Bay of Quinte Conference in 2009 overwhelmingly passed proposal

diversity

whereas the United Church of Canada desires to be theologically diverse; and

whereas, while the United Church of Canada acknowledges membership in every body by those
"which profess this faith in Jesus Christ and obedience to Him as Divine Lord and Saviour", (basis xv)
"who make credible profession of their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and obedience to his law", (basis xvi (2))
the diversity within us has sometimes stepped outside that profession, leaving some questioning the meaning and appropriateness of simply transferring membership from one congregation of the United Church of Canada to another; and

whereas if the affected congregations are not part of the same overseeing presbytery or conference the Manual offers no resolution other than request to the General Council;

therefore be it resolved that Bay of Quinte Conference propose that the General Council direct the General Secretary to outline the process by which congregations, presbyteries, and conferences might resolve difficulties that arise from different and incompatible ways the respective courts within separate conferences may exercise their responsibilities;

as recorded in the minutes without the whereases which gave context

Motion: Paul Reed/Jean Wilson

"That Bay of Quinte Conference propose that the General Council direct the General Secretary, General Council to outline the process by which congregations, presbyteries, and conferences might resolve difficulties that arise from different and incompatible ways the respective courts within separate conferences may exercise their responsibilities." [motion 85th.09.28, Volume 2-Minutes, 85th Annual Meeting, p. 24]

The proposal was considered by Artic Commission, 40th General Council

BQ 2 – Addressing Differences in Court Practices
Origin: Bay of Quinte Conference, transmitted with concurrence Lindsay Presbytery
Financial Implications:
Staffing Implications:
Source of Funding:

That the 40th General Council 2009 direct the General Secretary, General Council to outline the process by which congregations, presbyteries, and conferences might resolve difficulties that arise from different and incompatible ways the respective courts within separate conferences may exercise their responsibilities.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Background:
Delegates voted not to transmit an original proposal from Glenn Brown of Dunbarton-Fairport United Church, “Non-conforming United Church Congregations”.

However, arising from the discussion on the previously mentioned proposal, the following motion was made by the Chair of Proposals, and is to be considered a proposal.

Motion: Paul Reed/Jean Wilson (85th.09.28)
That Bay of Conference propose that the General Council direct the General Secretary, General Council to outline the process by which congregations, presbyteries, and conferences might resolve difficulties that arise from different and incompatible ways the respective courts within separate conferences may exercise their responsibilities.
Carried. [wb2_8_arctic_commission.pdf p.20];

and the action of General Council

Addressing Differences in Court Practices (BQ 2)
After seeking some clarification, this proposal was deferred, to be considered at a later time. (Note: as the court was not able to complete all of its work, this proposal was included in the motion to refer to the Executive of the General Council.)

That the 40th General Council 2009 direct the General Secretary, General Council, to outline the process by which congregations, presbyteries, and Conferences might resolve difficulties that arise from different and incompatible ways the respective courts within separate conferences may exercise their responsibilities. [ROP2009_complete.pdf p.202]

(Arctic 5)
Motion: Karen Smart/barb janes GC 40 2009 - 135
To refer to the Executive of the General Council:
...
BQ 2 – Addressing Differences in Court Practices
Carried [ROP2009_complete.pdf p.230, also p. 243];

and included in the agenda for the General Council Executive which “took no action”; leaving resolving related inconsistencies to the discretion of session.