<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [Mins] Question about Nomination of Office Bearers</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>Hi Jack,<BR>
<BR>
It just so happens that we have just gone through the nomination process too, so this is fresh in our memories! We do what you do, as well as the two suggested amendments. <BR>
<BR>
The reasoning behind the first point is that it just seems like good manners for a nominator to get the nominee’s consent before their names will be put before Session and discussed (and possibly dissected!). It also potentially saves time: there seems no point discussing a nominee at length and eventually accepting their nomination, only to them have them refuse to accept it themselves when they are informed of it.<BR>
<BR>
The reasoning behind the second point is that: if the nominee doesn’t know they’ve been nominated, of course, there’s no point in telling them they were and then rejected. But if they do know they’ve been nominated, it is much better that they find out in person from an elder than merely by the fact that their name isn’t on the voting slip. This also provides pastoral opportunities, i.e. to explain to someone who might think they are leadership material why they are not, which might have broader impacts in the church.<BR>
<BR>
Anyway, that’s just my two cents’ worth!<BR>
<BR>
Cheers,<BR>
<BR>
Des Smith, CRC Kingston<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 18/03/13 2:08 PM, "<a href="mins@crca.org.au">mins@crca.org.au</a>" <<a href="mins@crca.org.au">mins@crca.org.au</a>> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Tahoma, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10pt'> <BR>
Hi Everyone,<BR>
<BR>
In Launceston Session we have always followed what I thought was fairly standard procedure when it comes to nominating office bearers, that is we call for nominations from the congregation, we receive some names in reply, we add some extra names of our own, we consider them carefully and prayerfully, we come up with a list of candidates and then we announce this to the congregation. It has recently been suggested that we do a couple of things differently, namely:<BR>
<BR>
1) That it should be specified that nominators should always gain permission from the person they wish to nominate before putting their name forward to Session.<BR>
2) That if someone is nominated and Session decide not to put them up for election, that Session should go back to the nominator and the nominee and explain why their nomination was rejected.<BR>
<BR>
We are wondering if anyone has any experience, thoughts or wisdom for us on this matter?<BR>
<BR>
Yours in Christ, Jack Kapinga.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="95%"></SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10pt'><FONT FACE="Consolas, Courier New, Courier">_______________________________________________<BR>
Mins mailing list<BR>
<a href="Mins@crca.org.au">Mins@crca.org.au</a><BR>
To manage subscription settings - <a href="http://crca.org.au/mailman/listinfo/mins_crca.org.au">http://crca.org.au/mailman/listinfo/mins_crca.org.au</a><BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>