In a story from Cross Talk, Bishop Donald George Kenneth Ming apologized to Bishop Richard Franklin Norris for what he, and many others, preceived as a slight to newly elected Bishop Norris in his first Episcopacy appointment. He was the first of the class of 2000 Bishop in vote gatherig, and the first elected to the post. His assignment, however, is believed by many to be less in stature than those received by his other three classmates, the Bishops Vasti McKenzie, Gregory Ingram and Preston Williams. This is a two part question: Do you, like Bishop Ming and many others, feel Bishop Norris was slighted? Secondly, do you agree with Bishop's Norris' assertion, and the ressolution felt by Bishop Ming, that God's will still will shine through the assignment process? If you have not seen the stories yet turn to the homepage of A.M.E. Today at http://www.ame-today.com

Rev. John

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2000

Answers

This raises an interesting question. It makes the assumption that there is a pecking order in episcopal assignments, and therefore assignments are not made totally on merit, need, or Godly Judgement. Could this be true?

As to whether this is a "slight", let's look at some of the recent elections (in the tables below, the order is as close as I can remember to order of election: if this keeps up, I may need to bring a discipline to work! :-)):

1980 Mayo - Assigned to 16? (fuzzy memory here) Hunter - Assigned to 18 1984 Senatle - 19 (Newly created, extracted from prior 15) Pruitt - 17 Belin - 16 Byrd - 14 1988 Bryant - 14 Thomas - 15 Chappelle - (I forget: 18?) 1992 Young - 15 Henning - 14 Webster - 17 Grady - 16 1996 DeVeaux - 18 Kirkland - 17 Richardson - 14 2000 Norris - 14 McKenzie - 18 Ingram - 15 Williams - 17

Looking at this, the first in class was assigned to the 14th twice. The 1984 assignment of Bishop Senatle to his home district may be viewed as a special case. Does this mean that Bishop Bryant was similarly slighted in 1988? Perhaps the answer is based on certain factors about the evaluation of districts at each quadrennium. Such factors may inlcude: - number of charges in district - income in district - potential growth in district - amenities (epsicopal residence, episcopal office, schools) in district

In what area does Bishop Ming perceive this slight? Does this mean that there should be a dispassionate, data-driven way that the Episcopal Committee can evaluate these factors? If so, then perhaps the criteria can be shared with the delegates of GenCon so that all can realize that fairness is being applied to the assignments. I'd be curious to see what Bishop Ming thinks the four assignments of the new class should have been (Time to read the Cross Talk article).

This should really be fun in 2004. :)

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2000

I could not be;eive what I read. Surely there must a misunderstanding. Can you imagine how the good people of the 14th Episcopal District will feel when they read this? Jesus said something about the first being moved to last. He also taught that we ought not to think too highly of ourselves; and to take thelow position so that God could raise us up rather than taking the high position and being moved down. God Bless

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2000

I did not perceive the statement as being intended as, or received as a slight of the 14th district, rather a question as to how the system worked and was supposed to work. If in the past, the first Bishop selected was assigned to the district perceived to be the best district available, and if by man's standards, the 14th District was not that district, then there was cause for Bishop Ming's statement. There is no denying that the polity of the African Methodist Church does support such ranking. Whether it is spiritually correct is left for God to judge but in terms of Africa, you also have to conside that methodology dictates that the first in, in terms of appointment, will be the first rotated back to the United States when the opening prevails. Now is this a slight to Africa? I think it more is a business procedure than a slight.

On a job, if you were the top-rated employee, would you considered slighted if the top-rated job went to someone selected beneath you in the ratings.

And I think the most important thing to note is that Bishop Norris never registered a protest as to where he was appointed. He accepted his charge and asked God to sanction and uplift his work there. Bishop Ming also said, and it should not be overlooked, that God is the final hand in all appointmentsw, so even if it was intended as a slight by man, God still moves in mysterious ways and that God's glory will shine through despite what man's intentions may be. Yes there is a lot to think about in that statement. But God very evidently was not left out of the mix, when you view it in its entire context. Rather it was an indictment of man and political maneuvering.

Rev. John

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2000

I don't believe Bishop Norris was slighted. All newly elected Bishops are sent to Africa.I think there's a perception "over there" that Africa does not deserve experienced leadership.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2000

Ming's admission of "guilt" seems to this observer much ado about nothing. I must be missing something in terms of protocol because I can't seem to understand why Bishop Ming is making a mea culpa about assignments!! I admit I am ignorant about who goes where in the continent of Africa but to imply as Ming does that somehow "choice" assignments are available creates to me unnecessary hierarchies and internecine squabbles for positions. This is a waste of theological energy and space. If any one is slighted I can make the case it was me given the fact that Bishop Bryant did not come to the 11th [big laugh].

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2000

I agree with Bishop Ming he wae Slighted, But this is the AME Church.

I belive were ever Bishop Norrie Presides It will all good.

Yes God willshine.

Pat Clark

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2000

Do you think anyone from the 14th. Episcopal District who reads the 'apology' will not have a blow to his/her self-esteem in terms of 'worth' in the AME Church, or will the 'apology' serve as a step to closing the wide divide between the overseas districts and the districts in the United States?

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

I believe that both pastors and bishops should be assigned to a work on the basis of their ability. I believe the tougher the assignment the more talented the pastor or bishop must be to cope with the challenges of the assignment. Now, that belief places me at the doorstep of a major problem: If the more talented are placed in the more difficult assignments, who then will be sent to those charges and episcopal districts that the talented have helped to get into a healthier condition, after the talented have left to go on to another difficult assignment??? The answer to my own question is this: Those who follow the talented must be capapble and indeed demonstrate the ability to keep those charges and episcopal districts moving forward. If not, our A.M.E. system must be able to move them out. When our concern for our pastors and bishops, surpasses our love and concern for the church of Christ, our concern is misplaced. Our chief concern in every assignment ought be, What is in the best interest of the church? When that is abused, either by a bishop or the episcopal committee, the church collectively ought deal with that in such fashion the abuser will know that we cannot tolerate abuse of authority as it relates to assignments or anything else in the Church of the Living Christ. Pastor George Thomas, St. Paul A.M.E. Church, Madison, Wisconsin(end of message)

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

Presumably the Episcopal Committee made the Bishop's assignments "subject to the approval of the General Conference." (Section III, para. C.1. Assignmanet of Bishops, 1996 Doctrine and Disciplines of the AME cHURCH). Bishop Ming's chagrin at the appointment and placement process of one Bishop raises probably more questions that need to be answered. "I don't think well of how. . .or where he was assigned," speakes volumes about the process. For example, 1) are there "favored districts" in Africa for assignments? 2) are there "favored Bishops" considered in the placements? 3)Is the General Conference body made aware of the dynamics of the process (after all, THEY had to approve the actions of the Episcopal Committee)? 4)Is Africa then to be considered not as a "field ripe unto harvest" for Jesus Christ like any other district but only as a Bishopric training field, rated as "good, better or best?"? Dr. James Forbes, speaking to a group of Methodist clergy at the 1st Schooler Institute of Preaching at METHESCO (Delaware, Ohio) said, our Pastoral assignments in the "hinterlands" of God's vineyard are often looked upon by clergy in the Itinerancy as "undesireable." However, he said we should WELCOME the placement because "GOD HAS SOMETHING THERE FOR US TO DO!" And when we've been there and "faithfully" done our work, we can look back upon it and see God's hand in it through us." Slight or no slight, Bishop NOrris and God are a majority and THEY WILL PREVAIL.

Peace & Love, Rev. Harold L. Turner, Pastor, ZION AME, Delaware, Ohio (hturner641@aol.com)

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

The people of the 14th district can see Bishop Ming's comments as nothing but a slight. The obvious implication is that there are better places to be in Africa other than Nigeria, Liberia, Ghana and Sierra Leone. I am sure there are those who feel South Africa would have been better. As a member of the 13th district understand all too well the concept of what the "better" districts are. But God's people live in all districts and countries and God does not care for who has more money or people all of us live in an imperfect world. It would be good for us to remember that.

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2000

I am impressed that this issue has generated the most volume of mail since the thread on should a woman be elected Bishop, that only was silenced by the reality of its occurence....however... What I found distressing was most people talked more about the symptom and found it hard to even see the disease. Is there a pecking order as to which African Districts are ranked? Of course. Is there a similar pecking order to American Districts? The answer is equally easy, Yes. Is there vying for American Episcopal Districts? Unless you are extremely naive you also know the answer to this question. Yes Certain districts are more sought after than others and seniority gets you to certain districts. Now, only one person cut to the heart of the whole matter of assignments, which goes much deeper than a single appointment. Rather than fret whether an appointment was slighted by a particular African appointment, go the whole route, why should a Bishop have to start in Africa in the first place. Using the general tone of the recent responses as a barometer, a freshman Bishop should be an equal candidate for districts considered plumbs such as the 1st, 2nd, 6th, 11th, 5th, etc. as they would a post in Africa. Will that ever be a reality...Having all the freshmen sent to Africa is far and away more of a slight to all overseas districts than any one comment as to this year's Bishops assignment and this procedure has been going on for time in memorial. I think it is hard to complain about one comment while buying into the overall practice. And to take this to a totally level playing field, why then shouldn't a leading pastor, of a class A church, be sent to a small charge so he could cultivate a vineyard that needs his expertise to bring growth and advancement. Do you think you would ever see such an appointment made. Even before the passage of the pastor's bill of right, it only would happen with somebody kicking and screaming. Slights are a built in stock in trade of the whole system. Ranking is part of it both of churches and episcopal districts. Just something to consider.

Rev. John

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2000

As a 1st timer in Cincinnati, it was a real eye-opener. Bishop Ming should be advised to withdraw that entire statement or come open to clarify it in no uncertain terms. Africans have known this as a matter of fact for a very long time that we are not considered equals in the AME Church connection. Bishop Ming has verbally expressed but he is not on an isolated island. Since inception Africa is a guinea- pig (a training ground) for newly elected bishops. And I have previously made that statement during the mess of the 1992 - 1996 quadrennial in the 15th Episcopal in Namibia's writings to the Council of Bishops, the General Board and the Episcopal Committee of 1996. The AME Church, the church of my choice, has not been fair in all respects to the aspirations of the African districts. Bishop Ming is not the only prophet representing that school of thought. Bishops past and present, assigned to the overseas districts have no permanent interest there, have no vision, no commitment, no nothing and are just idling until the next quadrennium. Upon arrival in Cincinnati, prior to the official opening, it was no secret that a certain Douglass was to become Chair of the Episcopal Committee. Long before the assignments did we hear rumours of who's going to be assigned where and the Episcopal Committee only came to confirm the rumours. The close door meetings of the Episcopal Committee is not enough. The bishops manipulate this committee by their so-called proregative to unilaterally assign delegates to the various committees of the General Conference. If I am a bishop I'll appoint a confidante onto the Episcopal Committeee, a trusted friend to debrief me and to influence decisions in the Episcopal Committee. That is what is happening. Put the names of bishops and numbers of districts in a hat, and pool them like a lottery in the Closing Worship Service. That will be transparent and the only fair method. We must stop making a mockery of the AME Church. There is nothing wrong with the Church - it is us, we! Take out the money politics from the Church, and let us do these elections and assignments in prayer and fasting. No wonder thousands are leaving the AME Church in the USA. No wonder we do not establish new ministries and new departments, but close down and merge existing ones. We are failing to consolidate on the foundations laid by the pioneers, but we preside over sessions that have (down-size and right-size) buried this church alive. In a nutshell, the AME Church will fail to be an international connectional denomination until such time that we de-americanise her. The US capitalist self-help self-enriching, ego-wagon what-have-you is killing us, and blinding us. Bishops have to be forced to retire and we are not honest in the presence of God. Pray much, pray much, pray much - the AME leadership (and especially the Class of 1972 and 1976) are in need of retouch (by the Holy Spirit). God bless

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2000

Rev. Hanse's last remark raises some interesting observations. The original class of 1972 elected 5 bishops that would have served 32 years. Was it the intent of that confeence to embrace youth in an effort to address the concerns of African Methodism that had built up from 1941-1971? I wish Dr. Dickerson were reading this site so that he could elaborate some of that perceived insight. Since 1972, the largest class has been 5 bishops (1976). Now, coupled together those two classes changed the episcopal composition 65%. Without a doubt many around the connection must have been hopeful of "a new dawn."

I note this, because in 2004 we will be in a similar position. We just elected 4, a "nominal" class (1972-8, 1976-5, 1980-2, 1984-4, 1988-3, 1992-4, 1996-3, 2000-4). WIth such a normal election, the compositoin of the bench would only change 20% in a quadrennium, 40% in two. But 2004 will bring a nother new 7, totalling a 55% shift. Much as we refer to changes in the Supreme COurt by the era of the Chief Justice (Warren Court for civil rights, Berger court for abortion rights, Rehnquist court for a return to conservatism), 2004 will be the end of the "Adams Bench". And we will look to our recent and future electees to establish "a new dawn" once again.

The next era of African Methodism MUST address the jusrisdictional question. Rev. Hanse raises valid concerns about the perception of leadership motivaton assigned to Africa. Over the years there have been bishops who have not occupied their charges for the 8 months mandated by the discipline. Actions and behaviors such as this serve no purpose in furthering and engendering trust in "American" leadership. The heart of the matter is our continued reluctance as a connection to trust the abilities and skills of our brethren on the continent. To this end we have lost leaders like Desmond Tutu and Leslie Leouw. Rather than continue the hemorrhaging, the church at large must recognize that capability of our people in all districts, and bite the bullet that will lead to a substantive transformation.

This discussion is occurring in the vacuum of Church Union. What would be the impacts of reconciling AME, AMEZ, and CME into one? How many districts would result? How many active bishops would we bring to 2004? Can this be accomplished by 2004? (I think not.) And can we fairly address the African Jurisdiction needs by then in such a context?

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2000

First of all I ask, Who are we to say what is and what isn't a promotion in God's work. To say that this was a slight is to say that some Christians are better than others. We are all God's People and we all need competent leadership. This type of attitude in not Christ like. Secondly I'm 100% sure that Bishop Ming when first elected a Bishop did not care where he was sent just as long as he was elected. I could understand saying that Bishop Norris was slighted if he had not of won but he did, and That is enough to be greatful. Thirdly it's this type of perception that is holding us down. How do upper class Afro-Americans view lower Class Afro- Americans? I am a member of the 8th district which is comprised of MS and LA home of some of the poorest AME churches in the U.S. how is my district viewed by standards of the upperclass AME church do we not deserve to recieve good leadership or is it a "slight" for a Bishop to be assinged here. I do not think that Numbers rather it's votes or rather it's how many dead presidents one has in the bank make you a Good Leader. The contents of your character, which should include dedication and committment to the work at hand is what makes you a good leader. Futhermore I can understand to some degree why we send Newly elected Bishops to Africa, but I can't understand to no degree why this is a must and why aren't more African Bishops eleceted and why they don't serve over Here. And In closing when we get over humps such as the cry for "PROMOTIONS" and start dealing in issues like "REVIVING" our Zion we won't have to worry about Bishops are anything else that Concerns the AME church for it will be GONE.

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2000

My brothers and sisters:

At the Quadrennial Convention of the Young People's Convention last year we heard the story of Bishop Adam Jefferson Richardson who at that time was assigned to the 14th Episcopal District. He told of how he could not go to his district due to the war going on in the countries making up his district. It was so bad that his delegation could not attend the convention. It was sad to see his section empty while the delegations were on the floor to conduct business.

Eventhough there are rough times going on in the fourteenth district someone has to go over there and be a representative from the Lord. Someone has to provide leadership not only to the African Methodist in that region, but also to the countries involved. With everything going on, I think it is a compliment to the Rt. Rev. Norris that he is being sent to the 14th. Everyone appears to be looking at the negative aspects of the district. But I think that it is a chance for the Bishop to continue his excellent leadership on a greater level.

Sometimes God moves in ways that we don't understand, but over time if it is His will we will be able to see the complete picture. In the AME Church there are some districts that seem to be regarded higher than others, but we are all children of God. Whether you are in the first or the 12th, the 7th or the 15th, the 16th or the sixth God needs someone to go and tell the the people the word of the Lord. So if Bishop Norris sees this, you have an excellent opportunity to lead not only in the AME Church, but also on an international level. May God bless the your work.

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2000

ITTruly the work is all divine. I thank god that my husband was assigned to the Eighteenth Episcopal District in 1996. During the time i spent there I witnessed the work of missions in action. I saw men, men and youth committed to following Christ' mandate to feed his sheep. It was a life changing experience for me. I pray that God will allow me to serve with vigor and wisdom in the Sixteenth Episcopal District. This discussion will be good for us as we focus on enhancing our church. God bless

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2000

I'm glad to see a spouse of a bishop respond to this question. The various opinions on this subject reflects the serious problems we have in the AME Church. First, all must bera some responsibility, "Al have sinned and come short of the glory of God." There is no question that God is no respecter of persons. This also expands to districts. We, as pastors, presiding elders, and bishops are servants of the people of God. If the 14th District is deficient in comparison to all the other districts; then the assigned bishop should be the bishop that is best suited to bring the 14th District to the level that God desires. This "problem" also exists in the assignment of pastors and presiding elders. My brothers and sisters, this ought not to be. Perhaps God is giving us space to repent by taking the remarks of Bishop Ming, that were intended for the local audience only, and using them to make this problem so visible that the saints of God will rise up and demand changes be made. God Bless

-- Anonymous, July 30, 2000

I am just writing to thank Mother De Veaux for her contribution. The De Veaux family were tools in God's hands in making miracles happen in Mozambique (18th District). The delegation was devastated that this "action-bishop" was not re-assigned, but we just hope and pray that Bishop McKenzie will continue on their tradition.

One issue that needs to be raised is that of names given to AME Church's buildings (sanctuaries, educational buildings, etc). I have noticed during the past couple of years that we do not honour the names of deceased AME saints, but those in control ensures that their names are attached whilst they are in the land of the living. In Africa the tendency now is to name all new circuits and.or stations to the Presiding Bishop. Do you know what I am talking about?

-- Anonymous, July 31, 2000

Some bishops do marvelous work overseas. As for Bishop McKenzie, ALREADY, she has in place some wonderful ideas for continuing the progress in the 18th which has begun by Bishop DeVeaux and others preceding him. We should pray for ALL of our Episcopal Fathers and Episcopal Mother that God will enable them to be a blessing WHEREVER they are assigned. Ultimately, the judge of what they do and how they do is God himself. I am uncomfortable about Bishop Ming's comments and hope that he will either clarify or retract. THE WORK IS ALL DIVINE!!!

-- Anonymous, July 31, 2000

Several people have asked this question....rather than to continue to respond individually, here is the answer for all to see and I also will post it publically in the site from which the questions originally were purged.

It is an easy answer. Those comments were purged because they were libelous. You can not write and accuse someone of taking money unless you both have proof and evidence of such an occurence. Libel means you make an accusation that you can not substantiate. Just by way of background, A.M.E. Today for me is a labor of love, but my living has been made for the past 30 years as a professional journalist working for a newspaper with a circulation (combined) of a quarter million a day. I have served as an editor for the last six years and as an investigative reporter and entertainment editor prior to that. So I can say that if I do not know anything else, I do know journalism and libel. Anybody can accuse anybody of anything when they can hide behind the banner of not substaniating what they have said. It is as easy as writing it and walking away. I just hope the writer and all who endeavor to do such fingerpointing realize that they can be sued penniless for doing so. Personally, I am not going to put myself in jepordy of such a suit by permiting obviously libelous statements to stay online and as quick as I detect them, they will continue to come down and for those directly involved withe posting, they were informed that the posts were coming down, with an explaination as they were removed.

Rev. John

-- Anonymous, August 02, 2000