EPNC Final Report and Recommendations, October 24, 21013

WHAT A WONDERFUL DAY FOR OUR PRESBYTERY!

By my calculation, it has been fourteen years since this council last elected a new Executive Presbyter and six years since we started this period of interim leadership. Given such a long gap between moments like this one, before we move to the time in which I trust you will concur in the recommendation of your Executive Presbyter Nominating Committee, I want to set the stage by telling of the process we used in the search, explain why we unanimously voted to present this candidate and make two motions on the committee’s behalf. Before those steps, however, I want to offer a few words of thanks.

Words of Thanks

First and foremost, I stand before you with a profound sense of gratitude to God for the clear leading of the Holy Spirit throughout this process. As events unfolded for our committee during the past eleven months, there was an abiding sense of calm for your EPNC as it became ever-more apparent that we were instruments, but not the primary actors in this search. Instead, from the start to this moment, it has been evident that God was the One in charge and now in God’s timing, this day has arrived.

Secondly, I thank the Presbytery for the hard and oftentimes, painful work that you have done in the past few years. As we began this process, I learned that our Presbytery had had a reputation in the larger church which was not completely positive. Those perceptions–fair or not—surely played a part in two previous searches here not resulting in a new EP. I was part of one such effort six years ago and can remember at the end how our top candidate told us there were critical issues which needed to be addressed before any EP would come here. A second search committee also ended without a nomination, not because they were any less faithful or committed, but because the time was not right. We are now at a different place because of the hard work you have done in matters of trust-building and truth-telling, budgeting and staffing, a new Presbytery office and starting to live into our mission design. I applaud you for those steps and give thanks for the faithful ministry of our Interim EP, Lucy Rupe. Without such efforts and your prayers this day would not have come.

Lastly, I want to thank publicly the amazing committee with whom I was privileged to serve on your behalf. Mostly we did not know each other when elected, a few of us openly resisted the invitation when it was first offered, but together we formed a sense of community and experienced amazing consensus in our deliberations. At several point along the way when candidates asked for signs of hope in our Presbytery, members of the EPNC would speak of their experience in this search as evidence of the talent and possibilities here. Before this morning, our group met 25 times—at one point doing so ten times in a stretch of thirteen weeks. In meetings alone, we spent 75 hours working on this effort not including driving time or reading time, phone time or e-mail time, Internet search time or prayer time. If you consider that a typical Session meets 12 times over the course of a year with an average of two hours for each meeting, this committee offered the equivalent of a full term on a Session, but did so in eleven months. What faithful Presbyters they have been for you and a gift to me.

Our Process

Our committee was elected last year at the November 27 meeting of Presbytery and we assembled for the first time on December 11. At our initial gathering, we made two decisions which blessed the work moving forward. First was our response to a concern voiced at the Presbytery meeting that there were no members of a smaller membership congregation on the EPNC. We asked the Nominating Committee to rectify that gap and by our second meeting had welcomed David Sanchez to the effort. It was during the same gathering that the group asked me to send regular updates to you after each of our meetings. We have received much positive feedback on that step. In fact, at my first regional Presbytery meeting in June I introduced myself to someone I did not know and he replied “Oh, you’re the one who has been sending me all those e-mails.” I knew then that word was getting out.

Members of the EPNC attended each of the four listening sessions sponsored by the Transitional Leadership Council and reported back on what was heard. We wrote the Church Information Form in January and had it approved by the TLC. As part of it, we spoke of an Executive Presbyter who is “assertive, courageous and passionate…an ability to build a culture of trust; a record of breaking down silos and building bridges of credibility that lead to honest, open communications and relationships.”

We prepared an ad for the Presbyterian Outlook which appeared in the April 1st edition—it did not speak of our seeking a “fool for Christ”–but instead talked of one who is a “devoted follower of Jesus Christ; an innovator, ambassador, collaborator and convener with an ability to bring together people in a presbytery with diverse race, gender, and faith perspectives.” The deadline for applying was April 15 which we later extended to April 30th. It was during that stretch we learned one of our committee members, Teaching Elder Elizabeth Lyman, had resigned due to personal matters. We were saddened by that news, but grateful for the gifts she had offered in getting us underway.

We designed a survey of the Presbytery asking for the top qualities you wanted in our next EP. 103 Teaching or Ruling Elders completed it with the top traits chosen of one who “Demonstrates a vibrant and compelling relationship with God in Christ” and “Leadership that cultivates diversity.” We met with Lucy Rupe and our Business Administrator Larry Davis to get a feel for issues in our Presbytery. We spoke with Jill Hudson, Coordinator of Mid Council Relations at General Assembly, and with Bruce Stevens, our Synod Executive. Each of them offered invaluable input for our work together.

We wrote to the Executive of each of the 173 Presbyteries and 16 synods, and our 11 Seminary Presidents seeking their recommendations. We followed-up on each letter with an e-mail or phone call. Those conversations led to 70 suggestions. In addition, we received 13 Personal Information Forms from computer matches, 19 self-referrals, and several names from members of this Presbytery. Some individuals were recommended more than once so we began with 98 potential candidates and each was contacted by a member of the EPNC asking them to consider applying. Eventually, 50 individuals sent us a Personal Information Form or resume’. Of that group 35 took the next step of answering four supplemental questions we developed and providing a statement of faith; those individuals became our pool of active candidates. They represented 31 presbyteries and consisted of 3 Ruling Elders and 32 Teaching Elders, 18 women and 17 men. Each member of the EPNC read through each PIF or resume’, the answers provided to our four questions and the candidate’s faith statement. Using a rubric we had developed, we then scored each person individually and posted our totals into a Dropbox file.

Once that process was complete, we discussed each candidate one-by-one and chose to conduct initial interviews with 11 candidates. Prior to the interviews, we had Bruce Stevens make a reference check with the respective Synod or Presbytery Executive of each candidate, conducted our own online research of each one and shared then what we learned—a clear reminder that all of us leave a digital footprint. We met with Dean Foose, a Teaching Elder in this Presbytery, who helped us consider the kinds of interview questions we might pose, developed a plan for interviewing, and then had a trial run with Stuart Spencer, another Teaching Elder in this Presbytery, to see if we were ready. On his first question Stuart stumped us, which told us we had more work to do!

After all of those preliminary steps, we conducted the eleven interviews over a span of two days via Skype. The demographics of that group included 6 women and 5 men; 10 Teaching Elders and 1 Ruling Elder; 7 Caucasians, 3 Latinos, and 1 African-American. We were profoundly impressed with the faith and experience of those persons, but then began to reflect on how each candidate compared to what the Presbytery, the CIF, and the ad said we were seeking in our next EP. We voted to continue conversation with six of the eleven and conducted reference checks on them. Prior to the second Skype interview, one of the six accepted another position and thus we talked a second time with five candidates.

Following those conversations we invited three candidates to make a site visit, checked secondary references on each of them and then held face-to-face conversations last month. Over a span of 24 hours, each candidate had two meetings with us, visits with Presbytery staff and other local leadership, and received a brief tour of the city including several of our congregations and other ministries.

On September 24th, after those visits had concluded we met as a committee to reflect upon all that we had heard and learned. It was time for us to complete the journey from 98 to 50 to 35 to 11 to 5 to 3 to 1. I reminded the committee of the characteristics you and we had identified as key for our next EP and then one-by-one we went around the table and expressed our conviction as to the top candidate. We unanimously voted to extend an invitation to the Reverend Ruth Faith Santana-Grace to become our Executive Presbyter and–thanks be to God–she accepted on the 30th!

Why Ruth?

When we began this search, several people outside the committee expressed a concern to me that we might not have any talented candidates to apply. Happily, we found that not to be the case and instead were inspired by the faithful women and men who serve across the church. Given the caliber of our applicants, it became clear that we had a challenging task, so meeting after meeting, we opened with Scripture and prayer while reminding ourselves of the things you and we had said we were seeking. Let me use some of those descriptors to tell you why we ultimately were led to Ruth as our nominee.

The survey of Teaching and Ruling Elders identified wanting an EP who “demonstrates a vibrant and compelling relationship with God in Christ.” Ruth is a cradle Presbyterian whose depth of conviction was evident in our conversations with us and her statement of faith where she wrote of the “relentless love story of the creator.” She spoke with ease about her faith, naming both places of certainty and doubt while drawing from Scripture to frame her words. In her PIF, for instance, she said: “I shape my ministry with what I have called, ‘theology of the table.’ It is by modeling a commitment to ‘staying at the table’ through the good and the tougher times that we will experience the profundity of the grace of God. Jesus models this commitment for us in his table fellowship with a diverse cadre of disciples.”

Our CIF said we were seeking someone with “a record of breaking down silos and building bridges of credibility that leads to honest, open communications and relationships.” The more we learned about Ruth, the more we heard of a strong track record in all of those areas. In her 19 1/2 years of ordained ministry, she has served alongside congregations and leaders who were happy with the denomination and those who chose to leave it, those who felt on the inside and those who perceived themselves on the margins, with those who honored what it means to be part of a connectional body and those who took advantage of it. In other words she has known conflict and we sensed in her and have heard from others about her that Ruth is one who listens, speaks the truth in love, and seeks to bring reconciliation and justice. One way she helped build relationships in the Presbytery of San Gabriel was through forming teams from self-identified progressive and conservative congregations who joined in mission trips to Peru. Two students from Peru joined the San Gabriel group at the recent Triennium.

Our ad in the Presbyterian Outlook spoke of seeking “an innovator, ambassador, collaborator and convener.” One of the themes we clearly found in Ruth was her understanding that the Presbyterian Church in the 21st century must find new ways to proclaim and live out the Good News. “We have a responsibility to teach and preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” she writes “in a way that will have relevance and meaning for our members when they find themselves in the board room, the living room, [and] the soccer field.” Likewise, she spoke of how the work of an EP must take on a different shape. It “can no longer be viewed as that of a regulatory bureaucrat,” she says. “One must serve as a relational pastor to the congregations—providing a voice of hope and possibilities along the journey.”

As our committee listened and read, discussed and prayed and prayed some more, it became clear that Ruth brought the kind of faith and preparation, skills and experience which our Presbytery needs. One member of the EPNC said of Ruth “She is bold, yet sensitive in her words” while another added “It has become very obvious that she establishes deep relationships wherever she is.” Another member writes “My sense is that in a field of immensely well qualified candidates, Ruth stands out as one whose qualifications are second to none…Ruth is intellectually, academically and experientially well-prepared for the challenges and joys of our position…She is a leader whose first response and abiding response is to turn to the Word for her own guidance and inspiration and for the vision by which she leads others.” With such sentiments among the EPNC, when it came time for us to vote the conviction of our hearts last month, the decision was both clear and unanimous.

One last thing. I mentioned to you how early on in our process and before we had begun to talk to any candidate as part of an interview that we took all of their written materials—PIF or resume’, Statement of Faith and answers to our supplemental questions—and then scored them individually. When we finished that process in late May and added up the scores from the committee, the top-rated candidate, just on paper, was The Reverend Ruth Faith Santana-Grace. Now after eleven months of seeking to discern the will of God on your behalf, our conclusion remains the same.

Therefore, Madame Moderator, it gives me great joy, on behalf of the Executive Presbyter Nominating Committee to make the follow motions:

  1. That we receive the Reverend Ruth Faith Santana-Grace as a member of the Presbytery of Philadelphia pending her release from the Presbytery of San Gabriel.
  2. That we elect the Reverend Ruth Faith Santana-Grace to a five-year term as Executive Presbyter of the Presbytery of Philadelphia effective February 1, 2014, with the Terms of the Executive Position as presented.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan Aggarwal, Ruling Elder, Wayne Church
Isaac Baah, Ruling Elder, United Ghanaian Church
Randy Barge, Teaching Elder, Olney Church
Susan Bravo, Ruling Elder, Bryn Mawr Church
Delores Brisbon, Ruling Elder, First Church, Philadelphia
George Rendell, Ruling Elder, Concord Liberty Church
David Sanchez, Teaching Elder, Christ’s Church
Bill Teague, Teaching Elder, Langhorne Church
John Willingham, Teaching Elder, Doylestown Church (Moderator)

 multicolorbar web