Category Archives: news

Controvery Headed To The Church Of Scotland General Assembly Increases

Leave a reply

[Editorial note:  Before I begin with the news I did want to let my readers know that life has gotten busy and my blog writing production has dropped off.  The family events are good and exciting but time consuming.  That last massive post took me five days.  As my list of news items to blog about quickly increases I anticipate a few shorter posts to cover some of them and probably bumping some of the others off the list.  Thanks for your understanding.]

When we last looked at a controversial pastoral call in the Church of Scotland the Commission of Assembly had decided not to rule on the protest of the presbytery’s concurrence with the call but to let the upcoming full General Assembly decide the matter.  Well, in the last few days the issue has hit the press and has increased in visibility and verbiage, as well as published opinion.  What was happening “decently and in order” as we Presbyterians like suddenly is having its trial in the press.

First the background:  The Rev. Scott Rennie, a partnered gay man, was called by Queen’s Cross Church, Aberdeen, to be their new pastor.  The Presbytery of Aberdeen concurred but 12 commissioners protested the decision because of Mr. Rennie’s lifestyle.  As I said, the Commission of Assembly, a body with interim authority between Assembly meetings, heard the protest and decided this was of such significance that the full Assembly needed to deal with it.  So we were waiting for the Assembly meeting in just about a month.

Over the last few days the issue has now flared up in the press.  It appears to have begun with an editorial in the latest issue of the Church of Scotland’s monthly publication Life and Work.  The magazine is editorially independent and appears only in print so the editorial is not available on-line as best as I can tell.  Accounts all seem to agree that the editorial in the latest issue takes the side of the Rev. Rennie.  As the Rev. Louis Kinsey says about this in his blog Coffee with Louis:

In her editorial, Muriel Armstrong writes about the General Assembly
of the Kirk, shortly to take place in Edinburgh, and focuses entirely
on the case of the Rev Scott Rennie, whose call to the congregation of
Queen’s Cross in Aberdeen is being resisted by dissenters from that
Presbytery, amongst whom I am one.

The serious mistake that Life & Work has made here is
that the magazine attempts to argue this case and to bring it to a
liberal conclusion long before the General Assembly even convenes.  How
can it be considered fair or proper to discuss a case and to say what
the outcome should be before the Kirk’s highest court has convened and
debated?   This is simply prejudice, not journalism.

Mr. Kinsey goes on to fault the magazine not for being editorially independent but for being “so manifestly one-sided and unbalanced.”  And his concern is with the timing so close to the beginning of GA it will influence the commissioners.  And he has concerns about how she has formed her opinions:

How can she know the evidence?  Has she seen all of it?  If not, and I
most sincerely hope she has not, for the evidence is confidential, how
can she offer anything resembling a responsible point of view.  Her
editorial is factually incomplete and numerically misleading.  It is
naive about the way scripture is to be read and used in the modern
world.  It also demonstrates remarkable ignorance of the biblical and
theological issues that are involved, choosing to try and conclude the
argument with a few sweeping generalizations about homosexuality and
the integrity of relationships. 

And Mr. Kinsey finishes with this:

The editorial ends with a swipe at the dissenters, reminding us of our
ordination vows – which we are presumably forgetting – vows about the
preservation of the peace and unity of the church, the very peace and
unity that is being threatened by those who press this matter,
including Life & Work, and not by the dissenters.  It is no wonder at all that Life & Work
is so disregarded in evangelical congregations and by evangelical
ministers and elders…  It presents itself as the magazine of a
broad church, but it is clear that the broadness of the church works
only in one direction.  It is a broadness that suits those who are
theologically liberal but which shows a growing intolerance towards
evangelicals and their theology. 

You can also check out media coverage of the editorial by the BBC and Christian Today.

But this editorial and the Rev. Kinsey’s response was only the beginning.  Yesterday Mr. Ron Ferguson authored an opinion piece in The Herald that raised the possibility of a modern split in the Church of Scotland like the Disruption of 1843.  Again Mr. Kinsey responds to this article saying:

A divide may indeed eventually come over the issue of the affair of
Aberdeen Presbytery, but whatever form and shape it will take, it will
only be the visible manifestation of a divide that has existed for some
time.

In addition, The Herald has posted some letters to the editor on both sides of the issue.

With these two opinion pieces being widely reported the blogosphere has lit up as well, including this post.  Others discussing it include Anglican Mainstream, Euangelion, and Gay Religion among many others.

While I expected this to be a major focus at the Assembly, I am a bit surprised that it has become such a high-visibility story ahead of the Assembly.  I expect that we can see statements from Forward Together and Affirmation Scotland leading up to the meeting.  We will see how much more this issue develops in the next month.

Latest News And Some Local Commentary On The Presbyterian Church Of Ghana

Leave a reply

Many of you have probably noticed that one of the global Presbyterian branches I try to follow closely is the Presbyterian Church of Ghana (PCG).  What makes this possible, and in itself is one of the aspects that I find interesting, is the amount of media coverage that the church receives.  Based on the amount and nature of the media coverage this Presbyterian denomination is a recognized entity in the life of that nation.  So today I will bring a few short notes on that church in the media, and finish with something unusual — a published local criticism of the church.

A couple of weeks ago the Moderator of the General Assembly of the PCG, the Rt. Rev. Dr. Dr Yaw Frimpong-Manso raised many eyebrows when he commented on several recent fatal traffic accidents.  In addition to human factors he raised the issue of “forces of darkness” being involved.  Joy Online writes

“The spiritual dimensions of the recent spate of fatal accidents,
therefore, call for spiritual solutions”, Rev Frimpong-Manso told The Ghanaian Times in Accra on Monday in sharing his thoughts about the carnage on the roads.

It should not be a surprise that those writing on the comments page for this story mostly criticize the Moderator for invoking “superstition.”  And while this criticism takes on some cultural aspects, it also has parallels in the just released Barna survey that most U.S. Christians don’t believe Satan or the Holy Spirit exist.

There have also been a couple of recent words from the church leaders addressed to the people of Ghana.  At a chapel dedication on Easter Sunday the Rt. Rev. Dr. Frimpong-Manso “urged political leaders to mobilize the country’s human and material
resources… to
enhance the living standard of the people” and “appealed to Ghanaians to use the resurrection of Christ to transform
the nation and avoid negative tendencies such as corruption, armed
robbery and laziness but should work hard to increase productivity in
the country,” according to an article in Modern Ghana.  In another appearance he “advised the youth to avoid indecent dressing and other immoral activities during festive occasions,” also from Modern Ghana.  The Rev. Abraham Nana Opare Kwakye, a District Minister in the church, in a report from AllAfrica.com, warned his listeners about “the increasing spate of ethnicity and tribalism in the
country.”  The article goes on to say that “He warned that if the practice was not checked with the
urgency that it deserves, it could ruin the development of the country.”  Finally, Modern Ghana reports a speech by the Rev. Otuo Acheampong at another dedication (this a public sanitary complex) where he encouraged virtue and moral behavior by the young people.  The article quotes him as saying “The act of going to church regularly is good in itself however, we
must be more conscious of putting into practice what the Holy Book says
if we are to achieve our aims and objectives to be sons of God”.  And this is just a sampling of the many public comments by PCG clergy to the citizenry as reported by the media over the last couple of weeks.

But, there has also been a rare published piece of criticism of the church this past weekend as well.  In an op-ed piece in Modern Ghana Mr. Yaw Opare-Asamoa writes about “The Reformed Tradition and the Presbyterian Church.”  Beginning with the motto “The Church reformed and always to be reformed” (as he phrases it) he complains that the church should have a “dissatisfaction with the status quo” and then asks “Why does the church today seem to be so satisfied with the status quo?”

He raises three issues that, in his opinion, need to be dealt with.  The first issue is “postings,” where a minister is assigned to work, especially new ministers.  While the “field” areas outside the cities need good ministers those ministers who are well connected can get more desirable and comfortable assignments in the cities.  He suggests that the process is political

Ministers go to the head office to lobby for placement to
congregations/stations they consider favourable. If you are not
‘connected’ at the head office, then your chances of being posted to
any of the ‘plush’ congregations are virtually nil.

And he holds up the Methodists’ system as an alternative

They (the Methodists) have a laid down structure where new ministers
join the ‘queue’ and wait their time. You start your ministry from the
village/town and work your way to the city.

He points out that one effect of the political nature of the process is that new ministers don’t immediately take parish work but continue in school to earn more academic qualifications in an attempt to avoid the country churches.

The second issue is that some ministers don’t want to be posted outside the main city of Accra.  For those that speak Ga they avoid serving the country churches since many of those speak Twi.  Yet, Mr. Opare-Asamoa points out that they don’t seem to have a problem serving a Twi church in Accra.

Finally, he takes issue with the quality and editorial bias of the church’s monthly newspaper, Christian Messenger.

Third issue has to do with the ‘Christian Messenger’ (Ghana’s oldest
Christian monthly newspaper). I have never seen any Christian newspaper
that is as unchristian as the Christian Messenger. If you pick up this
newspaper expecting to be edified or spiritually exhorted forget it!
You would be lucky to find a page of biblical/spiritual content. The
rest of the pages are reserved for obituaries and announcements. There
are pages devoted to activities that various congregations have
embarked upon. For years the former editor had a stranglehold over the
paper. Nobody could say anything to him. The quality got from worse to
worst. During private conversations with some ministers, they
acknowledged the sorry state of the newspaper but were not ready to
cross the editor. I wondered why. He eventually went on pension only to
be contracted back as a consultant, for what I don’t know.

Unfortunately Christian Messenger does not appear to have a web presence, as far as I could tell, so checking out the content and editorial bent for ourselves is not easily done.

Based upon the Modern Ghana page Mr. Opare-Asamoa is a regular contributor of op-ed pieces to the web site.  He usually deals with the politics in Ghana and from looking through his other pieces this appears to be the only one that addresses the PCG.  Also, his style and level of criticism of his other targets seem to be similar to this article.  None the less, as he points out churches in the Reformed tradition are to be “always reforming” so a voice pointing out potential problems and holding the church accountable has a place.

As I said at the beginning, this style of criticism is unique in the numerous articles I have read about the PCG.  The church generally seems well regarded by the media and the people and the PCG is an active and supportive part of many communities.  As such, I have not found either corroboration or contradictory evidence of Mr. Opare-Asamoa accusations.  Particularly regarding the “posting” system, the potential for abuse is clearly understandable.  This is one advantage of the “call” system in many Presbyterian branches, that the congregations select the pastor rather than receiving a pastor by appointment.  However, even in the PC(USA) there is a preference among ministers for urban over rural parishes.  Some things are constant in the church no matter where you are on the globe.

The Future Of Mainline Protestant Churches — I Am Trying To Decide If A Recent News Story Says Anything About It

Leave a reply

In skimming through my blog feeds I came upon this story from Christianity Today about President Obama expanding his White House Faith-Based Advisory Council. While I normally don’t pay much attention to a political story like this and would have just moved on to the next story, something about the list caught my eye and I have re-read it several times now.  I am trying to decide if there is any significance in this list or if I am just over-interpreting the data (not an unusual thing for me).

The members of the council as now constituted are listed below.  Those that were added yesterday have the asterisk next to their names.  I have split them into two groups.  Group 1 – Those with listed associations not clearly denominational:

  • *Anju Bhargava, Founder, Asian Indian Women of America
    New Jersey
  • *Harry Knox, Director, Religion and Faith Program, Human Rights Campaign
    Washington, DC
  • Diane Baillargeon, President & CEO, Seedco
    New York , NY
  • Noel Castellanos, CEO, Christian Community Development Association
    Chicago, IL
  • Fred Davie, Senior Adviser, Public/Private Ventures
    New York , NY
  • Eboo S. Patel, Founder & Executive Director, Interfaith Youth Core
    Chicago, IL
  • Melissa Rogers, Director, Wake Forest School of Divinity Center for Religion and Public Affairs
    Winston-Salem , NC
  • Richard Stearns, President, World Vision
    Bellevue , WA
  • Judith N. Vredenburgh, President and Chief Executive Officer, Big Brothers / Big Sisters of America
    Philadelphia , PA
  • Rev. Jim Wallis, President & Executive Director, Sojourners
    Washington , DC

Group 2 – Those with denominational or specific religious affiliations listed

  • *Dalia Mogahed, Executive Director, Gallup Center for Muslim Studies
    Washington, DC
  • *Dr. Sharon Watkins, General Minister and President, Disciples of Christ (Christian Church)
    Indianapolis, IN
  • *The Rev. Peg Chemberlin, President-Elect, National Council of Churches USA
    Minneapolis, MN
  • *Bishop Charles Blake, Presiding Bishop, Church of God in Christ
    Los Angeles, CA
  • *Nathan Diament, Director of Public Policy, Orthodox Jewish Union
    Washington, DC
  • *Anthony Picarello, General Counsel , United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
    Washington, DC
  • *Nancy Ratzan, Board Chair, National Council of Jewish Women
    Miami, FL
  • Dr. Arturo Chavez, President & CEO, Mexican American Catholic College
    San Antonio , TX
  • Pastor Joel C. Hunter, Senior Pastor, Northland, a Church Distributed
    Longwood, FL
  • Bishop Vashti M. McKenzie, Presiding Bishop, 13th Episcopal District, African Methodist Episcopal Church
    Knoxville, TN
  • Rev. Otis Moss, Jr., Pastor emeritus, Olivet Institutional Baptist Church
    Cleveland, OH
  • Dr. Frank S. Page, President emeritus, Southern Baptist Convention
    Taylors, SC
  • Rabbi David N. Saperstein, Director & Counsel, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism
    Washington , DC
  • Dr. William J. Shaw, President, National Baptist Convention, USA
    Philadelphia , PA
  • Father Larry J. Snyder, President, Catholic Charities USA
    Alexandria , VA

Yes, It is a little rough, and I have kept the NCC person with the denominational members since that is representative of “Mainline” churches.

Since my focus is church affiliation I will ignore Group 1 and boil down Group 2 to the denominations.  (Having said that, I realize that those in Group 1 probably have denominational ties, but I’ll just go with their reported identification for now.  I also realize that in Group 2 I may be attributing a group’s affiliation to an individual.  But my concern here is the public perception of the denomination so I’ll go with that as well.)

In the non-Christian affiliations there is one Muslim and three from different branches of Judaism.  On the Christian side there are three Roman Catholic and no Eastern Orthodox.  Of the remaining eight Protestant individuals, three are different Baptist branches.  One of the other five I included as a generic “Mainline” representative (Rev. Chemberline from the NCC) and one is (as best as I can figure out) non-denominational.  The remaining three Protestant representatives are from the Disciples of Christ, Church of God in Christ, and the AME Church.  There are no members with listed affiliations in two of the top five churches in the NCC — the United Methodist Church or the LDS (Mormon) Church.  The other three, Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist Convention, and Church of God in Christ, are represented.  I was struck by the uneven distribution across all the religious groups and the fact that many of the “usual suspects” of the Mainline Protestant churches, the Methodists, Lutherans, Episcopalians, and Presbyterians, were not represented.

We could look at this representation in a number of ways:
1)  The White House rolled the dice and this is what came up.  Not a likely interpretation in a political setting.
2)  The selections are purely political, those chosen represent a political agenda, and no broader cultural implications for the American religious landscape should be drawn.  Being a big-time cynic regarding secular politics I could live with this interpretation.
3)  The choices reflect some cultural perspective and so there is useful information in this distribution about the American religious landscape and developing trends.

Well, if you subscribe to #1 or #2 you can stop reading now.  I’ll follow #3 a bit further and reflect on what it might have to say.

One possible view is a pragmatic one — that the denominations represented have something to “bring to the table” in the way of social work.  A couple of those listed have programmatic ties, such as Catholic Charities USA and Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.  While the PC(USA) is known for advocating at the national level, the structural changes in the denomination have pushed mission and outreach programs down to the local level so there is not a recognized national social program to highlight.  This could be true for the other “missing” denominations.

Another viewpoint could be the semi-political approach.  Instead of the pure political motives I suggest in #2, there could be a blend of thinking about “what groups should we reach out to so as to advance out political agenda” with “what groups represent a coherent enough body that we can work with.”  Put another way, if a “key leader” were at the table would that person bring enough members of the denomination with them for both practical and political advantage.  Short of Beau Weston’s “Presbyterian Establishment” that is not something many Mainline churches can do at present.

Finally, maybe the selection says something about the perceived importance or sustainability of the denomination now or in the future.  It strikes me as possibly more than coincidence that the NCC denominations reporting growth or only slight declines are at the table while those with larger declines are not.  Does the selection suggest a vote of confidence by the White House staffers or a judgment on which groups will be viable to work with going forward?  Or does it have a relationship to perceptions about groups that don’t have internal struggles and divisions and so are freer to focus energy on this external initiative.

As I thought about this it does seem to me that a certain degree of political motivation is present in the choices.  For example: Three individuals broadly representing Jewish views when ARIS reports that self-identified Jews are only 1.2% of the adult population.  And if Jews are well represented, the LDS Church, with only slightly greater representation in the population, has no identifiable representation.

For each individual on the committee the particular reasons they were invited would probably be a mix of political and functional characteristics.  And maybe the “missing” representatives were too busy doing ministry, much like Tony Dungy was too busy to join.  But it does seem there is a message in the lack of individual representation from, for lack of a better term, the “liberal Mainline churches.”  This sector of society apparently brought no political or functional advantages to the table.  Whether it is an indication of perceived impotence, irrelevance, or lack of cohesiveness I’m not sure.  But for a group of Mainline churches to be sidelined seems to suggest a lack of faith in their present or future role.

Reflections On The Amendment 08-B Voting — Preliminary Musings On The Text

6 Replies

While not quite finished, at this time the voting on Amendment 08-B to modify the “fidelity and chastity” section (G-6.0106b) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Book of Order is closing in on the conclusion.  Yesterday there was a split vote, San Jose Presbytery voting “Yes” and the Presbytery of South Louisiana voting “No.”  This brings the unofficial tally to 65 Yes and 82 No. (Presbyterian Coalition, PresbyWeb)

If you look at the remaining 26 presbyteries, there are five that have solidly voted against “fidelity and chastity,”  and another six that have split votes in the last two votes (i.e. voted once for it and once against it).  In addition, Boise tied on 01-A and Pacific was one vote away from a tie.  Of the remaining 13 that voted no on the last two votes, five presbyteries did overwhelmingly in near or total unanimity.  Those five, if they again vote “No”, should give the necessary 87 votes to defeat 08-B.  So after yesterday’s results I, and some others (e.g. John Shuck), consider the passage of 08-B somewhere between highly unlikely and miraculous.  I won’t say “impossible” because that word is not in God’s vocabulary.

This vote was much closer than I and many of those I talk with initially felt it would be.  At the present time 25 presbyteries have changed their votes from 01-A.  Why?  This question has been rolling around in my head for almost two months now and I’ll give some numerical analysis when the voting concludes.  Related to what I talked about a couple of weeks ago, and what I see in the numbers, there is probably no single explanation.  Where there is truly a swing in votes why did the votes change?  One explanation is a greater “pro-equality” sentiment — that is that commissioners have switched views from “pro-fidelity and chastity” to “pro-equality.”  But I want to have a detailed look at something else first:  The text of the Amendment.

Looking back at the history of G-6.0106b, and it is laid out in the Annotated Book of Order and Constitutional Musings note 8, you can see that attempts to add fidelity-like wording date back to 1986.  The current wording was added from the 208th General Assembly, approved by the presbyteries 97-74.  The next year the 209th GA sent out to the presbyteries an “improved” wording that would have left “fidelity and chastity” but removed the “which the confessions call sin” line.  At that GA the Advisory Committee on the Constitution advised against making the change.  The Assembly approved the change and sent it out to the presbyteries who did not concur by a 57-114 vote.  The 213th GA sent out Amendment 01-A to strike G-6.0106b and add a line to the remaining G-6.0106a about suitability for office and the Lordship of Jesus Christ, but that too was not affirmed by the presbyteries, this time 46-127.

So here is my hypothesis:  I wonder if Amendment 08-B is having more success because it is more of a compromise text.  The previous two attempts to amend dealt with removing all or part of G-6.0106b.  Amendment 08-B would replace G-6.0106b with new language:

Those who are called to ordained service in the church, by their assent to the constitutional questions for ordination and installation (W-4.4003), pledge themselves to live lives obedient to Jesus Christ the Head of the Church, striving to follow where he leads through the witness of the Scriptures, and to understand the Scriptures through the instruction of the Confessions. In so doing, they declare their fidelity to the standards of the Church. Each governing body charged with examination for ordination and/or installation (G-14.0240 and G-14.0450) establishes the candidate’s sincere efforts to adhere to these standards.

The new language does have a number of theological points that make it attractive and that are being used by those advocating for 08-B as benefits.  These include a pledge to “live lives obedient to Jesus Christ the Head of the Church,” and stating the hierarchy of Jesus, scripture and confessions, in that order.  While the opposition argues that this now leaves important standards up for interpretation and heterogeneous application across the denomination, I can see how this would be a more palatable form of standards for many in the church.

So I do have to wonder whether comparing 08-B to 01-A or 97-A is comparing apples to oranges.  While it is frequently viewed or portrayed as a battle of “good versus evil” (you define the sides for yourself), when it comes down to the vote by a particular commissioner in a given presbytery if the decision and vote is much more nuanced.  How many commissioners have not changed their opinions but have changed their vote because the language has changed?  Because the wording changes from one vote to the next do these black and white decisions have many more shades of gray than we want to admit.

Something to think over until my next post on this topic when I’ll put numbers on these shades of gray.

Presbytery Voting In The PC(USA) — All But B And I Have Passed

2 Replies

The Presbytery voting on amendments to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Book of Order and ecumenical statements continues.  And while Amendment 08-B has gotten all the attention, there are actually 14 different items that need to be voted on — ten amendments and four ecumenical statements.

Well, the latest official vote count from the Office of the General Assembly shows that 12 of those 14 items have now been officially adopted.  And while most proposals passed overwhelmingly, Amendment 08-A on membership vows and 08-F on Presbytery membership of Certified Christian Educators have 50 no votes each to about 88 yes votes on them, a sizable objection.  For the ecumenical statements, while they all had strong support it is interesting to note that the statement with the Episcopal Church did garner 10 No votes to the 124 yes.  A not overwhelming but noticeable objection.  I have to wonder how much is a polity objection to their having an episcopal structure with bishops and how much is a dissatisfaction with their aggressive pursuit of property cases against congregations that leave to join other Anglican Provinces.  Remember, this is nothing near a full communion document but a statement of mutually agreed principles.

Finally, while many think that the closely watched 08-B to modify the “fidelity and chastity” section will ultimately be a very close vote (currently 55 to 79 official and 64 to 81 unofficial), on the official tally 08-I on Certified Christian Educators is actually closer with only 17 votes separating the 77 yes and 60 no votes.  In both cases, it could be until the very end of voting before the outcome is certain.  Stay tuned…

Appointments To PC(USA) Special Committees And Task Forces

Leave a reply

This morning we finished a process that I expected to begin three months ago and take two weeks.  Instead, it began two months ago and finished today.  That is the appointment and announcement of all the committees and task forces created by the 218th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to be named, at least in part, by the Moderator of the Assembly, the Rev. Bruce Reyes-Chow.

Below I provide a bit of an annotated summary of the appointments.  More official versions of the complete list can be found on Bruce’s web site or from the PC(USA) Special Committees page.

So here are the links to the info on the groups.  I will not provide commentary on the specific membership but will link to a few places where comments are made.  At the end, I’ll make some general, and personal, comments on the composition.

While I expected the announcements to begin shortly after the first of the year, Bruce began this process on February 3, 2009 with an intro video about the process.

Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage (Feb. 4 announcement)

Moderator Announcement
OGA Press Release
PNS Article
Committee Members’ Biographical Sketches
Committee member resignation and replacement
Assembly Action Item 04-13

This committee has met (March 16-19) and there is an OGA Article and an Outlook Article on the meeting.

Being the first committee named and one of the more controversial there was significant and spirited discussion of the composition.  Check out the comments section of Bruce’s announcement.  It has also ricocheted around the religious and GLBT news world. (e.g. BaptistPlanet and 365Gay)

Special Committee on Correcting Translation Problems of the Heidelberg Catechism (Feb. 6 announcement)

Moderator Announcement
OGA Press Release
Committee Members’ Biographical Sketches
Assembly Action Item 13-06

According to an OGA Press Release this committee met last week.

Committee to Prepare a Comprehensive Study Focused on Israel/Palestine (Feb. 6 announcement)

Moderator Announcement
OGA Press Release
Committee Members’ Biographical Sketches

Assembly Action Item 11-28

According to an OGA Press Release this committee met this week.

At the time of appointment The Reformed Pastor, David Fischler, shared his anaylsis of the committee composition.

Climate for Change Task Force (Feb. 25 announcement)

Moderator Announcement
OGA Press Release
PNS Article
Task Force Members’ Biographical Sketches
Assembly Action Item 09-16

There was a bit of a discussion in the comments about the balance of this task force.

Special Committee to Consider Amending the Confessional Documents of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to Include the Belhar Confession in The Book of Confessions (Mar. 10 announcement)

Moderator Announcement
OGA Press Release
Committee Members’ Biographical Sketches
Assembly Action Item 13-07

Following the naming of the committee Viola Larson, in her blog Naming His Grace, had some comments about the composition.

Youth Ministries Task Force (Announced today, April 3)

Moderator Announcement
OGA Press Release
Task Force Members’ Biographical Sketches (I will link when it becomes available)
Assembly Action Item 17-3NB and referral of business in Item 17-4NB

Finally, Bruce included a wrap up of the appointment process on his March 10 ModCast.  I was in a Presbytery meeting during the ModCast and unfortunately it appears that the archived version is corrupt (I can’t get past 3:07) so I don’t know what he said.

A Few Comments:

I think a lot has been said publicly and privately about the membership of these committees.  While I won’t comment on any of the particular individuals named to the committees, I do have a few comments about the balance of the groups.

On the one hand, it is tempting to be a “bean counter” and look to see that all the labels are covered.  Civil Unions had good clergy/elder mix and nice male/female balance, but lacked some geographical representation from the northeast (as originally announced) and mid-continent.  Heidelberg is 10 clergy versus 5 elders and no southwesterners.  Israel/Palestine has two from SoCal, and most of the rest from the Atlantic seaboard, with six clergy and three elders.  Climate for Change is mostly easterners with two elders and six clergy.  Belhar is eleven clergy and four elders and again dominated by the eastern regions with no one from the northwest.  And similar things can be said of the Youth Task force, lacking the inter-mountain west and the northwest.

But at this point I would like to defend Bruce and his work:
1)  Having done appointments myself for Presbytery and Synod bodies it is not easy balancing all the different factors.  I can’t imagine the task for GA appointments.  When I did it I went to work with a preference for certain factors, I’m sure Bruce placed an emphasis on certain things as well so other factors, maybe like geography, suffer.

2)  It is tough to get the elder/clergy to balance on these committees because of the time involved.  For example, the Civil Unions Committee will require four meetings for a total of 16 days away from home for its members in the next 12 months.  In general, clergy are usually in a better position to be away to “do the work of the church” than us elders in secular employment.  You have to admire the fact that the Civil Unions committee is balanced clergy versus non-clergy.  (7 vs. 6 at the moment)

3)  While I know only two or three tales, take my word for it that there must be a lot of “back stories” to these appointments.  What Bruce has presented us in the announcements has a lot of twists and turns behind it.  Alert readers may realize that I had a good reason for expecting the announcements to begin in early January.  I suspect that the one month delay from what I expected has something to do with these twists and turns.

4)  Trust the Holy Spirit.
You may have spotted my name on the Special Committee on Civil Unions.  I am honored to be asked and fortunately I am in a position in my life that I have the vacation to use and the understanding family to accept the diversion of my time.  At the committee’s first meeting I had the wonderful experience of getting to know the twelve other amazing people who are on the committee, as well as the great staff we have.  I can assure you that we do not all think alike, but we all are taking this assignment seriously and devoted to working on it together.  We all agree that this is a journey where none of us really knows the end point.  But we are trusting the Holy Spirit to lead us.  Bruce, thanks for the opportunity to be on this journey.

Along these lines, let me conclude with a version of a paragraph that I wrote recently about my journey in Presbyterian leadership and serving on the Civil Unions committee:

I am continually struck that in my journey in the Presbyterian church the service that I have rendered to the church, including serving on this committee, has almost always found me rather than being something that I have gone looking for myself. On the one hand, when I look back and see where God has called me my usual reaction has been “what a long, strange trip it’s been.” On the other hand, I marvel at how God has worked through other people to identify my God-given gifts and where they may be used for the building of the Kingdom. This was brought home to me after I had served two years as the chair of the Committee on Ministry. I had been asked to serve a third year but was resisting because, being Presbyterian, I have an aversion to people becoming too entrenched in a leadership position. Two other members of Presbytery sat down with me for a long talk and laid out who was on the committee and the gifts that God had given them. It was not that my serving as chair was a position of prestige or power, it was just that when you fit all the different people together each had a task on the committee based on how God had gifted each one of them, and with the set of jigsaw puzzle pieces that the committee had that year the best use of my talents was to continue as chair. It is my prayer, and expectation, that God, through Bruce and others in the denominational community, has done the same to bring the range of gifts and talents together for this committee.

Thank you for your work Bruce and may God indeed work through the covenant community of our church in each of these appointed bodies.

WARC And REC Merger To Form WCRC Moving Forward

3 Replies

Over the weekend there was news, courtesy of the The Christian Post, that the years-in-the-making union of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC) and the Reformed Ecumenical Council (REC) continues to move forward.  And in this new technology-driven world the news is that the new body, the World Communion of Reformed Churches (WCRC) now has a web site for the Uniting General Council.  The Council, to mark the unification of the two organizations, will be held in June 2010 in Grand Rapids, Michigan, U.S.A.  (But I would note that none of these web sites have an RSS feed for the their news thus making it more laborious to keep track of developments.)

To look back on the developments in the uniting process you should check out the WCRC page on the WARC web site.  The news includes the unveiling of the new symbol for the WCRC.  The first joint meeting of the two groups governing bodies with a quote about the new organization:

“This
is not a merger or a takeover but the creation of something new,” added
Peter Borgdorff, president of REC. “I am very excited that this has
come about. At its core, Reformed history is a history of separation.
This is a global witness that emphasizes the better and more excellent
way.”

And there is also news about the work of the implementation committee for the Uniting Council as well as the preparations for the Global Institute of Technology that will immedieatly precede the Uniting Council.

Finally, back in October 2008 a draft constitution was sent out to the member churches for their approvals.

All this news leaves me with two somewhat “tongue in cheek” comments:
1)  According to a paragraph in this article, either the sum of the parts is greater than the whole, someone has done some rounding, or there is a math problem somewhere.

WCRC
will represent 80 million Reformed Christians around the world. WARC
has 75 million members in 214 churches in 107 countries. REC has 12
million members in 41 churches in 25 countries.

(Actually, the answer is buried in another article that notes the two groups currently have 25 churches that belong to both.  This means that over half the REC members, 25 of 41 churches and 7 million of 12 million members are in WARC as well.)

2) While “warc” and “rec” seem to have natural pronunciations, how should we pronounce “wcrc.”  I’d like to buy a vowel.

Hope For The Presbyterian Mutual Society Stakeholders?

Leave a reply

In the spirit of “All politics is local,” British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s government has bailed out a Scottish building society in his previous district.  The government arranged for the failing Dunfermline Building Society, a financial institution like an American Savings and Loan, to be taken over by The Nationwide Building Society with an infusion of £1.5bn from the Treasury.  (BBC Article)

While news in its own right, especially since Dunfermline was the largest Scottish building society, this raises the hopes of those invested in the failed Presbyterian Mutual Society in Ireland and might put added pressure on Mr. Brown.  As the article from the Belfast Telegraph says:

The [Ulster Unionist Party’s] deputy leader Danny Kennedy said Mr Brown will be accused of
favouritism if he does nothing for the Mutual’s investors after saving the
Dunfermline Building Society, which is in his Kircaldy constituency in
Scotland.

And it goes on to quote Mr. Kennedy

“An intervention of this scale for a local building society is a perfect
template for action over the Presbyterian Mutual. What is sauce for the
Dunfermline goose is also sauce for the Presbyterian Mutual gander,” said Mr
Kennedy. “I now call on the Prime Minister to move quickly to protect the
savings of Presbyterian Mutual investors.”

In another article from the Belfast Telegraph a letter from the Treasury Minister Ian Pearson is quoted saying “The Government is keen to ensure a sucessful resolution to this matter.”  That, and a quote from Mr. Brown in the previously mentioned article, “It is important to recognise that throughout this whole crisis, everyone who
has been saving in a UK institution has been protected,” seem to give hope of Government help for the Mutual Society.  However, both articles note that at the present time it is only discussion and no action.

Economic Downturn Impacts The PC(USA)

1 Reply

I have a collection of drafts for posts where I am waiting for the proverbial “other shoe,” but I figured enough shoes had dropped here that I should put out an update.

This is not so much a new story as a developing story, and probably will continue as one for a while yet.  I talked about it last fall, and one of the early casualties in the global Presbyterian family was the Presbyterian Mutual Society of Ireland.

Within the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) the first agency I saw make a public statement was the Presbyterian Foundation Group which offered an early retirement program with a retirement date of last Monday, March 23, according to the Presbyterian News Service (PNS) article from February.  I have seen no word yet on how many individuals took advantage of the offer or if the Foundation met its goal for cost reduction.

In the headlines this week was the General Assembly Council (GAC) meeting where they dealt with a shortfall of around $10 million on a $111 million annual budget.  The GAC began working on this a while back and the first move, based upon employee suggestions, was to have a mandatory, unpaid furlough the week of May 17-23, 2009.  This was accompanied by the announcement of salary freezes for the 2010 budget. (GAC Press Release, PNS Article)  Going into the meeting this week the GAC staff had put together a recommendation to cut about $4 million and spend about $6 saved from previous years budgets.  The recommendation was accompanied by the press release, the PNS article, and a video with Linda Valentine, executive director, and Tom Taylor, deputy executive director for mission, of the General Assembly Council.

It appears that the GAC accepted at least the outline of the staff recommendation because after their meeting they announced the approval of a revised 2009 Mission Budget with about $4 million in reduced expenses and the use of about $6 million in “prior year accumulations.”  The Council message, both written and on video, emphasized that the revised budget with the savings was in line with the restructuring of the GAC over the last two years.  The Summary of Budget Revisions gives more detail on the savings and lists events which are canceled and offices consolidated.  The news is not just about elimination of positions and events, but in line with the “Grow Christ’s Church Deep and Wide” initiative new positions will be created in church evangelism and personal evangelism.  One of the more far-reaching changes/cuts will be to the grants supporting new church developments and transformations.  Only the first round of applications will be done in 2009 with no fall applications “as we evaluate a new program design and roll out a new funding structure and methodology by 2010.” There are also across-the-board reductions in travel spending by 15% and postage by 10%.  There are also articles from the Presbyterian News Service and the Presbyterian Outlook covering the budget revisions.

Probably the hardest area is the staff reductions.  As part of the budget revision announcement it was revealed that 14 positions had been eliminated since last October.  In addition, another 14 were eliminated effective Friday, March 27.  The budget revision includes nine vacant positions that were eliminated in the last few months and 19 more eliminated on Friday.  And as I already mentioned, it is not completely elimination, but 12 new positions have been created.  These are all detailed on a list of staffing changes.  Peter Smith, religion reporter for the Louisville Courier-Journal, in his story on the budget revision also reports that local pastors were on hand at the headquarters to counsel with people in the wake of the layoffs.

Finally, for more thoughts on the GAC and the budget revisions I would encourage you to check out Michael Kruse and his Kruse Kronicle blog.  He is in the unique position of being the vice-moderator of the GAC. (Or GAMC – General Assembly Mission Council as he calls it.  That is the new name now approved by the vote of the presbyteries.)  And while I would suggest his short post from the beginning of the meeting, he mostly links to the GAC material I have mentioned.  He does say you can ask questions of him in the comments to his post, not that he’ll have answers.  And keep watching because once he recovers from the meeting and his half-century birthday (Happy Birthday Michael, from an oldest child who is rolling his eyes (read his post if you want the context for that comment)) he might provide more commentary.  UPDATE:  Michael posted at almost exactly the same time I did and you can now find his reflections online.

So where does this leave the PC(USA)?  The GAC is the largest single arm of the denomination with about 400 employees.  I have already mentioned the Foundation that has revenues primarily on the management fees from the invested funds.  With investments down they clearly take a hit on the fees.  The Office of the General Assembly (OGA) and the Board of Pensions probably have fairly stable, or at least more predictable, revenue streams.  While the GAC depends on more variable mission giving and investment income, the OGA has the revenue stream from churches’ per capita and the Board of Pensions from the employee pension contribution.  The Board of Pensions does pay benefits from investment of the funds, and while it has taken a hit the Board reports this spring that the retirement plan “remains secure.”  The Presbyte
rian Investment and Loan Program (PILP) deals in cash and CD’s so the securities downturn should not affect that, but I have not found information on their non-preforming loans.  Finally, the impact of decreased purchases, if any, from Presbyterian Publishing Corporation is unknown but it is a self-supporting arm of the church and depends on sales alone.

And this is the 2009 budget.  At the September meeting the GAC will have to project ahead to 2010.  Stay tuned…

UPDATE:  With the few extra days there has been more reflection and comments on the meeting.  The ones that I have seen include:
GA Vice Moderator Byron Wade
GA Moderator Bruce Reyes-Chow
GAC Member Melissa DeRosia (h/t BRC)
I am expecting a few more as well.

In addition, there is a Presbyterian Outlook article on the OGA budget situation which will require about $400,000 in cuts for 2009 because of the decrease in investment income.

And the Louisville Courier-Journal has an article about a worship service recognizing all of those laid off.

Two Sign Posts On The Journey With Standards For Ordained Office: 1 – PC(USA) and the Synod of the Pacific

Leave a reply

It is interesting that we are expecting two important decisions in two ordination standards cases in two different Presbyterian branches in two days.  Furthermore, it appears that these decisions may not present final decisions but rather markers on the journey that these cases follow.

The first is today’s decision from the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Pacific (SPJC) that is probably just a step in the interpretative ping-pong game going on within the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) right now.  This case comes in the “yes I can”/”no you can’t” discussion between the PC(USA) General Assembly and the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission (GAPJC) over scrupling.  The 217th GA (2006) adopted the report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity (PUP Report) which included an Authoritative Interpretation (AI) that candidates for ordination could declare a departure from the standards of the church if they felt those standards were non-essential.  Their presbytery would then have to decide whether to agree that the departure was about a non-essential.  In response to this AI multiple presbyteries passed policies that G-6.0106b, the “fidelity and chastity” section, was an essential.  In the case Bush v. Pittsburgh, the GAPJC said that a presbytery can not pass a blanket statement but must consider each case individually on its own merits.  However, they also said that declaring a departure as a matter of conscience could involve belief but not practice.  In response, the 218th GA (2008) passed a modified AI that said practice, as well as belief, could be scrupled.  In this ping-pong game the little white ball is headed back to the judicial commissions.  That is the general framework we find ourselves in at the present time.

But PJC decisions are not made in the context of a general question but decided on the specifics of particular cases — In this case Naegeli, Stryker and Gelini v. Presbytery of San Francisco.  It is a remedial case filed against the Presbytery of San Francisco related to the Presbytery meeting of January 15, 2008, and as such the SPJC is the court to hear the case first with the full evidentiary hearing.  At the January meeting the Presbytery, by a vote of 167-151, declared Lisa Larges, a candidate in the preparation process for ministry, certified ready to receive a call.  As a practicing lesbian Ms. Larges declared an exception to the “fidelity and chastity” section of the Book of Order, which the Presbytery accepted with their vote.  You can read more in my post after the meeting or the Presbyterian News Service article.  And to remind you of the polity setting, this was after the 2006 AI, but before the 2008 modification.

Friday’s hearing before the SPJC was live blogged on The Bilerico Project and you can read the account there.  One of the more interesting details was the SPJC’s decision that Ms. Larges’ testimony was not relevant to the case.  This is not surprising since the case would focus not on Ms. Larges specifically, but how the Presbytery as a governing body handled the proceedings and made the decision.  (A complaint specifically against an individual would normally be a disciplinary case.)

Ms. Larges has been in various stages of the ordination process since 1985 and the GA adoption of the AI’s produced a way for her to finally be ordained.  She serves as the Ministry Coordinator of That All May Freely Serve (TAMFS).

The SPJC decision was released late today (thanks to PresbyWeb for a scanned copy) and this interesting decision hinges on two technical details of Presbyterian polity.  The decision was unanimous.

Specifications of error 1 to 9 dealt with the SPJC review of documents and procedures from the Committee on Preparation for Ministry.  The SPJC uniformly said that it “has no jurisdiction to review the actions of a committee of presbytery. (G-4.0103(f), D-6.0202a(1))”

Specification of error 12 was that the presbytery incorrectly granted an exception to a “mandatory behavioral ordination standard of G-6.0106b.”  Instead of answering this error, the SPJC pointed out that the AI specifies that an exception must be declared during the examination for ordination and so this exception was voted on at the wrong point in the process.  Errors 10 and 11, concerning the presbytery process, are effectively moot because of the decision on error 12.

Bottom line:  This was the wrong point in the process for the presbytery to deal with the declared exception.

Relief granted:  The status of “ready for examination” is rescinded but Ms. Larges remains on the rolls as a candidate.  In addition, the Presbytery is admonished “to faithfully execute its constitutional obligations to the entire church to enforce mandatory church wide ordination standards.”

Consequences?  The decision could be appealed at this point but I think that the SPJC got it right and so it looks like Ms. Larges should receive a call and be examined for ordination with her declared exception.  (although it looks like the vote on “certified ready” must be redone with out the declared exception)  And then repeat the judicial process?  Being a SPJC decision I’m not sure that it directly affects Mr. Scott Anderson’s process in another synod, but it is something to keep in mind.  John Knox Presbytery dealt with his “affirmation of conscience” on advancing him to candidacy.  This does suggest a reshaping of the polity landscape since previous GAPJC decisions Sheldon v. West Jersey and Stewart v. Mission dealt with them during the preparation process.  And keep watching the next few days to see if anyone says they do want to appeal this decision.  Also, the decision is fresh and it is late in the day so give it a day or two for reactions.

Finally, I’ll comment that the media has generally not figured out the situation in the PC(USA) while covering this case.  For example, an article on the KGO-TV web site says “Presbyterians may have their first lesbian minister.”  Or from glaadBlog — “Lisa Larges may be first openly gay pastor in the Presbyterian church.”  Both of these articles seem to overlook others who have been ordained previously, like Janie, as well as Paul, Ray, and Scott (who was ordained, renounced, and is now working to restore it).  Yes, on this third attempt of hers Lisa has become the test case for the new openness to declare a departure, but I think I have heard her give credit to the few others who have gone ahead of her.  In fact, Lisa does give her “forebearers” credit, although not by name, in a quote included in an radio piece from KPFK linked to by TAMFS.  The reporter in the piece does a well-above-average job of describing Presbyterian polity, even if the anchor introducing it has a couple of mis-steps, like referring to Ms. Larges as a “deacon that has been denied ordination.”  As we know, a deacon is also an ordained office so it is ordination to the ministry of Word and Sacrament that has been denied.  (Yes, I know that in the grand scheme of things I’m being picky but the piece itself gets so much right that it sets a high standard.)  Or take the article from the KCBS web site when it presumably makes reference to Amendment 08-B and says “There is a proposal to allow each of the 11,000
individual congregations to decide for themselves whether or not to
ordain gay and lesbian clergy.”  I think they mean the proposal is before the 173 presbyteries which both decide on the amendment as well as act as the ordaining bodies for clergy.

Well, the journey continues whether it be back to the Presbytery for the examination or on to the GAPJC on appeal.

Tomorrow we can expect a decision for Aberdeen.  Stay tuned.