My recent post "The Co-Pastor Trend" prompted quite a few comments and some good discussion about the pros and cons of calling a co-pastor who becomes senior pastor upon the retirement of a (usually) long-time senior pastor in the PCUSA.
I just realized that the Form of Government (FOG) recommendations to General Assembly address some of the concerns that gave rise to the co-pastor model for pastoral transition. Just as in the poem, this FOG is stealthily coming upon us like little cat feet, and there are many who will be surprised by what is in it.
For example:
Upon a 3/4 vote of the presbytery, an associate pastor may become the next installed pastor of that congregation (G-2.0303a);
An interim pastor may called to an installed position (G-2.0303b)
There's a whole lot more in the FOG recommendations, but given the recent discussion here, I'm highlighting these two which, if approved, would represent a major change in the denomination's historic policy that prevented associate pastors from being installed as senior pastor in the same church and interim pastors from being called to a permanent installed position in the church they are temporarily serving.
There would be little need to call a transitional co-pastor if the church could hire an interim pastor and then call the interim to the installed position. Permitting the approval of "promoting" an associate pastor as the senior pastor raises a lot of issues--never mind making that approval contingent on a super-majority vote of presbytery.
Presbytery of New Covenant has a task force studying the FOG and preparing an interpretive report for our commissioners and sessions. When the final report is made it will be posted on the presbytery website and I will post a link to that for those of you who are interested. Meanwhile, here is a link to the FOG report itself, which is posted on the PCUSA website. Remember that the FOG Task Force was instructed not to make any changes to the "trust" provisions in the property sections of the BOO or to the "chastity and fidelity" requirement of section. 6.0106b.
UPDATE: A bit more sleuthing around the FOG report revealed that there is now an additional recommendation at the end stating that the GA may wish to ask presbyteries to remove provision allowing an associate pastor to become the installed pastor with a 3/4 vote of presbytery. Apparently there has already been an outcry over this. I don't understand why the task force didn't just amend their report to cover that if they reconsidered the change. Maybe some of you can enlighten me. But it's just another reason why I think we won't be ready to adopt this sweeping change on the accelerated schedule that was set for the FOG Task Force.
There would be little need to call a transitional co-pastor if the church could hire an interim pastor and then call the interim to the installed position. Permitting the approval of "promoting" an associate pastor as the senior pastor raises a lot of issues--never mind making that approval contingent on a super-majority vote of presbytery.
Presbytery of New Covenant has a task force studying the FOG and preparing an interpretive report for our commissioners and sessions. When the final report is made it will be posted on the presbytery website and I will post a link to that for those of you who are interested. Meanwhile, here is a link to the FOG report itself, which is posted on the PCUSA website. Remember that the FOG Task Force was instructed not to make any changes to the "trust" provisions in the property sections of the BOO or to the "chastity and fidelity" requirement of section. 6.0106b.
UPDATE: A bit more sleuthing around the FOG report revealed that there is now an additional recommendation at the end stating that the GA may wish to ask presbyteries to remove provision allowing an associate pastor to become the installed pastor with a 3/4 vote of presbytery. Apparently there has already been an outcry over this. I don't understand why the task force didn't just amend their report to cover that if they reconsidered the change. Maybe some of you can enlighten me. But it's just another reason why I think we won't be ready to adopt this sweeping change on the accelerated schedule that was set for the FOG Task Force.
6 comments:
Thanks for the link QG. I want to read that later when I have more time.
Your post seems prescient now. Interesting times for sure.
In a way, all pastors are Interims. Yet, I'm not in favor of allowing the Interim to be installed. There is a purpose behind interim ministry, and it will be severely reduced if there is the potential that the interim will stick around.
I am in favor of allowing an Associate Pastor to be called - with the approval of Presbytery.
I am highly suspicious of any sort of the sweeping changes being proposed. Our Synod Exec is fond of saying that rather than saying "The BOO says so" we should be saying, "it is the received wisdom of the entire church over a long period of time that this is the best way we have found to do these things."
I see a lot of wisdom in the rules regarding interims and AP's (no offense to any AP's or interims out there), wisdom that has its roots deep in our reformed undestanding of human depravity. Given our tendency to want what we don't have, I can easily picture an AP or an unscrupulous interim (and they do exist, unfortunately)gunning for the head pastor job, with resulting turmoil in the church.
Anytime there's a rule prohibiting something, you can bet that means that someone tried it, with not so good results.
There have been multiple attempts (looking at the annotated BOO online) to change this provision, and all have been rejected by the presbyteries. I would be nervous about ditching this received wisdom for something that would most liekly lead to more work for those of us on COM.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the call of an associate pastor continue when the senior pastor leaves? Of course, having said that, it seems that many associates leave around the same time, and this is generally a good thing. The PNC would probably appreciate not having to work around an associate that wants to stay...
Since there is a mechanism for calling a co-pastor, I'd say use it. Many congregations see this as a way to provide continuity and a smooth transition in ministry.
In my view, co-pastors are the best solution to the problem of continuity. I agree with Rev Dave that the existence (and persistence) of the rule about associates succeeding a senior pastor is a strong indicator that it can cause problems. On the other hand, the fact that the topic keeps coming up suggests that there is a need that needs to be addressed.
Allowing interims to become the called pastor makes me much more nervous than allowing associates to have their call changed when the senior pastor moves on.
FWIW ... there is not going to be enough time to review the changes in FOG and to determine what the changes mean to the church as a whole before the GA meeting.
There has been some requests that the FOG be brought for review and comment at this GA, then voted upon at the next GA in 2010.
Considering what has occurred over the past month due to a report that was pushed at the last GA, I hope that a period of 'reflection and comment' (I hate the word discernment) will be given, rather than a 'take it now or leave it now' decision at this GA.
I finished the book meme! That was hard!
Post a Comment