Category Archives: news

An Interesting Tale Of Stewardship, Property, And The PC(USA) Trust Clause

5 Replies

A news item on Friday caught my attention and got me thinking.  This is a brief recounting and reflection on that news item.

The news, from the DailyNewsonline.com, is that Oakfield Community Bible Church (OCBC), a congregation that can be traced back to the First Presbyterian Church, Oakfield, NY, of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), purchased back its property from Genesee Valley Presbytery at public auction for $50,000.  This property contains both the 11,740 sq. ft. church structure and the manse.

This history is, with a twist or two, simple and predictable: First Presbyterian wanted to leave PC(USA) over doctrinal differences, the Presbytery would not let them just take the property with them, after a brief attempt at negotiations the congregation filed a lawsuit for the property, and at trial the property was awarded to the Presbytery under the trust clause.  Apparently the Presbytery decided not to continue using the property themselves and so auctioned it off.  The successor church, now the OCBC was the successful bidder for $50,000.  (There was a bit of bidding drama, check out the news story for more details.)

The one twist in here is that upon separating from the PC(USA) the congregation of First Pres. became the Oakfield Independent Presbyterian Church (OIPC) and a bit later the church split and the majority of the congregation followed the pastor to form OCBC. So, while no longer Presbyterian, OCBC in its membership represents the successor to First Pres.  The remaining members of OIPC decided it was not worth appealing the trial court’s ruling. (Layman article)

So what questions does this raise?

First, for $50,000 did the Presbytery get anywhere near what they should have for the property?  In scanning articles I have not seen the figures for what each side was talking in the brief negotiations.  However, an article in The
Layman a week ago values the property at $398,000 and a comment in the minutes of a special meeting of Presbytery says “No appraisal has been done, but the worth may be greater than $200,000. The property is a valuable asset in the middle of the village.”  The property
does not appear on the town’s 2005
tax rolls, but a residential property very close by had an assessed
valuation of $83,000.  Even if the number in the Layman is a bit high
and we consider the minimum number the Presbytery listed, clearly the selling price at auction was no more than 25% of the
property’s value.  It appears that other bidders at the auction were
only interested in the manse and were willing to bid $45,000-55,000 for
the whole property to get the house.

So, on the one hand the Presbytery appears happy to get the empty building off their hands so they don’t have to put money into maintaining a vacant property.  In a depressed real estate market in a small western New York town they were able to unload a unique parcel of property.  (And I am well aware of the current challenges related to selling a unique parcel.  As chair of the trustees of the Synod right now I have a couple of “interesting” properties that we would like to find buyers for, especially if the offer reflects the value of the property.  One city has offered us naming rights if we donate the property to them for a park.)

But on the other hand, we have to ask the question whether with some patience and work the Presbytery could have gotten more value out of the property.  Yes, it probably would have required carrying it on the books longer and if not used for religious purposes carries the risk of losing tax exempt status.  And I am sure that the Presbytery considered this.  In addition, in defending the litigation they incurred expenses, some of which may have been offset by higher governing bodies or insurance.

On the other side of the equation the congregation is now back in the facility they were using before for what is probably a good deal.  It has been vacant for a while and that carries concerns about the condition but basic upkeep seems to have been preformed.  The flip side of this is that the church has been unsettled with some uncertainty and other arrangements for a couple of years.  And in the auction process they did not have assurance that they would be the successful bidders.

So is this a win-win situation, at least as far as the property is concerned today?  Presbytery gets vacant property off their hands, church gets to use their old facility again for a price that is 25% of the property value.

One does have to wonder if the Presbytery could have gotten more of the value out of the property.  One also has to wonder if a negotiated settlement right at the very beginning may have gotten everyone a reasonable outcome without the expense, frustration and polarization of litigation.

I don’t know what the best answer is here but these are questions that come to mind as I read about the outcome of this property auction.

Ethno-religious Violence In Nigeria And The Presbyterian Response

1 Reply

Violence around the city of Jos in Plateau State of Nigeria has been moving in and out of the mainstream media headlines over the past week.  However, while this month’s attacks by Muslim Hausa speaking Funali herdsmen on Berom Christians has gotten some press it is also reported that this is a retaliation raid for Berom attacks on Funali settlements back in January.  And in the even bigger picture, as you can probably anticipate, this is part of a much longer and larger cycle of violence in the area.  I found a story from the BBC to be particularly helpful in providing the context for the conflict.  Here are some helpful excerpts:

A mosaic of distinct ethnic groups – Tiv, Jukun, Pyem, Kofyar, Berom, the Hausa-Fulani and many more – live along this dividing line between the Muslim north and mostly Christian south.
…
The fertile land and jobs were a powerful draw for migrants seeking work. People travelled to Jos from all over Nigeria.

Those patterns of migration are marked today by sharp divisions in the community.

People here are either classified as indigenes or settlers.

Indigenes are able to prove their ancestry in the state.

Settlers – whose grandparents and great-grandparents settled here – cannot.

Settlers find it difficult to get jobs in local government, or apply for educational scholarships.

Most indigenes are Berom Christians. Most settlers are Hausa Muslims.

Many Christians believe Hausa Muslim settlers seek to seize political control and impose Sharia law. They fear an extremist Islamist agenda and jihad.

Many Muslims believe the Plateau State government wishes to drive them out of certain areas.

The circle of violence, the emergence of vigilante groups and organised militia, the suspicion of the military within the Christian community and the lack of a political framework for talks worries those tasked with security.

There is a bit of coverage out there, some of it better than others.  From the admittedly incomplete reading that I have done I would recommend the BBC article, a New York Times piece, and an AP story from The Boston Globe.  General Christian voices include Christian Today and The Christian Post.  Local voices carried by AllAfrica.com include news stories, opinion pieces, and interviews.  In particular, there are some interesting comments in that interview with Barrister Yahaya Mahood who has previously represented Fulani settlers.  In the interview he says about earlier incidents:

They are not religious riots. They are ethnic clashes between those that are called indigenes and those called settlers. The dispute in the two communities is not over religion, its practice or right. It is purely economic. In both cases, people who settled 200 years who are purely traders and businessmen dominated the economy over those who say they are indigenes and who are public servants and farmers.

When asked for his solution to the current conflict he answered in part:

[I]f the ‘indigenes’ will not accept the ‘settlers’ as Nigerians with a right to stay anywhere in Nigeria and enjoy rights as Nigerians, then the federal government should move all the settlers out of Jos back to wherever and pay them adequate compensation. That is why I welcomed the Chief Solomon Lar Panel, made up of indigenes and settlers to sort out their differences. It is better than setting up Judicial Commissions of Inquiry.
…
We should allow Chief Solomon Lar panel to do its work. They know themselves. They know the problems and have the solution. The federal government must step in, be firm and rebuild the town as was done in Zango. Plateau State government should be neutral and fair to all, if the settlers are to remain in Jos. The leaders of the settlers should undertake to control their people and there should be mutual respect. Only that can guarantee peace.

That is a brief introduction to the situation.  Related to this I have seen both internal and external responses from the Presbyterian church.

From the Presbyterian Church of Nigeria the Moderator of the General Assembly, The Rt. Rev. Ubon Bassey Usung, has expressed views similar to those of Mr. Mahood.  According to the press report The Moderator “warned that the recurring ethno-religious crisis in Jos, Plateau State, if not checked immediately, might snowball into a full-blown war.”  The article goes on to say:

Usung  condemned the attack.  He advocated the setting up of a Conflict Resolution Committee  made up of Christian and Muslim leaders, government community chiefs and security agencies to check violence in the area.  “The committee should be able to preach peace among the members of the various communities and religions in the area and nip any crisis in the bud,” he added.

In solidarity with the Presbyterian Church of Nigeria the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, The Rev. Harvey Self, has issued a statement which echoes Mr. Usung’s call for peace, security, and community work to heal the divisions.  The statement concludes with:

We also call on state and federal authorities in Nigeria to put an end to the culture of impunity by making every effort to identify and punish to the full extent of the law all those responsible for instigating and for carrying out these murderous attacks. In addition, we call upon state and federal authorities to make a concerted and sustained effort to deal with the underlying causes of these repeated outbreaks of ethnic and religious violence; namely, discrimination between settlers and indigenes, endemic poverty, and the continuing unresolved disputes over land. Finally, we call on all people of faith, everywhere, to pray and to work together for peace, healing, reconciliation, and acceptance of all human rights for the people of Nigeria.

We will see how this develops and which other Presbyterian branches speak out on it.  For now, I echo these words for us to “pray and work together for peace…”

Moderator Designate Of The General Assembly Of The Presbyterian Church In Ireland

Leave a reply

Three news sources, the BBC, U.TV, and Daily News, are reporting that the Rev. Norman Hamilton, pastor of Ballysillan Presbyterian Church in north Belfast, has been chosen by the presbyteries as the Moderator designate of the 2010 General Assembly.  Presuming that he carried the five presbyteries that voted for him in the February vote, he received votes from six of the nine presbyteries that voted for candidates not making it into the second round.  He received the votes of eleven of the nineteen presbyteries.

The BBC provides this reaction from Rev. Hamilton:

“I am greatly humbled and surprised that this has come to me.”

“I hope during my year to bring a very Biblical perspective to a wide range of issues that are important to both church and society.”

Called Meeting Of The General Synod Of The ARP

3 Replies

As observers of Presbyterian denominations know it is a very rare event for a denomination to call a special meeting of its highest governing body.  At about this time today a Called Meeting of the General Synod of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church will convene at Bonclarken Conference Center in Flat Rock, N.C., to hear the report and act on the recommendations of the Moderator’s Commission on Erskine College and Theological Seminary.  This Commission was created by the 205th General Synod last summer and the minutes of the Synod meeting (p. 44, 47th page of the PDF file) record the adoption of the following Memorial from First Presbytery:

That First Presbytery encourage the 2009 General Synod to instruct the Moderator of Synod to form a special commission to investigate whether the oversight exercised by the Board of Trustees and the Administration of Erskine College and Seminary is in faithful accordance with the Standards of the ARP Church and the synod’s previously issued directives.

Erskine College and Theological Seminary (“Erskine”) are linked educational institutions in Due West, South Carolina, founded by, and still associated with, the ARP.  In case that is not obvious from the name, the institutions are named for one of the principal leaders of the secession Presbyterian branch in Scotland, the Rev. Ebenezer Erskine, who helped establishe the Associate Presbytery in 1733.  It is worth mentioning that the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church descends from this branch and is not, nor was ever, a part of the mainline American Presbyterian branch.  Furthermore, the ARP can trace its founding to 1822 without any subsequent reorganizations making it the American Presbyterian branch with the longest time period since the last division or merger.

Erskine is still associated with the ARP — the vast majority of the trustees are elected by the General Synod and it is considered an agency of the church.  The College on its web site is not as clear about this association.  It refers to its status as a “Christian institution” and its Mission Statement does refer back to its ARP origins.  The Theological Seminary describes to itself as “organically and historically related to Erskine College” and the Mission Statement is:

Erskine Theological Seminary is an educational institution of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and the Seminary has been called by God and commissioned by its host to serve not only that denomination, but also the entire Church of Jesus Christ. The mission of Erskine Theological Seminary is to educate persons for service in the Christian Church.

According to the minutes (pg. 10) the ARP General Synod budget for 2009-2010 includes $617,000 in unrestricted funds for support of Erskine College.  In addition, Erskine is the beneficiary of special offering funds and occasional special allocations.

I don’t know how far back questions started to be raised about the Christian world view of the College but I do know that there was significant discussion by the 204th General Synod (2008)  as reported by ARP Talk, and various reports suggest that there were issues well before that Synod.  (ARP Talk is an unofficial source of news, commentary and advocacy edited by the Rev. Dr. Charles Wilson that has devoted a lot of electronic ink to the Erskine debate.)  The heart of the issues with Erskine has been with the infallibility of Scripture and whether the faculty upholds and teaches in accord with that belief.  As a general statement of the Synod, but clearly aimed at the college, the Synod took the following action, described as the most significant since 1979.

That the 2008 General Synod go on record by stating that the position of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church on Scripture is that the Bible alone, being God-breathed, is the Word of God written, infallible in all that it teaches, and inerrant in the original manuscripts.

While that position went into the minutes it seems to have had little affect on the college.  ARP Talk continued to report from students, faculty and alumni about the world view of some members of the faculty.  Independent blogs were set up that both advocated for change at Erskine as well as another that defended the school.

Additional perspective on the situation comes from an article by Joel Belz in World Magazine which describes the dynamics that have caused the present tensions in the following way:

It’s true, of course, that such a prickly relationship between a denomination and its colleges and seminaries is hardly a new thing or a newsworthy matter. But this may be different. There is, for example, no mountain of evidence that the two ARP schools have lurched noticeably leftward in recent years. What’s happened instead is that the sponsoring denomination has itself moved decidedly to the right—and now wants to take firm steps to bring its college and seminary with it.That’s a rarity in the ecclesiastical and educational history of America.

This was a high-profile issue at the 205th General Synod last summer and coverage included blog reports from ARP bloggers Brian Howard (three parts – 1, 2, 3), and Tim Philips (with a whole bunch of his follow-up articles).  There was also a lot of Christian media coverage of the meeting including the previously mentioned article in World Magazine, at least two articles in the Layman, and the Evangelical Press News Service (provided by Tim Philips).

At that meeting the minutes (pg. 71) record the Report on Erskine College and Theological Seminary where the Chairman of the Board of Trustees and the Pres
ident say:

A few students have publicly criticized Erskine for failure to live up to its Christian profession and some of those criticisms are valid and are being addressed. Because Erskine does not require a profession of Christian faith for admission, there will always be some students who do not embrace our mission statement or live by Christian values.
…
Every year Erskine hires some new faculty and their appointment is probationary for the first year. In their application and during interviews, they subscribe to our mission statement and to Synod’s document on the Statement of the Philosophy of Christian Higher Education. They also affirm Synod’s view of the inspiration and authority of Scripture. New faculty are carefully evaluated by the Academic Dean and some of those professors who do not embrace or practice our mission are not invited to return. One or two senior professors have been singled out for criticism and the administration has investigated those criticisms and taken appropriate action. Erskine has sought to faithfully measure up to the expectations of Synod to be a Christ-centered institution. We, like many ARP churches, have not always succeeded but we sincerely strive to please Christ in all that we do.

In addition, there was a panel discussion one evening where the President and a Vice-president of Erskine answered questions posed in writing and during the debate the next day the Synod granted voice to Erskine students to address not only the synod committee but to allow a representative to speak to the full Synod.  In the end, the Synod approved the Memorial, quoted above, and a Commission was appointed.  It was announced in January that the Commission was ready to report and the Called Meeting of General Synod was scheduled for this week.

The Aquila Report provides us the text of the Preliminary Report of the Commission — the full report will be distributed to the General Synod today.

The Commission does not mince words — It comes to the following unanimous conclusions (summarized here – read the report for the full text of each):

  1. The General Synod has been negligent in its oversight of Erskine College and Seminary.
  2. There are irreconcilable and competing visions about the direction of the college and seminary among the members of the Erskine Board of Trustees.
  3. There are irreconcilable and competing visions about Erskine’s mission as a liberal arts college on the Erskine Board and within the Administration and faculty… Despite vocal differences among the faculty and Administration, it was not evident that the trustees have given any clear direction in these matters.
  4. It became evident to us as we listened to all the parties concerned that Erskine College and Seminary stand at across roads as the search is conducted for a new president. The General Synod must speak clearly at this critical juncture so that the message of our interest in Erskine’s success is unambiguous. The next president must have the full support of the ARP Church and its Board of Trustees of Erskine College and Seminary.
          In our candid conversations with trustees, faculty, and members of the search committee, we came to the conclusion that no presidential candidate could garner the whole-hearted support of every Erskine Board member. It would be grievously unfair to the next president and potentially disastrous for these institutions if he does not have this unqualified support.
  5. Almost without exception, present and past members of the Board of Trustees believe that the size of the Board is a significant obstacle to effective governance.
  6. In an effort to govern the institutions effectively with such a large number of trustees, the Board is subdivided into several committees. While committees can be an effective means of utilizing the special experience and skills of trustees, the committee structure presently employed by the Erskine Board is a hindrance to proper governance and oversight because, in the nature of the case, the Board relies heavily on its Executive Committee. The result, despite the best of intentions among those serving on the Executive Committee, is that most trustees are left without knowledge about large parts of the institution entrusted to their care.
  7. The structure and composition of the Board of Trustees are problematic for the faithful oversight of the seminary.
  8. The ideological divisions on the Board have created significant challenges for the Erskine faculty. The College faculty are rightly troubled that the Board of Trustees and Administration have given them little guidance for the implementation of Erskine’s mission. The lack of clear directives has led to widespread faculty confusion about their responsibilities to the ARP Church in the classroom setting.
  9. The Board has been negligent in its responsibility to hold the Administration accountable for the faculty it employs. The Board has not instructed the Administration to evaluate the faculty either on the quality of their teaching or on their ability to integrate faith and learning in the classroom.
  10. The so-called “culture of intimidation,”found by Second Presbytery’s Committee on the Minister and His Work several years ago, is still present on the campus. There is an atmosphere in some quarters of Erskine College and Seminary that is inimical to faithful implementation of the mission.

The preliminary report does not present recommendations but instead says:

This Commission has been constantly aware that the very nature of our work is sensitive. It involves the reputations of trustees, administrators, faculty, staff, and students.The goal of our report is that Erskine College and Seminary emerge from this process with the tools and vision necessary to fulfill the missions the ARP Church has given to them. This goal must also inform how the Commission reports certain conclusions.
…
Some have asked that our entire report be delivered to delegates weeks in advance of the called meeting of General Synod. We are sympathetic to this line of thinking. We, too,want the delegates to have sufficient time to discern the Lord’s will prior to the hour of decision.

However, it should be evident to all that the discussion and debate over Erskine over the past several years has generated much heat and little light. This is at least partially to be explained by the widespread use of blogs, internet discussion boards, and “Facebook” as methods for disseminating sensitive information.

We believe that the release of some conclusions and our recommendations would have the effect of depriving the General Synod of the deliberative process such a premature action is meant to effect. Our report would then be removed from the carefully reasoned and prayer
ful deliberations of elders and ministers in the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ and would instead be subject to the publicly-voiced opinions of anyone with internet access, whether or not they hear the Commission’s full report or have any real interest in the future success of Erskine College and Seminary. The realities of what takes place on the Erskine campus and among the trustees are nuanced and delicate.


Debate about these matters should be marked by the fruits of the Spirit of God and not the sometimes mean-spirited clamoring that so often occurs on the internet.

Conclusions like these have caused not a little bit of concern from various quarters in both the church as well as academia, and have produced a new round of media attention.  There is an article from Inside Higher Ed that recaps the story to this point, discusses some of the implications, and quotes one anonymous faculty member saying of the report “They are not traditionalists. I’m a traditionalist. They are extremists… I am not sure what they want except control.” 

The other dynamic in this drama is the announced retirement of the Dr. Randall Ruble as Erskine’s President on June 30.

So, with an attitude of prayerful support and discernment, and what I hope is not “mean-spirited clamoring,” I and others await the Spirit-led discernment of the General Synod.

I would conclude by adding one further prayer concern for those traveling to the meeting — Tim Philips has arrived there and is blogging about the meeting.  He reports this morning that with snow expected there is a concern whether the meeting will have a quorum so that it can actually take action on the report.

Second Vote For The Moderator Of The General Assembly Of The Presbyterian Church In Ireland Tomorrow — Presbyterians Doing Things Decently And In Order

Leave a reply

Originally I was not planning to post a pre-meeting comment about tomorrow’s second vote to select the Moderator designate of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland.  The vote is necessary because in last month’s voting the Rev. Norman Hamilton and the Rev. Norman McAuley each received five presbytery nominating votes with the remaining nine votes divided between three of the other four candidates.

But today Alf McCreary, the religion correspondent for the Belfast Telegraph, has an opinion piece in that paper titled “Church’s election process shows the need for reform.”  In that article he brings up two good arguments why the church should modify their election procedures.  While I see his point I am not sure that I agree with him.

His first point is that the second vote should be taken the same day as the first rather than waiting the month.  He argues that this would provide a longer lead time for the nominated candidate to make the necessary preparations for the Assembly and their moderatorial year. 

From the practical consideration of giving a designate a chance to prepare I could see that the four extra weeks to make arrangements could be useful.  But from the management of the presbytery meeting and the discernment process of the body having the vote at successive meetings is more logical.  Going through the process twice in one evening would get it over with but would also prolong the evening since every presbytery reports to a central office and 18 presbyteries would have to wait for the last one to report to know if another vote is necessary.  Yes, times could be set for voting to be completed, but to set pre-determined inflexible times for making decisions goes against the Presbyterian concept of the body taking the time to discern God’s will together.  (Note: this is not an argument against a specific body setting its own time to end debate.  Any individual governing body is welcome to limit their debates as they decide for themselves.  My argument is with outside constraints limiting discussion.)

And if the amount of lead time is truly a concern then move the moderator voting back a month so there will be sufficient time after a runoff should there be one.

Mr. McCreary’s second point is equally valid – that with a term of one year by the time the Moderator has come up to speed through on the job training their moderatorial year is up.

While valid points, what both of these arguments miss is the nature of the role of the Moderator in the Presbyterian system.

First, the Moderator is chosen for his previous experience, service to the church and divinely bestowed gifts for this form of service.  Particularly if the moderator designate is a pastor they have already moderated session meetings and probably church committee meetings.  The presbyteries in selecting their nominee should consider the skills and abilities each candidate has for presiding at the meetings and representing the church throughout the year.

As an aside, while the selection to be a Moderator of a higher governing body is an honor it should not be viewed as a “lifetime achievement award” or automatic post when you have “put in your time.”  Like all positions within the church God bestows specific gifts upon each believer for them to use for the building up of the Body.  Not all these gifts are alike.  While everyone has gifts, not everyone has the gifts of administration and leadership desiresable for the position of Moderator.  The body’s work of discernment is related to identifying those who do possess the gifts that correspond to a particular position of service, be it Moderator or another office.

Second, the position of Moderator is one of service and not authority.  Granted, he is empowered with the authority necessary to conduct the meetings of the governing body decently and in order.  But beyond that he has no authority of his own but the authorization of the governing body.  In this light, the position is a temporary one and passes to the next Moderator on a regular basis, generally when the governing body next reconstitutes itself.

Having said that I would also acknowledge that the selection process for the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland is both unique among Presbyterian branches and also my favorite.  It is the only one where all those gathered to discern God’s will are not in the same place but rather distributed in their 19 individual presbytery meetings.  Other branches do it by nominating committee or the Moderator is selected from among the members of the Assembly when the governing body convenes.  To me, having one individual identified and endorsed by the wider church represented by the presbyteries is particularly meaningful.

So there you have my commentary on the Irish process.  I can understand the concern for efficiency, expediency and experience.  And I would hope that in our governing bodies we would keep those goals in mind — but only to the extent that we are still concerned with discerning God’s will together.

Great Earthquake In Chile – Feb. 27, 2010

Leave a reply

The aftershocks just keep on going… And will keep on going for a while.

When I got up Saturday morning and turned on my cell phone it immediately filled up with text messages and after clearing those there were a bunch more.  Yup, my day job caught up with me on the weekend and after an event Saturday morning I spent the afternoon studying the developments and looking at the tectonics.

The basic information: The magnitude 8.8 earthquake off the coast of Chile was a shallow earthquake in the Peru-Chile trench and appears to have broken about 400 miles of the fault.  The fault is the boundary between the South American Plate and the Nazca Plate.  The Nazca Plate is a small and young tectonic plate completely under the Pacific Ocean.  The Nazca Plate is going under South America at about 80 mm/year and is responsible for the Andes Mountain Range and the active volcanoes in it.  At the time of this writing there have been 119 aftershocks of magnitude 5 or larger with an additional one now every hour or so now.

This earthquake makes the top ten list of events since 1900 and released about 500 times more energy than the recent earthquake in Haiti.  With the official death toll in this event still a bit below 1000 (it will certainly pass that mark) it is interesting to note the difference that preparedness and economic development have on earthquake survivability.  There is substantial damage and I spent a lot of time studying the failure modes that I see in a great collection of pictures by the Boston Globe, but I don’t see the total collapse of neighborhoods full of unreinforced masonry structures like the pictures from Haiti showed.

The Pacific Coast of South America is no stranger to great earthquakes. (And for the record, a “great earthquake” is a technical term to distinguish an even of magnitude 8 or larger.  There is a magnitude 8 or larger earthquake somewhere on the earth about every year and a half on average.)  The largest recorded earthquake was the 1960 Chile earthquake (magnitude 9.5) on the section of the fault just to the south of this earthquake.  And Charles Darwin experienced a large earthquake here while visiting on the voyage of the Beagle in 1835.

For an idea of the size of this earthquake consider the fact that the point the earthquake began (the epicenter) was about in the middle of the section of fault that broke.  As the earthquake happened it broke about 300 km in each direction.  At a rupture speed of 3 km/sec that give a rupture time of 100 seconds.  That is how long the fault took to break, but it generates different waves that travel at different speeds so the local shaking is longer as all those waves go by.  Another point of comparison is that we would expect the largest aftershock to be about the same size or slightly larger than the Haiti earthquake.  At the present time the largest aftershock is magnitude 6.9 and Haiti was magnitude 7.0.

Now the reminder for my North American readers:  Many of you are probably aware that Alaska had a great earthquake like this one back in 1964 that devastated southern Alaska, especially the Anchorage area.  There is a lesser known earthquake back on January 26, 1700 along the coast of Northern California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia.  While this event is detailed in the oral traditions of the indigenous peoples of the area we also have a written record from Japan of the devastation caused by the tsunami there.  And the geologic situation in the Pacific Northwest is very similar to South America with the volcanic mountain range (Cascades) and a small, young tectonic plate (the Juan de Fuca Plate) going underneath North America.  It is good to know that locally this risk is now understood and preparedness measures are being taken.

News From The CCAP: Synods Become Flexible And An Ecumenical Alliance To Monitor Democracy

Leave a reply

Over the last couple of weeks one news item from Malawi is that the three synods of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian in Malawi have agreed to an arrangement that would end their dispute over having churches in each others’ territory.  The synods have essentially agreed to become non-geographic or flexible synods.

The disagreement goes back a number of years.  I became aware of it when it hit the media in the late summer of 2006 when there were complaints that Tumbuka language congregations associated with Livingstonia Synod were established within the boundaries of Nkhoma Synod which is predominantly Chewa speaking.  However, the reverse of Chewa language congregations in Livingstonia had been the case for a substantial time before that.  Over the last three years there have been additional developments in this story but recently there has been news of an agreement to end the disagreement.

The solution – an agreement that all three Synods will have flexibility in membership.  Essentially, each will have a geographic component but will be non-geographic to the extent necessary to include churches based on their predominant language.  While the news broke at the beginning of the month (Nyasa Times Feb 2 article, Feb 4 op-ed) the Livingstonia Synod Moderator did a radio interview on Thursday with some more information.  The Nyasa Times writes:

CCAP’s Livingstonia Synod moderator, Rev. Mezuwa Banda has said the wrangle over border issue with the Nkhoma Synod has been settled with a “gentleman’s agreement” and is not legally binding.

and

“That’s no longer an issue. You will remember that Nkhoma recently has agreed with us to say there is no border not only with Livingstonia but with Blantyre as well.”

“Let Nkhoma go as far as they can go, Livingstonia can go as far they can go. The matter is over.”

However, the story does say that this agreement comes at a loss of connectionalism:

On membership, Nkhoma Synod said in a statement signed by moderator Vasco Kachipapa that any individual will have the right to belong to any congregation under a synod of their choice and not have allegiance to another synod.

“That there shall be no transfer of eldership or deaconship across synods and that church leadership shall only be attained through the expressed wishes of the local congregation, presided over by an ordained minister of the same Synod,” the statement reads.

While this interview was with the Livingstonia Moderator the two earlier articles both indicate that this ultimately came about by a unilateral decision of Nkhoma Synod.  The Feb 2 article begins:

Church of Central Africa Presbyterian (CCAP) Nkhoma synod has finally given up  over the boundary wrangle with Livingstonia synod and say the synods should operate on a no boarder basis.

Nkhoma Synod the made its position in a pastoral letter that was read in all its prayer houses signed by the moderator Vasco Kachipapa and senior clerk Rev Kamwendo.

…

In a statement the synod said, it has finally decided to stop pursuing the matter following the disturbing and worrisome developments that have taken place since the row started.

And the Feb 4 Op-ed includes:

Going by recent events, I am relieved to see that the hot air seems to be simmering away, what with the Nkhoma synod declaring unilaterally the new “no boundary policy”, not just with their erstwhile “enemy” but across the country and beyond, meanwhile bringing Blantyre and other international synods into the fray.

So where is the General Assembly in this?  The Feb. 2 article quotes the Nkhoma statement with a mixed assessment – “We acknowledge with gratitude the initiatives taken by the CCAP General Assembly in order to resolve the border conflict, which to say, have all been in vain.”  And the Christian Observer reports that Livingstonia Synod requested a postponement of the December 2009 meeting of the General Assembly as Nkhoma Synod worked out their current response to the situation.

From the viewpoint of being Presbyterian this would not be the end point.  Will this loss of connectionalism continue and the two or three synods essentially operate as independent denominations on the same territory? Or, over the next few years can the General Assembly work out an arrangement that will preserve the flexible nature of the synods while recognizing membership and ordinations across the boundaries?

In other news, and with a touch of irony, about a month ago it was reported that a faith-based alliance called Church Foundation for Integrity and Democracy (CFID) was launched in Malawi.  In an interesting commentary on the boundary dispute resolution the General Secretary of the new organization is the Reverend Andrew Kamponda from Blantyre Synod of the CCAP.   At the conference announcing the new group his comment was that it is time for the church to stand and speak with one voice against evil.  What is one of the particular evils named?  Tribalism, often cited as being at the root of the boundary dispute between the other two CCAP synods.

(Editorial note:  While this story talks about the launch of the group I do find it on an old list of organizations (#58) accredited to provide voter education for the 2009 elections.)

The group is chaired by the Reverend Malani Mtonga, a former adviser to Malawi’s president.  The Nyasa Times reports:

According to Mtonga the organization has been formed to restore human dignity and sustain moral responsibility in the country and was quick to tell the audience that came to witness the launching ceremony that the organization is purely apolitical.

“We are here to pursue a common goal of seeing to it that the country (Malawi) is fully enjoying the fruits of democracy attained in 1994,” Mtonga told Nyasa Times on the sidelines.

He said the grouping will not tolerate evils to take roots in Malawi.

Mtonga cited homosexuality, tribalism and intra-party divisions as some of the things the clergy need to stand up against.

Readers are probably aware that in many places in Africa homosexual practice is a topic of some debate and illgele.  While the proposed legislation making homosexual sex a capital offense is Uganda has been grabbing headlines, in Malawi the arrest of a gay couple has been lower profile but raising complaints and requests for release
of the couple from NGO’s.

Finally, I mentioned at the beginning of January how pastors from Livingstonia Synod were protesting against the University Council and government quota system for getting into the University.  That is ongoing with comments on both sides being disputed by the other, as evidenced by an article in the Feb. 14 Nyasa Times that quotes critics (not necessarily from the CCAP) of the Education Minister, and another from Feb. 18 where the Moderator of the Livingstonia Synod has critical comments of the President and the government about this.

We will see how all of these situations develop.

Steps In Ecclesiastical Discipline In Two PCA Presbyteries

4 Replies

Regular readers know that in spite of my great regard and agreement with the Westminster Confession of Faith I prefer the formulation of the Marks of the True Church in the Scots Confession and some other Reformed confessions.  The WCF [25:4] says “Churches… are more or less pure, according as the doctrine of the Gospel is taught and embraced, ordinances administered, and public worship performed more or less purely in them.” The Scots Confession puts it thus:

The notes of the true Kirk, therefore, we believe, confess, and avow to be: first, the true preaching of the word of God, in which God has revealed himself to us, as the writings of the prophets and apostles declare; secondly, the right administration of the sacraments of Christ Jesus, to which must be joined the word and promise of God to seal and confirm them in our hearts; and lastly, ecclesiastical discipline uprightly ministered, as God’s word prescribes, whereby vice is repressed and virtue nourished. [Chapter 18]

Many people have problems with the idea of invoking “ecclesiastical discipline” since it may conjure up images of heretic trials and draconian punishment.  Regarding this let me make two points.

  1. It is important to remember that “discipline” relates to the word “disciple,” as the root of the words suggests.  One online resources tells us that “discipline” derives from the meaning “instruction given to the disciple.” True discipline is instructional.
  2. Related to that the intent of ecclesiastical discipline is to be restorative and not punitive.  As the Confession says “whereby vice is repressed and virtue nourished.”  We are not out to “get” someone but to restore them to right relationship with God and the Community.

Finally, I would also emphasize that discipline involves a process and in the Presbyterian sense it encompasses the Covenant Community and may impact on our “reformed and always being reformed” as the community tries to discern how God is calling us to be faithful to Scripture.

With that preface I wanted to summarize two recent events in Presbyterian Church of America presbyteries.  In both cases these are on-going issues and the recent news only represents the latest steps.

The first began as a bit of a “sleeper,” or at least was overshadowed by a higher profile case going on at the same time, but in the last two weeks it has really taken on a life of its own in one little corner of the blogosphere.  Let me say at the onset that much of the reporting on the web comes from one side of this controversy but in reading a lot of the articles the timeline and facts of this case do not appear to be in dispute.

This case began in the Spring of 2008 and involves the examination of a Teaching Elder in the Presbytery of Siouxlands specifically regarding views which are currently referred to as Federal Vision theology.  For a good detailed summary of this case I refer you to a piece last September that TE Brian Carpenter wrote for the Aquila Report.  In the interest of full disclosure I need to let you know that Mr. Carpenter is a complainant in one part of this case, now under investigation in another part, and also has a personal blog – The Happy T.R.   That will become important in a moment.

UPDATE: Wes White has now posted an all-in-one-place summary/timeline on this issue in Siouxlands.  Thanks.

Here is a summary so what follows will make more sense:  In April 2008 TE Wes White and TE Brian Carpenter asked the Presbytery of Siouxlands for an investigation of a member of the Presbytery and whether he was teaching federal vision theology contrary to the Standards of the PCA.  The Presbytery denied the request, White and Carpenter filed a complaint at the next Presbytery meeting and when that was denied a complaint was filed with the General Assembly.  A panel of the Standing Judicial Commission (SJC) sustained the complaint and the Presbytery was ordered to conduct an investigation.  The investigating committee was created, worked over the Summer of 2009, and by a 4-2 vote brought a report to the September Presbytery meeting that there was a “strong presumption of guilt.”  On the floor of Presbytery one of the dissenting members of the committee, TE Joshua Moon, moved a substitute motion to not accept the report and recommendations and the substitute motion prevailed.  He then made the motion that there was no “strong presumption of guilt” that the views of the member who was investigated were outside the bounds of the Standards and that motion prevailed by a narrow 20-17-1 vote.  New complaints were filed with the Presbytery.  The first summary ends at that point but TE Carpenter writes on his personal blog that at a called meeting at the end of October the new complaint was sustained and a new investigating committee formed.  In addition, a church session sent an overture asking for an investigation of a second TE, that individual answered the charges on the floor of Presbytery, the Presbytery voted to accept that examination as fulfilling the examination and find no “strong presumption of guilt,” and TE Carpenter filed a complaint in that case that the investigation was not extensive enough to fulfill the requirements of the Book of Church Order. A January item from the Aquila Report informs us that one session in the Presbytery found the new overture and other writings and statements of TE Carpenter  to have misrepresented another TE to a strong degree and they overtured the Presbytery to “find a strong presumption of guilt that Mr. Carpenter has publicly sinned…by violating the ninth commandment.”  These writings include his pieces on The Aquila Report and The Happy TR.  That brings us to the stated meeting of January 22…

The Aquila Report brings us one summary of that presbytery meeting, written by the other original complainant TE Wes White.  In the original case the second investigating committee brought a unanimous recommendation that the Presbytery find a strong presumption of guilt that the member’s teachings were outside the bounds of the Standards.  The Presbytery chose to postpone action on the report until September and formed a committee to “instruct and advise that member.”  On the one hand see above abo
ut discipline being restorative, on the other hand confer TE White’s personal blog for his analysis of the make-up of the committee and conclusion that it lacks balance.

The Presbytery also denied the complaint from TE Carpenter that the October examination was not sufficient.  The Presbytery did accept the overture regarding TE Carpenter’s actions and has set up an investigating committee to make a recommendation whether he had broken the ninth commandment by misrepresenting another member.  Part of this accusation has to do with his writing about the previous Presbytery meeting on his blog and the Aquila Report.  In line with the concept of ecclesiastical discipline it is interesting to note that in a completely unrelated item of business “a teaching elder who had previously been indefinitely suspended for a public sin was restored to office and the Presbytery expressed thanksgiving to God for the exemplary repentance God had worked in his heart.”

Still with me?  So here is where this story took on a life of its own on the blogosphere.  Following the meeting TE White and TE Carpenter weighed in on the meeting on their blogs.  In fact, Mr. Carpenter expressed his frustration a number of times in the first few days following the meeting and then felt the conviction of the Spirit, repented of his more sarcastic writing and took down most of his initial postings.  (Yes, I am aware that there are cached copies but to honor Mr. Carpenter’s wishes I won’t link those, you will have to find them yourselves.)  I do wish that at least the original post were available because in spite of the sarcasm I believe it clearly conveys both the passion that TE Carpenter has for the issue as well as the frustration he feels in trying to get the Presbytery to adequately deal with it.  From my saved copy let me simply quote part of the two paragraphs related to the new investigating committee that will be examining his behavior:

Now, I am not in the least perturbed by all of this… I think judicial investigations are fine and good. I am not threatened by them in the least. I didn’t do anything wrong. I did some things that some don’t like. I did some things that some don’t think are right, but they are mistaken. My conscience is clear. And if a fair and competent investigation can convince me that I did do something wrong, I will repent.

I have some good hope that the committee appointed to investigate me can conduct a fair and competent investigation…  The PCA has a fine constitution and I have the right and ability to make use of the provisions afforded by it.

The summary by TE White, while maybe not as passionate, is strong, seems to lay out the facts with supporting quotations, and shows a similar level of frustration.

Others are weighing in online with less detailed posts about the meeting and the controversy.  This includes TE Lane Keister on Green Baggins, Jordan Harris at Sacramental Piety, and Steven Carr at Beholding the Beauty, all from Siouxlands Presbytery.  From elsewhere R. Scott Clark on the Heidelblog, Kevin Carrol at Reformed and Loving it, David Sarafolean at Joshua Judges Ruth, and Mark Horne.  I would also note that Wes White has continued to post so keep watching his blog Johannes Weslianus for news updates and detailed critiques from his perspective.  Brian Carpenter, in addition to his mea culpa and self-editing, has left a few things up at The Happy TR but is taking a step back from blogging for a while.

This particular case is interesting in a general sense because any Presbyterian blogger should be wrestling with the question of whether their work is contributing to or hindering the purity and peace of the whole body.  The lines are not always clearly drawn and each of us needs to decide where we draw the line and then be accountable to the rest of the body for our decisions and to be open to correction.

It is also worth pointing out that intertwined with the developments in this Presbytery are responses to the recent SJC proposed decision in the Pacific Northwest Presbytery case in the form of a Supplemental Brief by TE Robert S. Rayburn.  I will not go into any detail on this in part because Lane Keister has been analyzing and critiquing it at Green Baggins (as of today he is up to Part 6).  This case will be reviewed by the full SJC next month.

While it is tempting to announce “And now for something completely different…”, I turn to another presbytery’s action that may be different in content, but still represents a step in the process of ecclesiastical discipline.

About two weeks ago the Presbytery of South Florida ruled on a complaint filed by six members of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church who had been banned from the church grounds.  According to an article on the Sun Sentinel web site the Presbytery sustained the members’ complaint, ruled that the members had not been granted due process, and ordered the ban lifted.  (For the record, this article seems to be the only source for this news, the newspaper based some of it on “a document” they obtained, and the Presbytery did not comment for the story although a member of the Coral Ridge Session did speak on the record.  I would also note that their terminology is a bit off.  For example, they say “denominational officials” made the decision which is technically correct, since the presbytery is made up of ordained officers of the church, but to a reader not familiar with Presbyterian polity it would probably sound like one or two high-ranking national figures rather than the membership of the next-higher regional governin
g body.)

According to the document the Presbytery decided that the church “acted impulsively, improperly, prematurely, and without warrant.”  The representative of the Session expressed disappointment with the decision but said the session would comply and reopen the case at the March Session meeting.  Possible outcomes could be reconciliation or an ecclesiastical trial.  The representative of the break-away group indicated that the Presbytery decision does not directly impact their new worshiping community.

It should be pointed out that there are traditions and legacies in play here, as I have described before.  It is good to read that Coral Ridge does not consider itself an island unto itself but part of the Presbyterian connectional system.

As I said at the beginning both of these actions are just part of more extensive processes.  There will be more to come, possibly a lot more.

First Vote For Presbyterian Church In Ireland Moderator Designate Ends In A Tie

Leave a reply

Well, I guess William Crawley gets points for calling it Friday at Will and Testament. His closing line was

In other words: it’s too close to call. If I was a betting man (whichI’m not), I’d expect the election to continue into March.

The results were just released by the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, as reported by the BBC, and two nominees, the Rev.  Norman Hamilton of Ballysillan, Belfast, and the Rev. Norman McAuley of Greenwell Street, Newtownards, both received the votes of five presbyteries.  The other nine presbytery votes were not specifically reported but only described as “divided among three other candidates.”  And that means that one candidate received no votes.

When the voting is reported I’ll update it here.  However, the BBC article is suggestive by listing the Rev. Derek McKelvey, Rev. Ivan Patterson, and the Rev. Roy Mackey, but not the Rev. Ruth Patterson.

UPDATE: The Church press release is now out and breaks down the voting as:  Hamilton – 5, McAuley – 5, McKelvey – 4, I. Patterson – 4, and Mackey – 1.  They also note that this is the third tie vote in nine years.

So, as Mr. Crawley so presciently suggested, the presbyteries will vote again between these two nominees in March.

Presbyterian Mutual Society Gets Its Hearing

Leave a reply

First, I apologize for the silence the last week.  A lot going on in my life at the moment and my relaxation time blogging has been severely cut back.  The next two weekends I have a big meeting and a big family event and I suspect I’ll get back to my regular rhythm in about eleven days.  I hope so because I have a lot of material piling up in draft and note form.

Having said that, I just sent off a major “deliverable” so I have a very short break to look at the latest events this week related to the Presbyterian Mutual Society in Northern Ireland.  I gave an update about three weeks ago and want to thank “Anonymous” for the pointer to a current forum for discussion of the situation.

Unfortunately this week’s news about the situation is not confirmation of the rumored deal to bail out the savers and investors.  (And as noted in the comments from last time I have been sloppy with my use of the terms “savers” and “investors,” lumping them together.  I will try to be more precise.)  But the Society was in the news this week as a select committee of the U.K. Treasury met in Belfast to inquire into the collapse of the Society.  For Northern Ireland this was front page news being covered by the Irish Times, Derry Journal, Belfast News Letter, and Belfast Telegraph, among other.  It was also a topic among the blogs including Alan in Belfast and William Crawley: Will and Testament.

And then we have the reports from the Rt. Rev. Dr. Stafford Carson, the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland.  More than an outside observer, he was a focal point at the inquiry as he led the delegation from the Church.  The Irish Times article includes a brief report on a question asked of him by the committee chair, Mr. John McFall, former Northern Ireland Minister:

Mr McFall also demanded to know from the moderator of the PresbyterianChurch, Dr Stafford Carson, if it felt any responsibility to the 10,000savers left unable to access their funds by the sudden failure of thescheme. Dr Carson said the church was very aware of the plight of itscongregation who had invested in the society.

Since the collapse of the Society this has been a sticky point for the Presbyterian Church.  While the Society was a free-standing financial entity, it had very close ties to the Presbyterian Church in Ireland which promoted saving and investing in the Society, had several congregations that were heavily invested, and savers had to be members of the church to put their money there.  However, the Presbyterian Church has made it clear that it does not have financial resources to even begin compensating savers and investors and the collapse was part of the greater global financial crisis so the government should help the mutual societies the same way it helped other financial institutions.

It is important to note that Rev. Carson mentioned this meeting twice in his own blog.  He posted the day before the meeting with a brief description of what this was about and the text of his prepared remarks.  He then posted again after the meeting and among his thoughts he says:

The Treasury Select Committee asked some hard and good questions. Theeffect of that was to re-focus and re-energise the efforts we have madeto get the situation resolved, and for that we are very thankful. Muchof the discussion was taken up with the question as to how this crisiswas allowed to develop, and the failures of the registration andregulation process. The Committee report will make for interestingreading.

This seems to be as close as he gets to mentioning the question to him reported by the Irish Times.  He goes on to say…

All through this crisis, however, we have sought to stay focused on theresolution of the problem. When other financial institutions in the UKgot into trouble, they were bailed out without any inquiry into thecause of their collapse and without regard to the culpability of theinstitution. What became clear yesterday was that no one is reallytaking ownership of the drive towards a resolution, and, as John McFallsaid, the “pass the parcel” game needs to stop and a new political willneeds to be found. We hope that the visit of the committee will helpcreate that will and purpose.

So, we will see if this brings any government action, specifically a bail out like the other financial institutions had.  And without news soon this could become a very hot topic at the upcoming General Assembly.

Finally, it is important to note another piece of news about the Society and that is a further delay in the Administrator making the first payment to investors and savers.  This is where the distinction between the two groups may become important because under the bankruptcy laws the investors, who technically loaned the Society large sums of money, would be due payment before the savers who had lesser quantities on deposit with the Society.  A first payment was initially anticipated last month but clarifying the legal issues, and maybe accumulating more available cash, are holding up the payments until at least March. (Belfast News Letter, statement on PMS web site)  Next week the High Court is scheduled to rule on this as well as hear the request from the Administrator to extend the administration of the Society for five years.

Stay tuned – this has a long way yet to go.