A potpourri of opinions from your Synod Executive.
Some things deserve a word of appreciation.
Presbytery of Philadelphia Executive Presbyter Ruth Santana-Grace speaks on behalf of Puerto Rico as the site for the 2028 General Assembly while surrounded by other former GA moderators. (Photo by Brenton Thompson)
Mission Co-Workers: Thank you for your faithful service to the Church in your time abroad. May some of you find your work continuing through new funding models. May others bring outside wisdom to the Church here — wisdom we dearly need. May all of you continue offering your gifts to the service of the Church, and when applicable may we continue “provid[ing] for [your] welfare” (W-4.0404i(c)).
Agency Leaders: I appreciate the difficult decisions you have made. I have every reason to believe your choices were in good faith. The ministry of the Church must find new structures for a new day. May the upcoming investigation strengthen your leadership.
Some things are just out of order.
Consider amending the Book of Confessions. An amendment to the Book of Confessions must follow the specific process defined in G-6.03. This year’s attempt (RUS-10) left out essential elements of that process.[1] The Assembly could not constitutionally forward the draft confession to the presbyteries. But it could form a new study committee that met the requirements.
Other things are just out of order. An amendment to the Book of Order, for instance, is not the same as an authoritative interpretation. You cannot authoritatively interpret the Book of Order by amending it. Even though CON-10 tried.
Some things are best buried.
And while we’re talking about CON-10: Not every request for a position deserves a position statement. Sometimes questions are best left unanswered. Like this one:
(Note: The whole video is great. But jump forward to just before the four-minute mark, and watch through 6:30, for the example.)
(Also note: Kermit protests that it’s a “personal question.” But his face says otherwise. I think Kermit objects because any answer will yield a bad outcome. You who are versed in Muppet-lore will understand.)
Sometimes assigning a question to a study committee is an excellent way to bury it, at least for a few years. And even when the study committee is done, remember: The PC(USA) already has a position on monogamy. See W-4.0601.
Some things can be solved without a constitutional amendment.
ORD-07 forwarded several valuable changes to ordination. The new process toward becoming a Minister of Word and Sacrament, if approved by the presbyteries, will allow for flexibility while yielding better prepared candidates. CREs will have voice and vote in presbytery during their term of commission. The historic parity of offices will be reaffirmed. All to the good.
But one provision did not move forward. Presbyteries will still not ordain a congregant to the role of ruling elder. The strongest argument in favor of such a change is, interestingly, also the most unnecessary one.
Proponents would argue that leaders of immigrant fellowships ought to have voice and vote on the presbytery floor. Preventing them from serving as ruling elders effectively disenfranchises them.
I agree with the stated concern. The disenfranchisement smells of structural bias. But there’s a simpler solution, and it’s already within presbyteries’ reach.
Just charter the fellowships. Make them into established congregations. Let them ordain ruling elders. Let them elect some to presbytery service. Commission others into pastoral leadership.
After all, most presbyteries already have chartered congregations with fewer worshipers and smaller budgets than many immigrant fellowships. If a dusty old policy-and-procedure stands in the way, why not update it?
Conclusion
Wherefore the potpourri? Because such thoughts help me keep GA in perspective. After all, everyone comes away from GA disappointed, because (a) something happened they didn’t like and (b) negative experiences are sticky. Before we get all twisted up about the PC(USA)’s latest tomfoolery, let’s consider what the Assembly actually did and didn’t do — and why.
If my thoughts bring some perspective for you as well, then I’ve done my job.
Somewhere along the Way —
Forrest
______________________________________________________
[1] See the advice on RUS-10 from the Advisory Committee on the Constitution.