Download this F.A.Q. as a PDF document.
- What is the Mission Alignment Coordinating Council and how was it developed?
- How will the MACC proposals be implemented and when will the process end?
- Who exactly was consulted in developing these proposals? Have the right people been heard?
- How will covenants and merger agreements with the Church be honored as part of this process?
- One of the requested outcomes of Mission Alignment was more clarity about the role of the General Board. Has this been accomplished?
- Our mission priorities are fine for now, but won’t we need new ones to work on after 2020? Who will set those goals and priorities? What is the role of the General Board in all this?
- Will putting the racial/ethnic ministry leaders at the pastoral table keep their constituencies isolated/segregated from the church at large? Does this plan assume we will always have a European-American General Minister and President?
- What does the MACC process mean for congregations?
- Where do the regions fit into these conversations?
- Is the MACC’s work complete?
1. What is the Mission Alignment Coordinating Council and how was it developed?
The Mission Alignment Coordinating Council (MACC) was formed at the direction of the General Board after its April 2008 meeting in response to calls from congregations for more transparency in mission. The foundation for the MACC’s work started with the 2020 Vision laid out in 1998*, and was informed through the work of the 21st Century Visioning Team, input from the College of Regional Ministers, the Council of General Ministries, racial/ethnic communities and ministries, moderator teams, pastors, congregations and others. The MACC report represents a first step toward aligning our ministries with our mission. It presents proposals and a timeline to continue that process in nine specific areas.
2. How will the MACC proposals be implemented and when will the process end?
The MACC will present nine proposals to the General Board for consideration in April 2009. These proposals form an action plan for conversations and collaborations over the coming year with the goal of presenting next steps to the General Board in April 2010. The proposals both expand the table of dialogue partners (particularly to include regions) and extend the timeline. They mark areas in the life of the Church where more work and dialogue is needed. The first four proposals represent areas where there appears to be the most clarity. The next four are proposals where more discussion is needed. The last proposal extends the call of MACC for an additional year to continue its work.
3. Who exactly was consulted in developing these proposals? Have the right people been heard?
The MACC team spoke with the boards of general ministries, gatherings large and small from the racial/ethnic ministries, congregations, pastors, regional ministers and moderators, staff of general ministries and more. The council itself includes individuals who represent those working in regions and general church, as well as those representing young adults, racial/ethnic constituencies, higher education, and ordained clergy and laity. For a full list, please refer to the full MACC report, footnote 4.
4. How will covenants and merger agreements with the Church be honored as part of this process?
Covenants with donors will be respected and kept intact, as will covenants and agreements, including the Merger Agreement, with groups such as the National Christian Missionary Society and the United Christian Missionary Society.
5. One of the requested outcomes of Mission Alignment was more clarity about the role of the General Board. Has this been accomplished?
The first proposal in the MACC report undergirds the work of the General Board in its responsibility for the overall mission of the Church. To carry out this role, the General Board needs to be in covenant and mutual conversation with various ministries of the Church about the way their work fits within the mission of the overall Church. The proposal calls for new standing rules for the board regarding mission review and dialogue with ministries throughout the Church.
6. Our mission priorities are fine for now, but won’t we need new ones to work on after 2020? Who will set those goals and priorities? What is the role of the General Board in all this?
The 21st Century Visioning Team in its work over the 2007-2008 period laid some ground work for the evolving vision for the Church by developing a new identity statement for the Church (Visit the 21st Century Visioning Team web page.)
At the same time, the General Board will be taking a more active role in fulfilling its functions as laid out in the Design – to set the course for and coordinate the work of the Church through its oversight on behalf of the General Assembly. This will mean actively engaging ministries in conversation to accomplish the mission of the church in the most effective ways possible.
7. Will putting the racial/ethnic ministry leaders at the pastoral table keep their constituencies isolated/segregated from the church at large? Does this plan assume we will always have a European-American General Minister and President?
The intent of the pastoral table is to discuss pastoral concerns of the whole church in ways that will help integrate the different racial/ethnic ministries into the life of the Church and to address areas of common concern. The MACC would recommend that the Pastoral Table be adopted regardless of the ethnicity of the General Minister and President.
8. What does the MACC process mean for congregations?
The Mission Alignment process is intended to create or enhance mechanisms whereby the larger church can partner more effectively with congregations to help strengthen them for mission. As greater clarity is reached in each of the nine areas, congregations will be better served.
9. Where do the regions fit into these conversations?
The College of Regional Ministers, which includes leaders of the Church’s thirty three regions, will be integral to the 2009-10 conversations about ministry collaboration and processes. It is important that the mission alignment process be whole church, which includes regions.
10. Is the MACC’s work complete?
No. The MACC is asking for a one-year extension to continue its work in broadening the conversation with key ministry partners, particularly around the adaptive changes needed to more faithfully and effectively carry out domestic ministry in the 21st century.