Church Of Scotland 2013 General Assembly — “Affirm the Church’s historic and current doctrine and practice… nonetheless permit…”

3 Replies

“Affirm the Church’s historic and current doctrine and practice in
relation to human sexuality nonetheless permit those Kirk sessions who
wish to depart from that doctrine and practice to do so.”

Yesterday was a long day for the commissioners of General Assembly 2013 of the Church of Scotland as they heard and debated the report of the Theological Commission on Same-sex Relationships and the Ministry. I had to chuckle as the Moderator made a comment about keeping remarks brief or they would be there until midnight as it brought back memories of late nights at PC(USA) GA’s.

The final outcome of the debate was an action that tried to find a middle way. It was reportedly worked out over lunch in the middle of the debate and moved by the immediate past Moderator the Very Reverend Albert Bogle.

The full actions of the Assembly on this report are now available from the Kirk web site but the closely watched portion now says:

3. (i). Affirm the Church’s historic and current doctrine and practice in relation to human sexuality nonetheless permit those Kirk sessions who wish to depart from that doctrine and practice to do so.

(ii) Instruct the Legal Questions Committee to bring an Overture to the General Assembly of 2014 which the following principles of 3. (i) above:

Principles of the Overture:

  1. Would not require the Church to abandon its traditional position.
  2. But would allow individual congregations – by decisions of their Kirk Sessions – to depart from the Church’s traditional position.
  3. Would allow ministers and deacons (current and prospective) who are in civil partnerships to be selected for training and to be trained. Would also allow them to be ordained/inducted into a charge the Kirk Session of which had decided to depart from the Church’s traditional position.
  4. Would cover inducted ministers and ministers and deacons working in other roles in congregations.
  5. Would not enable one congregation to depart from traditional position where others in a linking do not wish to do so.
  6. Would enable a Kirk Session to change its mind. But a minister or deacon who had been appointed to a congregation whose Kirk Session had decided to depart from the traditional position would not be prejudiced by a change of mind by the Kirk Session.
  7. Would preserve liberty of opinion and responsible expression. Would not permit harassing or bullying.
  8. Preserves right of members of presbyteries – whatever views – to engage or not in ordinations/inductions.

(iii) Instruct the Theological Forum to explore the relevant ecclesiological issues informing the principles of the “mixed economy” as set out in the Report of the Theological Commission and report to the General Assembly of 2014.

(iv) Instruct all Courts, Councils and Committees of the Church not to make decisions in accordance with section 3.(i) above until the position in relation to the proposed Overture has been finally determined by a future General Assembly.

What this means is that the Church of Scotland has effectively adopted the local option in determining suitability for ordination and service in a particular church and for recognizing and blessing same-sex civil partnerships. [Note: I use the term “local option” throughout this post but that is not an official term being used elsewhere in this discussion. It is a convenient term for me as this discussion and action parallels similar situations where the term is used.]

As I mentioned above, this particular motion — which was amended on the floor — was developed during the day of debate. As such one of its deficiencies is that it could not contain any changes to Kirk policies that are sweeping enough to have to be sent down to the presbyteries under the Barrier Act. Hence, the Overture based on the principles listed in the motion must be brought to next year’s Assembly and would not go into effect until 2015 if the presbyteries concur. This also leaves the action of this Assembly vulnerable to modification by next year’s Assembly when it will have to give approval to that Overture.

This motion was promoted as the middle ground to try to keep the Kirk together, a compromise where each side had to give a little in order to get something. And it had well-known members of the Kirk from across the theological spectrum speaking for it.

During the debate it was clear that this motion was a work in progress and that was bothersome to a number of the commissioners who spoke. There were points that the Principal Clerk had to try to interpret what the implications of the language would be. And it is clear going forward that the legal minds on the Legal Questions Committee will have a lot to do with what is ultimately brought back to the Assembly next year.

The debate was reasoned and well conducted with just a few points of frustration and raised voices. As with any debate of this complexity, with the multiple options and amendments flying, there were several points where commissioners were confused about what was happening. But overall the Moderator, The Right Rev Lorna Hood, did a very good job of keeping order and the process moving.

At the end of the day the commissioners had three options before them — this one and the two from the Theological Commission report I discussed in the preview. The other possible option, what was referred to as 2C, of which notice was given, was withdrawn on the floor. What was ultimately the prevailing motion was introduced as 2D.

After the arguments in favor of each of the three options a vote was taken on all three with 2A – the original revisionist option – receiving 270 votes, 2B – the original traditionalist option – receiving 163 votes and 2D getting 191 votes. With 2B voted off the island eliminated the final vote was 282 for 2A and 340 for 2D. (My thoughts on the voting shifts may come at another time.)

If the traffic on Twitter and the mainstream headlines are an indication this is being seen as a win for the revisionist side. (And I should add that several speakers expressed their disapproval of the revisionist/traditionalist labels the report used.) Many tweets repeat the BBC headline “Church of Scotland General Assembly votes to allow gay ministers.” Traditionalist are saying things like “How can you vote to affirm standards while allowing exceptions to them” as well as indications of individuals seriously considering leaving the church. And there are responses from members of the Free Church of Scotland as well. It is however interesting that the other issue in the report, that of same-sex civil unions, has seemed to get no play in the press or social media.

A few of the blog responses that appeared shortly after the decision include one by Chris Hoskins on his blog Endure Fort who reflects on his trying to figure out what he thinks of the compromise. More decided is John McLuckie in his blog JustLuckie who critiques how Scripture was used in the traditionalist argument. And an Anglican priest who followed the debate discussed first the debate and then a second post on Where Does the Church of Scotland Stand? UPDATE: I would add to the responses a long and thoughtful Open Letter to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland 2013 from Louis Kinsey.

In addition there are official reports from the Kirk and it’s official publication Life and Work.

But what is the bottom line here? Yes, the General Assembly has adopted an action that provides a path for ordination and blessing of civil unions for those in same-sex partnerships. It has also adopted an action that affirms traditional doctrine. But it appears to me that while a compromise agreement has been achieved that may avoid a major departure right away, the real result is that any actual polity change has been pushed out another year to 2015. And despite what the media is focusing on this is regarding both ordinations/training and civil unions. As point 3(iv) indicates, the moratorium is still in place. Under this action the traditional doctrine has been affirmed so in the discussion in the civil arena about same-sex marriage in Scotland the Kirk remains opposed to the proposed action of the Scottish Parliament.

This has also opened up a discussion on what allowing individual sessions to set their own standards means. Has the Church of Scotland taken a step towards congregationalism or, as one quote said, a “federation of congregations”?

The questions about this action are numerous: Will the 2014 General Assembly somehow undo this? Will this compromise hold the Kirk together, at least for the moment?  Is this system even workable if it is implemented? Would the proposed resolution be agreed to by the presbyteries under the Barrier Act? Could the local option be extended to other issues of human sexuality or even other issues in general?

What we see in this whole debate and action are two important Presbyterian values embedded in this debate and compromise. The first is the importance of process and doing things decently and in order. While this is a frustration to many who would like to see quicker change, we gather as community to discern together where God is leading. The second is the tension in which we hold doctrine and individual conscience. We are constantly seeking the line where individual views can be held but in the context of the community must be subjugated to the discernment of the community of which we are a part.

We will see how this action affects the future of the Kirk. Stay tuned…

2013 General Assembly Of The Free Church Of Scotland

Leave a reply

As of this evening in Edinburgh we have two General Assemblies meeting as the 2013 General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland convened in St. Columba’s Free Church. They have held their opening worship service, with the retiring Moderator, The Rev. Dr. Iain D. Campbell preaching. They have installed their new Moderator, The Rev Angus Howat. Some preliminary business, such as greeting corresponding delegates and approval of committees. And they have recessed for the evening to convene again at 10 AM tomorrow morning.

Here is what will help you follow along for the next four days:

One of the business items that caught my attention were the budget issues discussed in the Board of Trustees report. They note a shortfall of £300,000 for 2012 but also show that the churches are being more faithful in supporting the church as actual remittances are now much closer to the remittance target. They want to rename two of the funds, the Central Projects Levy will be renamed the Mission Levy and the Additional Contributions shall become the Mission Support Fund. There is also a need to bring expenditures into line and several recommendations are made about spending priorities.

Another interesting development is in the College Board report. To expand the enrollment at the Free Church College the Assembly is being asked to approve moving forward with the planning of actions to facilitate this expansion as well as changing the name of the institution to Edinburgh Theological Seminary.

Finally, the Board of Ministry report contains this item in the proposed deliverance. I will let it speak for itself:

9. The General Assembly, in view of the ongoing uncertainty of the church scene in Scotland at present, waive the requirement of Act XXXV, 2005, that authority to grant admission to ministers of other denominations lies solely with the General Assembly and empowers the Commission of Assembly at its meetings before the General Assembly of 2014, to receive and dispose of any such applications seeking admission to the Free Church ministry duly submitted through Presbyteries and the Board of Ministry.

And so our best wishes to the General Assembly and its members and our prayers for your discernment and guidance of the Holy Spirit in your deliberations.

Church Of Scotland 2013 General Assembly — Special Commission On Same Sex Relationships

2 Replies


General Assembly 2013 of the Church of Scotland convened yesterday and on the first day we got a bit of animated discussion about keeping the pension plan solvent and providing retired church workers an amount that is reasonable for a retirement income. I have heard that somewhere before but I have a bit more research to do if I am going to write on that.

The topic for the moment is the discussion that will begin in just a few hours. Monday at the Assembly is set aside for the consideration of the work of the Theological Commission on Same-sex Relationships and the Ministry. This group was created two years ago when that Assembly chose to move towards allowing those in same-sex relationships to become ministers in the church and to permit those in the church to preform same-sex marriages. One of the interesting, and in my opinion reasonable and good, moves that the Kirk has made is to consider all the issues related to same-sex relationships together and in a theological context.

To follow along with this debate you need to be aware of not just the Commission’s 94 page report, but the Supplement with the Legal Appendix Consequent Upon the Report of the Theological Commission on Same-Sex Relationships and the Ministry that begins on page 52. In addition, the Daily Papers covering tomorrow have notice of three motions (begins on page 28).

As I indicated above, the primary Report is an extensive document at 94 pages long. The Deliverance is sort-of straight forward with #1 to receive the report and #3 to dismiss the commission. In between the commission does not make a recommendation but offers a choice between two options – and I will return to that in a minute.

The report itself is structured around what it means to be “One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church” and develops that theme for the Church of Scotland in general. It then provides extensive discussions of what the report calls the revisionist and the traditionalist case for “Addressing issues of human sexuality.” I have not read through these sections in detail yet but from what I have read both provide very good development and background to each position.

The report is supposed to be neutral and so provides both of these discussions. In addition, even though a trajectory was chosen two years ago the Deliverance provides this Assembly an opportunity to revisit that decision and chose between two sets of recommendations based on approving the revisionist or traditionalist case.

If the revisionist option is approved an overture would be sent down to the presbyteries under the Barrier Act to approve the necessary changes to implement the new rules. In addition, liturgies would be approved for same-sex ceremonies. The ordination process for new ministers and deacons would remain on hold for another year to allow time for presbytery approval. Those ministers in same-sex relationships who are already in place would continue. And the block on discussing this outside of official business – i.e. talking to the media – would remain in place as well.

If the traditionalist option prevails in the Assembly it would reaffirm the present stance of the Kirk including the statements about homophobia being a sin, remind the members of the church of the particular burden of “homosexual Christians striving to maintain celibacy,” and “recognize that homosexual orientation in itself is not a barrier to leadership.” It would also have the Ministries Council and the Legal Questions Committee examine the implications of the decision.

As I mentioned above there are three motions of which notice has been given. The first asks that the Legal Appendix be revised to include the implications of approval and disapproval of the changes and that paper ballots be used by presbyteries in voting on the change. The third would provide another option that has stronger and simplified language of the revisionist option.

[UPDATE: My attention has been drawn to a correction to the article I discuss below. I have decided to let this stand but please see below this for the correction.]

There has been considerable concern that adoption of the revisionist option could precipitate a major departure of congregations from the Church of Scotland. The second motion from The Rev Prof David A S Fergusson is hoping to find a “third way.” Here are some excerpts from a Scotsman article that tries to explain what he hopes to accomplish:

Prof David Fergusson, principal of Edinburgh University’s divinity
school, New College, said that unless the Kirk’s General Assembly agreed
on a compromise it could take the Church a “generation to resolve”
differences between traditionalist and revisionist sides of the debate.

Insisting
that it was important that neither side should “enforce a victory” over
the other, the academic has tabled an amendment for the debate that
attempts to navigate a middle way between the two options put forward in
a Kirk committee report.

[…]

Fergusson said that this “mixed economy” approach would give
the Kirk space in which to discuss the issue further without causing a
major divide: “What I think we’re lacking so far is further reflection
on the nature of the Church as a community in which we can manage
disagreement while maintaining unity with one another, and I’d like to
see further work carried out, which would be crucial to consideration of
these matters.”

UPDATE: The Rev Prof Fergusson has issued a correction to the Scotsman article. He first wanted to make it clear that the “mixed economy” is not his idea but is in the Theological Commission’s report. His amendment simply asks to build on that approach and continue working on the nature of the church. He also points out that his motion does nothing to change the wording in the report that would allow churches but not presbyteries to opt out.

That appears to be the lay of the land. Let us see how the Assembly discerns the way forward in the midst of it. Prayers for the Assembly as the commissioners approach this task very shortly.

2013 General Assembly Of The Church Of Scotland

Leave a reply

  Coming up this Saturday the first large General Assembly of the 2013 season begins as the 2013 General Assembly of the Church of Scotland is convened in the Assembly Hall in Edinburgh.

The Assembly will begin at 10 AM local time on Saturday 18 May and adjourn a bit after 3 PM on Friday 24 May. The afternoon of Pentecost Sunday, 19 May, the Kirk will once again have their large public Heart and Soul festival in Prince Street Gardens (Event Guide). This year it is titled A Celebration of Celtic Christianity.

To follow along with the GA here is what you need to know

  • The Starting Point for almost everything is the General Assembly 2013 page
  • The Order of Proceedings is available as a PDF and the Daily Papers are starting to be posted. You can also find minutes and the text of speeches on that page.
  • Reports are available individually on the General Assembly 2013 page or all together in the Blue Book and Supplement
  • The Assembly will be webcast, as usual, linked to the media page
  • In addition, the media page will have the Daily Updates podcast and Assembly News Items
  • There is an official Facebook page for the Church of Scotland
  • On Twitter the official feed is @churchscotland and the Assembly hashtag is #ga2013 although I am also seeing some use of #ga13
  • Keep an eye on two other Church of Scotland Twitter accounts – the official magazine Life and Work (@cofslifeandwork), the Church of Scotland Youth (@cosy_nya) and maybe CofS World Mission (@cosworldmission)
  • A couple of other folks that I follow who will be there include Peter Nimmo (@peternimmo1) of Old High St. Stephens Inverness and Neal Pressa (@nealpresa) the Moderator of the 220th General Assembly of the PC(USA) who will be that church’s official representative to the Assembly.
  • I will add additional tweeps when the Assembly gets under way

If you want to have the polity documents at the ready you start at the Church Law web page and from there can get the Acts, Regulations, Standing Orders. Unfortunately, their publication An introduction to Practice and Procedure in the Church of Scotland is being revised so no version is available at this time.

This is already a high-profile year for the Assembly and it has not even convened yet. Two years in the making, the report of the Theological Commission on same-sex relationships and the Ministry has been widely anticipated and is docketed as the only business for Monday after the opening worship with communion.
While the Assembly in 2011 chose the trajectory towards, as this year’s report is calling it, the revisionist option, the Commission’s deliverance does include the opportunity for the Assembly to once again chose to reaffirm their earlier vote or consider taking the traditionalist option. For the polity wonks, or those interested in what process is next, the Supplementary Reports contains a section on how the selected trajectory would be implemented. There are three notices of intent to move amendments to the deliverance published in the first set of Daily Papers.

The second item of business which has gotten intense coverage in some quarters is the Church and Society Council’s special report The Inheritance of Abraham? A report on the ‘promised land.’ I wrote about this yesterday — how the first report had stirred up a bit of controversy in Jewish media and the report was pulled for revision after a meeting between representatives of both sides. This morning the revised version has been posted. The Council is docketed to report on Thursday, part way through the day.

On Tuesday, 21 May, there will be a special commemoration of David Livingstone for this the bicentennial year of his birth. Some of his great-grandchildren will be special guests of the Assembly that day.

I will update this info as necessary and comment in other posts as the week progresses. Prayers for the guidance of the Holy Spirit as the General Assembly meets.

Church of Scotland 2013 General Assembly — Church And Society Report On Israel

2 Replies


UPDATE: The revised report is out – a few comments below.

I have been watching with interest the unfolding drama around the Church and Society Council’s business that will be before the 2013 General Assembly of the Church of Scotland next week. More specifically, in the midst of recommendations concerning climate change, education and oversight and franchise related to the Scottish independence vote, what has garnered international attention is a special report on Israel and the “promised land.” (Those are not my scare quotes but the style used for the report title.)

While my close attention may seem reasonable considering the extensive debate now going on about this report, what interests me more is the parallel to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) 220th General Assembly last year. In both cases, the focus for those inside the church seemed to be on business related to human sexuality. But the business related to Israel and Palestine — in the case of the PC(USA) it was divestment from companies who “profit from non-peaceful pursuits” — caught the spotlight outside the church.

Even before the Assembly last summer in the media and social media the divestment proposal was being debated.  At the PC(USA) Assembly itself there were individuals lobbying inside the convention center (but not on the floor of the Assembly or in the committee room). And by the narrowest of margins, 333 to 331, the Assembly chose not to divest. The Assembly did approve a boycott of products made by Israeli companies in facilities in the occupied territories.

For the Church of Scotland the lightning rod was not divestment, or the specific recommendations of the Council per se, but the special report The Inheritance of Abraham? A Report On The ‘Promised Land.’ As you might guess from the question mark and the quotes around use of the term promised land, the report concluded that the modern nation of Israel does not having a scriptural basis for its existence. The response was swift and loud with coverage in the mainstream media (e.g. BBC, Herald Scotland), Jewish media (e.g. Haaretz, Algemeiner ) and internationally (e.g. Jerusalem Post, AP via ABC News, The Daily Beast). It has also caught the attention of bloggers outside the immeadeat circle including His Grace at the Cranmer blog.

There are also voices in the media speaking out in sympathy with the report including a Scotsman article about a prominent minister critical of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

In response to the commotion a meeting was held between Church of Scotland representatives and members of the Jewish Community in Scotland. The report was removed from the web site and a statement about the meeting posted in its place. The report is being revised with a new introduction and it is planned to be ready for the Assembly next week.  In the statement the Church of Scotland reiterates four points:

  • There is no change in the Church of Scotland’s long held position of the right of Israel to exist.
  • The Church condemns all violence and acts of terrorism, where ever they happen in the world.
  • The concern of the Church about the injustices faced by the
    Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territories remain firm,
    but that concern should not be misunderstood as questioning the right of
    the State of Israel to exist.
  • That the Church condemns all things that create a culture of anti Semitism.

To put a fine point on this, the distinction that they seem to be making is not the right of Israel to exist, but the lack of biblical support for the modern state of Israel.

While the report is gone from the official site it is available from another source. It begins with an introduction briefly outlining the recent history of the issue in the Church of Scotland and then lays out the topic of the paper:

There has been a widespread assumption by many Christians as well as many Jewish people that the Bible
supports an essentially Jewish state of Israel. This raises an
increasing number of difficulties and current Israeli policies regarding
the Palestinians have sharpened this questioning.

This assumption of biblical support is based on views of promises about land in the Hebrew Bible. These
views are disputed. The guidance in the Bible, notably the
interpretation in the New Testament, provides more help in responding
to questions about land and covenant. It also provides insight
(discussed later in the report) into how Christians might understand
the occupation of Palestinian land by the state of Israel, threats to
Middle East peace and security, human rights, and racial intolerance,
especially in the forms of anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

It continues…

In general terms there have been three
main ways of understanding the promises about land in the Bible:

  1. A territorial guarantee
  2. A land held in trust
  3. A land with a universal mission.

The report then discusses each of these different understandings and begins the summary by saying:

Promises about the land of Israel were never intended to be taken literally,
or as applying to a defined geographical
territory. They are a way of speaking about how to live under God so
that justice and peace reign,
the weak and poor are protected, the stranger is included, and all
have a share in the community and a
contribution to make to it. The promised
land in
the Bible is not a place, so much as a metaphor of how things
ought to be among the people of God. This ‘promised land’ can be
found — or
built — anywhere.

Jesus’
vision of the kingdom is not for one limited area of territory, it is
a way of anticipating how things can be
if people are obedient to God. Metaphor and symbol are often used by
the Biblical writers. Words such as
‘widow’, ‘stranger’, ‘orphan’, ‘wilderness,’
‘neighbour,’ ‘Egypt,’ ‘exodus’ and ‘exile’ have
symbolic reference…

Now, I have to take pause at that first line where it says the promises were “never intended to be taken literally.” [emphasis mine] I do see the point of the piece in a modern context and do accept that the ultimate goal of being a “light unto the nations” (Isaiah 49:6) is that the Kingdom may encompass all of the earth. But the book of Joshua has a lot about specific physical geography as those in the second generation at the end of the exodus take position of the land that God has given them. A similar argument could be made about the return from the exile. Considering all of the history that revolves around that I personally have a hard time taking that part symbolically as the report suggests. The question really seems to be how the promises of the Old Covenant get transformed in the New Covenant?

The conclusion brings us back to the modern situation:

From this examination of the various views in the Bible about the relation of land to the people of God, it can be concluded that Christians should not be supporting any claims by Jewish or any other people, to an exclusive or even privileged divine right to possess particular territory. It is a misuse of the Bible to use it as a topographic guide to settle contemporary conflicts over land. In the Bible, God’s promises extend in hope to all land and people. Focussed as they are on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, these promises call for a commitment in every place to justice in a spirit of reconciliation.

The report then reminds readers of eight points previously agreed by General Assemblies. These points include the inequality of power in the region, that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal, that the human rights of all peoples should be respected, that negotiations need to resume and that the Church of Scotland must remain in dialogue with ecumenical partners and not do anything to promote illegal settlements.

For those who are familiar with the ecumenical statements regarding this area I would point out that the Kairos Palestine document is frequently quoted in this special report.

So, we wait to see a number of things. First, how the introduction is revised to reflect the discussions that were held last week. Second, how the Assembly receives the report — and keep in mind that it is nothing but a recommended report until and unless the Assembly adopts it as an official position of the Kirk. Finally, we will see what sort of reaction there is from the various groups within and outside the Kirk to whatever action the Assembly takes.

UPDATE 17 May 2013: The Church of Scotland has posted the revised version of the report. In addition to new opening Preface and Context sections notable revisions have been made through out the document to clarify the language. For example, the line I took issue with above, “Promises about the land of Israel were never intended to be taken literally, or as applying to a defined
geographical territory” has been revised to now read “To Christians in the 21st century, promises about the land of Israel shouldn’t be intended to be taken
literally, or as applying to a defined geographical territory.” This is typical of the changed tone of the paper as it has been re-framed as a document intended to reflect and speak to modern Christian thought.

Presbyterian News Headlines For The Week Ending May 11, 2013

Leave a reply


With the Church of Scotland 2013 General Assembly beginning on Saturday I hope to complete a few more posts about the Assembly and its business later this week. For the moment, the big news headline was a meeting last week between representatives of the Church of Scotland and various Jewish groups. From this there was a softening of the stand and a rewrite of the controversial report. Some of the headlines:

The Inheritance of Abraham? A report on the ‘promised land’ – Press release from the Church of Scotland

Church of Scotland Agrees to Amend Controversial Report on Israel – from The Altemeiner

Kirk and Jewish leaders hold talks in bid to mend relations – from The Herald

It also caught my attention that the news had spread beyond Scotland and the UK to some American news sources:

Church of Scotland Report Angers Jewish Community – picked up by ABC News from an AP report

Church of Scotland report angers Jewish community – picked up by the Miami Herald from the same AP story

The Church of Scotland’s Less Than Awesome Report on Israel – from The Daily Beast

And there are still some critics of Israel, like The Very Reverend Gilleasbuig Macmillan, who spoke out this week. (Polity note: Rev. Macmillan holds the position of Dean of the Thistle which is one of three positions in addition to being a former Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland that gets the title “The Very Reverend.”)

Leading Church of Scotland minister slams Israel’s treatment of Palestinians – from the Daily Record

In other news…

Presbytery of Chicago is forced to sell a camp due to financial needs, partly caused by an abuse case settlement.

Abuse case leads to dunes camp sale – from WOOD TV

Don’t Destroy ‘Thin Place’ – letter to the editor of the Commercial Record

Five years after the collapse of the Presbyterian Mutual Society in Ireland six of the directors have settled legal proceedings by agreeing not to act as corporate directors for up to six years (despite what that first headline says):

Collapsed Presbyterian Mutual Society chiefs will not become company directors again – from the Belfast Telegraph

Six Presbyterian Mutual Society directors agree to stand down – from the BBC News

Programming note: Because the Church of Scotland General Assembly will be in full swing next week it may impact my time to put together this headlines post. We will see.

Presbyterian News Headlines For The Week Ending May 4, 2013

Leave a reply

Once again, the business before the Church of Scotland General Assembly makes the headlines but this time the story comes from the Church and Society Council:

Scottish Church denial of Jewish land rights stirs ire – From the Jerusalem Post

This is one of the few stories about this to hit the mainstream media. In the secular media the story has taken off with stories like this:

Church of Scotland Questions Right of Israel to Exist – from The Jewish Press.

Needless to say the blogosphere has taken off as well and I would point you to one of the more noted bloggers, His Grace on the Archbishop Cranmer blog.

If you want to read it for yourself you can read the Church and Society Council report and the study that is causing the commotion: The Inheritance of Abraham? A report on the ‘promised land’

And in the midst of all these issues in the Kirk the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, calls on the church not to divide:

Williams urges Kirk not to split over gay ministers – From The Scotsman

In other news…

Truth Commission hears Canadian abuse stories
– from the Church Times; and a story from the Presbyterian Church in Canada – Moderator John Vissers Addresses the Truth and Reconciliation Commission

PCUSA, Presbyterian Church of Korea Call for ‘Season of Prayer’ for Korean Peninsula – from the Christian Post

First Scots Independent Presbyterian Church officially founded in Beaufort – from the Hilton Head Island Packet

Rev Ted Mwambila dies: Ex-deputy SG [Secretary General] of CCAP Livingstonia Synod – from the Nyasa Times; while the country’s Vice-President used the occasion to speak to the church – Malawi VP Kachali begs Livingstonia CCAP Synod to tone down: Pays tribute to Rev Mwambila

First Moderator Candidate For PC(USA) 221st GA (2014) – RE Heath Rada

Leave a reply


Got to admit, this was a bit of a shocker — no sooner had I posted the line up for the 2013 GA season than I see the Presbyterian Outlook’s announcement of the first candidate standing for Moderator of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) 221st General Assembly in 2014.

I’m not ready for this yet! There is still way too much good stuff this year to be distracted by an Assembly next year.  But Oh Well, here it goes…

Ruling Elder Heath Rada has been endorsed by the Presbytery of Western North Carolina to stand for Moderator of the 221st General Assembly (2014). He is a member of Grace Covenant Presbyterian Church of Asheville which, on one directory site, describes itself as “A progressive Presbyterian congregation in
Asheville, NC, inclusive, welcoming, focused on Jesus Christ and
reaching out in service to our community.”

On his About page there is a long list of his professional and volunteer activities. For the Presbyterian crowd maybe his most prominent position is as President of the Presbyterian School for Christian Education (PSCE) from 1980 to 1992. (I am supplementing the press release information with dates and details from his LinkedIn profile and posted CV.) The school merged with its neighbor, Union Seminary, in 1997 and was later renamed Union Presbyterian Seminary. In addition he has served on the presbytery and national level including being a current board member of the Presbyterian Mission Agency and the Montreat Conference Center.

Professionally, besides the time at PSCE he was the CEO of the American Red Cross Greater Richmond Chapter and currently is the Major Gifts Campaign Director for Montreat.

His education includes an M.A. in Christian Ed from PSCE and a Ed.D. in Adult and Community College Education from N.C. State. He did post-doctoral work at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Leadership Studies.

The press release gives mostly biographical information and not much about sense of call and in the short YouTube video he explains how after being asked and praying about it he agreed to serve. His Vision page on his web site has a bit more. Here is a substantial part of that explanation:

At this time in our denomination’s history, I feel called to try to
continue my life-long commitment to help assist its efforts for service
and showing the love of Christ to all of God’s children. We should build
on our long tradition of caring for others with the help of the Holy
Spirit. Within our church family we have different interpretations and
understandings of God’s word, and of the ways we are to follow. Learning
from each other even when we disagree can be a gift from God.

My vision is that we incorporate Christ’s encompassing love for all
of our sisters and brothers, be open to and learn from one another, and
enable our denomination to be a beacon of peace and love in a world torn
apart by hatred and anger.

He has most of the usual social media in place: The web page and blog at his personal domain heathrada.org, and the YouTube video. Have not found a Twitter presence yet and no public Facebook page.

And so, as we begin this ramp-up to the 221st General Assembly we wish him the best and pray for him, his family and the commissioners of the next GA.

And on a lighter note – how often do you see it that all the candidates for Moderator are ruling elders. But that will change for sure.

And now a few polity wonk thoughts…

As you may suspect this is the earliest announced candidacy for a GA moderator, 14 months before the Assembly and four months before the first nominee usually starts popping up.  Is this a sign of creep in the schedule? Do Dr. Rada and his advisors think there is value to being ahead by so much? Are we now waging political style campaigns where the next one begins the day after the previous one ends?  I am not sure but will be watching if this early announcement makes a difference to the Moderator nomination process as a whole. (And how many of us are wondering it we should seek endorsement soon if we are being encouraged to stand for Moderator at a far off GA? )

At this point there has been no announcement from the Office of the General Assembly about Dr. Rada’s nomination. (UPDATE: Shortly after I posted this the PC(USA) issued their article.) In fact, the GA 221 page (expected to be at http://oga.pcusa.org/section/ga/ga221/ ) does not exist yet. We will see here as well how soon they want to begin the ramp-up to the 221st General Assembly. With three constitutional amendments still undecided we are not really done with the 220th yet, are we?

Don’t know what to expect, but this could get interesting. Stay tuned…

General Assembly Season 2013

2 Replies


Ah, the First of May — the start of General Assembly Season 2013! 

Coffee? Check.
Alarm clocks set? Check.
Internet streaming? Check.

It looks like we are all ready to go so here is this year’s line-up:

  General Assembly
Presbyterian Church of Tasmania
  14 May 2013 (begins)

  General Assembly
Church of Scotland

18-24 May 2013
Edinburgh

  General Assembly
Free Church of Scotland Continuing
20-24 May, 2013
Edinburgh

  General Assembly
Free Church of Scotland
20-24 May 2013
Edinburgh

  General Assembly
Presbyterian Church of South Australia
  27 May 2013 (begins)
North Adelaide, S.A.

General Assembly
United Free Church of Scotland
 
29-31 May 2013
Perth

  139th General Assembly

Presbyterian Church in Canada
31 May – 3 June 2013
Toronto, Ontario

  General Assembly
Presbyterian Church in Ireland
 
3-7 June 2013
Londonderry

80th General Assembly

Orthodox Presbyterian Church
5-11 June 2013
St. Mary’s College
Moraga, California

Synod
Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland
10-12 June 2013
Dromore

209th Stated Meeting of the General Synod

Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church

11-13 June 2013
Bonclarken
Flat Rock, North Carolina

183rd General Assembly
Cumberland Presbyterian Church
17-21 June 2013
Murfreesboro, Tennessee

41st General Assembly

Presbyterian Church in America
17-21 June 2013
Greenville, South Carolina

33rd General Assembly

Evangelical Presbyterian Church
18-22 June 2013
Highlands Ranch, Colorado

  General Assembly
Presbyterian Church of Queensland

  24 June 2013 (begins)
Clayfield (Brisbane), QLD

  N.S.W. State Assembly
Presbyterian Church of Australia
in the State of New South Wales

 
1 July 2013 (begins)
Croydon, N.S.W.

  77th General Synod
Bible Presbyterian Church
1-6 August 2013
Grand Island, NY

  National Youth Assembly
Church of Scotland

16-19 August 2013
Dundee
(Technically not a governing
body, but still an Assembly I track)

  General Assembly
Presbyterian Church of Australia

9 September 2013 (begins)
Surry Hills (Sydney)
(note: this is a triennial Assembly)

  General Assembly
Presbyterian Church of Victoria
  October 2013

  General Assembly
Presbyterian Church in Western Australia
  25 October 2013
Bassendean, W.A.

A few branches have biennial assemblies so those with their next assembly in 2014 include the Cumberland Presbyterian Church in America, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), and the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand.

These are the ones that I am tracking at the moment.  I will update as
appropriate.  If I have missed one, or have information wrong or incomplete, please provide the appropriate information and I will update the list.

And, to make the GA season complete here are two more items…

The first is the series of articles I wrote as an introduction to Presbyterian General Assemblies five years ago.  My GA 101 series consists of the following

GA101: Preface
GA101: Introduction – Why in the world would anybody want to do it this way?
GA101: Connectionalism – The Presbyterian Big Picture
GA101: The Cast of Characters – A score card to identify the players
GA101: The Moderator – All Things In Moderation
GA101: Where does the GA business come from? – Incoming!
GA101: Doing the business of GA — Decently and in Order

Yes, what started as a six part series expanded into seven
completed articles with two more unfinished ones in the queue.  (Maybe
this will give me some motivation to finish those up.)

And finally, on to the ridiculous.  Lest we take ourselves too seriously, a couple years ago I had a little fun with the General Assembly and in the post passed along the GA drinking game and GA Bingo. Please play both responsibly.

So, for all the GA Junkies out there I wish you the best of GA
seasons.  May you enjoy the next few months of watching us do things
decently and in order!

A Look At The PC(USA) Church Dismissals In Alaska

2 Replies


A little under a year ago I did an analysis of some church dismissals from Tropical Florida and Mississippi Presbyteries of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). In each presbytery multiple churches were dismissed permitting a statistical comparison of the sizes of those churches with the churches across the presbytery and the analysis found that the churches requesting dismissal were typically larger than the churches in the presbytery as a whole.

Now a similar situation has presented itself in the Presbytery of Alaska that allows me to once again go into statistical analysis mode.
 
The Presbytery web site contains this short news statement:

The Presbytery of Alaska met in Haines on April 5-7, 2013, and having concluded the processes set out in
“A GRACIOUS, PASTORAL RESONSE [sic] TO CHURCHES OF THE PRESBYTERY OF ALASKA REQUESTING DISAFFILIATION”
dismissed to the Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterian [sic] these churches: Kake, Angoon, Hoonah, Chapel by the Lake, Haines, and Skagway.

The Presbytery web site has been updated to list just the remaining nine churches.

At the one meeting this presbytery lost 2/5 of its 15 congregations. The question is whether this presbytery follows the previous pattern of church size distributions.

Here are the 15 churches’ membership numbers from their 2011 statistical reports.

Church  Location 2011 Membership
Remaining churches    
 First PC  Petersburg  39
 First PC  Sitka  73
 First PC  Wrangell  44
 First of Craig and Klawock  Craig  46
 Hydaburg PC  Hydaburg  28
 Ketchikan PC  Ketchikan  42
 Metlakatla PC  Metlakatla  40
 Northern Lights UPC  Juneau  99
 Yakutat PC  Yakutat  10
     
 Dismissed churches    
 Chapel by the Lake  Juneau  491
 First PC  Skagway  30
 Frances Johnson Memorial PC  Angoon  21
 Haines PC  Haines  63
 Hoonah PC  Hoonah  13
 Kake Memorial PC  Kake  14

Before the dismissals the Presbytery’s 15 congregations had 1053 members combined. Of that 421 members (40.0%) remain in the nine churches and 632 (60.0%) left in the six churches that were dismissed. The median size of the churches in the Presbytery before dismissal was 40 and after it is 42. The median size of the dismissed churches is 25.5.

So, the answer is that taken as a group the churches that requested dismissal to the Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians are generally smaller than the churches remaining in the Presbytery. In other words the pattern we saw in Mississippi and Tropical Florida is not seen here in Alaska, but rather we find the reverse.

There is one pattern here that we have seen elsewhere – the departure of the largest church. While this did not happen in Tropical Florida – there the largest church requesting dismissal was the second largest church in the Presbytery – we did see in Mississippi that the two largest churches departed. We are seeing in other presbyteries the largest church requesting dismissal but my more comprehensive analysis of that is still in the works. In Alaska, the largest church in the Presbytery was dismissed and it has a membership almost five times larger than the second largest church. In fact the membership of Chapel by the Lake represented 46.6% of the Presbytery’s church membership before dismissals and 77.7% of the membership that was dismissed. (And because this one data point has such a large value is the reason I have so far not mentioned the statical mean of the data.)

Looking a bit further at the data we see that the second and third smallest churches were also dismissed, contributing to the median size of the dismissed churches being below those that remain.

Just out of curiosity, if we drop the large outlier from the data set we find that there are 562 members in all the other churches with 40.1 members as the mean size of a church and 39.5 the median. For the five smaller churches that were dismissed there are 141 members (25.1%) and the remaining churches have 421 members (74.9%). These five departing churches have a mean size of 28.2 and a median of 21. The remaining churches have an average size of 46.8 and a median of 42.

All this to say that in this case, while the largest church in the Presbytery of Alaska was among those being dismissed, overall the churches that requested dismissal to ECO were generally smaller churches in the Presbytery.

I have not done the necessary research on these churches to have formulated a good theory as to why this reverse pattern is present in this presbytery. Part of the reason that this area may have significantly different dynamics is because of the isolation of each of these communities and therefore church choices are very limited. This is in contrast to areas with larger populations and better transportation networks where perspective members can church shop for a congregation that meets their long list of interests and preferences. Only in Juneau were there two Presbyterian churches in the same city. For the others, even if two churches were on the same island, travel between was by sea or air — no driving between the communities. There is generally no choosing between two Presbyterian churches with different styles or theological perspective.

For the polity geeks I will mention that with the Presbytery of Alaska dropping to nine congregations, they are now below the minimum of ten required for a presbytery. The Layman reports that while the Presbytery continues to be administered as it has been the Synod of Alaska-Northwest has assumed jurisdiction.

So, an interesting data set but one that may not be representative of other parts of the country. As other data sets get larger we will see what they look like.