The rapid growth of the Seventh-day Adventist Church around the world means there must be a more efficient method of filling top leadership positions, said members of the church's executive committee, meeting April 18 in Silver Spring, Maryland, United St
International church leaders have voted against a proposed change to the nominating committee process at General Conference Sessions. Meeting at the world church headquarters April 18, the church’s executive committee recognized limitations of the current system, but said the proposed changes would raise a new set of problems.
The nominating committee at General Conference Sessions is responsible for bringing recommendations to fill top leadership positions of the international church. These names are then considered and voted on by the more than 2,000 delegates who represent every region, or “division,” of the church.
Too many positions need to be filled in too little time, suggested Gerry D. Karst, a vice president of the Adventist world church, who presented the discussion document. The pressure to fill key leadership positions means the nominating committee may not have time to adequately assess potential candidates. A person nominated for a position may only have a few minutes to decide whether to accept or decline the nomination.
Under the current system, the GC nominating committee does its work while the general business of the session continues. This means that more than 200 Adventist leaders are involved with the nominating process while other important issues are being debated and voted on the floor of GC Session.
Proposed changes would have seen each Division of the world church select members of the GC Session nominating committee up to nine months before the session begins. The nominating committee would then convene and start its work a few days before the opening of the session.
A number of executive committee members spoke against the proposal. Some argued it was essential that the GC Session nominating committee continue to be chosen and endorsed by the full 2,000-plus session delegates, rather than by division executive committees. Others suggested the length of time between selection of the nominating committee and the time it would begin its work, opened the door to potential lobbying for specific candidates—something that has always been discouraged in the process of electing church leaders.
