deletion are marked through. We have no translation of this text. If the bishop wants, we will translate it.
Nerses Ketikian: Let us vote on all the changes in one block.
Daniel Topalski: This is a technical job. The document will be translated for the bishop. Voting is only for the Bulgarian part of the conference.
Voting on the amendments to the Statute of EMEC in Bulgaria
For - 32, against - 0, abstentions - 0
Daniel Topalski: The changes will be submitted to the Sofia City Court. The protocol must be signed by everyone. If anyone is interested in knowing about our policies for the handling of personal data - we are very responsible in the way that we handle personal information. We follow the laws with respect to persons who are in an official legal relationship with EMETS in Bulgaria. Only when required by the court are they provided.
(After these two items were discussed and voted on, Daniel Topalski resigned as temporary chair and Bishop Streiff returned to his place at the table as chair continuing on with the work of the Annual Conference.)