Category Archives: commentary

New GAC Deputy Executive Director For Mission in the PC(USA)

1 Reply

It is exciting to see today’s announcement/press release from the PC(USA) news service about the hiring of Rev. Tom Taylor to be the new General Assembly Council Deputy Executive Director for Mission.  Tom is a Louisville outsider who will come from the “tall-ish” steeple Glenkirk Presbyterian Church (1400 members) in Glendora, CA, San Gabriel Presbytery.

This hiring of a pastor from a large, prominent, generally “conservative” congregation to a major visible role in the national administration is comparable to the hiring of Gary Demarest to head up the General Assembly office of Evangelism in 1988.  Interestingly, Gary is quoted in the press release promoting Tom’s talents.

No one says that this will be an easy task.  Tom is quoted as saying:

“Anyone would be either crazy or arrogant to assume that this will be
an easy task,” Taylor noted. “This can only be done with God’s
direction and a Holy Spirit-driven energy and creativity, but I am
still more excited than daunted by the challenge,” he said. “I see it
as an opportunity for hope, growth and healing in our denomination.”

I look forward to Tom’s leadership in this position.

Ordination standards – with a twist

1 Reply

The Layman Online is reporting that there will be a candidate coming to the stated meeting of John Knox Presbytery next week to be admitted to the candidacy process as an inquirer. The individual is a self-avowed practicing homosexual and understands that his present life style is in conflict with the ordination standards in the Book of Order, G-6.0106b.  The letter to the presbytery from the Committee on Preparation for Ministry, included in the Layman article, takes the polity view that the candidacy process is a time for the presbytery and candidate to investigate and discern the call and that the ordination standards in the Book of Order apply to the final ordination.  This is the same view that San Gabriel Presbytery took several years ago and Mission Presbytery took earlier this year, and that has so far been upheld by the Synod PJC.

The twist:
(Actually two of them.)

1)  The CPM letter also makes it clear that this request to be admitted to inquirer status will also include the new authoritative interpretation.  This is the first direct challenge to the ordination standards by a candidate for minister since the PUP report and it is clear that this candidate will declare “scruples” about whether the ordination standards are “essentials.”

2)  The big one!  The candidate in question is Mr. Scott D. Anderson, the same Scott Anderson who was the only openly homosexual member of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity.  Mr. Anderson was previously an ordained minister of word and sacrament in the PC(USA) but renounced jurisdiction in 1990 when he acknowledged his present life style.

Commentary:  So much of this commentary seems to write itself, especially since the CPM does make a point of the fact that Mr. Anderson will be challenging what is essential.  I want to leave it at the point that if “nothing has changed,” as we are constantly being told, why is a member of the PUP Task Force the first to challenge the ordination standards?

Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences

1 Reply

Tradition has it that on this day, October 31, in 1517, Martin Luther posted on the Castle Church door in Wittenberg, Germany his “Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences.” This invitation to scholarly debate is now commonly known as the “95 Theses” and is considered a pivotal moment in the Protestant Reformation.  (More information on the 95 Theses from Wikipedia)

This was an academic and scholarly document, no question about that.  Luther was a theology professor and wanted to debate theology.  And this was not mainstream theology.  Luther was directly challenging the church doctrine of the day, a doctrine that had economic implications for the church.  But while he was challenging the church doctrine and theology, at this point he was not challenging the existence of the church itself.  In an effort to preserve the status quo the “powers that be” realized the threat this posed to them, their authority, and their way of life.  As events unfolded the stakes were raised and a renegade branch of the Roman church split off to form what is today the Lutheran Church.  It is interesting to note that probably the only reason that Martin Luther did not meet a swift and sudden end was that in God’s providence there was a political structure in place that chose to, and was able to, protect him.

Fast forward to today:  Yes, I have structured this commentary to have direct parallels to the current crisis, and yes I deliberately use that word, in the PC(USA).  When the 217th GA passed the PUP report and the new Authoritative Interpretation, I had hoped that the polity and theological issues would play themselves out decently and in order.  I had hoped and prayed that members, churches and presbyteries would take a step back and make it happen that “nothing had changed.”  Instead, as we have seen, the AI has raised a significant level of distrust in the “powers that be.” (Yes I know, we are Presbyterians and the “powers that be” are supposed to be us as presbyters.)  And the gang in Louisville isn’t doing us any favors by having file cabinets full of legal memos and actively helping synods and presbyteries pursue civil litigation against congregations.  In the last two weeks I have had several conversations with people, sessions, executives, and other officers and much of what I have been hearing makes the PC(USA) sound like an inverted triangle with the mission and the program on the overloaded top coming down to the “people in the pews” rather than the church being founded on a base guiding and doing mission.  The PC(USA) may win the battle but lose the war.

In this press for invoking the trust clause to protect property and per capita I close with G-3.0400 from the PC(USA) Book of Order:

The Church is called to undertake [its] mission even at the risk of losing its life, trusting in God alone as the author and giver of life, sharing the gospel, and doing those deeds in the world that point beyond themselves to the new reality in Christ.

Happy Reformation Day

High Profile Church of Scotland GA Moderator

Leave a reply

I don’t know if I have an increased sensitivity to it this year for some reason, or if it is really the case, but the Rt. Rev. Alan McDonald, current moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, seems to be higher profile in the popular press than any of his predecessors in that position.

He as been quite outspoken against the replacing of Trident ICBM submarines at naval bases in Scotland.  The Good News from yesterday carries the most recent account of his comments at public meetings, usually with leaders from other denominations.  This particular meeting was in London, so he does stray from Scotland for these comments.  There have been many articles in the Scottish and British press about his outspoken stand on this topic.

But now Rev. McDonald is being widely reported on for his comments about the commercialization of Christmas and the recovery of the true meaning of it.  The reports are covering a speech he gave to the organization Alternativity a week ago.  According to the news articles, Alternativity reaches out to the poor and forgotten in society to be sure they are not forgotten at Christmas time.

However, the reports of his comments, like those on the Christian Today web site, seem to focus on remembering those members of society who are frequently forgotten at Christmas.  Some examples from the Christian Today article:

“It is vital to encourage thoughts of the present and not to think only
of the kitsch Victorian Christmas card scene of Bethlehem… but to think
of Bethlehem today and for the peace that is so longed for”

“It is of great concern that so many people feel under pressure to
present the perfect Christmas. The poorest in our society, and women,
are particularly vulnerable at this time of year. Alternativity gives
people the confidence to take small steps away from the commercial
Christmas.”

The Sunday Herald makes a brief mention of Rev. McDonald’s comments in an article on “Christmas Creep” and another article in The Herald is completely devoted to the speech, noting that it got a “mixed reaction from retailers.”

Regarding the Moderator’s higher profile, it is interesting to see the increased coverage of the Church of Scotland.

About Rev. McDonald’s comments on Christmas, it is curious to see that the reports are on what the Herald calls the “values of Christmas.”  In none of these three articles is there specific mention of Jesus, the PERSON of Christmas.  I don’t know if this goes back to the original comments themselves or to the reporting on the comments, but it is a bit disturbing to me to see the “meaning of Christmas” reduced to the “values” and not the “incarnation.”  It is the “exhibition of the Kingdom” with out the “proclamation of the Gospel.”

My thoughts, take them for what they are worth.

Winning the battle but losing the war at the PC(USA)

1 Reply

I have commented on this before, but after a conversation yesterday and reading the news out of Louisville, I was again reminded of the road the PC(USA) appears to be directing itself down.  While the Office of the General Assembly seems intent on fighting tooth and nail to at least keep the property in the denomination, even if there are no members in those pews, the question raised last night was “At what cost?”  And while my main concern in previous posts was the cost of people, attitudes and spiritual well-being, the cost discussed yesterday was pure money.

As we looked at presbytery, synod, and national budgets it seemed to us that the PC(USA) is headed for trouble.  Not only is the declining membership, by both the ongoing decline and now the churches withdrawing, going to put the squeeze on “per capita” funds, but in places the legal expenses are mounting fast.  At least one presbytery, and the synod by extension, is accumulating large legal bills in its litigation against multiple churches.  And as they plan the budget for next year they are trying to figure out how to raise the funds to pay the bills, probably at the expense of significant ministry opportunities.  And Santa Fe and Sierra Blanca presbyteries are on record questioning their role and future viability.

The denomination has acknowledged these challenges in several press releases coming out of last month’s General Assembly Council meeting.  These include “GAC, PC(USA) Executives look for ‘a new way’“, a story about a joint meeting between GAC and presbytery executives.  Discussion groups looked at the future of the denomination and the article says:

One small group went so far as to suggest that the 2008 General
Assembly take no actions, but spend it’s entire time in discernment of
God’s mission for the church. Another group suggested that annual
statistical reports be replaced by reports on governing bodies’
discernment of their mission.

Another news article about the meeting entitled “Turning mazes into labyrinths” lists eleven items for discussion including this interesting one:

The congregational dilemma — what is job one? (“The denomination has
not lost members; local congregations have lost members.”);

On the one hand, I’ll admit that no one is a member of the General Assembly, they are a member of a local congregations.  But is this intended to negate that fact that when I sometimes tell people that I attend a PC(USA)  church they say “Isn’t that the church that _____________?”  Fill in the blank with your favorite controversial topic be it the Trinity report, the 9/11 book, the divestment in Israel, the list goes on.  I hate to break it to the folks in Louisville, but the PC(USA) an image problem, or a disconnect, that is hurting the local congregations, not the other way around!

Another article titled “Forward into the unknown” details comments that GA Moderator Joan Gray made to the GAC.  I am encouraged that at times Rev. Gray seems to have her head on straight about this and is very pragmatic.  In particular, she is blunter than most about the situation:

The ways of being a denomination that have served
us so well for so many years, in which I was raised and trained and
done my ministry for the past 30 years, are passing away, some so
slowly that we barely recognize it, some very fast.

We
have come to a time when any person with a computer can access a
universe of resources, programs and relationships. And churches are not
looking to the national office for these things much any more.

And a final article, “Reorganizing principles,” discusses the new GAC executive director Linda Valentine’s comments at the meeting.  Facing a nearly 10% budget reduction from last spring and a continuing series of layoffs to downsize the denominational offices, she too discusses the changes that are taking place.

Thus, responsiveness, accountability and collaboration, Valentine said,
are the “restructuring principles” undergirding the current GAC
reorganization, which was set in motion by the council at the end of
April.

So where does this leave the PC(USA) at this juncture?  Nice words from the top but I think many of us have heard these before from GA, synods, and maybe even our presbyteries.  Are we “rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic” or will this have a real trickle-down to the congregations?  Are we reducing expenses and selling off property just to balance the budget and then we will turn around in one, five, ten more years and have to do it all over again.

I am struck by two things in this series of articles:
First, a lot of talk about restructuring, about doing new things, increased communication, all of that.  But I saw very little about individual congregations and reconnecting with the people in the pews.  It is still about Louisville.
Second, I was looking carefully but saw no comments in any of these articles from the Stated Clerk, the Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick.  I will let that observation stand without further comment about conspiracy theories or that old science of “Kremlinology.”  But if GAC says or does something, will OGA follow?

So what is the future of the PC(USA)?  Can the denomination reconnect with the people in the pews or is all hope of that gone with the decline of main-line denominations?  And what will be sold/cut next to hold the denomination together?

Report of Administrative Commission on Riverside PC, Presbytery of Prospect Hill

Leave a reply

Riverside Presbyterian Church of Linn Grove, Iowa, voted to leave the PC(USA) over the summer, the Session voting on June 28 and the congregation on July 30.  At a called presbytery meeting on August 14 an administrative commission was formed to handle the situation and the report of that administrative commission to the September 9 presbytery meeting is now posted on the presbytery web site.

Reading through the report it presents one side of the story.  The report says that the AC was aiming to be pastoral and possibly conciliatory but they say that they were stopped from carrying out their task by the church’s lawyer and the leaders of the church prohibiting them from leading worship services and holding meetings.  So, they have gotten their own lawyer, sent stronger letters, and are ready to bring in the Office of the General Assembly.

This is one side of the story.  It would be interesting to hear the church’s side and I will keep looking for it.

As if Presbyterians don’t have enough to worry about

1 Reply

A news article in yesterday’s Scotsman.com entitled “Don’t worry, be
happy — and healthy” talks about the depressed mood in Scotland and the
“Scottish Cringe.”  It focuses on Dr. Harry Burns, Scotland’s
chief medical officer, and the new campaign for happiness. 
Scotsman.com writes:

Last year, the [Scottish] Executive pledged £150,000 over three years to a new
Centre for Confidence and Well Being in Glasgow. The centre, run by the
“happiness tsar”, Carol Craig, is designed to encourage more positive
attitudes, individuality and innovation, as well as recognition of
success in Scotland.

And what is the cause of the negative attitudes in Scotland?  None
other than John Knox, the founder of the Church of Scotland, according to Dr. Burns.  As
Scotsman.com puts it in the leading paragraph:

SCOTLAND should throw off the burden of “doom and gloom” imposed by
Reformation preacher John Knox and pursue happiness for the sake of its
health, according to the country’s chief medical officer.

and again later in the article:

He added that the founder of the Church of Scotland was partly to blame for a certain negativity in Scots culture.

“I think John Knox has a heavy burden to bear … ‘Oh doom and gloom’.”

I will grant two things:  That a positive attitude does improve
your health and add years to your life expectancy.  And that while the
Scots Confession, that John Knox helped write, does not say much about activities on the Sabbath, the Westminster documents do, including Q61 on the Shorter Catechism:

Q. 61. What is forbidden in the fourth commandment?
A. The fourth commandment forbiddeth the omission or careless
performance of the duties required, and the profaning the day by
idleness, or doing that which is in itself sinful, or by unnecessary
thoughts, words or works, about our worldly employments or recreations.

Yes, this is the same document that begins with the well known question “Q:What is the chief end of Man. A: To glorify God and enjoy him forever.”

Now I know that we are sometimes called the “frozen chosen” and we emphasize doing things “decently and in order,”  but we also recognize a tension between “ardor and order”  and being Presbyterian does not automatically equate to a negative mood!

But you don’t have to take my word for it.  If you check out the bottom of the article the Scotsman.com invites comments from their readers and the comments are being added quickly.  Those comments (posted so far) that mention Knox defend him, including one that points out he was trained and was influential in what is now the happiest country in the survey, Switzerland.  Many of the commenters point to centuries of British rule as the cause of the bad mood, not the Presbyterian state religion.  And a few even point out that the decrease in happiness parallels a decrease in the attenders of the Church of Scotland.

So, Dr. Burns may blame “Johnny Knox,” but it doesn’t seem that anyone else wants to.

Article: Finding my way back to church…and getting kicked out

2 Replies

Today’s edition of “Counterpunch,” a liberal, probably very liberal, appearing electronic newsletter has a fascinating article by Robert Jensen titled “Finding my way back to church…and getting kicked out.”  In the article Mr. Jensen details his experience at St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Mission Presbytery.  He also outlines his, by his own admission, marginally Christian beliefs, and how his membership at St. Andrew’s was challenged at the presbytery because in another news piece he referred to himself as an atheist.  The presbytery instructed the church to remove him from the membership rolls by a vote of 156-114.  His membership is still in place while the presbytery decision is appealed to the Synod of the Sun.

The article is interesting on a lot of different levels. 

First, it gives a view of our denomination from a liberal, modern, and marginal perspective.  How do we present ourselves?  What do our presbytery meetings look like to someone who had never seen one before.  How does it translate to the outside world?  As Mr. Jensen points out, he was present at the meeting but was not given the privilege of the floor.  He was allowed to distribute his statement of faith which reads:

On God: I believe God is a name we give to the mystery
of the world that is beyond our capacity to understand. I believe
that the energy of the universe is ordered by forces I cannot
comprehend.
On Jesus: I believe Christ offered a way into that mystery that
still has meaning today.
On the Holy Ghost: There are moments in my life when I feel
a connection to other people and to Creation that rides a spirit
which flows through me yet is beyond me.
I believe that Holy Spirit can only be nurtured in real community,
where people make commitments to each other. I have found that
community in St. Andrew’s. I have tried to open myself up to
our pastor’s teaching, to the members of the congregation, and
to the church’s work in the world.”

I never said it was orthodox, but if the church is to address the faith that people bring with them then we need to be aware of this.  But where do we as a church go with this?  He has clarly found community so now how do we help him find the Gospel?

Do not get me wrong.  In the PC(USA) we have a specific membership requirement:

G-5.0101 Membership through Faith
a. The incarnation of God in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ gives to the church not only its mission but also its understanding of membership. One becomes an active member of the church through faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and acceptance of his Lordship in all of life. Baptism and a public profession of faith in Jesus as Lord are the visible signs of entrance into the active membership of the church.

But the question that we as a denomination, and maybe as a system of church government, need to be aware of, reflect on, and be cautious about, is how do we undertake the “Proclamation of the Gospel” so that our polity helps and not hurts us?

GA of the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand

Leave a reply

The 2006 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand will convene in a few hours in Auckland and will meet through 1 PM Monday October 2.  The theme is “Christ-centered, community-facing.”  Looking over the docket for the meeting, both the summary version and the detailed PDF version, much of the proceedings have a familiar feel to them.  There are however a few distinctive elements that caught my attention.

The first of these is the election of the moderator.  The denomination uses the moderator designate model so this year the GA will receive the moderator for the next GA in 2008.  However, the nomination and voting procedure is run by the nominating committee throughout the wider church before GA.  This year there were two nominees with the Rev. Dr. Graham Redding receiving slightly more votes than the Rev. Peter Cheyne.  But this is the other interesting part of the process:  The nominating committee report and election of the moderator does not occur until the third day of the GA on Saturday.  Logistically, it makes some sense to give the moderator a chance to prepare for the GA and be part of the planning.

Another interesting element is the structure of the church, and the meeting, with different ethnic constituancies having representation.  These are probably not much different than the PC(USA) non-geographic presbyteries.  The groups include the Pacific Islanders Synod and the Council of Asian Congregations.  There is also the Maori Synod named Te Aka Puaho meaning “The Glowing Vine.”  In the Standing Orders of the GA, Te Aka Puaho has the ability to meet and make decisions in their traditional consultative system and report back to the whole GA.  In addition, if Te Aka Puaho has questions about a GA decision relative to their Maori culture:

(e) Te Aka Puaho may advise the Assembly that, because of a distinctive Maori perspective or value on a matter affecting Maori, it wishes to stand aside from the decision-making process for a time in order to undertake full consultation amongst the Maori people, the results of which will be reported no later than at the next General Assembly.

While the highest profile item on the agenda, that of ordination standards, comes up at the meeting on Friday, Thursday’s docket has its own controversial items.  Specifically, there are three overtures from the Presbytery of Auckland that seemed to be aimed at restraining and weakening the central authority of the denomination.  Overture 1 calls for limitation on the amount of money the national offices can collect from each church.  Overture 2 is about limiting mission assessments.  And Overture 3 proposes a “Federal Model” for the church structure.  As I read the overture it appears that it is recommending a denominational structure that is more congregational than presbyterian changing higher governing bodies into support agencies more than connectional and oversight bodies.  The overture refers to “independent/togetherness.”  The Book of Order and Judicial Reference Group comments:

…without wishing to discourage full consideration of the overture, advises that it raises major constitutional issues which go to the heart of the governance of the Church.

And a final interesting twist, the GA has corporate sponsorship to supply technology for the assembly.

I am still looking for a webcast of the GA but I will post as I am updated by the various channels.

Layman Online article on “PCUSA dispatches teams…”

Leave a reply

Greetings,
    On Friday, September 15, the Layman Online published an article entitled “PCUSA dispatches teams to advise synod officials on property issues.”  The article talks about lawyers and others from the PC(USA) denominational headquarters sending teams out to talk to synod officials about property disputes.

There seems to be no question from the “Louisville Papers,” as the Layman calls, them that the national headquarters is concerned about property issues. And from recent events and continuing disputes it seems certain that property cases will be contested for a while.  Also, several of the older cases, that is pre-TTF report, are in the Synod of Southern California and Hawaii.  It is in that setting that the article talks about a case in the Presbytery of San Gabriel over a year before the 217th GA adopted the PUP report.

I wanted to add a bit of context to that part of the Layman article since it makes up a significant portion of that whole piece.  The article mentions an Administrative Commission active in the winter and spring of 2005.  It is important to know that while this commission was dealing with property, the property was in no way contested.  The Presbytery of San Gabriel formed the commission to dissolve a church at the church’s request.  With the dissolution the property was transferred to another PC(USA) congregation that was sharing the space with the dissolving congregation.  There was no dispute and no property ownership contested by any entity here, be it one of the churches or a middle governing body.

Yes, as part of that process the administrative commission made a series of recommendations to the presbytery that were suggested in the spirit of making similar events easier in the future.  And, the commission did consult with property specialist to be sure that the transfer was done properly, legally, decently and in order.  As far as I can discover talking with people involved in the process the recommendations were made and accepted in good faith and in the context of working with struggling churches. For those on the presbytery level who I know these events predate the release of the TTF report by almost a year and no connection to the present disputes is seen.