The report of the Commission on Ministries, Services, and Structures adopted by the GC executive committee is a progressive step. I believe that Michael Cafferky's article in the current issue of Spectrum could have done more to celebrate the progressive steps taken by the GC committee.

1. The recognition of diversity is unprecedented since the turn of the 20th century. The past several commissions and committees that have studied re-structuring of the denomination have all sought to discourage diversity, while this report embraces it.

2. The affirmation of the "union of churches" type of structure opens the door to reducing the size of the denominational structure in North America significantly. It allows the functions of the local and union conferences to be merged into a single entity. This could save millions of dollars in each union territory that could be returned to local ministries. It would also open the door to reducing the number of boarding academies to a level that better matches the actual need and saving further millions of dollars.

In fact, the potential for change in these actions is so far-reaching that it cannot be expected to be fully realized in short order. It will take years of studied, persistent pushing on the part of lay leaders and pastors to encourage some conference administrators and union committees to walk through the door that has been opened. Others are ready for this kind of change, but the consensus is uneven at present and will need to be built over time in order for change to be implemented. But, no one can use GC policy to block change.

It appears that the Commission on Ministries,Services,and Structures hits its target - the structure has to change to better utilize its finite resources and become more effective and efficient.

I concur with Mr. Sahlin's points, but I am troubled by his words - although probably true - "it will take years..."

Too bad Ol' Lucifer has found another way to stall the work.

"the potential for change in these actions is so far-reaching that it cannot be expected to be fully realized in short order. It will take years"

Changes are made very rapidly in both the federal, state, and county governments as we are seeing daily. When revenues dry up because of the economy, many programs are cut and schedules for further cuts are being made daily. The church is no exception to this inevitable fact.

The Church has made much larger cuts than most of those in government. For example, the staffing of church-ministry-related departments at the union level is less than one quarter what it was 20 years ago; a 75 percent cut. I don't know of any entire professional area (such as health, education or libraries) that has been cut to a similar degree in state governments, which would be roughly comparable. I could give other examples.

Unfortunately, no one has been able to discover how cuts help a voluntary organization. They may satisfy some who see certain activities and low priority, but for every member who thinks that "basket-weaving ministry" is low priority, there is another member who believes that it is the most important priority, so every cut ends up being as much a loss in support and participation as a gain in cost reductions. Unlike government, voluntary causes are fueled largely by individuals who feel motivated to make donations and give time, so loss of that type to not move the organization forward.

The church is mission-driven. That is both a sociological observation and a theological viewpoint. Looking at just the sociology of it, a voluntary organization thrives on its ability to connect with people who feel strongly enough about a cause to give time and money. When it does not do so, it declines. The church and other voluntary organizations are in this way fundamentally different than government or for-profit organizations.