Category Archives: General Assembly

An Interesting Development In The Presbyterian Church In Canada – Active Campaigning For Moderator

3 Replies

In my reading today I came across an interesting development — one of this year’s nominees for Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada has begun an active campaign for the office.

While this is now standard procedure in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), in no other branch (to my knowledge) does active campaigning take place. In most branches out-and-out campaigning by a nominee is considered inappropriate to the office. Many times subtle campaigning does take place, but it is in the form of word being spread through networks of supporters asking voting delegates to
support this candidate or that one.

Let us take a step back for a moment and consider the position and role of the Moderator. First, a person does not “run” for Moderator but “stands” for it. Someone does not so much seek the office as the office seeks them through the discernment of the community. The position is often considered an honor bestowed on an individual for service to the denomination but comes with the expectation that the person has the experience and character to preside over the meeting(s) of the governing body in a neutral way. The Moderator must control the flow and efficiency of the meeting while being fair to all making sure both sides get heard.  From experience I can tell you it is no small task and after a particular contentious meeting your head can be spinning. (And a good Moderator has a great Clerk covering their back.) In addition to presiding over the meeting the Moderator also acts as the visible face of the governing body for the term of office.  The office carries no power beyond that necessary to run the meeting and the powers accorded to the position for the work of the term of office. However, in the way that a person holds the office, the things they say and priorities they keep, they can have a significant impact on the life of a denomination.

I have written much more extensively on the role and selection Moderators but let me just finish by saying that there are three usual methods for a Presbyterian General Assembly or Synod to select their Moderator.  They can be elected from the commissioners to the Assembly at the beginning of the meeting (PC(USA), PCA). They can be selected by the presbyteries in the time leading up to the Assembly (PC Canada, PC Ireland). Or they can be selected by a nominating committee in advance of the meeting (Church of Scotland, Free Church of Scotland). As I mentioned above, the PC(USA) does have active campaigning for the position in the 6-9 months before the Assembly, and most of the nominees for the upcoming assembly have web sites (1,2,3) and Facebook pages (1,2,3).

In fact the PC(USA) has fairly strict rules for the election of the Moderator and campaigning in advance of the meeting.  These can be found in section H of the Standing Rules of the Assembly. They have a small limited budget, not counting travel.  They can not distribute campaign materials to commissioners except in the designated campaigning space and time and in the commissioners’ mailboxes. The nominees and their supporters can not actively contact commissioners before the meeting. As the Standing Rules say:

(b) In order to encourage reliance on the leading of the Holy Spirit in the selection of the Moderator, no candidate shall send a mailing of any campaign materials, print or electronic, to commissioners and/or advisory delegates or permit such a mailing to be sent, nor shall candidates or their advocates contact commissioners and/or advisory delegates by telephone.

I review all this as an introduction to the news that it appears PC(USA) style campaigning for the position has come to the Presbyterian Church in Canada.

The election of the Moderator as described in the Book of Forms is rather general:

282. At the time appointed for meeting, a diet of public worship is held when a sermon is preached by the moderator of the last Assembly, or, in his/her absence, by a former moderator. Immediately thereafter the Assembly is constituted with prayer, and a provisional roll, consisting of the names of commissioners appointed at least twenty-one days before, is submitted in printed form by the clerk. The General Assembly elects its moderator on nominations made immediately after the Assembly has been constituted, who then takes the chair.

The actual election procedure with the nominations and election by presbyteries in advance was set by the 95th General Assembly and then the election by the Assembly, while in theory it could be a contested race, is usually a pro forma vote.

Well, now that the nominations are out the Rev. John Borthwick has supplemented his regular Twitter account (@jborthwik) with a Moderator campaign account (@borthwick4mod) and he has created a Facebook page for his campaign.

Nothing says he can’t do this — But the usual custom is to have a more passive campaign. He has gotten one comment on the Facebook page indicating support, one saying “Sorry, but not a big fan of campaigning,” and one that says “Drag us into the 21st Century, screaming if necessary.” Mr. Borthwick does appear to be the youngest of the nominees and this could be interpreted as a clear statement of his youth and association with a younger demographic in the church.

Lots and lots of questions come to my mind with this development. Will others follow – this year or in coming years? Will the Assembly feel it necessary to prohibit, regulate or comment on this development? Will the active strategy turn out to be a positive or negative for his election? To put that another way, as the commenter on the web page says, will, or does, this change represent an approach to bringing denominations into the virtual age?

This is at least a development worth watching. Is it a development whose time has come or one that clashes too strongly with our Presbyterian ethos? It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Stay tuned…

Nominees For Moderator Of The 138th General Assembly Of The Presbyterian Church In Canada

Leave a reply

The First of December – It is time again for the Principal Clerk of the Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada to announce the names of those nominated to serve as the Moderator of the next General Assembly.  This year the nominees for Moderator of the 138th General Assembly are

  • The Rev. John Borthwick – Currently pastor of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Guelph, Ontario.  The biographical sketch on the church web site tells us that he has been at the church just short of nine years with five years pastoring in Toronto before that. It also says “His current areas of interest are
    conflict mediation, change theory, and the influences of consumer culture on society.” His work leading local churches to build a house for Habitat for Humanity was recognized by a local publication in 2008.

  • The Rev. Peter Bush – Pastor of Westwood Presbyterian Church in Winnipeg, Manatoba. From the church web site there is a  list of articles he has written, including a January 2010 piece for the national magazine, the Presbyterian Record, on the Priesthood of all Believers. Style points for the church staff listing where his title is Teaching Elder.

  • The Rev. Gordon Haynes – Rev. Haynes is on the denominational staff in Toronto where he was the Associate Secretary for Canadian Ministries/The Vine. Beginning this fall he began research for a project that will “provide the [Life and Mission Agency] staff and Committee with the material upon which a national strategy will be formulated.” The announcement goes on to say “The report will identify possible future ministry opportunities as well
    as areas of potential growth and innovation in presbyteries.”

  • The Rev. Dr. Andrew Johnston – Pastor of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church, Ottawa, Ontario for just under 14 years. His bio on the church web site lists his service to the church including Moderator of the Presbytery of Ottawa and President of the Christian Council of the Capital Area.  He was awarded a D.Div. from Presbyterian College, Montreal, in 2007.

  • The Rev. Dr. John Vissers – Rev. Vissers serves as Principal of the just mentioned Presbyterian College.  His official bio on the College web site indicates that he began his ministerial career in the pastorate, including at Knox PC, Toronto. He previously taught at Ontario Theological Seminary (now Tyndale Seminary). His M.Div. and Th.D. are from Knox College, Toronto. He also holds a Th.M. from Princeton Theological Seminary.  His bio also tells us that his research interests include “Reformed theology, contemporary theology and constructive Christian doctrine.”

An interesting group – all male, all Teaching Elders, three in the parish, one from the west, and a diversity in ages.

Ballots will go out to the presbyteries shortly and the announcement of who the presbyteries have discerned to lead the next General Assembly will be announced at the beginning of April.  Our prayers are with all the nominees.

Developments In The Church Of Scotland Related To The Ordination Trajectory

Leave a reply


Over the last couple of months there have been some issues hitting the news that are tied to the action of the Church of Scotland deciding at their General Assembly last May to start down a trajectory that in about three or four years could lead to the training and ordination of active homosexuals as church officers.

The first item is pretty recent hitting the media earlier this week. While it has been picked up by several media outlets, all reports seem to be based on a November 14 article in The Guardian with the headline “Gay clergy row threatens mass resignations from Church of Scotland: Breakaway church possible with up to 150 ministers ready to quit over ordination of gay clergy.”

Let me first compliment the article as a whole for being balanced reporting concerning this issue but criticize the headline and the lede for being a bit sensationalistic.  When you read the story you find that the figure of 150 mass resignations comes from one source, Kirk Session Clerk Mike Strudwick of Gilcomston South Church, a church that is looking to leave the Church of Scotland. He may well be right about the mass resignations.  The article tells it like this:

[Strudwick] predicted other churches opposed to gay ordination could follow, and
perhaps form a new breakaway church. He said he could “well believe”
there were 150 ministers considering resignation.

It also attributes to him the idea that “Maybe five or six years down the line there will be a grouping of like-minded evangelical Presbyterian churches.”

But no one else quoted in the article will go nearly so far in predicting the future of the Kirk.  The article says this about the statement from the official spokesman

However, a spokesman for the Church of Scotland denied that so many
ministers were threatening to leave and urged critics of gay ordination
to wait until a theological commission reported in 2013.

The Rev. Ian Watson, a leader in the evangelical group Forward Together, is described as holding the opinion that “only a few ministers would leave in the near future.” He is quoted as saying

“If there will be an exit, it will be two, three years down the line at least.”

As a side note, Forward Together has their annual meeting tomorrow so we will see if additional insights come out of that.

On the other side of the question the article says this:

The Rev Peter Johnston, of the liberal One Kirk [sic] group which supports
gay ordination, said he believed some rebels were threatening to leave
simply to put pressure on the church, but hoped most critics wanted to
keep talking about a harmonious solution.

The general assembly’s
decision “does leave them in an awkward position”, he said. “I can grasp
that but the majority of folk in the Church of Scotland want to see
what the theological commission comes back with. From our perspective,
we’re still trying to keep dialogue open with all people.”

And the article accurately captures one major barrier to departure, the same barrier faced in many Presbyterian denominations including the PC(USA).

One obstacle to mass departures is that ministers who resign loses their
home, income and future pension payments. Congregations would lose
their church and its buildings.

So thanks to the Guardian for letting each voice be heard.  As a transition to the next issue let me include two more lines from the article.  The first looks ahead to the next GA:

Critics of this strict ruling [referring to the loss of home, pension and buildings] are thought to be planning to contest it
in May, in a bid to give rebellious ministers greater protection.

The next is a quote from the Kirk’s official spokesman that points out that this issue is far from resolved:

The Church of Scotland spokesman added: “It is disappointing that any
ministers or members feel the need to leave the church before the
commission reports.

“We stress that no final decisions have been taken, and the church is currently holding more dialogue on this issue.”

The fact that no final decisions have been taken is the key polity point in the second item rattling around the Scottish media right now.

The Scottish Government is in the midst of a 14-week Consultation on Marriage that will conclude on 9 December. The consultation asks for input on introducing same-sex marriages and religious ceremonies for civil unions.  Because the Church of Scotland is in the midst of its own discussion and study of these topics, in very Presbyterian fashion it has declined to contribute to the government discussion.  Until a future General Assembly, and possibly the presbyteries under the Barrier Act, make an explicit decision on the topic, the Kirk is remaining silent. The silence is also required under the moratorium on commenting on the issue the GA has put in place while the issue is being studied. Well, sort of…

While most of the Kirk has remained quiet, the silence is not exclusive and the Lewis Presbytery has, as a body, let the government know of their opposition.

On the other side, the Rev. Scott Rennie, the partnered gay minister whose call to an Aberdeen church precipitated the current controversy, has been talking to the media and has expressed his support for the government changing the definition of marriage.

And the group Forward Together has submitted a response to the Scottish Government and made a copy of the official form available on their web site.

Finally, a statement by the Kirk, published by Defend Marriage in Scotland, leaves the door open for a “properly considered response” coming through the Legal Questions Committee which usually responds with more of an eye to the civil legalities than the theological and doctrinal angle.

Other churches, including other Presbyterian branches, have not been silent on the issue.  The Free Church of Scotland has issued an official statement through their Commission of Assembly. The statement begins

The Commission of Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland, (5th
October 2011), wishes to express its deep dismay over the Scottish
Government’s current proposals to introduce same sex marriage in
Scotland. Its opposition does not arise out of any kind of homophobia,
but a concern that 1) the timeless definition of marriage as the
voluntary union of one man and one woman would be changed irreversibly
and 2) the timeless institution of marriage would be permanently
undermined if the government effectively changes its meaning to include
same sex couples.

Many churches, both congregations and denominations, have given input to the consultation on both sides of the issue. In particular, there were articles today (e.g. Christian Concern) about 70 church leaders representing 20,000 members, sending a letter to the First Minister urging the government to keep the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman. These signatories include at least a few from the Church of Scotland, including the Rev. Dominic Smart of – wait for it – Gilcomston South Church, the church of the Kirk Session Clerk I began with at the beginning of this post.

As was pointed out earlier, this is an issue that has a long way to go. Maybe an organized group will develop that will pull out of the Church of Scotland en masse. Maybe it will be in one’s and two’s over the next few years as the discussion progresses. We will have to wait and see. The journey continues…

Update (1 Dec 2011): The Church of Scotland has weighed in on the consultation regarding same-sex marriage with a “no, not at this time.”  There is a brief press release with a summary of the main points as well as the full 19 page response form.  In addition to outlining where the Church of Scotland is at this time, including the process that was put in motion by the 2011 General Assembly, they weigh in with this concerning the issue at hand:

The Church of Scotland cannot agree that the law in Scotland should be
changed to allow same-sex marriage. The Government’s proposal
fundamentally changes marriage as it is understood in our country and
our culture – that it is a relationship between one man and one woman.
In common with the historic position of the Christian Church, the Church
of Scotland has always viewed marriage as being between one man and one
woman. Scriptural references to marriage, whether literal or
metaphorical, all operate under this understanding. To redefine marriage
to include same-sex marriage may have significant and, as yet,
inadequately considered repercussions for our country, for the
well-being of families, communities and individuals.

They go on to say

The Church of Scotland is concerned about the speed with which the
Scottish Government is proceeding on this issue, and believes that the
debate has so far been patchy, undeveloped and exclusive of both
ordinary people and the religious community. The Government states that
the purpose of this proposal to re-define marriage is to accommodate the
wishes of some same-sex couples. The Church believes that much more
measured consideration is required before the understanding of marriage
which is entrenched and valued within the culture of Scotland, both
secular and religious, is surrendered to accommodate this wish.

Fourth Moderator Candidate For 220th PC(USA) GA (2012) Endorsed

Leave a reply

Last week a fourth candidate was endorsed to stand for Moderator of the 220th General Assembly (2012) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) when Palo Duro Presbytery endorsed Teaching Elder Randolph “Randy” Branson.

TE Branson is the pastor of First Presbyterian Church of Graham, TX, and currently serves as the Moderator of the Presbytery. According to the PC(USA) announcement, TE Branson is a graduate of the University of Oklahoma and San Francisco Theological Seminary. (SFTS has posted the PC(USA) announcement on their web site.) He has served churches in Texas and Southern California.

He has provided a quote to the Presbyterian News Service about his vision where he says:

“The middle of the church needs to demand and expect a culture of
respect and appreciation in the PC(USA). Palo Duro Presbytery has been through a lot and we’ve
figured out a way to get along across a lot of viewpoints. I’m hoping to offer that to the denomination. We can’t keep going the
way we’re going.”

In addition to the Presbyterian News Service article, there is also coverage from the Presbyterian Outlook and The Layman.

In looking around for links and chatter it appears that TE Branson has little in the way of a social media presence.  He does have his sermons available on iTunes, but no immediate finding of blog, Facebook or Twitter handles. (Please let me know if I have missed these.)

I congratulate TE Branson on his endorsement and add him to my prayers for the 220th GA.

[ Additional note: It was interesting to find another pastor named Randy Branson on the web who is in the Pentecostal Church of God, actually just down the street from me.  He does have a strong web presence with a web site and Facebook page and I am hoping his links have not kept TE Branson’s information from being found.]

Church Of Scotland Moderator Designate… Two Of Them

Leave a reply


Today the Church of Scotland announced the Moderator Designate for the 2012 General Assembly.  And last week the Church of Scotland National Youth Assembly Moderator Designate was also announced.  Here is some info on both of them.

The Rev. Albert Bogle was selected as the Moderator Designate for the 2012 General Assembly. Rev. Bogle is the pastor of St. Andrew’s Parish Church – Bo’ness and has his pastor’s blog titled iTalker. His Facebook page tells us that he is a graduate of the University of Glasgow and did his final theological training at the University of Edinburgh. (And as an aside, I like the Facebook profile picture better than the darker picture in the press release that the BBC article used.) He was short-listed last year in the Moderator selection process and his church’s web page has echoed the press release announcing his selection this year.

Besides the parish ministry Rev. Bogle has been involved in a wide range of ministries and in service to the church. He is involved with Sanctus Media, a non-profit that provides technology help to churches. He founded the Vine Trust that provides assistance to impoverished areas around the world and is currently working on the Amazon Hope Project that brings medical help to the Amazon region. He has served on multiple committees within the church, was the convener of the Church Without Walls group from 2004 to 2009, and is currently on the World Mission Future Strategy Group. The Church Without Walls is a theme his church has picked up on.

He has done a great job with his social media using the iTalker handle on Twitter (@iTalker), Facebook and his iTalker blog. Congratulations to Rev. Bogle on his selection and I look forward to following him and his Moderatorial year in the virtual world. May our prayers be with him as he undertakes this new calling.

It is also a pleasure to pass on the announcement of the new Moderator of the National Youth Assembly of the Church of Scotland, Mr. Euan Patterson of the Presbytery of Greenock and Paisley. Mr. Patterson can of course be found online on Twitter (@Elfangorax) and Facebook. He has contributed to the COSY Blog and for a good introduction to Euan I highly recommend his 15 minute video about his experience as a youth delegate to the 2011 General Assembly. I congratulate him on his selection and as he takes on this special calling we will be praying for him as well.

Third Moderator Candidate For 220th PC(USA) GA (2012) Endorsed

Leave a reply

On Tuesday October 11 a third candidate for Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) joined the group when Teaching Elder Robert Austell was endorsed by the Presbytery of Charlotte.

TE Austell is the pastor of Good Shepherd Presbyterian Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, where he has served for almost ten years. Previously he was an associate pastor in Lenoir, NC.  His M.Div. is from Princeton Theological Seminary with some coursework at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He also has a D.Min. from Reformed Theological Seminary, Charlotte. His dissertation was on worship and music and is available through lulu.

The Presbytery of Charlotte has issued a two page press release that is full of quotes about Robert. Speaking of his own sense of call he is quoted as saying:

“I have challenged my congregation to stretch beyond their walls and answer the question, ‘What is God doing in and around you, and how can you be a part?’ With the discernment and blessing of my family, elders, and local congregation, standing for Moderator seems to be the clear answer of how God would have me answer that question. I see it as an extension of the calling and work which I have already been doing – loving ordinary and imperfect people and pointing them to the extraordinary grace of God in Jesus Christ. I believe I am being called at this time to remind the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) of the extraordinary God that has called us together into being and leads us out into the world with hope and Good News as a distinct, truth-and grace-bearing people.”

The chair of the presbytery’s nominating committee, Teaching Elder Lee Koontz, provides this quote:

“If I may be allowed some personal privilege here… I personally am excited to support Robert’s candidacy, and I recognize that he has substantial gifts that would serve the denomination well as Moderator. Among those gifts is the ability to speak authentically and faithfully to a wide spectrum of Presbyterians. During a time in which we’re discussing congregations potentially leaving the denomination, Robert is able to relate to those who want to leave, those who want to stay, and everyone in between, and he does so with compassion and understanding. That’s one of many reasons that I’m excited to support his candidacy for Moderator of the 220th General Assembly.”

His candidacy has been covered by the Presbyterian News Service, in an article in the Presbyterian Outlook about the second and third candidates, and by The Layman Online in their article about all three candidates.

The Rev. Dr. Austell has served as the Presbytery moderator, Presbytery Council Vice-Moderator and is the Moderator-elect of the Presbytery Council.  He has served the presbytery in a number of positions and is known as a worship leader for conferences.

Robert was a commissioner to the 218th General Assembly (2008) and may be best known from that Assembly as one of the commissioners who co-sponsored the commissioner resolution On Urging a Gracious, Pastoral Response to Churches Requesting Dismissal from the PC(USA). More recently Robert created the well-known GA Help web site to help guide interested individuals through the 219th GA in 2010.

Needless to say, Robert is well represented in the virtual world with his Moderatorial web site, personal blog lighthouse/searchlight church, and on Facebook and Twitter (@gspcrobert).

So, best wishes and prayers for TE Austell as he stands for Moderator.

Now, how many more candidates are yet to come?

Second Moderator Candidate For 2012 PC(USA) GA Endorsed

Leave a reply

Let me begin with a technical note: The Second and Third individuals to be endorsed to stand for Moderator of the General Assembly were endorsed by their presbyteries on the same day and the news seems to have hit Twitter within a few minutes of each other.  But, media outlets seem to be consistent in the use of the 2nd and 3rd designations so I will use them as well.

On Tuesday October 11 the Presbytery of Great Rivers endorsed their General Presbyter and Stated Clerk, Teaching Elder Susan Davis Krummel, to stand for election as the Moderator of the 220th General Assembly.

There is no bio or statement posted on the Presbytery web site but the PC(USA) news article tells us that TE Krummel has served in a variety of pastoral positions in various sized churches in the first 24 years of her ministry.  She has been in her current position for the last eight years. She received her ministry degree from Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary and has additional certificate education from McCormick Theological Seminary.

Ms. Krummel has a strong record of service to the denomination including teaching polity at the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary, serving as the president of the Association of Executive Presbyters, and Moderator of the General Assembly Nominating Committee.

Her Moderatorial web site is up and it contains the press release and a collection of weekly perspectives she wrote for the Presbytery. It also invites us to follow her on Facebook and Twitter (@skrummel) for which there is one tweet so far.

In the press release, Ruling Elder Gary Davis, the moderator of the presbytery nominating committee, is quoted:

“An inspiring preacher and
teacher of the Reformed faith, Sue Krummel knows about the culture of
our presbytery because she was born and raised here. We recognize that
most of the churches (small membership congregations) in our
denomination are very much like some of the churches that Sue has
served. We believe that in this critical hour, the Presbyterian Church
(USA) needs a Moderator who understands the people in the pews. Sue
does.”

The Presbyterian Outlook has an article about her and the third candidate (I’ll post tomorrow) and The Layman Online has an article on all three of the current candidates.

This endorsement raised an interesting question about the current call of individuals who are standing for Moderator.  It struck me that serving in a higher governing body council was rare for those also serving as Moderator, but after I looked into the statistics it is not common, but not as rare as I though.

The obvious exception right now is Teaching Elder Landon Whitsitt who, while currently serving as Vice-Moderator of the General Assembly, just recently received a call to be the Executive and Stated Clerk of the Synod of Mid-America.  But that change was recent and he was serving as a parish pastor at the time of the 219th GA.  The other Vice-Moderator that came to mind was Ruling Elder Gay Mothershed who was serving as an Associate Executive Presbyter in Texas at the time of the 208th GA.

So, looking systematically at the list of Moderators, there have been 25 General Assemblies since reunion.  Of the 25 Moderators there have been 17 Teaching Elders and 8 Ruling Elders.  While the ruling elders could be an executive (cf. RE Mothershed above) it turns out that five were involved in business or non-profit corporations (Wilson, Gwynn, Brown, Ufford-Chase, Bolbach).  Two of them were in academics (I. Rogers, Gardner) and one writer (Marj Carpenter – I was tempted to call her a missionary because she wrote with a mission).

Regarding the Teaching Elders, about half (nine) were parish pastors at the time of election (Taylor, Hall, Fife, Dobler, Bohl, Buchanan, Andrews, Gray, Reyes-Chow).  Three were in academics (Oldenburg, Rhee, J. Rogers), two missionaries (Nelson and Weir – retired at the time of election), and one heading up a ministry non-profit (Abu-Akel).  The remaining two were an Associate EP and an EP (Salmon-Campbell and Valentine respectively).  So while being elected Moderator while serving in a presbytery executive position is not unheard of, it is one of the less common positions of call to be in at the time of election.

So, there is a summary of Rev. Krummel’s endorsement and the EP’s that have gone before her to this position. Our best wishes as she stand’s for the position of Moderator of the General Assembly.

Now, on to number three…

Free Church Of Scotland 2012 Moderator Designate Announced

Leave a reply

There are multiple Presbyterian branches that are moving into the new General Assembly cycle and a couple of days ago we had the meeting and report of the Free Church of Scotland’s October Commission regarding their Moderator Designate.

The Commission has prayerfully selected the Rev. Dr. Iain D. Campbell as the Moderator for the 2012 General Assembly.

Rev. Campbell, or “Iain D” as he is apparently known, is the pastor of the Point Free Church on the Isle of Lewis. He is well known to a much wider audience through is own blog, Creideamh, as well as his writing for the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals online magazine Reformation21. (Although to be fair, both of those have been a bit quiet since last May.)

The Point Church is Rev. Campbell’s third charge since his ordination, having served at Snizort Free Church and Back Free Church previously.  He is an active writer and lecturer and serves as an Adjunct Professor of Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary (PA).  He has served the church in multiple ways, recently as a member and the Convener of the College Board, and currently as Convener of the Communications Board.

For more about Rev. Campbell you can check out the Free Church press release, his church bio (which has the link to his sermons), the Reformation21 contributor information (that where I got the “Iain D” from), and his faculty blurb at Westminster.

As always, congratulations to the Rev. Dr. Campbell on his selection and prayers for him as he prepares to Moderate the upcoming GA.

First Moderator Candidate For 2012 PC(USA) GA Endorsed

Leave a reply

Ah, the circle of life polity continues and as we roll out the new Book of Order completing the amendment process from the 219th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA), we now start to look ahead to the 220th.  The sure signs of the new General Assembly are in the air with presbyteries working on overtures, PC-Biz has the category (but no content), the logo is out there, advocacy groups are rolling out web sites, and in a sure sign of a new GA season we have a sighting of the first robin Moderator candidate of the new season.  Yes, all is right with the world.

So as we enter this new cycle we welcome Teaching Elder Neal Presa who was recently endorsed by the Elizabeth Presbytery where he is currently serving as the Moderator. His current call is as the pastor of Middlesex Presbyterian Church in Middlesex, New Jersey.

He has an extensive biographical sketch from the presbytery meeting that lists his education and service to the denomination.  Following the meeting there was also a presbytery press release. Since then all the usual media sources have posted their articles including PresbyWeb, Presbyterian Outlook and the Presbyterian News Service. And one of his many alma maters, San Francisco Theological Seminary, has issued their own news story, and in what in my experience is record time for this sort of thing.

After looking through all of this material I have decided not to undertake the daunting task of consolidating all of Mr. Presa’s accomplishments into this story.  Let me summarize his educational background by just saying that he has three different flavors of Masters’ degrees and a Ph.D. in liturgical studies from Drew University. In fact the PresbyWeb article quotes the presbytery info making note of his varied education saying:

1. Neal has diverse theological experiences through attending
Westminster Theological Seminary in California, then obtaining his M.
Div. from San Francisco Theological Seminary, later receiving a Th.M.
from Princeton Theological Seminary, and finally earning a M. Phil. and
a Ph.D. from Drew University. At this juncture in PCUSA history, we believe
Neal clearly understands different theological convictions and has the
acumen to bridge theological divides.

Have to agree there – WTS California to SFTS is a unique theological combination.

His service to the denomination is also extensive and among the many ways that he has been involved maybe the most timely one is as Chair of the General Assembly Special Committee on the Heidelberg Catechism which is due to report to the 220th GA.  (Note a trend here – Ms. Bolbach was the Co-Moderator of the nFOG Task Force that reported to the 218th and 219th GA.) 

It is also worth noting that he has authored multiple books, as well as being a Cub Scout leader and soccer coach.

As he stands for Moderator of the General Assembly he has launched his web site introducing himself and his thoughts about the denomination. On the front page are his bullet points “for such a time as this” we are called to:

  • A Renaissance of service for Christ’s mission.
  • A Recommitment to journey together.
  • A fresh sense of being Reformed and always being Reformed, according to God’s Word and Spirit.

He invites us to connect with him by means of Twitter (@nealpresa) or his Facebook page.

So we have entered the new cycle and we know that there is much more coming in the nine month we have until the 220th General Assembly convenes in Pittsburgh.  I hope you will join me on the journey.

Reverberations From Ordination Decisions: Some Challenges In The Church Of Scotland

Leave a reply


[Ed. note: This is the second in a three part series that I hope to get written and posted over the next week.]

Over the last few months a couple Presbyterian branches have made
decisions to make, or move towards making, standards for ordination more
inclusive, particularly regarding the ordination of individuals who are
in active same-sex relationships.  These decisions have made waves in
the international Presbyterian community and these waves will be
reverberating in the community for a while to come.  This is a look at another set of reverberations.

The second set of decisions was made by the Church of Scotland General Assembly towards the end of May. The Assembly took a full day, May 23rd, to debate the report of the Special Commission On Same-sex Relationships and the Ministry. In that report the Commission noted:

9.14 As we have said in section 7, ordination and induction raise issues of the lifestyle of and the example set by leaders in the Church. The issue of whether to ordain and induct people involved in same-sex relationships depends upon a decision of the Church on the prior question of its stance towards committed same-sex relationships.

This is a complicated question and one which it tied to other theological understandings.  Unlike the decision by the PC(USA), they acknowledge the linkage of these issues and in helping the church deal with them in a systematic manner they recommended the establishment of a Theological Commission to report back to the 2013 GA.  The work of this commission is described in the Remits Report from the Assembly (pg. 20):


The Assembly has agreed to establish a Theological Commission of seven persons representative of the breadth of the Church’s theological understanding, who will address the theological issues raised in the course of the Special Commission’s work.

The Assembly also resolved to consider further the lifting of the moratorium on the acceptance for training and ordination of persons in a same-sex relationship. This consideration will come to the General Assembly when the Theological Commission reports in 2013.

The Theological Commission’s report will also examine:

(i) the theological issues around same-sex relationships, civil partnerships and marriage;
(ii) whether, if the Church were to allow its ministers freedom of conscience in deciding whether to bless same-sex relationships involving life-long commitments, the recognition of such lifelong relationships should take the form of a blessing of a civil partnership or should involve a liturgy to recognise and celebrate commitments which the parties enter into in a Church service in addition to the civil partnership, and if so to recommend an appropriate liturgy;
(iii) whether persons, who have entered into a civil partnership and have made lifelong commitments in a Church ceremony, should be eligible for admission for training, ordination and induction as ministers of Word and Sacrament or deacons in the context that no member of Presbytery will be required to take part in such ordination or induction against his or her conscience.

This means that the Theological Commission has been given an instruction to explore the possibility of making significant changes to the Church’s present position; however, decisions about change will not be made before the Assembly of 2013, thereafter there may be the need for Barrier Act procedure, with final decisions on any matter more likely to be considered by the General Assembly in 2014.

The Theological Commission has now been appointed and the members are the Rev. John McPake (convener), Rev. Prof. Andrew
McGowan, Rev. Gordon Kennedy, Rev. Dr. Mary Henderson, Dr. Jane McArthur,
Rev. Dr. Alan Falconer and Rev. Dr. Marjory MacLean. All are prominent in the Church of Scotland (as evidenced by the fact that they are all easy to find using a search engine) and many have academic experience.  As you might guess from the titles there are six clergy and one ruling elder, so not much balance there, but there is good gender balance and all the reviews I have read give high marks for theological balance.

Following the conclusion of the Assembly it did not take long for the reactions to begin. In fact, the planning for one meeting apparently began after the decision but while the Assembly was still in session.  That meeting, a Ministers and Elders Meeting, was held about three weeks after the Assembly meeting at St. George’s-Tron in Glasgow and it bears strong similarities to the Fellowship Gathering in the PC(USA). This was a gathering of about 600 congregational leaders who listened to at least six presentations about what the future looked like and what the options are for Evangelicals in the Church of Scotland.  (The six presentations are available on the web.)

On the one hand, these presentations use much of the same language (count how many times “like-minded” is used) and express the same feelings and perspective we have been hearing from conservatives in the American church.  And there was talk about the next meeting to be held this fall where there would be less of the presentations from the front and more interaction of those gathered. There are some differences besides the fact that this was a much shorter meeting, being only an afternoon.  One is that this is still a more informal group that is gathering for discussion. Another is that all the presentations foresee churches leaving the denomination if the trajectory continues as it is set and the question is whether to leave now or leave when, or if, the process has concluded.  There was brief mention of the possibility of accommodation within the church but that was a single passing comment that I caught.

One of the other interesting things about this meeting was that the attendance was reported as about 600 individuals, representing 0.12% of the total church membership.  Remember for the Fellowship Gathering the attendance was about 2,000 individuals or just slightly below 0.1% of the PC(USA). Both of these events had a similar draw on a percentage basis with right around one person attending for every thousand members of the church.

As I mentioned, the question addressed at the meeting was not “stay or go” but “go now or go later?”  There is an interesting response to the meeting by Mr. James Miller on his blog Five Sided Christian.  Towards the beginning of the piece he writes:

Having spoken to a number of ministers, elders and others, it is
apparent that there are many people who are deeply troubled by the two
options being put forward by St George’s Tron Church and some others. I
have to say that I share this dissatisfaction and have the sense that
evangelicals are being railroaded into a decision to separate. This
seems to be coming from a certain group of ministers and elders, who
give the impression that they have been wanting for years to leave the
mixed denomination they are in and have now found an issue through which
they can force their vision into reality.

He then goes on to counsel moderation, saying that while he thinks the decision of the Assembly was wrong he also considers the meeting “premature and pessimistic.” He holds out hope for the process, something that was lacking in the video presentations, arguing that this issue has a long way to go through the Theological Commission, the 2013 GA, and then the necessary approval of any changes by the presbyteries under the Barrier Act.  Consideration of leaving should only happen once it has reached its conclusion. As he says:

…I think it much more likely that if we stay in and “wrestle, and fight,
and pray” that the “trajectory” can be turned back into an orbit around
the Bible’s teachings and historic, traditional and ecumenical Christian
views and that the current momentum for change will be sent crashing at
one or other of the four hurdles still to be crossed.



My prayer is that it will be so. But if it is, then the evangelicals
will face as big a challenge and one we must not shirk. We will then
have the enormous task of loving and caring for and serving every gay
and lesbian Christian, to help them live the life of celibate friendship
we say that they must follow. For if we will not do this as fervently
as we protest actively gay people being ordained then we risk being
condemned of hypocrisy and outright pharisaism with every justification.
I hope we are also planning with equal vigour how we do this now,
whatever structures or denominations we find ourselves in
ecclesiastically come 2014 or 2015.

But while there are these discussions going, as you might expect some churches are not waiting for the process or the discussions to play out.  Almost immediately Gilcomston South Church in Aberdeen began the process to break away but according to the BBC the kirk session has postponed a final vote to allow time for discussion with Aberdeen Presbytery. Stornoway High Church did discuss and vote on leaving, but the kirk session set the necessary approval for the action at 80% of the congregation and the action only received 74% approval. A news article also mentions that St. Kane’s Church, New Deer, Aberdeenshire, is also contemplating the move but I have found no updates to the first news article. There was also a preliminary report of two ministers leaving the Kirk over the decision.

In addition to these actions many sessions and individuals – office holders, members, and members of other denominations – have expressed their disapproval of the Assembly action on a web site called simply Dissent.  The dissent itself is a five point statement expressing support for “the traditional teaching of the church” and the intent to “commit ourselves to pray for the members and the work of the Theological
Commission; to work with all our strength for the evangelisation of
Scotland in partnership with all God’s people; and to depend upon the
renewing and reforming presence of God’s Holy Spirit within his Church.” Similarly, there is a page at Christians Together which announces this site and gathers other statements of concern and opposition to the GA action.

And lastly, in one of the more interesting reactions, the Westboro Baptist Church has announced that it would like to have members travel to Scotland to picket churches in protest of the Assembly action.

There was another significant decision the Assembly made as part of the Special Commission report.  It reads:

4. During the moratorium set out in 8 below, allow the induction into pastoral charges of ministers and deacons ordained before 31 May 2009 who are in a same-sex relationship.

This has now moved from the hypothetical to the specific as a minister in Fife announced to her congregation that she is in a committed same-sex relationship and would like to marry her partner. After making this announcement at the end of August she has dropped out of sight and there are no further updates.  The Scotsman article says:

A Church stalwart last night revealed that residents has been “stunned”
to hear of Ms Brady’s plans, adding that parishioners were at
loggerheads over whether or not she should be allowed to continue in her
current role.

He said: “The congregation is divided over the
issue of the minister’s sexuality. One elder has already resigned and
others are considering their position. I personally do not believe it is
right and I do not believe same-sex civil unions are right.

“Miss Brady has been a conscientious minister but this is going too far.”


Finally, there has been reaction to this decision from other denominations. I mentioned in the first part of this series the decision of the Presbyterian Church of Ghana to sever ties with partners who approved of ordaining active homosexuals and preforming same-sex marriages.  While this was apparently aimed primarily at the PC(USA) following this trajectory of the Church of Scotland would also put them in the position of meeting those requirements.

Closer to home, the first speaker at the Ministers and Elders meeting mentioned concern expressed by the General Assembly of the United Free Church of Scotland.  I am grateful for the full language of the UFCOS Assembly action sent to me by their Principal Clerk, Rev. Martin Keane, because the action is nuanced.  The motion from the floor that became part of the agreed deliverance was:

“The
General Assembly noting recent decisions taken by the Church of
Scotland to consider further the issue of same-sex relationships and the
ministry, agree to suspend the review of the Covenant between our two
churches pending the outcome of their consideration of the matter.”

What is important to note is that the Covenant itself was not suspended. Rather the review of the Covenant, which would normally happen every two years and is due to be done in the coming year, has been postponed until after the Church of Scotland has come to a resolution on this issue.  With the review of the Covenant would come any modifications and the renewal of the Covenant for another two year period.

I think it is safe to say that the reaction of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland was not as nuanced.  Before both Assembly meetings four presbyteries asked the General Board to express concern to the Church of Scotland regarding the report of the Special Commission.  The General Board agreed and passed the following resolution:

“That the General Board instructs the Clerk of the General Assembly to write to the Church of Scotland expressing appreciation of the long and valued relationship between our two Churches; indicating that the Presbyterian Church in Ireland strongly believes the scriptural position to be that sexual relations outside of marriage between a man and a woman are sinful and as such, in the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, no minister or elder would be ordained or installed who continues to engage in such practices; and assuring the Special Commission of its prayers that wisdom and insight be given as it reports to the General Assembly in May.”

Then, at the meeting of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, three weeks after the Church of Scotland decision, the full Assembly passed a motion “That the General Assembly endorse the actions of the General Board and the Clerk…”  The church also issued a press release concerning these actions and the report of the outgoing Moderator who was an ecumenical delegate to the Church of Scotland GA.

So, having now jumped over to Ireland let me stop here for now and pick up some of the related issues circulating on that island in my third, and final, installment.