The holidays are now behind us and traditionally this is the time when voting on amendments to the Book of Order of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) kicks into high gear. So I thought that I would take the first, preliminary look at possible trends in the voting. But first some preliminaries…
Let me first make a couple of comments about the question “why bother?” Well, beyond the fact that crunching data is the sort of thing that I enjoy doing I also think that it gives one of the best windows into what is going on in the denomination at this time. It is a widely accepted generalization that the decisions of the General Assembly do not necessarily reflect the thinking of the “people in the pews.” The usual evidence that is pointed to is the fact that three times previously the GA has sent an amendment to remove or rewrite G-6.0106b in the Book of Order, and three times it has been rejected by the presbyteries. Another example of a disconnect is the negative reaction from many churches to the GA decision to boycott companies who supply items linked to the Israel-Palestine conflict. So, while Research Services gives us statistics based on opinion poles of sampled members, the vote counts, both the absolute and relative numbers, give us an insight into how ruling and teaching elders react to the issues the Assembly sends down to them. In short, I think the vote numbers can give us an insight into how the PC(USA) is changing.
So what is different this year about the vote? I think there are four things that need to be taken into account.
1) Each year the Assembly sends an amendment with a bit different wording and that might make a difference. This year the proposed language speaks more about the examination, that the governing body is responsible for it, and that they are to be guided by the Scriptures and the confessions. One of the more interesting lines is “The examination shall include, but not be limited to, a determination of the candidate’s ability and commitment to fulfill all requirements as expressed in the constitutional questions for ordination and installation (W-4.4003).” So while the confessions and the Scriptures are to guide the governing body, the candidate’s qualifications seem to be focused on the constitutional questions. So, how will any individual commissioner view the proposed wording this time around?
2) This vote is coming right after another vote two years ago while the previous interval was seven years from 2001 to 2008. There are a number of ways that this could manifest itself with two possibilities being the reduced turnout due to a “fatigue factor” and/or little change in the numbers due to less time for the church to evolve.
3) I will not develop this point here, but will just say that in looking at the numbers for the last four votes (96-B, 97-A, 01-A, 08-B ) I consider the vote on amendment 01-A to be a unique case with a turnout of conservative voters in proportions not seen in the other three votes. I will say that so far for 10-A this observation seems to still hold with the current numbers looking a lot like the last round of voting.
4) Overall, the voting is not just about “fidelity and chastity” this year but there is also the addition of the Belhar Confession to the Book of Confessions and a whole new revision to the Form of Government. The voting could have different dynamics this year due to this expanded slate and the dynamics of the timing of scheduling the votes.
OK, now the data. While the official count is always kept by the Office of the General Assembly , it only gives the totals. For the Amendment A vote I have been comparing the breakdown by presbytery from several sources: the Yes On Amendment A site, Covenant Network, Reclaim Biblical Teaching, and the Layman. Voting on the Belhar and nFOG are covered by both the Layman and the Reclaim Biblical Teaching site. Then for breaking news there is always Twitter. I’ve got my own tally sheet shared online, but I don’t claim to have it updated as quickly as the others. And if you want a detailed list of resources related to these votes you should start with Robert Austell’s GA Help web site.
So, at the present time the Belhar Confession trails by 17-12 (remember it needs 2/3 for a confession to be approved), nFog is passing 10-7, and after a flurry of voting yesterday Amendment A is currently failing 15-20. In total, 67 of the 173 presbyteries have voted on at least one of these items, eight have voted on two and three have voted on all three. You can see that so far the presbyteries are taking the votes deliberately and not usually taking more than one at a time.
Of the four that have voted on both the Belhar and 10-A the votes have been very similar: Alaska – 24% yes Belhar and 31% yes 10-A, Lackawanna – 45% yes Belhar and 40% yes 10-A, New Castle – 72% yes Belhar and 70% yes 10-A, Santa Barbara – 23% yes Belhar and 27% yes 10-A. While this is not proof that commissioners view Belhar and 10-A as being closely linked, it is suggestive that many may view both of them through a common filter.
Correlations for nFOG with the other two are not as close. Sometimes there is a similar proportion, like Alaska that had identical 7-22 votes on each, or Des Moines which had 64% yes on Belhar and 70% yes on nFOG. Sometimes it is not as close, such as Eastern Oklahoma that barely passed 10-A but passed nFOG on voice vote, or Northumberland which was 36% yes on Belhar but only 13% yes on nFOG.
But these are early trends of just a small number of votes so we will see what develops over the next six months.
I want to finish by taking a quick look at the repeat voting on G-6.0106b comparing Amendment 10-A to 08-B. We have reports on 35 presbyteries having held their votes and so far two have moved from “no” to “yes” (Eastern Oklahoma, Eastern Virginia) and one has moved the other way (Lake Huron). So the net change at this point is one to the yes column.
Looking at the total yes and no votes, we find that there are 6% fewer total votes (3848 versus 4101) for these 33 presbyteries. It is interesting to note that this 6% decline in commissioners voting exactly matches the overall decline in membership in the PC(USA) over the last two years (3.1% plus 2.9%). Taken as a whole, the
number of commissioners voting yes is up 5% (1875 this vote versus 1786
in the last vote) while those voting no have declined 15% (1973 down
from 2315). If the decline in total votes were proportionally represented in the yes and no votes we would expect 88 fewer yes votes and 199 more no votes. So the decrease in no votes can not be explained only by the increase in yes votes but there must also be a decline in the number of commissioners who favor “fidelity and chastity” who are voting.
For the 33 presbyteries with reported numbers (Northern NY and Cayuga-Syracuse had hand or voice votes without recorded numbers), 23 had a decrease in the number of votes, 9 had an increase and one was exactly the same. Now, some normal fluctuation in the number of commissioners attending the meeting is to be expected and I have usually placed this at +4%. Taking this into account, eight lower totals and five higher totals for a total of 13 more are added to the unchanged category. This total of 14 is just a bit less than half of all the presbyteries voting so far. The greatest decline is from Elizabeth Presbytery which had only 76% of the commissioners present as they had for the last vote. This could easily be attributed to the inclement weather in the northeast this weekend. However, Genesee Valley, which voted at the same time, had only a slight decrease of 3%. The largest increase was in Newton Presbytery which had 1.14 times the number of commissioners as the last vote. Of the four increases that I consider significant (in a statistical but only quasi-rigorous sense), there are three presbyteries that voted no and one voted yes. Tempting but dubious to draw conclusions from such a small sample.
If we look at yes and no votes broken down by presbytery, on average there are 19% more yes voters and 13% less no voters. For the presbyteries that voted yes there was only a 1% increase in the number of yes voters and 16% decrease in no voters. For the presbyteries that voted no, the increase in yes voters was 31% while the no voters decreased by 11%. That increase in no votes was pulled by a couple of large increases, but it suggests that the Yes on A get out the vote campaign is having an effect while the similar effort for No on A is not as effective.
Let me warp up this discussion with the general observation that I am seeing the whole range of behaviors in different presbyteries. The three presbyteries that switched all had significant increases on the prevailing side with 12%, 21% and 22% increases. On the other side were varying decreases from 5%, to 14% to 23%. The switch in position was a two-way street apparently caused by both gains and losses. There were a couple of presbyteries with uniform change, such as Great Rivers which had a 3% increase in both the number of yes and no votes, or Newton which had a uniform 19% increase in both columns. There are also presbyteries, like Central Florida and Stockton, where the total number of votes was very constant and the votes shifted columns. It was into the yes column for Central Florida and towards no for Stockton. There is only one presbytery, Mississippi, where the no votes were stable (47 versus 49) but the yes votes increased (up to 11 from 2). And there are two presbyteries, Boston and New Castle, where the yes votes remained constant but the no votes declined significantly. And then there are the rest of the presbyteries which exhibit more complex changes that can not be explained solely with these simple end-member models.
So, that is what I am seeing so far. As I said, this is preliminary because with only around 30-40 presbyteries having voted on each amendment drawing statistical conclusions would be a bit early. However, there are interesting trends developing and we will see how those play out. Stay tuned… I’ll get out the white board and draw geeky charts and graphs next time.
#cmte12 #ga219