Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Historic Day at G.A.

Wednesday night, the General Assembly voted by a 69%-30% margin to pass on for presbytery approval a major overhaul of the PCUSA Form of Government -- the "nFOG," or new Form of Government proposal.  The margin of the vote was a surprise to veteran observers, since major issues usually pass on a more narrow basis.  The reason for the overwhelming majority can be attributed to a number of factors:  a committee that was solidly behind the proposal 37-5 after some 30 amendments made it more palatable to moderates; an opposition that not only seemed confused, but overplayed their hand by making claims that were clearly unfounded and even characterized as "paranoid"; and a poorly presented substitute motion on the floor that forced the assembly to perfect the main motion prematurely before an up-or-down vote.  In the end, the assembly adopted all 30 amendments in a voice vote, rather than allow any difficulties in the document to be displayed before the assembly.

The nFOG assembly committee did not do the church any service by allowing some of the amendments into the final document, which will be voted on an up-or-down basis in the presbyteries.  Among the most serious flaws in the amended document are provisions that would allow interim or associate pastors to become the next called pastor of a congregation, and the removal of language explicitly permitting a presbytery to remove a pastor "if the ministry of the Word imperatively demands it."  The latter is language that has a long history in the denomination and is central to the presbytery's authority to exercise oversight of the ministry of the Word and sacrament in its churches.  The way the proposed language reads, one could interpret that a congregation must consent for the presbytery to remove a pastor.  That would be an unprecedented move toward congregational polity.

The debate, which was incredibly civil, nevertheless almost generated the Assembly's first "crying YAD" (okay, they are now "YAADs" -- young adult advisory delegates) .  Readers of last assembly's blog know that "the Assembly ain't over until the YAD cries."  Word has it that there were sufficient instances of YADs in committees to ensure a crying YAD during Assembly debate sometime this week.

Earlier today, the Assembly approved two important motions regarding our Book of Confessions.  By an overwhelming vote, the Assembly approved joining a process already underway by the Reformed Church in America and the Christian Reformed Church to retranslate the Heidelberg Catechism.  By nearly as large a margin (77% - 22%) they voted to approve sending the Belhar Confession to the presbyteries for their votes to include it in our Book of Confessions.  A 3/4 affirmative vote of the presbyteries is required for inclusion, plus an affirmative vote of the next assembly.

Yesterday's blog post was delayed by computer issues -- I received word from tech support at GA that my computer was officially "dead".  I am still in denial about the situation and hope to experience a resurrection when I return to Greeley.  As it is, I am still blogging on "borrowed ROM".  The Assembly Committee on Middle Governing Bodies (which I have been advising) completed its business yesterday afternoon.  The committee seemed to follow closely to the ACC advice.  Of particular concern was the report of the Special Administrative Review Committee on the Synod of Puerto Rico, which has been experiencing "institutional meltdown."  The committee report was riddled with constitutional flaws, which were worked out with a subcommittee of the assembly committee in a late night session Monday.  Expect the commissioners from the Synod to launch to raise a floor fight against the committee recommendation, which is to form an administrative commission to work with the Synod, and at least in a limited way, take original jurisdiction, if necessary.  The committee also approved forming a GA Administrative Commission to address other middle governing body issues in the denomination.  If both actions are approved, only only one commission will be formed to address both issues.  Controversial overtures to form non-geographic theological affinity synods and presbyteries were resoundingly disapproved by the committee.

As indicated in Saturday night's blog, this is giving every indication of being a far more progressive assembly than expected.  After the 2008 assembly, which passed many liberal agenda items, one would have expected this to be a "backlash" assembly (like 1998 after 1997).  Indeed, one left-wing activist admitted that they would have been happy just to hold on to the gains made last assembly.  However, this gives every appearance of being an even more liberal/progressive assembly than 2008.  "Party-line" votes are breaking nearly 70-30 progressive, versus the 54-46 votes two years ago.  If this holds true, I will have some comments on why this might have happened in a future post.

Tomorrow (Thursday) there is a full slate of business, including Middle Governing Bodies in the morning, Church orders (ordination standards) in the afternoon; and gay marriage in the evening.  Hold on tight, the road ahead is going to get rough!

2 comments:

  1. Dan, this is a good summary of a big day.

    I need to correct your statement that "one could interpret that a congregation must consent for the presbytery to remove a pastor." Please note that G-2.0904 in the approved Revised Form of Government still says: "The presbytery may inquire into reported difficulties in a congregation and may dissolve the pastoral relationship if, after consultation with the minister, the session, and the congregation, it finds the church’s mission under the Word imperatively demands it."

    What was eliminated was an exception from the requirement for holding a congregational meeting in G-2.0901. The committee and the Assembly were advised about circumstances in which such a congregational meeting could further traumatize a congregation, but they determined that the congregational meeting nevertheless should be required. The outcome of such a congregational meeting does not limit the presbytery's authority to solve a problem by dissolving a pastoral relationship "when the church's mission under the Word imperatively demands it."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ah, here are your comments on the NFoG and such. I should read further before responding.

    Quite a surprise to me how this assembly turned out.

    ReplyDelete