Monthly Archives: May 2007

Update on the PCA Federal Vision report and other FV news

2 Replies

I haven’t been keeping up very well with my postings on the Federal Vision report and controversy over the last few weeks and there have been a couple of interesting developments.  First, in preparation for the 35th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America, the report has now been posted on the web site for the General Assembly.  The report is no longer available from the online magazine byFaith but that site now has a link pointing to the official GA site.

In addition to a conversion to PDF and a reformatting to look like a GA report, people who have compared the two note that at least one paragraph was corrected or clarified.  If you want more on that you can check out the entry on the blog Reformed News.

This week news started circulating of a letter signed by ten PCA pastors urging the GA to proceed with caution and not approve the Federal Vision report at this time.  As best as I can tell, the on-line source closest to the original is a posting on Joel Garver’s blog Sacra Doctrina.  There are also comments and information on each pastor’s affiliation on Reformed News.

The pastors emphasize that they are not proponents of the Federal Vision Theology, but are concerned about several aspects of the report.  They raise procedural questions and several theological questions.  They begin by saying:

We are not FV men. We are PCA pastors and elders who believe that it
would be premature and unwise to ratify this report as it now stands.
We also have procedural questions related to the forming of this
committee. In this letter, we cite statements from the report followed
by related questions that we believe the report fails to answer
adequately.

And they conclude with:

Fellow presbyters, until the committee clarifies these issues, it would
be premature for us to ratify their report. We encourage you to
carefully and prayerfully think through these issues and not enter into
this vote hastily. We are convinced that the report as it now stands
lacks the quality and scholarship of a PCA General Assembly position
paper.

In general the response in the blogosphere to the letter has been positive but with a couple of comments along the lines that “the ten pastors are sympathizers” or “if you have problems with the process why didn’t you speak up at last year’s GA when the process was approved.”

Finally, in an interesting twist there has been a flurry of writing in the past week about the Federal Vision Theology and Roman Catholic Theology.  An ex-Reformed and now Roman Catholic blogger, Taylor Marshall, back on May 22, posted an article on his blog, Canterbury Tales, titled “The Catholic Perspective on the Federal Vision.”  In this article he writes:

The [PCA] leadership and pew members are basically Evangelicals that read R.C. Sproul, maybe believe in infant baptism, and have worked “the five points of Calvinism” into their worldview. And when the last word is spoken, the Federal Visionists will be sidelined and ridiculed as crypto-Catholics and adherents to “salvation by works.” Fundamentally, the PCA fears that the Federal Vision movement is “just too Catholic.” All this talk about sacraments, covenants, ecclesiology, robes, candles, weekly communion, just gives your typical Southern Presbyterian the heebie-jeebies. They want that old time religion of three Wesleyan hymns, the pastoral prayer, and a 35 minute sermon
proclaims the “sovereign grace of the Gospel.”

Ultimately, I
think that younger Presbyterians will gravitate toward what the Federal
Vision offers. Many will sink their teeth into it and many will find it
wanting. Many will discover that the Catholic Church is their true
home, and many will discover her in a great moment of joy. This Federal
Vision is really only a peek into the keyhole of the Catholic Church.
The Federal Visionist has a vision of the beautiful things inside, but
they have not yet appreciated the warmth of a true home.

As you might expect this article has also lit up the blogosphere with a number of writers on both the “He’s right” and “He’s wrong” side.  Among those who think he fairly characterizes the Federal Vision Theology are R. Scott Clark at Oceanside United Reformed Church and Matt on his blog Berit Olam.

On the opposite side I would note a post on the Puritan Board discussion forum titled “The View From Rome is a Little Fuzzy.”  However, I would encourage you to read the comments to the article.  One in particular caught my attention where the author, Anne Ivy, writes:

I was RC (Roman Catholic), too….an adult convert, AAMOF….and have been struck for years by the similarities between the FV and RC doctrine.

And you know what else? Off the top of my head I can’t think of a single ex-RC-turned-Reformed that doesn’t see those similarities.

So we’ve got those who have come out of the RCC issuing warnings
regarding how much it resembles the FV, and we’ve got new converts to
the RCC chirping about how the FV’s doctrinal distinctives resemble the
RCC’s.

But the ex-RC’s and the new RC’s are assumed to not know what they’re talking about and are shrugged off by FV supporters.

Y’know, that’s really rather irritating.

Just some more to ponder about the Federal Vision Controversy.  The PCA GA starts June 12.  We will see what wisdom the Holy Spirit gives the commissioners about this.

Free Church of Scotland General Assembly

Leave a reply

At the same time that the Church of Scotland was meeting the Free Church of Scotland was also holding their General Assembly in Edinburgh across the street. 

The best analysis of the Assembly I have found is by the Rev. David Strain, a Free Church minister in London.  He has posted on his blog “Life Towards God” both his comments as well as the text of the moderator’s message urging greater ecumenical unity.  The moderator’s message is also available from the Free Church web site.

This assembly also receives the Lord High Commissioner, and Thursday morning HRH Prince Andrew addressed that body and they in turn assured him that they were still loyal subjects of the crown.

One of the noteworthy events of this GA was the exchange with the GA of the Church of Scotland.  On Wednesday, the Rev. William Brown, convener of the Church of Scotland Ecumenical Relations Committee was invited to address the Free Church GA.  The favor was returned on Friday when three members of the Free Church were welcomed by the Church of Scotland GA.  These included the Free Church GA Moderator Rev. John Ross and the convener of the Ecumenical Relations committee the Rev. Iver Martin.  The Rev. Martin addressed the Kirk GA.  There are articles about this exchange from both the Free Church and the Church of Scotland.  The two churches approved a Joint Statement which can be found in the report of the Ecumenical Relations Committee.  It is Appendix II beginning on page 20.  The statement looks at the Biblical and Confessional basis that they hold in common and then discusses the implications and applications of that for the two churches and their relationship, including a commitment to cooperate and a framework for discussion.

Churh of Scotland General Assembly: News wrap up

Leave a reply

The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland wrapped up yesterday with its usual ritual flourishes.  (We Presbyterians are good at doing that.  Part of the decently and in order thing.)  I have already commented on the highest profile items of business over the last week.  I’ll wrap up some of the lower profile news in this post and then add another with my commentary.  I’ve got three or four posts on other topics in the works as well which I am hoping to get finished up over this Memorial Day Holiday here in the USA.

In one of it’s first items of business the General Assembly changed its meeting dates from the current Saturday to Friday to Thursday to Tuesday or Wednesday.  The action was approved without debate.  So, in 2008 the GA will begin on Thursday May 15.

The Church of Scotland, like the PC(USA) and many of it’s Presbyteries and Synods, is in the process of reorganizing itself.  This year the Council of Assembly brought to the Assembly the reorganization plan for Communications, as well as items on the budget, and charity governance.  In the communications portion there was significant discussion about doing communications work in-house as opposed to contracting it out.  This is also where a question was raised about an official spokesperson, and the issue of Presbyterian Polity was discussed where no one person speaks for the church and the Assembly and Presbyteries are in a connectional relationship.  In a similar way there was significant concern, discussion, and confusion over charity governance as set down by the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR, pronounced Oscar) and how that governmental agency’s regulations fit a Presbyterian system.  First, OSCR has accounting standards which must be met by churches, presbyteries and the national boards and councils.  Secondly, there is the issue of who are the trustees of the charity.  OSCR could require consolidated accounts for the whole Church of Scotland which would be contrary to our understanding of our connectional nature.  The Assembly was asked to help argue against this potential requirement.  Under general finance it was reported that the Kirk revenues were up both from increased giving and from investments and that the national assessment would be reduced by a total of £1M.  (Sounds like the PC(USA) per-capita.)

One of the more unique reports of the week was from the Church Hymnary Trustees.  Many churches have found the current words and melody fourth edition of the Church Hymnary to be too heavy.  The Trust reported that they are negotiating with the publisher to produce a lighter weight words only edition.  There was an addendum to have the Trust implement a “trade-in” program so churches could swap their heavier hymnals for new ones but the Principle Clerk reminded the Assembly that the Trust is an independent body and not accountable to the Church of Scotland.  The addendum was revised to invite the trade-in program but the revised addendum failed.  In his closing remarks on Friday the Lord High Commissioner, with some humor, referred back to this issue by asking just how heavy the hymnals were since the Queen would be using one soon.

Besides the Same-sex relationships report, there was also an interesting debate within the Mission and Discipleship Report related to church publications when a commissioner requested that the Assembly instruct the editor of the church’s publication to publish a previously rejected article about the results of a survey.  At the end of the debate the Assembly voted to keep the editorial independence of the publication and did not approve the request to publish the article.  However, the debate did bring to the front some sore nerves or sour grapes about previous editorial decisions of the magazine editors.  A motion was made from the floor to add a section requesting the Council look at promoting sexual abstinence training, or as the motion worded it “saved sex.” In one of the more humerus discussions the wording was bounced around and whether it might apply to a theological doctrine.  At the Deputy Clerk’s suggestion the wording was changed to “promoting the concept of saved sex” but after additional discussion the mover withdrew the motion for this new section.

One other interesting part of the report from the Mission and Discipleship Council was concerning a National Children’s Assembly in the fall.  This event would be for 10 to 12 year olds but the children would be traveling to the event alone.  Significant concern was expressed about the success and advisability of the event and whether children should represent Presbyteries in pairs or chaperons should be added for travel.  We will see what the planning committee does.

One item which I did not comment on previously about the Report of the Council of Ministries, and one of the reasons the “Visions” document within the report was only acknowledged, was the suggestion of a “locally ordained minister.”  This position would replace the Readership position and would provide for a church to ordain a minister for service in that church only.  According to the Church of Scotland’s “Guide To Ministry” web page the Readership has similar to the PC(USA) the Commissioned Lay Pastor (CLP) in several respects.  Both the Reader and CLP are set apart by the Presbytery to serve in situations where a regular Minister of Word and Sacrament is not available or practical. The proposed Locally Ordained Minister would be set apart by a church and Presbytery oversight and connection is not yet clear.

Finally, a few notes on the Lord High Commissioner’s comments at the Assembly.  The summary from the Kirk web site indicates that in the opening session HRH Prince Andrew included comments about the 300th anniversary of the union of the Scottish and English parliaments and affirmed the relationship.  With the new Scottish First Minister present Andrew went on to comment on how the recent electoral win by his Scottish National Party has “shaken the timbers” of this relationship.  (In my experience with these Assemblies this is the most political a Lord High Commissioner has gotten.)

The Lord High Commissioner’s closing comments on Friday evening were less weighty and contained a reasonable amount of humor.  He opened, in response to the Moderator’s invitation to speak, by saying he had a few brief comments, “but since she asked…” and he continued with the customary speech about his activities that week.  He also made the comment that he could “spread his wings further” than most Lord High Commissioners and travel further afield in Scotland.  I could not tell if this was intended as justification of his air travel reputation or self-effacing humor.  It is interesting to note that Andrew mixed his two roles during this Assembly, making some visits as the Lord High Commissioner, while sometimes acting as the Duke of York, Special Representative for International Trade and Investment.  (For some details you can see the Court Circular from the TimesOnLine.)  However, the Moderator did thank him at the closing for introducing himself as the Lord High Commissioners while visiting Kirk projects and thereby raising the profile of the Kirk.

Church of Scotland General Assembly: Notes on Day 6, Thursday

Leave a reply

Today’s session included the report of the Committee on Chaplains to Her Majesty’s Forces, the Church of Scotland Guild, the Parish Appraisal Committee, and the HIV/AIDS Project.  However, the longest report was the Ministries Council stretching across both the morning and afternoon sessions and covering a wide range of topics.  This Council does much the same work on a national level that PC(USA) Committees on Ministry do on a Presbytery level.

Of particular concern in the report was the suitability of International Christian College (ICC) in Glasgow for training Kirk ministers.  The problem is that staff at the college are required to sign a statement of faith that some Church of Scotland ministers would not agree with.  In addition, the Church of Scotland has traditionally trained ministers in a university setting rather than in seminaries and that was a matter of concern about ICC as well.  When that section of the report was debated the council convener, the Assembly Moderator, as well as the Principal Clerk all seemed to reach a point where they were as confused as the rest of the commissioners and at the Clerks suggestion the proceedings were “rewound” to a point  where most people were no longer confused.  In the end there was no final action on ICC since the council wanted another year to consider the situation.  There was a statement by a commissioner the Kirk should be careful adding a sixth school for training at a time when the Church of England was closing some of their schools, and Dr. Barbara Wheeler, the president of Auburn Theological Seminary and the PC(USA) representative to the GA, gave a similar caution pointing out that the PC(USA) now has a surplus of seminaries relative to the number of students and the Church of Scotland should be careful where it uses precious resources.

Another item of concern was a report contained within the council report titled “Vision for Ministries in the 21st Century.”  While the report was generally acceptable as far as it went, there was concern that more work was needed on some issues in the report.  The Assembly passed, by a vote of 299-201, an amendment to the Council report which acknowledged rather than affirmed the “Vision” report.

The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland: Summary of major issues

Leave a reply

I have had a hard time keeping up with posting about the Church of Scotland General Assembly going on this week, so I will post a summary of the closely watched issues now and will come back and catch up with some of my comments and look at lower-profile issues over the next few days.

The agenda item with the most advanced media coverage was today’s Mission and Discipleship Council’s report on Same-sex Relationships.  There was emotional and lively debate, but in the end the Assembly approved the Council’s recommendation that the discussion continue, and that individual churches be encouraged to study the report.  It was interesting to me that the working group that wrote the report was described as “diverse” in viewpoint but in the end, despite differences of opinion, there was a spirit of convergence.  This is similar language to what was used to describe the PC(USA)’s Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity.

The longest report of the Assembly was Tuesday from the Church and Society Council, both in length (44 action items or deliverances) and time.  The report began in the morning session and, with the break for lunch, concluded at 6:10 PM.  In that time the report covered, and the Assembly approved, opposing nuclear weapons, advocating for withdrawal of British troops from Iraq, declaring the death penalty contrary to Christian teaching (but with an addendum for the council to consider it further), encouraging fair trade in food (including support of locally sourced food), speaking out against the evil of human trafficking and alternatives to custody.   There was also a section on energy and climate change where the Assembly challenged church members to make significant lifestyle changes to reduce their use of energy and for the government to set radical targets for energy conservation.  Another hotly debated section of the report dealt with the Middle East.  In particular, deliverance #32 which declared:

32. Endorsing the voice of the local heads of churches in Jerusalem on the subject of Christian Zionism, recognize the theological errors and political difficulties inherent in this interpretation and encourage members of the Church of Scotland to reject it.

This deliverance had extended debate around a counter motion that would have softened the language to concern about Christian Zionism.  This countermotion, like almost all others contrary to the original language of the report, was defeated.  There was also extended debate about “socially acceptable” gambling, including internet gambling.  It was recognized that Church of Scotland social projects do benefit from the money raised from gambling revenues but in the end reaffirmed a decision of the Assembly of 1998 expressing real concern for the national lottery as well as approving the other items about gambling.  Finally, additional items were added to the report from the floor including motions about Darfur and Zimbabwe.

Church of Scotland GA: Notes on Day 1

Leave a reply

The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland convened yesterday with all the flair and formality the meeting brings.  The meeting began with a ceremonial start including the election of the new moderator (a formality as this point since the tradition is to have a committee select a designate in the fall), and the letter from the Queen and the address by the Lord High Commissioner.  After a brief adjournment the Assembly continued with business, much of it related to the administration of the Kirk.

One of the major reports of the morning was a Joint Report of the Legal Questions Committee and Ministries Council dealing with workplace standards in the church and the “equivalence of protection offered by the Church to its ministers and others, in comparison with the rights of employees and others in civil law.”  The full report is available from the reports page.  Here is a link to the MS Word version.  One of the concerns of the report is Ministers in the church being bullied by “office-bearers” in a congregation, particularly session members.  The measure adopted would provide that the civil law would apply to church workplace situations including bullying, harassment, and victimization.  (As a note, the primary responsibility of the Legal Questions Committee is how the church’s rules and laws interface with the civil laws.  This is were last year’s debate on blessing same-sex partnerships came out of.)  The Assembly amended the adopted document by a vote of 214 to 138 to include in the “protected grounds” sexual orientation.  The assembly debate did not follow the report numbering exactly but I believe that this would be a change to the report Appendix B, Section 1a.  Beyond this, the report is extensive on expected behaviour and the procedures if a claim is filed.

In the collection of administrative reports there were also reports on budgets and communications which led to discussion but were approved.  One Presbyterian polity issue in the communication report was a discussion on why there was no designated “spokes person” and how no one person can speak for the church or a body of the church.

One of the external controversies to come out of the GA so far is the choice of HRH Prince Andrew as Lord High Commissioner.  For an Assembly which will be calling on the world to take action on global warming, including the number of airplane flights, people are saying it is hypocritical to have a representative of the Queen who is known for his jet-setting habits.  In addition, Andrew will be traveling by helicopter the next three days to church projects around Scotland.  Several news outlets have picked up this story but here is one from Scotsman.com.

Today is a quieter day with a business session this evening that will involve no council reports or votes.  It will mainly be speeches including that of the outgoing moderator.

Church of Scotland GA begins tomorrow

Leave a reply

With the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland beginning in roughly 12 hours, the Scottish news media has had a variety of articles this week.  Here are a few:

A tribute to the outgoing Moderator Alan McDonald and an introduction to the Moderator Designate Sheilagh Kesting are both written by Ron Ferguson and appear in his column in The Herald.  In “The Ministry of a very Modern Moderator” Mr. Ferguson writes about Presbyterian Polity saying:

The Church of Scotland deliberately elects a moderator for one year only. This arises out of a Presbyterian distrust of entrenched ecclesiastical power. The ghost of John Knox still walks the land. The system has some obvious weaknesses, but among its strengths is the elevation of a variety of voices from within the Kirk. In his moderatorial year, McDonald has exemplified the highest traditions of ministry.

Mr. Ferguson introduces the Rev. Kester in “Breaking the Mould:  Meet the Kirk’s quiet rebel.”  He writes how she will be only the second woman to serve as Moderator of the General Assembly and the first clergy.  And as Rev. McDonald was high-profile about his combating sectarianism (My comments from December and March) Rev Kester has made it known that with her work and background in ecumenism, she will be proactive in that area as well.  This is one of the longer and most informative articles I have read about Ms. Kester.

Probably the most closely watched issue this year will be the Report on Same-sex Relationships, especially after the motion to allow ministers to bless same-sex partnerships was defeated by the Presbyteries.  An editorial in The Herald calls for compromise.  They write:

It is hoped that the Church will debate this
sensitive area with maturity and restraint and not precipitate any
rupture or stand-off between evangelicals and liberals, which would
only serve further to entrench their positions and weaken significantly
the Church’s authority in the eyes of the public. Instead, it must
surely be in everyone’s best interests to reach a conclusion advocating
tolerance towards those who choose to make these blessings, while
wholeheartedly accepting the stance of those for whom this ministerial
act is inconceivable.

However, an earlier article about this issue, also in The Herald, talks about the possibility of this issue leading to a split in the church.  I must note that while I found the article reasonable, it was interesting to see that all the quotes were from those who support the blessing of the partnerships, and most of them said they would defy the church if it passed a prohibition.  Related to this issue, the progressive group OneKirk is putting together a panel discussion on Monday evening that is not part of the official program.  However, the panel includes Rev. Ian M. Watson, a leader of the conservative group Forward Together, as well as Dr. Barbara Wheeler, President of Auburn Theological Seminary in New York and the PC(USA) official representative to the GA.  More details and the full panel can be found in a flier from OneKirk.

In other items, the Free Church of Scotland will be meeting at the same time and the ecumenical relations committees of each church will address the other’s General Assembly and they will be issuing a joint statement (The Herald article).  In addition, the Church and Society Council report will challenge church members to make changes in their lifestyles to reduce global warming (Christian Today article).

Finally, The Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly, that is the Queen’s representative, will be the Duke of York, HRH Prince Andrew, the second son of the Queen.  In my limited experience with Church of Scotland General Assemblies this is the first time that a member of the Queen’s immediate family has been the Commissioner, although vidio clips on the church web site show HRH Prince Charles serving in that capacity.  The best of the articles I have seen about Andrew’s service is from the Berwickshire News.

GA PJC Decision: I stand corrected

Leave a reply

Well, I wasn’t trusting the Associated Press report or some of the other media reports out there to get the details right, but if the PC(USA) News Service says so, than I guess I must be wrong.

I previously stated that in the case of Stewart v. Mission that since the case was moot because no remedy could be applied (see my earlier post for the details) that the GA PJC had not established the case law.  Specifically, they mentioned the Sheldon case where they ruled that celibate homosexuals may be advanced to candidacy.  There was extra wording in that case that: “However, if the [Presbytery] should determine the Candidate to be ineligible for candidacy at some point in the future, the [Presbytery] should remove the Candidate’s name from the roll of candidates, as provided by G-14.0312.”

Well, the PC News Service Article indicates that this is case law from the Sheldon case and was simply highlighted in this decision.

I stand corrected.

The beginning of GA season is coming: Five days to the GA of the Church of Scotland

Leave a reply

The first major General Assembly of this calendar year is coming up fast.  The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland begins this Saturday, May 19.  Today the General Assembly Web Site was updated with information and the agenda.  In particular, I liked the Order of Proceedings booklet which not only has the daily agenda but a lot of other interesting information that is available as a PDF file.  The various reports have been appearing on the web site over the last month.

Taking a quick look, it appears that the controversial report on Same-Sex Relationships to be delivered by the Mission and Discipleship Council (my previous post on this) will be the last item of business for the morning session next Wednesday, May 23.  They appear to be docketing a substantial amount of time, although there are other supplemental reports on other topics from this council as well.

Five days and counting until this GA Junkie gets a real fix.

The Three other PJC Decisions Just Reported

Leave a reply

Besides the closely watched case of Stewart v. Mission, there were three other GAPJC decisions reported this week, each with its own points of interest.

218-3 Consent Order — The Session of the Palos Park Presbyterian Community Church v. The Advisory Committee on the Constitution:  This was the recording of an agreement between the two parties reached by mediation.  The complainant filed the remedial case accusing the Advisory Committee on the Constitution (ACC) of not properly addressing questions filed with it and of violating the open meeting policy.  The agreement provides the ability for the ACC to respond to multiple questions in one collective response but they need to make it clear that they are answering multiple questions and that the questions have been answered.  In addition the ACC will be more careful of going into executive session at its meetings.

218-5 — Douglas J. Essinger-Hileman and Sandra D. Essinger-Hileman v. The Presbytery of Miami:  In this case the complainants brought a remedial case against the presbytery because of the manner in which their pastoral relationship with a church was dissolved by the presbytery rather than the congregation or administrative commission.  Read the decision for the full chronology.  The case is a matter of fundamental fairness and due process.  Getting right to the heart of the problem the GAPJC decision says:

The Book of Order, G-14.0602 and G-14.0603, addresses procedures for the dissolution of a pastoral relationship when requested by the pastor and/or the congregation. Similarly, G-9.0505b(1) and (2) address dissolutions through an administrative commission. In this case, none of these procedures applied. The Book of Order does not set forth a specific procedure to be followed when neither the congregation nor the pastor has requested dissolution, and no administrative commission has recommended or is empowered to act to dissolve the relationship.

Interesting question and problem in the Book of Order.  In this case the COM brought a motion to the presbytery meeting to call the congregational meeting.  A substitute motion from the floor from an elder commissioner from the church involved was approved dissolving the relationship at the meeting.  It was in the presbytery’s power, G-11.0103o, but was it fair?  The GAPJC writes:

Under the unique circumstances of this case, it cannot be said that it was fundamentally unfair for the Presbytery to proceed with the substitute motion. It would have been a better practice, however, to provide for a fuller hearing of the issues before voting on the substitute motion, particularly when the motion at hand involved so serious a matter as the dissolution of pastoral relationships. Some means should have been devised by which the Pastors and the congregation were given notice and an opportunity to be heard before the final vote to dissolve was taken.

However, as for a remedy?  No remedy would be applicable.  The decision says:

The SPJC was unanimous in finding that the pastoral relationships in this instance were irretrievably broken and that the church’s mission under the Word imperatively demanded dissolution in accordance with G-11.0103o. No remedial action or relief by any judicatory body will restore those relationships, and, therefore, the decision to dissolve the pastoral relationships should not be reversed.

218-7 — Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Through the Presbytery of the Redwoods Prosecuting Committee v. Jane Adams Spahr:  This is another high profile case but this is a procedural decision.

A brief recap:  A disciplinary case was filed against Rev. Spahr for conducting ceremonies that were essentially same-sex marriages (PC News Service article).  The PJC of the Presbytery of the Redwoods decided on March 3, 2006, that the ceremonies were conducted within her “right of conscience” and she was acquitted (PC News Service article).  The case was appealed to the Synod of the Pacific PJC but the Synod PJC basically said “whatever we decide the case will be appealed again to the GAPJC and we’ll just send it there now and not waste our time.”

The GAPJC, in this decision, responded with what can be summarized as “we have a process that we need to go through and don’t try to read our minds.”  More specifically:

1. A Matter of First Impression. While this may be a case of first impression as to an appeal by a prosecuting committee, now permitted under D-13.0102, it is not a matter of first impression as to the substance of the complaint. See, for example, Benton et al., v. Presbytery of Hudson River, Minutes, 2000, p. 586. The complexity of the issues invites consideration through the full judicial structure of the PC(USA).
2. An Appeal Inevitable. Despite an assertion by SPJC that an appeal is inevitable, it is not for GAPJC to speculate whether a non-prevailing party at the SPJC level will appeal a decision of SPJC. Further, the judicial framework established by the Book of Order provides an intermediate level of appellate review at the synod level. Acceptance of this reference would deny the parties one level of review.
3. Undue Expense and Delay. The expense and delay, if any, that may result from this refusal of reference is not likely to be extraordinary, as SPJC claims.

The GAPJC sent it back to the Synod PJC.