To: Louie Crew, Thank you for inquiring about the Colorado Proposal. Yes, I think it would be informative to hear responses from those who might be chosen to lead the House of Deputies after this convention. So far as I am aware, four people have publicly stated their willingness to be nominated for President of the House of Deputies: M.L. Agnew from the Diocese of Western Louisiana, Reynolds Cheney from the Diocese of West Tennessee, George Werner from the Diocese of Pittsburgh, and myself, Randy Dales from the Diocese of New Hampshire.
I am certain that the Legislative Committee on Structure will welcome any and all suggestions and will work diligently to allow both houses to decide which, if any changes, are needed Having only just read the proposal, I would look forward to learning more of the background and intent of these suggestions from the four position papers that are to be published in the Spring. That having been said, I have some immediate concerns.
Will the shortening of the number of legislative days achieve the goals of those who propose this change? If the intent is to limit the number of actions taken by convention, that may well be achieved. If the intent is to limit thoughtful, deliberative action, that would be a disservice to the church at large. If the intent is to cut back on the cost of convention, could not other solutions be sought that would not limit the time that deputies and bishops have together as a national body?
Any technical improvement in the mechanics of voting that is not cost-prohibitive would be welcome. In the Diocese of New Hampshire we have long used the Hare referential system of voting for the election of several people simultaneously, and it has been found to be a positive way to assist those who do not benefit from having immediate name recognition.
I am not convinced by the suggestion that our church would be better served by have conventions separated by five years. Much of what General Convention deals with is the result of hard work by over twenty interim bodies which give issues serious and significant study. The three year life of these interim bodies seems to be a very workable timetable, and they currently provide convention with plenty of thoughtful proposals on which to act and make decisions. More time between conventions would not necessarily make these bodies more effective, but might well place more decision making in the hands of Executive Council and the Church Center staff.
The House of Deputies is an extremely large legislative body. However, the option (not the requirement) for each diocese to have four clergy and four lay deputies has opened convention to new voices that might not otherwise be heard in a smaller house. Each triennium we see younger deputies, women and minorities from our church filling those fourth chairs. Even without consideration of the loss of the protection from actions approved by a narrow majority that comes with the 'divided vote' of four deputies, I'm not yet willing to give way the places now taken by new deputies.
Finally, I would applaud the call for "more sacred conversation and decision-making', but looking back just a few years, I believe that the House of Deputies is already moving in this direction. In the year just prior to the 1991 convention in Phoenix, Presiding Bishop Browning asked a committee of Executive Council members to propose changes in the way we do business at convention. As the chair of that committee I brought to the Joint Standing Committee on Planning and Arrangements a proposal to move the Daily Eucharists out the the hotel basements and away from the early morning hour into the heart of convention and into the center of the legislative day. As a result, for the last three conventions Daily Eucharist and Bible Sharing at round tables have been an integral part of the way we do the business of General Convention. Bringing deputies, bishops, members of triennial and visitors together for prayer and conversation in the context of the Eucharist has only improved the way convention does its business. I have not witnessed any sessions of the House of Bishops, but this will be my eighth time as a deputy and I have seen evidence of a changed, prayerful, polite and inclusive legislative process in the senior house. There are still some people who are 'too busy' with the work of convention to attend our daily worship, but I sense that those people are in the minority.
General Convention has shown that it is capable of holding sacred conversation around the most difficult decisions. One only had to witness the 1997 evening open hearing on the contentious issue of the blessing of same sex commitments to understand that, in a prayer-filled church, it is possible to have sacred conversation with those with whom we strongly disagree.
I look forward to further discussion about these and other proposals to improve General Convention. Please feel free to share this response with others.
Randy Dales
Randolph K. Dales
Wolfeboro, New Hampshire
[See the NH deputation. -- LC]
Please sign my guestbook and
view it.
Statistics courtesy of WebCounter.