Category Archives: Church of Scotland

The General Assembly Of The Church Of Scotland — Reaffirm The Third Article Declaratory

Leave a reply

The report of the Special Commission on Third Article Declaratory to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland was posted on the reports web page today.  The decision to reaffirm the Third Article Declaratory is a big deal because it essentially says the church has a “commitment to maintain worshipping, witnessing and serving Christian congregations throughout Scotland.”  (I stole that from the report.)  This has been under study for two years and the 2008 National Youth Assembly suggested change saying that Territorial Ministries were an “unnecessary burden.”  In contrast the Special Commission recommends keeping the Third Article as is, effectively saying “we must remember our mission from Jesus Christ, but find new ways to do it.”

First, for reference here is the Third Article from the Articles Declaratory :

lll. This Church is in historical continuity with the Church of Scotland which was reformed in 1560, whose liberties were ratified in 1592, and for whose security provision was made in the Treaty of Union of 1707. The continuity and identity of the Church of Scotland are not prejudiced by the adoption of these Articles. As a national Church representative of the Christian Faith of the Scottish people it acknowledges its distinctive call and duty to bring the ordinances of religion to the people in every parish of Scotland through a territorial ministry.

Now here are excerpts from the report.  I think it speaks for itself so I won’t be adding much additional commentary.
The deliverance itself:

1. Receive the Report

2. Pass a Declaratory Act anent the third Article Declaratory of the Constitution of the Church of Scotland in Matters Spiritual in the following terms:

The General Assembly declare as follows:

(1) The Church of Scotland reaffirms the principles enshrined in the third Article Declaratory and declares anew its commitment to be a national church with a distinctive evangelical and pastoral concern for the people and nation of Scotland;
(2) The Church of Scotland asserts that, while this commitment is recognised by Act of Parliament, namely the Church of Scotland Act 1921 and Articles Declaratory appended thereto, its true origin and entire basis lie not in civil law but in the Church’s own calling by Jesus Christ, its King and Head;
(3) The Church of Scotland remains committed to the ecumenical vision set out in the seventh Article Declaratory and, in pursuit of that vision, stands eager to share with other churches in Christian mission and service to the people of Scotland;
(4) The Church of Scotland understands the words “a national church representative of the Christian faith of the Scottish people” as a recognition of both the Church’s distinctive place in Scottish history and culture and its continuing responsibility to engage the people of Scotland wherever they might be with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
(5) The Church of Scotland understands the phrase “bring the ordinances of religion to the people in every parish of Scotland through a territorial ministry” to mean a commitment to maintain worshipping, witnessing and serving Christian congregations throughout Scotland.

3. Call upon the whole Church to give heed and respond with a sense of real urgency to the challenges coming from the Ministries Council, the General Trustees and those charged with the Church’s stewardship and distribution of resources.

4. Affirm the key role of Presbyteries in the delivery of the commitment expressed in the third Article Declaratory as understood by the Church and instruct Presbyteries anew to engage with the process instructed by the General Assembly of 2008 to create a Presbytery structure which can more effectively manage the deployment of the Church’s ministerial and other resources.

5. Instruct the Ecumenical Relations Committee, in consultation with the Ministries Council and relevant Presbyteries of the bounds, to seek discussions with sister churches with a view to identifying areas where a sharing of ministries and buildings would enable a more effective ministering to communities throughout Scotland and to report to the General Assembly of 2012.

6. Instruct the Ministries Council to give consideration to the establishing of arrangements similar to the Shetland arrangements for other remote areas and to report to the General Assembly of 2011.

7. Urge ministers of word and sacrament to give prayerful consideration to serving urban priority area and remote rural parishes.

8. Instruct the Ministries Council, as it takes forward the Presbytery planning process, to engage with the General Trustees and Presbyteries on the development of a strategic plan for church buildings and to report to the General Assembly of 2012.

9. Instruct the Ministries Council in consultation with the Worship and Doctrine Task Group of the Mission and Discipleship Council to consider authorising identified and appropriately trained individuals to celebrate the sacraments in the absence of an ordained minister and to report to the General Assembly of 2011.

10. Instruct the Ministries Council, in consultation with the Legal Questions Committee, to review the helpfulness of Act VI, 1984 anent Congregations in Changed Circumstances with regard to ministerial flexibility and to report with proposals to the General Assembly of 2011.

11. Thank and discharge the Special Commission.

And here are excerpts from the 31 page report that help explain the recommendations.
I will include the very first paragraph because I really like it and because it seems any committee struggles with this — I know the special committee I was on really struggled with how to have people read the report, not just jump straight to the recommendations.  This commission says:

1.1 The tradition of placing the proposed deliverance at the very beginning of a General Assembly report is rather like opening a novel with the final chapter in which all is revealed. To read the deliverance is to see, before reading any further, precisely where the report is heading.  Nevertheless, the Commission trusts that commissioners will read on and follow the reasoning which has led to the conclusions reflected in the deliverance.

The report continues:

1.2 The Special Commission believes that the Church does indeed have a divine call and duty in this regard and holds with passion to the commitment enshrined in the third Declaratory Article. The Commission also dares to hope that the General Assembly will capture its enthusiasm for rising to the challenges and embracing the opportunities which the spirit of the Article lays upon the Church today. These include a readiness to take difficult decisions on the distribution of resources, an acceptance of the need to develop fresh models of ministry and mission, a new willingness to work ecumenically and a refusal to adopt some kind of “supermarket model” which maintains a Church presence only where there is the “customer base” which makes it economically viable to do so.

1.3 In the course of one meeting of the Commission all the ministerial members acknowledged that the parish dimension was an integral part of their calling and a crucial aspect of their ministries. Along with the other members they are grateful for the opportunity which the work of the Commission has given over the past two years to test those convictions. It is now the Commission’s earnest hope that the General Assembly will judge that it has exercised due diligence and accept the recommendations which it brings.

The report then continues with a discussion of the Commission’s remit and the history and background of the Articles Declaratory.  It notes that the language used is “national” and not “established” church and within that it refers to it as not “the” but “a national church.”  Regarding their consultation with the presbyteries they comment that “It is noteworthy that in every response, though with varying degrees of emphasis, Presbyteries were in favour of the retention of the Third Article Declaratory. It is clear that Presbyteries viewed the Third Article not as an onerous obligation but as a Gospel imperative.” (5.2)

There is an interesting comment on the cultural significance of the Kirk in the section on Ecumenical Relations:

7.4.4 The Commission was also informed of a recent conversation amongst denominational Ecumenical Officers which indicated that, were the Church of Scotland to depart from its territorial responsibility, the whole church in Scotland would lose something important. In such circumstances it would be likely that other churches would feel a need to rise to the challenge. However, it is recognised that their resources are also stretched. Certainly there is a willingness amongst Scottish churches to explore the concept of ecumenical team ministry (not necessarily exclusively clergy), to provide ministry in a given area.

Another paragraph caught my eye which discusses a tension we are now seeing in the States with what we call “designated giving” where individuals control what their giving is used for.  This is an issue for us not just in the church but in the culture in general:

7.7.7 The meetings with office-bearers from a number of south Glasgow suburban churches threw into sharp focus the issue of wealthier churches contributing significant sums of money… to support work such as that carried out in priority areas parishes. There was a ready recognition of the need for this work, a concern that it should be encouraged and expanded and a willingness to support it. At the same time there were voices which indicated that those congregations which were significant net contributors to the Ministries and Mission Fund should have some kind of say in how “their money” was being spent. The Commission also heard a challenge to this approach on the grounds that, as one minister put it, “once the money is in the plate it’s the Lord’s, not yours”.

There was considerable recognition of the need for “shared ministry,” how one congregation had resources of location and knowledge to work in a high priority area but depended on others to provide the financial resources.  The concept of “twinning” was mentioned in this regards noting that “when these work well they provide a valuable two-way flow of information and enrichment.”

The consultation phase was very wide in every sense including many parts of Scotland, the Ecumenical Partners, and input from communities and secular organizations.  The deliberations of the commission were just as wide ranging considering the Ministries, Review and Reform (I will post on those next), General Trustees and their oversight of buildings, Finance and Stewardship and the financial situation of the Kirk, the Church Without Walls initiative, the trend towards a secular society, the feeling of a “sense of place” as well as a “sense of call.”  They also noted the extensive process of amending the Articles Declaratory — approval by three sucessive GA’s and two-thirds of the presbyteries in between.  They also say of the phrase “ordinances of religion”:

8.7.1 The Commission is quite clear that the task of bringing the “ordinances of religion” to the people of Scotland cannot simply be understood as the passive supplying of the religious needs of the population on request in terms of ‘matching, hatching and dispatching.’ The phrase must be interpreted dynamically in missional terms, not statically in reactive terms. Our calling is nothing other than the challenging of the people of Scotland with a vision of God’s kingdom and asking them to respond to it in faith and love.

The Commission recognizes that this will not be easy and as the deliverance shows it will require doing new things in the areas of Ministry, Finances and Stewardship, property through the General Trustees, ecumenical partnerships, and individual congregations.

To get a real taste of what territorial ministry means I will close with the words of the members of the church printed in the report. First, the report contains two letters from pastors.  The first is from the Rev. George Cringles who has a linked ministry that includes the only church, with 15 members, on the Island of Coll, almost three hours by ferry when the ferry runs.  He describes the church and its ministry saying:

The Basis of Linking with Connel requires that I visit the island and conduct worship there at least four times in the year. Depending on circumstances the nature of the services will vary. I try to include communion on two occasions (sometimes three) and also have a family service that will include the island Choir – the Coll Singers, and the children of the local primary school on special Sundays – e.g. harvest thanksgiving. I have made it my policy to try and visit the island for one of the main festivals every second year. So far this has included Easter, Harvest, Remembrance and Pentecost. I have yet to pluck up the courage to go over at Christmas! At other times I will visit for funerals and weddings or other pastoral needs as required.
…
Two of the elders have undergone basic training in leading worship and they will readily conduct worship if no one else is available.  Indeed they sometimes have more than one service in the winter months if there is sufficient demand.

Provision is made in the basis for weekly worship between Easter and the end of September. This is normally provided by visiting preachers – ministers (quite a few who have retired), readers and lay people, who enjoy a holiday in the manse in exchange for the Sunday service… This system seems to work quite well. There are the regulars who like to return every year, and others who find that once is enough! … It is a system which seems to be advantageous to all parties – the visitors enjoy a cheap holiday while the congregation doesn’t have to worry about paying pulpit supply and travelling expenses, which they simply could not afford.
…
There is no other active church on the island. The Free Church is effectively closed and there are very few Free Kirk folk left. I am delighted to say that one of them has even been joining with us for worship. The Parish Church is therefore the only remaining source of Christian work, witness and worship on the island. I feel it is vital to do all we can to maintain that work and encourage the Lord’s people in what is a far from easy situation.

The second letter is from the Rev. Ian Galloway from the Gorbals inner city area of Glasgow:

I understand the financial pressures being experienced by those congregations who are the net financial givers – and appreciate that to give beyond the bounds of the parish substantially is costly in terms of what local mission can be pursued. However I also consider that supporting local mission in other, poorer, places is a high calling worthy of our financially strongest congregations. The return on such investment will sometimes be hard to determine, though I know that within Priority Areas a range of examples can be given that enable measurement in both financial and human terms.

Of course Gorbals is the place I know best, and here we can point to Bridging the Gap – 11 years on with a budget of £200k and making a measured and evaluated difference to hundreds of lives each year… None of this would happen without the support of the wider church for ministry here.

We also have a few people who have chosen to belong here though they live in more affluent places. In a way they embody the same issue but this is not possible or indeed appropriate for many people.

When I look round our congregation I am, as always, aware of vulnerability and suffering as well as resilience and strong character. Lone parents and their children, kinship, caring granny, unemployed men, recovering alcoholic, gambler deep in debt, people with chronic diseases and cancers to manage, elders still faithfully taking decisions in their late eighties not through choice but necessity. The odd thing is that, even in transition without a building (though one is getting nearer) the congregation may even
be growing………

I am deeply grateful to the Church of Scotland’s redistributive model which is, I think, a real and lasting witness to the God we serve and is so deeply counter-cultural as to be more radical now than ever.

All in all, I think we need to develop clear priorities and find better ways of enabling congregations to take pride in the way their financial giftedness is put at the service of the whole church.

If we are to depart from the parish model – and by that I mean across Scotland – I think that we have to do so because there is a strong sense of God’s call – to all of us – to discover how our discipleship will evolve in a new shape.

That has to be about much more than money, and until we hear the debate move in that direction I have some difficulty in recognising God’s hand on the tiller of this particular change.

Finally, the body of the report closes with these words from a kirk session which appropriately sums up the whole report:

There are no disposable parts of Scotland and no disposable people in Scotland. The Kirk has an obligation to the whole country and all its people. It does not have an obligation, however, to do things as we always did them, and in particular to stick to one model of paid, full-time ordained ministry. The third Declaratory Article should remain, but radical rethinking of how we fulfil it is essential.

Approaching The General Assembly Of The Church Of Scotland

2 Replies

While not the first General Assembly meeting of the GA season, the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland is pretty close, convening in Edinburgh one month from today on May 20, 2010.  In the last few days various news items, some only tangential to the GA meeting, have been circulating in the Scottish press.  Here is a quick run-down:

Probably the most significant from a polity viewpoint is the debate on ordination standards, specifically as to what the place in the ordained ministry is for same-gender partnered individuals.  While the discussion and debate of the place of same-gender relationships in the Kirk has been circulating for a while now, the relationship to ordination standards came to the fore last year with the Assembly creating the Special Commission on Same-sex Relationships and the Ministry. This commission is not scheduled to report back until next year but it has the charge to consult with every presbytery and has developed a consultation paper for the session and presbytery discussions.  This paper sets forth the background and process for governing bodies to enter into this discussion.  There are four questions for discussion, #1 dealing with the Biblical witness, #2 talking about Approaches to Same-sex Relationships, #3 about ordination/leadership in the church, and #4 the Unity of the Church of Scotland.  The document provides a discussion of each of these to form the basis for group discussion.  The process then asks the body to vote on questions 2, 3, and 4 by secret ballot.  According to the Commission’s time-table this consultation process is almost over, intending to have it wrapped up by the end of May.  And being part of the official process it is not subject to the Kirk’s moratorium on public discussion .

This process has hit the news in the past few days for two reasons.  The first is that the special meeting of Greenock and Paisley Presbytery to debate the questions in the consultation is taking place today (probably as I am writing this in fact) and has been picked up by local press outlets — Inverclyde Now and Herald Scotland.  A couple of interesting quotes from the media reports.  Inverclyde Now says:

This level of consultation is almost unprecedented in the Church of Scotland and could involve the Special Commission in collating tens of thousands of responses.  The results will form part of their report to the General Assembly of 2011 at which the Kirk’s understanding of same-sex relationships in the ministry will be decided.

And Herald Scotland gives the historical perspective:

The issue of gay ordination threatens the greatest schism in the Church since 1843, when one-third of its body left to form the Free Kirk.

In a slightly amusing story from yesterday the Herald Scotland says:

The Herald has obtained a copy of a crucial consultation document that outlines for the first time the route the Kirk has taken to help members decide on the issue.

As best as I can tell this is the same consultation report available on the web site .  I have not been checking but I don’t think it just appeared today since the Commission has been using it for all of the consultations.  But maybe the Herald Scotland did get the scoop and it was only just posted.  I don’t know.  They do comment that the document seems reasonably broad, even if some of the descriptions are “not great.”

As I mentioned before, this Commission report is not due to GA for another year so I am not sure what if any related business will be on the docket — The agenda and reports are not posted yet.  However, it is certain that this will be on many commissioners’ minds next month and may raise its head in interesting places.

The other item of GA business that got some press coverage last week was the Church and Society Council‘s involvement in suicide prevention, especially teen suicides, as part of a national government campaign.  Maybe I am reading too much into this, but I think that I hear echoes of the National Youth Assembly 2008 deliverance on Healthy Relationships in here.  The key item in this program is to make available to everyone basic training in skills of recognizing a potential problem and working with a person to get help.

OK, there you have a couple of the high-profile business items which may or may not be in play at the Assembly.  In other Assembly news… The Garden Party is no more (at least not this year).  Traditionally The Lord High Commissioner hosts a Saturday afternoon Garden Party at Holyroodhouse that has been a fixture of the Assembly as long as anyone can remember. (Brief YouTube Video )  Well this year the event will not be held for cost savings reasons and other social functions will be scaled back as well.  The Scotsman reports :

The Queen’s representative to the General Assembly, the Lord High Commissioner, normally hosts the event for ministers, Kirk elders and other invited guests from across Scotland.

But after a cut in the commissioner’s budget for assembly week from the Scottish Government, the party has been axed as part of a savings drive that has also resulted in a scaling back of official dinners held at Holyroodhouse.

The Saturday afternoon garden party, thought to cost about £20,000 to stage, was widely regarded as one of the highlights of the Kirk’s social calendar.

However, reader’s comments posted by the Edinburgh Evening News seem favorable to the cutback considering current circumstances.

Finally, there is another news story that is more tangential to the Assembly and probably only hit the press because of the celebrity of the individual involved and possibly his sexual orientation.  There are stories circulating, I’ll point to the one from Pink News , about actor and gay rights campaigner Alan Cumming being asked to leave the Church of Scotland.  The story quotes Cumming as saying:

Writing in an online question and answer session with fans, he said: “It was more about tradition, habit, the thing to do. Then I began to realise that my being a part of it was only condoning and validating lots of things I disapprove of: oppression, guilt, shame etc.

“I began to talk about my lack of belief in the press, because, just like gay rights, I think more people need to speak out to highlight hypocrisy and fear.

“The Church of Scotland wrote to my mum and said they had read something about me being an atheist and would I like to leave the church, and I did. So I was excommunicated.”

The story also says:

A Church of Scotland spokesman told the Herald: “We have no knowledge of this. Such a decision could be made at the discretion of an individual congregation’s Kirk session.”

As I read this the information is slim but it just sounds like good Presbyterian polity to me — the session that had responsibility for him had questions about his Christian faith and appear to have made the inquiry of that faith and suggestion that if he did not agree with the Kirk’s doctrine he might consider removing himself.  There is no mention at all of any ecclesiastical judicial action which I would take to be a formal excommunication.  That appears to be the term he uses, not the term used by the Kirk.

UPDATE: As I was writing this Queerty posted a story titled “Is Alan Cumming Exaggerating About Being Excommunicated From Church of Scotland?” with one comment so far supportive of the exaggeration view.

Anyway, we are getting close to GA.  The Twitter hashtag #ga2010 is in use and there may be others.  I am watching for the agenda, reports and blue book to get posted and I’ll let you know as soon as I see that they have been.

Church And State In Scotland And England — The Reformation Still Means Something

Leave a reply

Suppose that you are the future head of the Church of England but you want to get married in a different church, in this case one belonging to the Church of Scotland — Big Problem.  Yes, believe it or not the Reformation still means something.

In case you have not been following the British royal gossip, and I hadn’t until it broke into the realm of Reformed theology, the rumor is going around that Prince William, second in line to the British throne, is close to having an announced engagement to girlfriend Kate Middleton.  If true, congratulations to both of them.  The problem that has arisen is that according to The Daily Express…

A source told the Sunday Express: “Officials at Buckingham Palace have been under huge pressure from Kate to try to persuade the Queen to agree to a Scottish wedding.

“Scotland will always have a special place in Kate’s heart because that is where she met William and where they spent so many happy years together at St Andrews University.”

Romantic weddings are nice…  However when marrying a future king and head of the state church there is a part of the constitution that requires you to be married in the church you will someday be the head of. Unfortunately for romance 450 years ago the Church of Scotland decided that the church did not need the monarch as part of its structure and declared that Jesus Christ was the Head of the Church.  The British royals have a respected place but not religious position in this National Church.  Word is that they are back to church shopping now that St. Giles has been ruled out.  (There would be something ironic about getting married next to the grave and in the shadow of a statue of a reformer who was not afraid to take the monarch to task.)

There is another interesting twist to this church and state thing, the decision for the Queen to meet the Pope in Edinburgh on his visit in September rather than in London.  Church spokespersons deny any church/state reason for this (from the Scotsman):

The church yesterday also denied conspiracy theories that His Holiness was meeting Her Majesty in Scotland to avoid embarrassing questions over his call for Anglicans to rejoin the Catholic Church.

While the Queen is head of the Church of England, she is only a member of the Church of Scotland, because of the constitutional settlement around the Act of Union.

The practical reason for the location is that the monarch will already be in the neighborhood for her summer holidays.  But it does seem a handy device that since they won’t be in England this will avoid the head of one break-away church having to greet the current head of the church they broke away from and is now open to churches transferring back.

Finally, the fact that the Church of Scotland is also a break-away church as well is not lost on the pontiff, and he recognizes the difference between Presbyterians and Anglo-Catholics.  Back at the beginning of February the Pope met with the Scottish Bishops and had this to say about the Reformation:

The Church in your country, like many in Northern Europe, has suffered the tragedy of division. It is sobering to recall the great rupture with Scotland’s Catholic past that occurred 450 years ago. I give thanks to God for the progress that has been made in healing the wounds that were the legacy of that period, especially the sectarianism that has continued to rear its head even in recent times. Through your participation in Action of Churches Together in Scotland,see that the work of rebuilding unity among the followers of Christ is carried forward with constancy and commitment. While resisting any pressure to dilute the Christian message, set your sights on the goal of full, visible unity, for nothing less can respond to the will of Christ.

It would seem that the Anglican division is seen as less substantial than the Reformed differences — the “great rupture.”  And what is meant by “resisting any pressure to dilute the Christian message” being used in an ecumenical reference is left as an exercise for the reader.

The Church Of Scotland National Youth Assembly — Looking Back And Looking Ahead

2 Replies

For the PC(USA)’ers who are going to GA this year, there is a joke about Minnesota (at least they tell me it is a joke) that Minnesota has two seasons: Winter’s coming and Winter’s here.

Right now I feel a bit like that with the National Youth Assembly of the Church of Scotland.  I still had my discussion of the last NYA sitting as a draft and I find the announcement of NYA2010 posted on the web.  So at this mid-point between NYA2009 and NYA2010 let me try to look back to get caught up and to look forward at what this year holds.

NYA2009 met back at the beginning of September last, and the final deliverances were posted about two months later.  As I say every time I discuss NYA, one of the things that impresses me about the National Youth Assembly is the fact that items from their deliverances move on to the General Assembly coming up in just about two months.

The NYA2009 deliverances were posted on the NYA Blog by Iain McLarty.  He includes this “cover letter“:

Hi everyone. Sorry it’s taken a while but you will now be able to find the final deliverance for each debate below. Both your General Assembly reps and I will try and make sure these are taken to the General Assembly and to its Councils and Committees but when you read through the statements you will find that a lot of them apply to local churches or to individuals and your involvement in these didn’t end on the Monday afternoon in Stirling. Remember that it’s up to everyone who was at the Youth Assembly to try and raise awareness of the deliverance and make changes happen, whether it’s just things you do yourself, your local church or your Presbytery. You could print them out and put them on your church notice board, or ask your minister to talk about a couple of points that your local church will take action on during a service. And if you have a blog you can copy them there and raise awareness of them.   Well done again on producing an excellent result to the long weekend of debates and if you have stories of your success in promoting the results during the year then come back and tell people here.

The NYA business addressed four specific topics:  Identity, Wealth, Spirituality, Inter-faith.  This is going to get long but I decided I could not do the deliverances justice by editing out what I thought were the most important points.  Therefore, I am going to give you the full text of each.

From the deliverance on Identity, here are the set of nine points that came out of the Assembly:

The National Youth Assembly…

1. Believes that we as a Church should seek to recognise and celebrate people as individuals with individual gifts and talents, and not to generalise.
We should:

(a) Seek to develop these gifts and talents
(b) Value building relationships over organising evangelistic events
(c) View people as works in progress and not the finished article

2. Would like the Church of Scotland to explore the emerging aspects of Positive Psychology as a way of forming relationships with people,particularly those on the edges of the church. We would encourage the church to develop resources and make these available to all groups and leaders working in the Church.

3. Believes that inappropriate responses by the Church of Scotland to the identity of individuals and groups has been a very real barrier to them feeling part of the church.

4. Urges the Church to explore ways of supporting growth in Christian identity for all ages, recognising the current work of COSY in this area.

5. Urges the Church of Scotland to continue supporting the young people of the church as they move through education and into the world of work.  We encourage the church to help with pastoral support,offering guidance both spiritually and generally, as young people develop their identity through these difficult challenges.

6. Believes that the Church of Scotland should respond positively to identity issues by providing opportunities for social interaction:

(a) Between young and old by creating ways for them to work together;
(b) By encouraging social and community events within churches to build relationships;
(c) By encouraging all local churches to engage with a partner church somewhere else in the world;
(d) By developing small group networks for folk to meet together, share their stories and build relationships.

7. Believes that the Church of Scotland should acknowledge that people within the church, despite the fact that they are Christians,experience identity problems.

8. Encourages churches to make spiritual support groups available for everyone in the parish regardless of whether or not they are a member.

9. Believes that the Church of Scotland should not make people conform to one identity. Instead it should embrace diversity, with its own identity being ‘Everyone is welcome’

The deliverance on Wealth made these points:

The National Youth Assembly…

1. Urges the Church of Scotland to take the lead in opening discussions on personal finance and to provide support in helping with issues of stewardship.

2. Recognise that while Western society encourages materialism, which is unacceptable, the Church should not condemn individuals but should work with them to combat materialism.

3. Would like the Church of Scotland to prioritise spending on people. Local churches should be encouraged to invite disadvantaged groups into their churches to use their resources in whatever way is appropriate.

4. Suggests greater discussion of collective tithing. There should be increased accountability and transparency from the Church as to where financial contributions go. Individual churches should have more of a voice in where their contributions go.

5. Urges the Church of Scotland to continue to work with people of other denominations and faiths in trying to eradicate poverty.

6. Believes that the Church of Scotland should continue to support the work of Christian Aid in its tax justice campaign and should build stronger links with projects tackling poverty.

7. Feels that the church should be at the forefront of tackling the structures that keep people poor and encourage people to see poverty as not being restricted to financial issues, with other factors including spirituality, health and education. Local issues should not be neglected in favour of international ones.

8. Would like to see the church make tackling poverty a priority and to see it as an act of worship. The use of biblical texts as a means of communicating the necessity and impetus for working to eradicate poverty should be encouraged.

9. Recognises that churches do a lot of good work in tackling poverty and encourage this to be fed back through stories about this.

10. Believes that the church should play a key part in tackling poverty through educating people and being active in the community. The local church should be key to identifying local needs in order to prioritise eradicating poverty in Scotland.

11. Would like churches to ensure that people in congregations who are struggling financially can be honest and receive help without having to feel they have to keep up a ‘respectable’ façade.

12. Encourage the Church of Scotland to be more involved in practi
cal work both at home and abroad (e.g. building projects) in charities and projects, other than just providing financial support.

13. Commend and encourage the continuation of ethical investment practices by the Church of Scotland.

14. Urge individual church members to review their giving with a view to giving more sacrificially in order that the good work of the Church may continue.

In this set I particularly admire that it calls the Kirk to action keeping the responsibility on the church and the individual members, not on secular institutions.

The deliverance on Spirituality says:

The National Youth Assembly…

1.    Affirms that spirituality is a crucial part of the Christian faith and believes that the Church of Scotland is not good at engaging with this. The Church should help people mature in their spirituality by openly confronting it and not hiding from it and by providing more accessible resources and pastoral care.

2.    Believes that every aspect of life has a spiritual dimension (e.g. use of money, relationships, values, suffering)

3.    Would like to see people in the church helped to develop a healthy relationship with silence, including during church services.Where practical, a dedicated space should be provided in churches for meditation and reflection, both in and out of “church hours” and open and advertised to the general public.

4.    Would like to see more emphasis placed on spirituality in preaching, possibly including questions for contemplation and discussion.

5.    Encourages the creative use of big posters/billboards in prominent public places, with messages to inspire people spiritually.

6.    Encourages church communities and individuals within those communities to share their stories and faith experiences, with the relevant support.

7.    Recognises that traditional services are of spiritual value,but would like to see more exploration of alternative worship both in and out of services for example, art exhibitions, film liturgies,poetry, i-pod reflections and labyrinths.

8.    Would like to see the promotion of opportunities for learning such as “Adult Sunday School” and programs like Alpha or Living the Questions.

9.    Thinks that spirituality should be spoken about and practised from Sunday school age so that children are aware of it, for example through “Godly Play.”

10.    Suggest that it is useful to look at spirituality in an Inter-Faith way.

11.    Would like to see an event exploring alternative worship and spiritual development, possibly on the theme of “Live faith and share life” [rather than live life and share faith]

Now I am viewing this through an “American lens” so I don’t know if some of the current tension in American religion over the general term “spirituality” is present in Scotland also.  If so this deliverance may be the most controversial or unconventional to some in the church, especially those that value orthodoxy.  It is interesting that the deliverance acknowledges this saying “the Church of Scotland is not good at engaging with this.”  In light of recent surveys that show that American “millennials” (those between the ages of 18-29) are “spiritual” but not “religious” this deliverance at times walks a fine line between the two, in places mixes them, and in other spots appears to advocate for what would be considered “new age” or “eastern” spiritual practices that some around here would argue should not be part of Christian worship or spiritual practices.  On the one hand, promoting Adult Sunday School, sharing faith experiences, and seeing a spiritual dimension to every aspect of life can be considered foundational Christian practices.  The large posters and billboards, healthy relationship with silence, and the alternative worship practices would be encouraged or discouraged depending on how they are focused.  But for some, looking at spirituality in an Inter-Faith way could be a concern.  This could be one of those issues where the details will be scrutinized.  But again, I don’t know if this is even the issue in Scotland it is in parts of the U.S.

The last deliverance was on Inter-Faith:

The National Youth Assembly…

1. Believes that the church should do more to combat stereo-typical views of what Christians are like and understand that all faiths have extremists, including Christianity. There is a need to extend education about all faiths to avoid stereo-typing based on biased media reporting.

2. Thinks that there should be more Inter-Faith gatherings and conferences at local, national and international levels, with better advertising to increase awareness of this work and its importance.

3. Consider consulting with local police forces and outside agencies to ascertain priority areas where Inter-Faith dialogue is required.

4. Encourages the use of Inter-Faith meals as a means of sharing faith and belief to build meaningful relationships while being sensitive to other customs.

5. Encourages the Church of Scotland to promote Inter-Faith Dialogue overseas in areas such as Israel/Palestine and Africa.

6. Challenges local churches to extend loving friendship and conversation to people of other denominations and faiths and to love their neighbours regardless of faith or absence of faith. We should accept people for who they are, treat them with respect, and never pity.  When talking with anyone we should have no agenda for converting them.

7. Encourages the Church of Scotland to offer more practical support to congregations engaging in Inter-Faith relationships. This could include an expansion of the role of Inter-Faith workers and the development of a volunteer network.

8. Encourages the Church of Scotland to recognise the values which we share with other faiths and which should inform and encourage practical work on issues such as poverty, conflict resolution and justice. Faith groups should work together for increased dialogue with all levels of government.

9. Are aware that ignorance breeds prejudice whereas knowledge breeds understanding.  It’s crucial to build lasting relationships before tackling religious issues. We need to be educated about other faiths and try to educate other faiths in what we believe and why we believe it, promoting mutual understanding.

10. Encourages the Church of Scotland to reach out to those who feel threatened and fearful of new cultures and religions in their area in the hope that such feelings won’t escalate.

11. Would like the church to consider ways in which communities can have dialogue with people of other faiths while being careful to avoid tokenism and condescension.

12. Encourage ongoing Religious Education programmes in schools with the involvement of churches and other faith groups, as part of commitment to promoting understanding about different faiths among wider society.

13. Encourage Inter-Faith dialogue at all levels of the church,including opportunities for people from other faith communities to speak to churches about their beliefs.

14. Want to encourage ecumenical discussions so that Christians of all denominations can work to improve inter-faith relationships.

Again, the church walks in a tension between supporting a pluralistic society where it is helpful to understand the cultural context of those around us of different faiths while not compromising, or appearing to compromise, the essential tenets of its own faith.  For the most part this deliverance does a good job walk
ing that line.

The next step is to see how these recommendations develop.  As the cover letter says, there is much in here that happens on an individual, congregational or presbytery basis.  But some of these items will come through to the General Assembly included in the deliverances from standing committees of the Assembly.  We will see these specifics shortly as the Assembly reports are posted.

Moving on, a short while ago the information for NYA2010 was posted on the COSY Blog.  Here is the lede:

Welcome to the National Youth Assembly 2010! Our theme for this year is To Boldly Go . . . and we’ll be thinking about mission – what does the word mission mean to you? How do we do mission in a 21st century Scotland and what might it look like?

The new Moderator of NYA is Kim Wood (note the spelling correction in the comment) and the discussion questions will be fashion, politics, and violence and peacemaking.  Those are three interesting, relevant and wide-ranging topics and I look forward to seeing where the debate goes on those.  Note also the emphasis on “mission in a 21st century Scotland” — not world mission, but local mission.

The event will be held at Stirling University, the same as last year, but apparently in a new venue on the campus.  It is the first weekend of September, Friday 3 Sept. to Monday 6 Sept. 2010.  And maybe the most important information: the conference is covered by the COSY Blog and will probably use the Twitter hashtag #nya2010.  If you need to register you can do so at MadStuff.biz.

Chris Hoskins over at What Is Freedom? has posted a brief note expressing his regret that he will be missing the Assembly this year and how meaningful the NYA has been in his life.  He says:

I will miss not being at the assembly, the 7 Youth Assemblies I have attended, as delegate or staff, over the last 10 years have been very important to me. I’ve made many good friends, been challenged, been inspired, at the assembly in 2000 I gave my life to Christ. Through my involvement in the Youth Assemblies, I’ve been opened to many other opportunities… I know this list seems a bit narcissistic, but I’m just realising how blessed I’ve been to be a part of all these things.

And he concludes with this advice:

If you’ve never been to the Youth assembly and you are eligible to go, I would recommend that you do, if you’ve been before, why do you share some memories with us? Those who are going this year – relish it, enjoy it, participate. Its the kind of event that is only as good as you make it, if you don’t put yourself into it and take part, it will never be as good as it could be – for you and for those around you.

I look forward to NYA2010, even if I will only attend in the virtual world.  My prayers for another meaningful Assembly.

Historical Realignments In The Scottish Presbyterian Church And Parallels In Other Branches

6 Replies

I ran across an article today that had some interesting historical details about the Presbyterian churches in Scotland, details that seem to mesh with what I have previously commented on for North American Branches.

The article is on the blog Holdfast and is titled “the Free Church in its current form is finished.”  The article looks ahead to the Free Church of Scotland General Assembly, something which would be of interest to a GA Junkie from the start.  Related to the focus of the piece is the editorial in the July ’09 issue of the Monthly Record, the Free Church’s official publication, something I had commented on at the time.  The point of the editorial was what the controversy in the Church of Scotland over ordination standards means for the Free Church — Including possibly making worship standards more flexible to allow CofS churches to comfortably realign with the Free Church. 

What the author mentions, which I am interested to find out, is that was not the first time the editor, Mr. David Robertson, had made comments about worship style.  The blog post informs us that he made a statement a year before at the 2008 General Assembly:

The current editor of the Monthly Record told the Assembly in 2008 that he could no longer ‘assert, maintain and defend’ the current practice on worship. That is that he desires hymns, instrumental music and women deacons too. He has said ‘the Free Church is going to change’, ‘the Free Church in its current form is finished’.

The 2008 General Assembly comments are covered in the July 08 issue of the Monthly Record (p. 27) and were preceded by editorial comments on “Worship Wars” in the May 08 issue (p. 4-5).

The specifics of the current debate I will hold for a while and try to return to them before the Assembly meets in May.  The information indicates that the Trustees will be bringing a recommendation to the Assembly concerning the current “Worship Wars.”

But all that is introduction to what really caught my attention in this article.  In my contemplation of the complexity of American Presbyterianism I have seen that Scottish Presbyterians are not far behind in their splits and unions.  But some of the parallels in dates are intriguing, such as a major Scottish split in 1732 and an American mainline split in 1741.  While the Americans reunited shortly after the Scottish branches did not.  The big Scottish split was the “Disruption of 1843” which produced the Free Church, while the American mainline suffered its Old School/New School split in 1837.  Maybe something related in all of this, maybe not.

Last week I mentioned the 1906 reunion of a majority of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church with the mainline American Presbyterians and how that was immediately preceded by revision of the Westminster Standards and occurred during the Ecumenical Movement of the early 20th Century.  Note what the author of the Holdfast piece says about the Free Church in that same time period:

The interesting thing for those who have a knowledge of the history of the Free Church is that the proponents of change are appealing to the historical precedent of the late-victorian Free Church where hymns and organs were permitted in order to make way for union with the United Presbyterian Church. Union with Church of Scotland evangelicals unable to accept psalms without organs is the great rallying cry now behind the movement for change. History is evidently repeating itself, it has to because few are really listening. An astute article looks at the historical arguments used by contemporary proponents of change. It notes that the changes in Victorian times came hand in hand with theological declension. The attempts to form a superchurch in those times culminated in the United Free Church declining further until it merged into the Church of Scotland in 1929. Only a very basic theological standard is going to suit most evangelicals in the Church of Scotland.

To clarify the timing here, in 1900 some from the Free Church joined with the United Presbyterian Church of Scotland to form the United Free Church.  Then a majority from that body joined the Church of Scotland in 1929.  Like the CPC/mainline American union, this is in the same time period and, as the article states, involves a modernizing/modification/compromise/weakening of standards (depending on your viewpoint) to accommodate the merger between two bodies with a vision of greater ecumenical unity through organic union.  Similarly, the United Church of Canada effected its union in exactly the same time period, joining in 1925 after 20 years of discussion.  The central argument among the Presbyterians was whether to have organic union to unite three denominational bodies as one, with the necessary compromises in doctrine and polity, or whether to have federation to more closely work together in locations where three separate church bodies were duplicating their efforts but preserving denominational identity.  The unionists formed the United Church but the large minority of Presbyterians who opposed union, and mostly supported federation, continued as the Presbyterian Church in Canada.  (It is also an interesting parallel that one of the figures in that debate, but on the anti-union side, was the editor of the official Presbyterian publication.)

For me one of the take-aways is that I may not be focusing as much on the ecumenical movement as I should, instead focusing on the fundamentalist/modernist debate that followed, and was probably influenced if not precipitated by the ecumenical movement.  And I will have to look more closely at the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand and the merger in 1901 that formed the present denomination.  I am curious if any of these dynamics seen elsewhere were a part of that merger.

And we will see how this specific issue develops both before and during the General Assembly of the Free Church which will convene on May 17, if my calendar is correct.

New Principal Clerk Of The General Assembly Of The Church Of Scotland

Leave a reply

I don’t know how many of you caught this job announcement for a new Principal Clerk of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.  As the announcement says “These senior positions offer talented individuals the chance to make a significant contribution to the life of the Church.”  But note, for some of us elsewhere around the globe, “Applications are invited from Ministers of the Church of Scotland for this key role.”  Now, although the job posting never explicitly says that the Principal Clerk must be a clergy member, it does ask for “experience and understanding of the parish ministry” and the Acts and Regulations of the Church of Scotland do require the Principal Clerk to be a minister.  Sorry all you polity-wonk ruling elders.

Well, in case you had not heard and are interested, sorry but the position has been filled.  No official press release from the Kirk yet, but according to Scotsman.com the selection for the next Principal Clerk is the Rev. John Chalmers.  Rev. Chalmers has previously served in parish ministry, his last charge being Palmerston Place Church at the West End, Edinburgh.  He currently is serving as the “pastoral adviser in the ministry department” of the national headquarters according to the article.  He will be confirmed by the Assembly in May and will begin duties over the summer.  The article quotes him as saying: “I’m excited by the challenge and approach it with quite some fear and trepidation.”

[I will update here as more stories and the press release are issued.]

For watchers of the Kirk the retirement of the Very Rev. Dr. Finlay Macdonald, the current Principal Clerk, is not a surprise.  At the last Assembly Rev. Macdonald was absent and the Assembly “resolved that the Rev Dr Marjory MacLean be appointed Acting Principal Clerk for the duration of the absence of the Principal Clerk.”  There is no word if the Rev. MacLean, presently the deputy principal clerk, was a candidate for the permanent position.

So, the best of wishes to the Rev. Chalmers as he prepares for and assumes his new position and it will be interesting to see how he advises and guides the Assembly of 2011.  And best wishes to the Very Rev. Dr. Macdonald as he prepares for retirement, but not until after he helps the Assembly through the 2010 Meeting.

And to all my readers, a happy Boxing Day, Feast of St. Stephen, and Second Day of Christmastide.

Being Missional In Scotland — A Presbyterian Partnership: Reformission Scotland

Leave a reply

This fall there has been an interesting development in Scotland – the launch of Reformission Scotland.  To quote their web site:

Reformission Scotland is a Scottish church planting partnership.

Our aim is to plant gospel churches that will replicate themselves.

The Gospel Partnership page describes the partners as being “individuals, churches and organizations” that have a shared vision and ethos.  These partners come from the Church of Scotland, the Free Church of Scotland, the Associated Presbyterian Church of Scotland, and the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church in the USA.

From the web page describing the history of Reformission Scotland, we learn that this is an effort that goes back two-and-a-half years to an initial meeting in June 2007.  From this developed a 10 man steering committee, six from the C of S, and two each from the Free Church and the APC. Their Council of Reference includes seven more men, three from the U.S., one from Surrey, England, and three from Scotland.  On November 3 they ordained their first church planter, the Rev. Athole Rennie, who was trained in the Church of Scotland but ordained to the ARP.  For more on all of this there is a nice description by Neil MacMillan (a member of the steering committee) on his blog, and a two-part article in the Outreach Newsletter of the Outreach to North America mission agency of the ARP.  The newsletter article begins on page 2 with comments by Rev. Rennie and a good article on page 3 by Ivor MacDonald the chairman of Reformission Scotland.  In the article he shares that the goal of Reformission Scotland is to have five church plants in five years.  There are some nice pictures of those who gathered for the Rev. Rennie’s induction in the APC Newsletter.

It is interesting that this group has identified church planting as the key to church growth and spreading the Gospel.  For more on their reasons for this emphasis you can check out their Why Church Planting Is So Important page, and the two articles that are linked there. The area identified for the first plant is Leith, the port area of Edinburgh that is now undergoing redevelopment and, from the sound of it, gentrification. This will be an interesting area in the near future.

I would also comment that the Reformission Scotland web site is attractive, easy to navigate, and easy to read.  The front page alone was interesting because of the fine photography that cycles through the banner – although generic landscape shots they catch your attention.  They have done a good job of providing summaries that link to more details for those that are interested.  I would also point out that the page style, sans the rotating banner, is very similar to the Duke Street Church website I linked to above.  For updates the Reformission Scotland page does not have a “news” or “announcements” section or a blog, but there is an RSS feed recognized by my browser. (Although I have not gotten my feed reader to recognize it yet – I’ll keep trying.)  As I noted above, one source of news will probably be the Rev. Neil MacMillan’s blog since he is on the steering committee and is the Mission Development Officer for the Free Church.

A very interesting project bringing several Presbyterian branches together in mission.  I look forward to how this project progresses.

Some Brief Updates

Leave a reply

There are a number of stories I have covered recently that now have updates that I have been collecting.  However, with no sign that there will be enough other related information for any to warrant a post of their own in the short term I now present a series of these in one general post.

Church of Scotland/Free Church of Scotland Discussions

In an update to the internal discussion in the Church of Scotland over ordination standards, it was announced by the Free Church of Scotland last week that they have decided to suspend their biannual talks with the CofS.  In the news item they say:

However, the Free Church has said that, in the light of the uncertainty over the Kirk’s position on homosexuality following the induction of an allegedly gay minister earlier this year, which appeared to be sanctioned by their General Assembly, it cannot for the time being continue “as if nothing had happened.”

The announcement goes on to say that the decision was accepted with regret and then quotes the convener of the Free Church committee:

Rev. Iver Martin, Convener of the Free Church Ecumenical Relations Committee, said, “Suspending the talks, whilst regrettable, was the most tangible way of expressing the Free Church’s discomfort with the failure of the Church of Scotland to take a thoroughly Biblical stand on the place of marriage between one man and one woman.” The Free Church continues to value and encourage the close relationship that there is between congregations of both denominations in many areas of Scotland.

Case heard by the Presbyterian Church in America Standing Judicial Commission

It has been over a year since I have touched on the Federal Vision discussions in the PCA, and in that time the controversy has been moving along quietly but steadily.  Since the 35th General Assembly adopted the report of a study committee that was critical of this theological perspective the denomination has been dealing with it in the regular presbytery review process.  For the Pacific Northwest Presbytery this began with a theological examination about 13 months ago and the presbytery accepting that examination.  A complaint was filed and this past week the Standing Judicial Commission of the PCA heard the complaint.  Jason Stellman over at De Regnis Duobus is one of the complainants in the case and has provided his observations of the proceedings.  He includes this description:

A couple of the eyebrow-raising statements from the respondant include: (1) His insistence that the Westminster Standards do not teach that the covenant of works sets forth a distinct principle by which we receive eternal life from that of the covenant of grace; (2) His encouragement to the SJC that they all read John Frame’s review of Horton’s Christless Christianity so as to learn from Frame how to avoid the dangers of Westminster Seminary California’s sectarianism; and perhaps the most telling of all was (3)seeing firsthand what happens when one flattens out redemptive history so as to take Yahweh’s dealings with Old Testament Israel under the conditional, Mosaic covenant as an unqualified, across-the-board paradigm for understanding how God relates to the church today. When asked by the commission, “In what sense are we saved by baptism?”, the response was given, “Well, in the same sense that God can pardon his people and then damn them.”

The PCA SJC has 42 days to render their decision (unlike the PC(USA) GAPJC which must render their decision before the meeting adjourns).  TE Stellman concludes with this:

And to those of you who love asking, yes, if they find in favor of Leithart [the respondant] and against us, I will submit to that and never bring it up again.

Deaconess Issues In The PCA

The more prominent discussion in the PCA recently has been the status of women serving in ordained office, or what seems to resemble ordained office.  Recently, the discussion was fueled by a video of a commissioning service at Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan, NY.  Well, Bob Mattes asked the senior pastor at Redeemer, TE Tim Keller, about the video and has posted the response at Green Baggins.  In short, Rev. Keller writes:

We do not ordain our deaconesses nor do we ask our congregation to obey and submit to them. The minister in the video is newer on our staff and he accidentally read the deacons’ questions from the BCO and did not use the different questions we commonly use for deaconesses.  Others who go to Redeemer can attest that this is not our practice, and it will not be in the future. The minister in the video apologized when he realized what he had done.

While Mr. Keller has provided this explanation I would note that the BaylyBlog, one of Redeemers strongest critics, has updated the original post to acknowledge the explanation, but they basically say there is still a problem with what Redeemer does.

Responses To A Minister’s Term Not Extended By The Uniting Church In Australia

A couple of months ago I posted some comments on my initial review of the polity in the Uniting Church in Australia and illustrated that with a controversy that had erupted when the Illawarra Presbytery declined to extend the term of the Rev. Gordon Bradbery to his present call at Wesley Uniting Church on the Mall.

Now, before we go getting too Presbyterian about this, let me remind you that this is the Uniting Church and while the Presbyterians were part of the union that formed the church the polity is a bit different.  In that denomination the pastors are called with specified term lengths which may or may not be renewed or extended.  In addition, even though a congregation may vote overwhelmingly to want the call extended by the fixed amount, the presbytery, and in this case the synod as well, have substantial input into the extension.

So in the last two months there has been no change in the presbytery’s decision not to extend Rev. Bradbery’s term, but there has been plenty of activity regarding the decision and trying to get popular support for reversing the decision.  This includes a meeting of presbytery leaders with Rev. Bradbery (what the Illawarra Mercury called “peace talks”) and a letter from the Presbytery, a Facebook page to gather support and communicate to his supporters, an online petition (currently 20 signatures), as well as a recent op-ed piece in the Illawarra Mercury.  Too early to tell if the popular support will sway the presbytery but it is interesting to see the role the Internet is playing in the rather local story.

And finally, not an update but a news brief…

New Official PC(USA) Blog – Beyond the Ordinary

There is a new official blog from the PC(USA) called Beyond the Ordinary that discusses the U.S. Congregational Life Survey.  It is written by staff from the PC(USA) Research Services office and, as you would expect from them, deals with their statistical numbers.  It will be interesting to see what they have to say.

Church Of Scotland Commission Of Assembly Meeting – Ordination Standards Debate And Manse Occupancy

This was an interesting meeting last Friday (Nov. 13) in a number of ways.  One way that it was interesting was because of the media attention that was paid to it.  I seldom see much, if any coverage, of the meetings of the Commission of Assembly.  But extending on that it was interesting in what the media coverage was about.  With two controversial decisions to be considered by the Commission, only one of them seemed to get any media attention, particularly in advance.  I will cover that item second, but a brief reminder of the role of the Commission and the other item that did not get much media attention.

In the Church of Scotland each General Assembly establishes a sub-group to act on important matters in the interim year until the next Assembly meets.  As a commission they are empowered to act with the full authority and power of the whole Assembly on many matters.  We are fortunate that the Rev. Ian Watson of Kirkmuirhill served as a commissioner to this meeting and brings us a lot of insightful details in his blog.

The first item relates to the continuing journey regarding ordination standards in the Church of Scotland, specifically as it relates to same-sex partnered clergy and candidates.  The short review is that after a church called a minister last spring the call was protested and the GA decided to deny the protest.  But, the GA also decided that the topic should be looked at by a special commission and during the two years the commission is working there are to be no calls or ordinations of same-sex partnered clergy.  But what about individuals starting the process?  An individual was approved by the Presbytery of Hamilton, a dissent and complaint was filed and the individual withdrew. However, that withdrawal did not halt the protest and there was a request for clarification whether the moratorium did apply to candidates.  That is the question brought to the Commission of Assembly last week.

In his detailed post about the meeting Rev. Watson tells us:

The end result was that the Commission decided to uphold the dissent and complaint against the Presbytery of Hamilton.  The practical result is that the deliverance brought in the name of Rev. Dr. John McPake at May’s General Assembly (amended after long debate)—the moratorium—is to be interpreted broadly and not restrictively.  When it instructs Courts, Councils and Committees of the Church not “to make decisions in relation to contentious matters of sexuality, with respect to Ordination and Induction” that includes training for the ministry, which, by its very nature looks towards ordination and induction.   Should a Court, Council or Committee be faced with making a decision in this regard they must decline to do so, sisting the matter if appropriate, until 31st May 2011.

In his description of the meeting he talks about the background to this presbytery’s decision and the advice they had received from the Principle Clerk’s office.  He also talks about what the intent of the moratorium was and how a literal versus intended interpretation was applied.  He sums up that section with this (emphases his):

While it might seem that the Presbytery had reached a wise compromise, it presented the wider church with a problem.  Was this indeed the outcome May’s General Assembly had in mind?  Some felt that this was too narrow an interpretation.  While Hamilton Presbytery might wish to add a rider to their acceptance of the candidate, other Presbyteries might not.   Were this decision to go unchallenged, it would appear that the Church of Scotland had not decided not to train sexually active homosexuals for the ministry. 

Many believe that the moratorium provided the church with the chance to calm down.  The relative peace which has descended upon the church would be endangered if it become known that the moratorium was being applied so strictly as to be null and void for all practical purposes.

In the end the Commission agreed 43-38 to the counter-motion, made by Rev. Watson, that the moratorium applied to those training for the ministry as well.

As I said at the beginning, outside of Rev. Watson’s account, and the blogs like this one that link to it, the coverage of this action has been limited.  I have seen no coverage in the mainstream media, but there is some in the alternative media.  One example is an article from PinkNews which mentions the meeting and decision in the first line, and then spends the rest of the article profiling the candidate who was approved and then withdrew.  In the blogosphere there are some interesting comments by John Ross at Recycled Missionaries.

The second item did get the coverage in the mainstream media leading up to the meeting including the Edinburgh Evening News and The Sun.

This question revolves around a provision in the Regulations of the General Assembly, specifically Reg VII 2007 item 2. (Reg. VII 2007 in Word Format.)  That item says:

2. A Minister has the right to live in the Manse and a corresponding duty to occupy it.

The question raised is “what does it mean to ‘occupy’ the manse?”

The specific situation is that the Rev. John Munro, pastor of Fairmilehead Church near Edinburgh, lives in his personally owned home about 1/2 km from the church.  He and his wife did live in the manse next to the church for about 5 years but moved about two years ago reportedly because his wife did not enjoy living in the manse.  However, Rev. Munro made a good-faith effort to “occupy” the manse by working there every day.  Edinburgh Presbytery ruled that using the manse’s library and having possession of the manse’s contents were not sufficient and that occupying the manse entailed living there.

The Commission of Assembly agreed with the Presbytery by a vote of 64 to 5 (as reported in the Edinburgh Evening News) and has sent the case back down to the Presbytery for its action.

At this point I, as someone outside the Church of Scotland, am scratching my head a bit.  First the action is reported but the reasons behind this regulation are not clear t
o me.  (Or maybe I should say that I can think of a dozen reasons for the regulation but I don’t know which one is correct.)  The best indication we have is one reference in The Sun article where an unnamed friend of Rev. Munro says “They fear if the Inland Revenue thinks manses are no longer necessary for the job, they will change its tax status. But they are being paranoid. Since 2003 only five people have asked to live out with their manse in Scotland.”

Here in the states many churches have done away with the manse for a variety of reasons.  These include the fact that a manse is “one size fits all” and the minister and their family don’t always fit the property.  Also, some view the opportunity to own their property outright as an investment to help when they reach retirement.  And in the recent “housing bubble” many new church plants could not afford to purchase land for the church, let alone a manse for their pastor.  Finally, in the states the tax codes generally allow a minister similar tax treatment if they are in a manse or receive a housing allowance for their own property.

So this case in Edinburgh goes back to the Presbytery and possible outcomes range from censure to full dismissal from the charge.  We will see what the Presbytery decides.

Current News In The Ordination Standards Discussion In The Church Of Scotland

2 Replies

Compared to my two previous notes on developments in the PC(USA) and the PCA this recap on developments in the Church of Scotland will be relatively short since their process is much more focused at the moment.

You may remember that the last General Assembly dealt with a protest filed by a group of presbyters who considered their presbytery’s action to concur with a church’s call to a partnered gay man to pastor the church to be out of order.  The GA upheld the presbytery decision and denied the protest.  Along with the protest there was also an overture filed by another presbytery to establish some standards for ordained office regarding lifestyle and sexual orientation.  Instead of acting on that the Assembly chose to structure an environment to engage the church in discussion over this issue.  This environment includes a Special Commission to study the issue and report back to the 2011 Assembly, a moratorium on installations and ordinations of partnered same-sex individuals as officers of the church, and a ban on officers of the church talking publicly about the issue.  The moratorium and the gag order are for the two years the Special Commission will be working.

Well yesterday brought news that Lord Hodge will chair the special commission.  Lord Hodge is a Judge of the Supreme Court and was previously Procurator to the General Assembly, among other legal and judicial positions.  The news article also lists an additional four members of this nine member commission:

Other members of the commission include the Rev John Chalmers, former minister of Edinburgh’s Palmerston Place Church; advocate Ruth Innes, a member at Palmerston Place Church; former Moderator the Very Rev Dr Sheilagh Kesting; and the Rev Peter Graham, former clerk to the Edinburgh presbytery.

Thanks to the Edinburgh Evening News for this, but I look forward to a formal press release from the CofS Newsroom, or a more detailed media article listing the full membership of the commission.

A sidebar here, (pun intended) on the leaders of these Church of Scotland special commissions.  For those of you keeping score at home, this is the third special commission in three years that I am aware of.  The first of these, created by the 2006 General Assembly, was the Special Commission on Structure and Change which reported back to the 2008 Assembly.  What I find interesting was that commission was headed up by Lord Hodge’s colleague on the high court, Lord Brodie.  Not every commission is headed up by a distinguish justice because the third commission, and one that is currently working, the Special Commission on the Third Article is chaired by the Moderator of the 2006 Assembly, the Very Rev. Dr. Alan D. McDonald.  (And if you want more on the Structure and Change and Third Article stuff, you can check out my earlier discussion of all that.)  But in summary, you have to be impressed with the church’s integration in the culture to be able to get such secular leaders onto GA commissions.  (And you have to wonder how they have time to do it.)

Finally, I was looking back and I probably should close the loop on one more related item.  Back at the beginning of September the Presbytery of Hamilton voted to admit to training for the ministry an individual whose lifestyle was the subject of the new discussion in the church.  The issue at the time was focused on whether this presbytery action was a violation of the GA action, in spirit if not in letter.  Subsequently, the individual, Mr. Dmitri Ross, withdrew his application after the controversy erupted.  In a Time article he is quoted as saying:

“I do not wish, and have never sought, to be a cause of division within the Church I love so dearly. Therefore, after much heartfelt deliberation, and after much prayerful consideration, I have decided to withdraw as a full-time candidate in training for ministry of word and sacrament in the Church of Scotland.”

Like the other ordination debates, all of this is a point in the journey, or a step in a process, that will play out.  Stay tuned…