 Committee votes to address defiance with 'pastoral letter' The Layman Online Wednesday, May 28, 2003
The committee's 45-11 vote, in response to an overture (03-8) from the Presbytery of Redstone asking the assembly to remind synods of their responsibility to oversee presbyteries and to urge them to adopt guidelines for appointing committees to respond to congregational defiance, came after it had rejected such proposals as directing the Office of the General Assembly to develop procedural models to address such situations and encouraging synods to create procedures for reviews of presbyteries. The proposed letter also urges synods and presbyteries to "establish procedures to review the work under their charge" and to "intervene in a pastoral spirit that reflects the trust and love on which the community is based." In their arguments against the petition for a special meeting of the 214th General Assembly to deal with constitutional defiance, both Moderator Fahed Abu-Akel and Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick said the issue would be before the 215th General Assembly in the Redstone overture. Before the assembly convened, however, the Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly – two groups that advised Abu-Akel and Kirkpatrick and also opposed the special meeting - recommended that nothing needs to change. When he announced his decision not to call the special meeting – despite the fact that the petition bore the required number of signatures – Abu-Akel said the Redstone overture "assures that the matters in the petition will be before the commissioners to that [the 215th] assembly." Unlike the petition for the special meeting of the 214th General Assembly, the Redstone overture did not ask the commissioners to become involved in the ongoing disciplinary cases. It made some suggestions, notably to "remind all synods of their responsibility for oversight of their presbyteries," but does not propose that the General Assembly intervene in the process of defending and preserving the denomination's constitution. In their responses, both the Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Committee of the Office of the General Assembly treated the overture as one that will maintain the status quo. "The overture proposes no constitutional change and asks [for] no interpretation of existing constitutional text," says the ACC response. That response notes that Redstone's proposal calls on the General Assembly to "issue [unspecified] guidance and support to synods." But that's already being done, the ACC says: "We note that the Office of the General Assembly continues to produce such resources. A set of recommended forms and processes may standardize the ways in which governing bodies respond to alleged irregularities. However, no process within community will guarantee a result satisfactory to all." The committee debated the issue of how specific their recommendation should be, stressing that they wanted to be direct but not dictatorial. In the end, the majority seemed to want nothing that would instruct, equip or further encourage any governing body to require or direct lowering governing bodies to comply with the constitution. A pastoral letter, they said, would be less heavy-handed and would preserve the right to dissent while targeting public defiance. The Rev. Sharon Taylor, of Greater Atlanta Presbytery, said the committee is "trying to make a pastoral response to a very divisive issue, and this is not just about the constitution, but about the wholeness of the Body of Christ." |
||
Respond to this article |
||
| Home
· News
· PLC
Publications ·
The
Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives · History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
||