Category Archives: Moderator

The General Assembly Of The Church Of Scotland Chooses Their Trajectory

2 Replies

Yesterday, in a session on a single report that lasted all day, the 2011 General Assembly of the Church of Scotland chose the trajectory it would take regarding the service of partnered homosexuals in the ministry.  If all you want is the bottom line…

Executive Summary
By a vote of 351 to 294 the General Assembly chose to:

Resolve to consider further the lifting of the moratorium on the acceptance for training and ordination of persons in a same-sex relationship, and to that end instruct the Theological Commission to prepare a report for the General Assembly of 2013…

In addition, the Assembly lifted the moratorium on “induction into pastoral charges of ministers and deacons ordained before May 2009 who are in a same-sex relationship.”

So it is a resolution to keep on discussing it with an eye in a particular direction.  The prohibition on ordinations has not been lifted yet, but the Assembly has chosen to point the church in the direction of permitting them in the future.  While the action today is not subject to the Barrier Act it is anticipated, but not yet decided, that the final action would be.

For those who are very familiar with the Deliverance, it is my understanding (I did not hear the morning session) that every point passed as written (no amendments approved) with the Assembly choosing option 7b over 7a.

The Rest Of The Story…
First I want to comment on the nature of the discussion itself.  All who followed it on Twitter, myself included, gave very high marks to the Moderator, the Rt. Rev. David Arnott, and the Convener of the Special Commission on Same-sex Relationships and the Ministry, Lord Hodge. Even though the debate was serious, and at times intense, the Moderator, Clerk and several of the commissioners helped control the tension with a nice amount of dry humor and quick wit.  The debate itself was courteous and respectful and I did not catch any personal attacks or snide remarks.  As for the content, having been through many of these debates before nothing jumped out at me as being a new argument for or against with all the usual scriptural and cultural appeals being made by both sides.  None-the-less, at least one commissioner commented that he had his mind changed by the debate, but as to which specific point or item he did not say.  It was an interesting morning (in my time zone) of listening and the debate usually moved along well and seldom got bogged down in polity or semantics.

I will point out that in the time I was listening, by my count not a single amendment was agreed to by the Assembly.  Similarly, the Convener declined to accept any amendment on behalf of the Special Commission. He regularly expressed the view that the Commission had worked hard at crafting a Deliverance that reflected the work of the group and wanted to honor that work.

Walking through the Deliverance, found at the beginning of the Commission’s report, the Assembly worked through the first two items before lunch.  They accepted the report (23/1), agreed to the necessity for pastoral care and that orientation is not in itself a barrier to holding office (23/2), and affirmed the unlawfulness of discrimination within the church and within the bounds of church law (23/3).

After lunch there was a spirited debate about part 23/4 which would “allow the induction into pastoral charges of ministers and deacons ordained before May 2009 who are in a same-sex relationship.”  In case you did not pick up on the magic date of May 2009, that was the Assembly at which the Special Commission was created. While there were suggested amendments the item passed as written 393 to 252.

Item 23/5, to continue the silent period for public discussion on this issue was agreed to, as was item 23/6 to create a Theological Commission to carry this work forward.

And then the core issue was reached…

The Commission brought to the Assembly a choice between two options.  The first, 23/7a began:

Resolve to consider further the implementation of an indefinite moratorium on the acceptance for training and ordination of persons in a same-sex relationship thus maintaining the traditional position of the Church…

The alternate, 23/7b opened with:

Resolve to consider further the lifting of the moratorium on the acceptance for training and ordination of persons in a same-sex relationship, and to that end instruct the Theological Commission to prepare a report for the General Assembly of 2013…

Another alternative, a “third way,” was moved by a former moderator, the Very Rev. Dr. Finlay Macdonald, it proposed that the Kirk was not ready to limit their choices and presented instructions to the newly formed Theological Commission to help the church continue the discussion.  Specifically it opened with “instruct the Theological Commission to continue the process of
discernment initiated by the Report received by the General Assembly of
2007…”  While respectfully received and favored by many, after discussion it was defeated by one of the closest votes of the day, 303 to 347.

The Assembly then debated the two original alternatives, another amendment to 7a was defeated, and a final vote was taken on the item with the commissioners favoring 7b, to move towards lifting the moratorium, by a vote of 294 for A and 351 for B.

The remaining two items, 23/8 to continue the moratorium on actions related to this issue and 23/9 to dismiss the Commission with thanks, were passed quickly.  The Assembly then thanked Lord Hodge for his leadership with generous words from the Moderator and a standing ovation. And with that the consideration of the report, which began at 11 AM local time concluded a bit after 6 PM (with a break for lunch).

So, with the moratoriums on speaking and action on these issues still in place, for the moment nothing has changed in the Church of Scotland.  However, with the creation of the Theological Commission and the agreed direction of their deliberations the Kirk has set a direction for the future that everyone expects will result in the lifting of the restriction on same-sex partnered individuals being ordained to office.  For completeness, here is the full text of 24/7b which was approved:

7(b) Resolve to consider further the lifting of the moratorium on the acceptance for training and ordination of persons in a same-sex relationship, and to that end instruct the Theological Commission to prepare a report for the General Assembly of 2013 containing:

(i) a theological discussion of issues around same-sex relationships, civil partnerships and marriage;

(ii) an examination of whether, if the Church were to allow its ministers freedom of conscience in deciding whether to bless same-sex relationships involving life-long commitments, the recognition of such lifelong relationships should take the form of a blessing of a civil partnership or should involve a liturgy to recognise and celebrate commitments which the parties enter into in a Church service in addition to the civil partnership, and if so to recommend liturgy therefor;

(iii) an examination of whether persons, who have entered into a civil partnership and have made lifelong commitments in a Church ceremony, should be eligible for admission for training, ordination and induction as ministers of Word and Sacrament or deacons in the context that no member of Presbytery will be required to take part in such ordination or induction against his or her conscience; and to report to the General Assembly of 2013.

I want to wrap up here with two more items.  The first are links to several other blogs that discuss this change and give observations: Chris Hoskins, Stewart Cutler, Bryan Kerr, Stafford Carson, and Rev Shuna.

Second, I can’t leave this topic without looking at the numbers.  In the three votes I mention above the prevailing side in the vote had 60.9% of the votes on 23/4, 53.4% on the alternative amendment, and 54.4% on the selection of 7b.  For comparison, in my earlier post about the Commission report and the consultation they had with presbyteries and kirk session, they found that 48.9% of the responding presbytery members did not favor the church permitting partnered homosexuals in ordained positions while 41.4% did favor ordination.  The differences could be attributed to the fact one was a consultation and the other an actual vote.  There could also be differences in the populations sampled and as we see in other denominations the representatives to the national meeting being more progressive than the local members.  The differences could also be easily explained by the fact that the responses were to different questions.  Or, since this was only setting a direction and not making a final decision there may be an openness to continuing the discussion in this direction without the need to commit at this point.

In conclusion, it is worth pointing out the global community that was online for this session.  The Kirk streamed 1.7TB of data yesterday and those commenting on Twitter came from many corners of the world and stayed up late or got up early to follow the proceedings.  From my perspective it was a great social media community and a demonstration of how social media has enhanced Global Presbyterianism.  Thanks to all of you who were tweeting for the stimulating interaction.  But, this interest also demonstrated the “lightning rod” issue that I have talked about — This morning @generalassembly tweeted “We seem to be missing some several thousand viewers since yesterday. If you see them, please tell them we’re here all week!”  For those of you who could not join us, you missed another interesting day and some good discussion in the Assembly and on Twitter about youth and the church.  I’ll comment more on that at another time.

So, the Church of Scotland has more work to do, both in this Assembly and with their new Theological Commission to report back in 2013.  Stay tuned…

The General Synod Of The Presbyterian Church In Trinidad And Tobago

Leave a reply

The 51st General Synod meeting of the Presbyterian Church In Trinidad and Tobago was held this week. This Presbyterian branch has three presbyteries broken down further into 23 Pastoral Regions with four or five churches in each region.  The church has 72 primary schools, five secondary schools and a theological college.

At the beginning of the week the Trinidad Express reported that the election of the Moderator of this General Synod was much less of a formality and more of a contended election.  As they put it:

Sources told the Express “members are in favour of a young, vibrant
minister to heal the decay in the falling membership of the church,
while the diehards are supporting a former moderator who had served two
terms in that office”.

And later they say

The Express learned Rev Brenda Bullock, current minister serving at
Couva, has the support of the younger members of the synod, as well as
those who want to see changes in the operations of the church. “We have
been losing members steadily, and now is the time for us to introduce
changes that would attract young people into the fold,” said a member of
the synod, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

So it looks like the “young, vibrant minister” prevailed and the Rev. Brenda Bullock was elected for a two year term as Moderator with 80 of the 102 votes, according to The Guardian.  In addition to this election being a more contested race, the election of the Rev. Bullock is notable since she is the first woman to serve as General Synod Moderator.  We wish her well and pray for her work.

Irish Presbyterians Chose Their 2011 GA Moderator

Leave a reply

For whatever obscure and personal reasons, today always feels like the beginning of the build-up to the General Assembly season to me.  There is something about the first Tuesday in February and the vote of the presbyteries of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland for their General Assembly Moderator that perks up my interest and makes me look ahead to the upcoming GA season.  But enough waxing poetic… Let’s get down to business.

In the PC Ireland today the 19 presbyteries gathered in their traditional simultaneous meetings and elected…

Rev. Ivan Patterson, pastor of Newcastle Presbyterian Church. He was on the ballot last year
and received four votes in the first round.  This year he received a very strong 12 out of 19 votes. Rev. Patterson is quoted as saying “I am absolutely overwhelmed to be elected as Moderator. I am very
happy to serve the Church and to represent its members but am somewhat
daunted by the thought of the year ahead.”

There were four others on this year’s ballot:

From the PC Ireland press release in advance of the election, here is the brief biographical sketch for the Rev. Patterson.

Rev. Ivan Patterson

Minister of Newcastle, Ivan was born in 1949 and in 1980 was ordained as
Assistant in First Bangor. In 1982 he was installed as minister of
Bushvale before accepting a call to Newcastle in 1991. He convened the
Youth International and Inter Church Committee between 1984 and 1989,
the Youth Board from 1989 until 1993 and the Reception of Ministers and
Licentiates Committee in 2008. He is currently Clerk of the Iveagh
Presbytery, a post he has held since 1995.



Thanks to @cherylmeban for the first tweet.  The results were just announced with an official announcement and additional media reports should be released shortly.  I will update here.

My congratulations to Rev. Patterson and best wishes and prayers for his moderatorial year.

Tensions In Nigeria Lead To New Presbyterian Branch

Leave a reply

As of a couple of days ago the universe of Presbyterian denominations got a little bit larger with the formation of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Nigeria.  This branch was formed when the Mid East Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Nigeria disagreed with their General Assembly over the rotation of leadership and so declared themselves autonomous.  How did we get here?

From a polity standpoint this seems to be about an agreement, possibly stipulated in their polity documents, that the position of Moderator of the General Assembly is to be rotated around the nine synods.  (I have looked and have not yet found The Practice and Procedure online so I can’t confirm the exact wording of the policy.)  Mid East Synod believed that the rotation should fall to them at the August 2010 Assembly but when a Moderator from another synod was elected and later installed they first filed a protest and then broke off on their own.

As I said, this started at the meeting of the General Assembly this past summer when The Rt. Rev. Prof. Emele Mba Uka was elected as the new Moderator.  With thanks to the Presbyterian Church in Canada for a story on the election , we know that not only was he elected by a unanimous vote but that a hard rain falling on the training institute the Assembly was meeting at, and only on the training institute, was taken as a divine sign.  Another article from the Daily Sun gives more of the back story and how two original candidates did not have their names placed in nomination and instead Rev. Uka’s name came into the picture at the last minute and he became the sole nominee.  The Rt. Rev. Uka is, as the professor title implies, a senior academic with numerous earned academic degrees, including a Ph.D. from Drew University.

The interesting thing is that nowhere in the reporting I have seen from the time of the election is there mention of any protest or dissent.  The election was unanimous after all.  Having looked over several news articles about the General Assembly and the election from the August and September time-frame there is not a hint of a problem.  In fact, the first mention of the dissent that I saw in on-line sources was from allAfrica.com at the beginning of December.

At that time the article reports that elders from Mid East Synod had presented a petition to the denomination’s trustees opposing the selection of the Rt. Rev. Uka and asking to halt his inauguration, which was later that week.  The article also mentions that there was an earlier protest registered with the trustees but the date is not given.  Specifically, the petition is quoted to state of the actions the “grossly unfair and unconscionable way our Synod was denied our
inalienable right to produce the next General Assembly Moderator.”

Well, the inauguration went ahead on December 7, to which the PCN press release and pictures on the home page testify.

The next chapter in the story appears to be ecclesiastical discipline as the General Assembly Executive Committee issued an order that a number of members of the Mid East Synod are “suspended indefinitely… for acts of insubordination and lawlessness capable
of destabilizing the Church and causing a breach of public peace.”  This according to the PCN’s own press release. Those suspended included not only ministers but public officials including the deputy governor and the commissioner for works in Ebonyi State.  The officials are accused of “using State apparatus as Deputy Governor and Commissioner
for Works in the Ebonyi State Government to sponsor some rebellious members of
the Church in actions designed to destabilize the Church and cause
socio-political disharmony.”  (Clearly this church discipline is not just in the ecclesiastical sphere but related to civil consequences as well.)  The other ordained officials are accused of ecclesiastical infractions that violate the church’s policies.  The press release is long on accusations but there is not much information about disciplinary process or judicial proceedings — it is just stated as a decision of the Executive Committee.

The immediate media coverage seems to echo the December 28 decision of the church, as an article from Vanguard shows.  However, Vanguard was out the next day with the response from Mid East Synod that said “the decision was contrary to the norms and proceedings governing operations of the Church of Christ.”  While the quotes from the Steering Committee of the Synod include a lot of counter accusations and rhetoric, it does include the very Presbyterian statement that “for the avoidance of doubt, no other body or organ has the right to
suspend any member of the church except the session where he or she
worships.”  They also cite the lack of due process.

Now, a couple of days ago, the Synod called a press conference and, among other things, told the reporters (as quoted by allAfrica.com )

“Whereas the Mid East Synod has the ecclesiastical right of self
determination in order to free herself from persisting enslavement,
perpetuation, and bondage; whereas members of the Mid East Synod being a
peace loving people not given to gangsterism and thuggery and violence
in the Church of Jesus wish to declare that in view of the foregoing we
are now Autonomous to be known and addressed as the Reformed
Presbyterian Church Of Nigeria with headquarters at Macgregor College
Afikpo and branches all over the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

(Synod spokesperson) Rev. Nwonu explained that their former church, Presbyterian Church of
Nigeria as presently constituted was being administered not by the
graded and constituted courts of the Church, rather, it was being
administered by the powerful interest groups who arrogate to themselves
the power to set aside the Church’s constitution, laws, policies and
procedures which have been guiding the Presbyterian Church of Nigeria
for over 164 years.

Where will this go next?  I don’t know and I’m not going to predict.  It is important to remember that the PCN is involved in conflicts in the north between different ethnic/social groups that also happen to be divided along Muslim/Christian lines. (My previous comments on the situation)  As recently as yesterday there were additional attacks in the area of Jos.  Regarding the church itself one possibility where this could end up is like the synods of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian in Malawi where the three synods are growing more autonomous and the General Assembly level has less authority and ability to coordinate and negotiate between the synods.  So, for the moment we now have the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Nigeria.

Theft Leaves The Church Of Scotland With Out A Symbol Of The Moderator

3 Replies

Every Presbyterian branch that I know of has a particular token passed between Moderators as both a mark of the office and a reminder of those who have held the office and those who will hold it in the future.  For some it is a service cross, for others a stole.  For the the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland these symbols include a ceremonial ring.

Last night that ring was among the items stolen from the home of the current Moderator of the Church of Scotland, the Rt. Rev. John Christie.

Numerous press reports confirm that the ring was among the items taken in an overnight break-in while Rev. Christie was asleep.  There is also a longer article from the BBC with a picture of the ring and some information on it’s previous mis-placement.  Beyond that I have not found any historical details on the background of the current ring.  The BBC also says that the church will make an appeal.  I will update as appropriate.

We pray for the quick recovery of the ring and for the Christie family.

More Updates Regarding Blantyre Synod, CCAP

Leave a reply

Well, things are not happening as quickly as they were a few weeks back, but since my last update there have been a couple of important developments in this story.

For those who need to have the details on the background, there is my original post on the story as well as one follow-up.  The short version is that the Moderator of Blantyre Synod of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian spoke out against a pastoral letter by the Roman Catholic bishops and it soon became clear that while he claimed to speak for the Synod the members of the Synod let it be known that they did not agree.  In the aftermath the Synod removed Rev. Mangisa from his position as Moderator and Rev. Chimenya, the deputy general secretary who appeared with the moderator at the press conference, was removed as well.  The Synod also decided that there were problems with the management style of the general secretary, the Rev. Kadawati, and while not removed from office he was informed that he could not request another term.

The first thing that has happened since my last discussion was that the dispute has moved from the ecclesiastical realm to the civil courts with The Nation reporting that Revs. Mangisa and Chimenya have gotten a High Court injunction against the Synod halting their removal from office.  Not much on details supporting the request for an injunction and not much has been mentioned about it in the last two weeks.  The Nyasa Times reports that a group has met to plan a response to the injunction and civil action.  We will have to see where this goes.

It is interesting tracking the arguments at this point.  The original problem was that Rev. Mangisa spoke out unilaterally claiming to represent the Synod.  What he spoke out against was how the Roman Catholic bishops had very publicly inserted themselves in a political debate.  This was actually the 20th time the bishops had done something like this and I’m pretty sure my readers are aware that denominations all over the world do this all the time.  In fact, the Human Rights Consultative Committee of Malawi has issued a report supporting the bishops’ letter.  But this has started at least some discussion in Malawi about the place of religion in the political sphere.  Now with the injunction, the secular has become involved in the ecclesiastical.

The second development is related to the administrative issue, but with an interesting twist.  Coming up next week is a special service and ceremony to unveil and dedicate a mausoleum honoring a former first lady of Malawi, Ethel Mutharika.  The Rev. McDonald Kadawati, the embattled general secretary of the Synod, was to have been the lead minister and master of ceremonies.  Now the Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC) has asked him to step aside and replaced him with… wait for it… Rev. Mangisa.  The article about this in The Nation has a bit of analysis, but I won’t even attempt any kremlinology or reading the tea leaves on this one.  Probably best to accept the easy explanation that the Mutharika family was no longer comfortable with the Rev. Kadawati.

So the story continues in the Blantyre CCAP Synod.  We will see how it progresses and what additional items of polity is touches on for us to discuss.  Stay tuned…

Update On Issues In Blantyre Synod, CCAP

Leave a reply

Speaking of Moderators…

In the Blantyre Synod of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian there has been a developing situation where the Moderator of the Synod, with the deputy general secretary, held a press conference where they spoke out against a pastoral letter by the local Catholic bishops.  They claimed to be speaking for the church but an emergency special Synod meeting resulted in 1) a statement agreeing with the bishop’s letter, 2) an apology to the bishops, and 3) a committee to conduct an investigation.  Check out my previous post on the subject for a more detailed version.

The investigating committee has now reported and the giant headline on the front of the print edition of the newspaper The Nation says “SHAKE-UP AT BT CCAP SYNOD.”  The headline for the on-line story is slightly more descriptive with “Heads Roll At BT CCAP Synod.”  The lede has the details:

Heads have rolled at the Blantyre CCAP Synod where moderator Reverend
Reynold Mangisa and deputy general secretary Reverend Austin Chimenya
have been forced to step down.

Yesterday’s Synod meeting, where the committee reported, was closed so only commissioners were present. There is no report yet of a statement from the Synod office. The newspaper had a source at the meeting who added a few details.  The General Secretary, Rev. MacDonald Kadawati was also under investigation and was asked not to run for a new term when his current term concludes in August 2011.  This was apparently not related to this matter but a generally poor working relationship with his colleagues.  The source made no mention of any action regarding the fourth officer, deputy moderator Rev. Mercy Chilapula, who has never been included in any of the reporting of this issue.

The paper contacted Rev. Mangisa last night and he confirmed that he had stepped down and stated he did not regret making the initial statement.  (I would note that this appears to differs from his stance following the first emergency meeting where he signed the apology statement.)  The article also quotes him to say that the decision of the investigating committee was a foregone conclusion because “The composition of the committee and the method used were not right.
It’s like an opinion had already been formed.”  He did say that he appreciated that the committee cleared up some misconceptions.

Getting to the polity matter of who speaks for the Synod, the article says “The insider said the probe faulted the two for speaking without
authority and for claiming they never called for the press conference in
question.”

I will leave it at that for now.  We will see what other details come out about the meeting and if an official statement is released by the Synod.

New Moderators And Moderator Candidates

Leave a reply

Over the last couple of days there has been an interesting collection of announcements about Moderators and Moderator Candidates. A very quick run-down:

Yesterday the Presbyterian Church of Ghana held the installation service for the Right Reverend Professor Emmanuel Martey, who becomes the 16th Moderator of the General Assembly.  The Rev. Martey was elected by the 2010 Assembly back in August and now begins a six year term of office.  It is reported that he expressed his optimism while acknowledging the task ahead.  The previous Moderator, the Very Reverend Dr. Frimpong-Manso, assured the new Moderator of his support.

Yesterday was also the day that the Principal Clerk of the Presbyterian Church in Canada announced the names of the nominees for Moderator of the next General Assembly. The nominees are:

Notable that all are ministers, no elders, and the westerner is from Hamilton (just slightly west of Barrie), so they reflect the church’s eastern concentration.  The vote of the presbyteries will be counted and announced on April 1, 2011.

Finally, not a GA Moderator, but the new Moderator of the National Youth Assembly of the Church of Scotland.  The Kirk has announced that Amanda Philip will lead NYA 2011 as well as serving as a youth delegate to the General Assembly in May.  The press release informs us that Amanda has attended every NYA since 2005 and has been a youth delegate to GA three times.  She also works in social care for the church at Morlich House. Other coverage of her appointment from the Edinburgh Guide.  Waiting for more info or response on the Church of Scotland Youth (COSY) Blog .

Best wishes and prayers for all of you.

Mixing Politics and Religion In The CCAP – Or – Who Speaks For The Church

Leave a reply

In Presbyterian polity it is usually the understanding that when a leader (moderator or clerk) of a governing body makes a statement they speak for themselves unless that governing body has taken an on the record position and then the leader can officially convey the position of the body.

At the present time in the Blantyre Synod of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian there is a complicated situation that not only raises the question of a leader speaking for a body when the body is not on the record, but also possibility taking action in consultation with the civil government.  Hold onto your hats as I unwind this, and hopefully I have a good enough handle on this to get it right and do it justice.

Just as background, the last time I looked at church and state in the CCAP it was with one of the other three Malawi synods, the Livingstonia Synod in the northern part of the country. This new controversy is with the synod in the southern part of the country.

This current controversy began at the very end of October when all eight of the Roman Catholic bishops and bishop elect from the Karonga diocese signed an open pastoral letter directed to Malawi’s President Bingu wa Mutharika and his government.  There are eight specific issues dealing with the workings of the government and the President’s party and they caution the President that he is heading towards becoming a dictator.  The article also notes that another pastoral letter from the bishops played an important role in moving the country from one-party rule to a multi-party system in 1992.

From a polity stand point it is helpful to note that this letter is coming from a unanimous group of bishops in an episcopal system to a political leader who an adherent with their church.  It is also worthwhile to know that this is the twentieth such pastoral letter the bishops have issued over a period of several years.

A bit over a week later, on November 11, the Moderator of the Blantyre Synod, the Rev. Reynold Mangisa, and the deputy general secretary of the Synod, the Rev. Austin Chimenya held a press conference where they criticized the bishops’ actions because “it did not follow protocol.”

Now, while I refer to the two leaders at the press conference, based on the reporting on the conference by The Nation, it would appear that Mr. Mangisa did most, if not all, the talking.  In one quote he does begin by saying “As officials of Blantyre Synod, we believe…”  But this article is very good from the perspective that it attributes the position to these officials only and, as I will discuss in a moment, it has a number of contrary quotes from other Presbyterian leaders, both in the Synod and around the country.  On the other hand, an article in Malawi Voice not only begins with the headline that says in part “CCAP attacks Catholic Bishops” but continues the point in the lede to the article where they say:

The Blantyre Synod of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian (CCAP)
has attacked the Episcopal Conference of Malawi (ECM) of the Catholic
Church over its last month’s pastoral letter to President Bingu wa
Mutharika.

In this article the remarks are clearly reported as coming from the church, and not just the synod but the whole church, if you only read the headline.  And if you want another variation, an article from ENInews says in the headline that the criticism came from the leader, but the lede says it comes from the Synod.

As I said, the article in The Nation is good because, with out explicitly saying so, they make it very clear the opinions expressed come from those leaders, even if the leaders though they were representing the church.  Among the contrary voices in that article is that of the General Secretary of the Synod, the Rev. McDonald Kadawati, who is also the acting chair of the ecumenical Public Affairs Committee (PAC).  In fact, the PAC came out in support of the bishops’ letter.  When asked for comment he indicates that he is not aware of the new synod statement and is quoted as saying “I don’t think what you are
saying is true about my officers. They can’t say that.”

Well, “They can’t say that” pretty much sums up where it went from there.  The next step was a emergency special meeting of Synod.  In the Malawi Voice article about calling the meeting General Secretary Katawadi chooses his words carefully.  The article indicates he said that he was not around when Mr. Mangisa made his comments so he does not know if the rest of the Synod was behind them as well.  He is quoted as saying “It is not tension per say, [sic] but we are meeting this evening to hear from
our moderator first before we come out with a stand as Synod.”

The meeting was held on Monday and Tuesday of last week, November 15 and 16.  The first thing to come out of the meeting was an official apology to the Roman Catholic Bishops for the Moderator’s comments.  According to The Nation, the official statement from the meeting reads in part:

We withdraw the statement made on our behalf by the synod moderator, the
Reverend Reynold Mangisa. We apologise for the divisions and hatred
that may have been caused to both our Catholic brothers and sisters as
well as within our synod, other CCAP sister synods, the public at large
and development partners.

And it is reported that the statement includes support for the Bishops’ statement, that it was overwhelmingly approved and that Mr. Mangisa’s signature is found with the others on the document.  He is not responding to media questions other than to confirm that they see his signature on the statement.  However, in an article about the apology from Afrique en ligne, former General Secretary and designated spokesperson, the Very Rev. Silas Mcozana, says of the meeting and Mr. Mangisa “at first, there were differences but later Rev. Mangisa saw the point.” In addition, the article informs us that a five-member team was appointed to handle the apology and the statement and that the team, or some of its members, had met with the Roman Catholic Archbishop to personally apologize for the comments.

The second item to come from the meeting is an investigation into this whole incident.  A story from The Nation indicates that all four top officials of the Synod – Kadawati, Chimenya, Mangisa, and Vice-Moderator Rev. Mercy Chilapula – will be subject to this investigation.  But the twist in this matter came from a series of articles by the Nyasa Times that allege the involvement by the Presidential Adviser on Religious Affairs Rev. Billy Gama in the original statement.  The first article talks about how Gama and two other government officials tried to talk the bishops into recalling the letter and not reading it in the congregations.  A second article alleges that Gama had Mangisa call the press conference and Gama funded it.  A third article talks about how Gama is not a subject of the investigation by the Synod but a following article says other sources in the Synod claim that he is.  The most recent article from yesterday says that the paper has a source that says the Office of the President and Cabinet was directly involved and the Rev. Gama was the intermediary.  The problem, of course, is that there is as yet no corroboration or named sources so verification of the allegations is difficult.  We will see what, if any, of this is part of the Synod report next week.

But getting back to Presbyterian polity and Biblical instructions, an article from the Nyasa Times today is particularly interesting.  This article says that the Rev. Mangisa had substantial support in the Synod meeting.  His supporters are reported as saying that he was right to criticize the bishops for their openly criticizing one of their own rather than first rebuking the President privately.  Also, his supporters say that he does have the authority to speak, without prior instructions, for the Synod.  The article says “Those backing the Spiritual Father said as a sitting moderator, Rev
Mangisa is the official mouth piece of the Blantyre Synod and does not
need permission to speak.”  The article also claims that Rev. Mangisa agreed to the apology under pressure.

As I said, the next installment of this drama is scheduled to play out in a week when the six unnamed members of the investigating committee report.  That is, unless the Nyasa Times or someone else doesn’t come out with new claims or evidence before than.

But as I highlight throughout this post, aside from the charges of government influence, this episode raises questions of what a Presbyterian official can do apart from the governing body they have leadership in.  The General Secretary seems to think that speaking for the Synod requires the explicit backing of the Synod.  Some of the members of the Synod are reported to fell that having been selected by the body to be the moderator then endows him with the authority to speak for the church.  We will see how this develops within that branch.

Church Of Scotland General Assembly 2011 Moderator Designate Announced

Leave a reply

Today the Church of Scotland announced that the moderator designate for the next General Assembly will be the the Rev. David Arnott.

Following his training at St. Andrews University and the University of Edinburgh, Rev. Arnott served his probationary placement in Greenock and was ordained to Stobhill Parish Church in Gorebridge (now part of Gorebridge Parish Church ).  After six years there he was called to Netherlee Parish Church, Glasgow, and then Hope Park, St. Andrews. While in Glasgow he served two years as a part-time chaplain at Her Majesty’s Prison Barlinnie. (It is Scotland’s largest prison and a bit infamous, as noted in this article from 2000 about a reported closure that did not happen, but the prison was extensively renovated soon after.)

Rev. Arnott also has rendered extensive service to the Kirk.  As Convener of the Glasgow Presbytery Business Committee he helped restructure the presbytery’s committee structure. While in St. Andrews Presbytery he served as a chaplain to a hospital and two schools, in addition to presbytery service as the convener of two committees and the Moderator of Presbytery in 2007.  He also has extended service on various national church committees.

The Kirk press release gives more details and there is a BBC article and an AllMediaScotland release that both closely follow the official press release.   UPDATE: No sooner had I posted here than Davidkhr’s post appeared on his blog with a little reflection on whether this was the right choice for the church or a “safe” choice.

As we anticipate a General Assembly meeting with some controversial topics, the Rev. Arnott has both my congratulations on being selected as Moderator designate and my prayers for his skill and wisdom guiding the meeting and for his year visiting around the Kirk.