There's a lot of PresbyNews out there suddenly, as the Christmas season is behind us and the 2008 General Assembly is ahead of us in June.
So far we see:
1. The Form of Government Report which recommends an almost total revision of the Book of Order. The exceptions are the Church Property Sections and the "fidelity/chastity" ordination requirement which the Task Force was specifically directed NOT to address.
2. The New Wineskins model Overture (scroll down to exhibit D-1 at the end of the documents) to change the aforementioned Property Section, which will doubtless be presented to a number of presbyteries within a few weeks for approval.
3. The Lisa Larges ordination case in San Francisco Presbytery, in which she declared a scruple against the fidelity/chastity requirement and the scruple was accepted by that presbytery in a narrow vote. Appeal pending to the Synod PJC and doubtless will go on to the GAPJC.
4. The lawsuit brought against Sacramento Presbytery for approving the withdrawal of two churches to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church with their property.
So far we see:
1. The Form of Government Report which recommends an almost total revision of the Book of Order. The exceptions are the Church Property Sections and the "fidelity/chastity" ordination requirement which the Task Force was specifically directed NOT to address.
2. The New Wineskins model Overture (scroll down to exhibit D-1 at the end of the documents) to change the aforementioned Property Section, which will doubtless be presented to a number of presbyteries within a few weeks for approval.
3. The Lisa Larges ordination case in San Francisco Presbytery, in which she declared a scruple against the fidelity/chastity requirement and the scruple was accepted by that presbytery in a narrow vote. Appeal pending to the Synod PJC and doubtless will go on to the GAPJC.
4. The lawsuit brought against Sacramento Presbytery for approving the withdrawal of two churches to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church with their property.
No doubt more news will be coming as we move closer to the date of the GA. Recently it was suggested to me that in a generation or two there may be such a complete realignment of Presbyterian churches that, for example, the Sacramento Presbytery may find itself associated with the EPC along with the two churches that withdrew or that all of them may find themselves members of another not-yet-formed denomination.
What do you think, fellow PresbyBloggers? What if that happened? Is that possibility in the longer term? And if so, what implications might that have for us as we address these issues?
10 comments:
Quite honestly I don't think a Presbytery withdrawing would happen. Unlike the Episcopal we're not under the authority of a bishop to whom we could pledge allegiance.
If however the property clause would go away. I think you'd see an amazing and far-reaching realignment within a year or two. Without that over their heads, I believe, a lot more tall steeple congregations would become independent and align with the EPC etc.
Alan
If memory serves, there's been a presbytery considering leaving as a group--I think it's San Diego. There would be some difficult questions raised if they actually tried to do that.
But it might be a different scenario where the PCUSA morphs into a different denomination and is then joined by some churches that previously withdrew.
You're right about the property clause. That's why the Wineskins model overture is out there, and if by some chance it is adopted, then there will be a big upheaval.
If I may be picky, what was brought against Sacramento Presbytery was not a lawsuit but a complaint. We can't sue each other yet within Presbyterian polity, thanks be to God! It's bad enough that we're doing it in the secular courts.
I suspect the split will occur the way it has already happened; a minority of discontented congregations will break away over a particular presenting issue, a la OPC, PCA, EPC.
I'm not entirely persuaded that the property clause is what is keeping more congregations from disaffiliating. Institutional inertia, indifference, a desire not to seek confrontation and even allegiance to the denomination, whatever its foibles, also play important roles here.
As a Presbyterian I am saddened by:
~the regular loss of general membership over the years
~the schismatic arguments where each side digs their heels in rather than trying to find a meeting ground.
~the rancor created on the various sides of the issues.
~the good people hurt in all of this.
I have no solutions myself. But I can see how Christianity is not helped when non-Christians see these things. Perhaps if everyone were to just stop for a minute and try to find where the common ground lies and then gently work from there, one issue at a time? I don't know.
I do know that if you are there, QG, I will hold out some hope.
Christine, you're correct, it's a complaint in ecclesiastical court not a lawsuit in secular court.
I think the property clause, and (quoting Christine) "Institutional inertia, indifference, a desire not to seek confrontation and even allegiance to the denomination, whatever its foibles, also play important roles here"
And I think a "decent and in order" realignment/reformation is overdue. If a "connectional" church is to be effective I believe it will be churches connecting in shared minstry of justice, mercy, reconciliation ... you know .. being the Body of Christ, reflecting his light in the darkness.
I think there is a realignment occurring within the broader church - the PC(USA) is a kind of microcosm of this. I don't think this can be avoided - and I'm pretty sure the property issue won't stop it. Though the property dispute promises to be a hotbed of controversy in the near future ... and that was partially the intent of making express trust clauses.
Again, personal opinion, but I think the moral issue now is HOW we go about this. I admit, I was rather strongly disappointed by the case in Sacramento - because that looked like it had broad agreement. I'm not saying it was a fair or right arrangement; I'm sure there are many factors involved. But it looked like an occasion where people were able to accept their differences and move forward in a way agreeable to all.
The issue here is that everyone gets to fighting about property or other really rather minor matters - and this diverts everyone on all sides of the issues that are our actual points of division, from continuing with their own missions.
I suspect that many would not feel so disenfranchised within the denomination were it not for the property issue or the sometimes heavy-handed tactics being advised. Again, solely my opinion - but I don't think as many people would be so anxious to leave if they weren't made to feel themselves in such a hostile situation.
Ultimately, there is an opportunity here that many of us are in danger of missing. We hear a lot about reaching agreements - but it is just as important how we model behaving in profound disagreement. Whether people stay or leave, whether these are on one 'side' or another - we are (in the mainlines in particular - but in the American church generally) in a state of profound disagreement. If we do it right, how we act while in that state - whether realignment occurs or whether some compromise position can be reached (which would greatly surprise me) - reflects on our witness as Christians.
All of us claim to be Christians - maybe it's time to prove it by how we act. In all honesty, there is plenty of blame to go around on this point - there are clearly already plenty of examples of pettiness, rudeness, vitriol, rancor, deceit, etc. - that are quite apparent for the non-Christian public to see. If we're not very careful, we'll all come off looking completely petty and ridiculous - and because we claim to represent Jesus Christ - we will be distorting other people's perceptions of Christ and Christianity.
It is self-evident that we can't undo the errors we've already made, but going forward, wouldn't it be better if how our actions reflect on Jesus Christ became a real priority for us?
The issue isn't land flowing with milk and honey. No, the issue is being the body of Christ.
Let 'em go with the property if they pitch in 20% of the value of the property - assuming the property is at least 20 years old.
One thing to watch for is congregations getting help to build new facilities, with help through the denomination, then pull out. So, I'd make it harder and more costly to pull out for those who have recently been upgraded, etc.
I really don't understand the pulling out - we're not considering anything of the sort.
One commenter mentioned that the PCUSA is facing some of the same things as other denominations, that this is much larger - and I agree. I'm wondering if we won't see more independents, but also more Federated churches as a result (especially in rural areas).
In Kansas, half the PCUSA congregations had 45 or less in worship in 2006. There's a Presbytery in Missouri where half the congregations had 30 or less in worship. What are we doing about the property issues for congregations which can no longer afford their 70 year old inefficient, far from wheelchair accessible, building?
Okay, maybe some people would rather dismiss the small congregations too. Yet, there is untapped potential in these congregations.
Wednesday our congregation is hosting a gathering for congregations in a 40,000 square mile area. We'll not be considering how to leave the PCUSA, but how to tap into the resources of the smaller congregations.
I think it's possible that the small congregations will find a way to understand our current situation and point the way into the future of the Church.
Congregations of 20 - 120 are finding that people are beginning to join and participate. But only if the congregation isn't contentious, or anxious about who they are.
Our little congregation was worried about survival a few years back. But a focus on caring for the children of young families has made a big difference.
The congregation here occasionally had 2 children from one family present, and was beginning to think they were impotent. Now there are 10-12 kids. The congregation has been adding 7% to the membership in each of the past 3 years. Each of the past two Sunday's another young couple with children has indicated interest in joining the congregation.
Add in a single mom, a grandmother with custody, a retired couple who moved here, and a single fellow who has never been baptized, and it looks like we'll add 8% to the membership by Easter.
Prayer, loving the people around us by caring for them (and their children) - these seem to make a big difference. It probably doesn't hurt to have a second-career pastor fresh from seminary to bring in some new ideas in regard to living into the mission of God.
I believe there's great potential in the small congregations - even in a place where the county is declining in population.
Will,
Thanks for your comments. How we go about this will be our public witness.
Denniss,
It's very heartening to hear your good news from Kansas about revitalization in your congregation. Indeed most PCUSA congregations everywhere are small and many like yours are in areas with declining populations.Your message is important for them.
Our presbytery is among the few with several very large congregations and more new church developments than any other. Our area is rapidly growing in population, too.
You also put your finger on an important issue when you make a distinction between churches that recently upgraded or built properties with denominational assistance in some form and older properties.
Post a Comment