Arguments scheduled today in Heartland per-capita case By John H. Adams The Layman Online Friday, April 2, 2004 OVERLAND PARK, Kan. – A church court case that has far-reaching implications for the relationship between congregations and presbyteries is scheduled to be argued at Overland Park Presbyterian Church this afternoon before the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of Mid-America. The case centers on the policy of Heartland Presbytery, which says no congregation that fails to pay its full per capita to support higher governing bodies and fails to make and fulfill a mission pledge to the presbytery will be eligible for presbytery mission support, shared grants or loan guarantees. Three ministers in the presbytery – A. Kirk Johnston, Laurie Johnson and Tom Sparks – are challenging the presbytery's policy in a remedial case that, many observers believe, may have to be settled finally by the highest court in the Presbyterian Church (USA), the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission. The General Assembly court has ruled three times that local church sessions have absolute authority over how to spend the tithes and offerings of their members and that congregations may neither be compelled to pay per capita or punished for failing to do so. One of the main issues for the complainants is the presbytery's refusal to sign loan guarantees for growing congregations – in effect stunting their possibility for growth in a denomination that has lost thousands of members every year since 1967. The accumulated exodus is 1.8 million members, shrinking the PCUSA from 4.2 million members in 1967 to 2.4 million at the end of 2002. Nonetheless, despite the flight, there are some growing congregations – including First Presbyterian Church in Paola, Kans., whose minister, Johnston, is one of the complainants. Paola has an expansion project under way, temporarily financed by a construction loan that did not require the presbytery's approval. But lenders are hesitant to provide permanent financing to Presbyterian congregations without the approval of presbyteries. Church law says that all local church property is held in trust for the denomination and that presbyteries decide how and whether to allow that property to be encumbered. "When congregations are faithful to the mission and ends of the church in G-3.0000 and G-1.0200 [Book of Order], they grow," the complaints say. "When congregations grow, they need to expand their facilities for the proclamation of the gospel; for shelter, nurture and spiritual fellowship of the children of God; and for the maintenance of divine worship. Heartland's policy fails to honor its responsibilities to all churches in its geographical district by failing to provide resources to its churches for worship, nurture, and witness – unless those churches pay and pledge as presbytery dictates." The presbytery contends that it is neither compelling congregations to pay their per-capita or mission pledges nor punishing them if they fail to do so. But the complainants believe the presbytery's policy is, indeed, punishment and that it constitutionally violates the very purpose of presbyteries – to encourage congregations in their ministries. The complainants use a simple hypothetical analogy to stress their point: Suppose, for instance, that a local session decided to use the same policy to raise its budget for operating expenses and mission, assigning each member a "per-capita" share of the budget. Further, suppose that the session's policy declared that each member unwilling or unable to pay his or her "per capita" was no longer eligible to receive the local church's services. However the session might try to defend that action, "such a defense would be wrong and wrongheaded," the complainants say in their brief. "Parishioners would quickly vote with their feet and their wallets – godly, cheerful, voluntary giving would cease and that local church would soon see a dramatic loss of members and anemic witness for the great ends of the church." The respondents' main argument is that its policy is compatible with authority tiers in Presbyterian government – that the presbytery has authority over local congregations, just as the synod has authority over presbyteries and the General Assembly, the national governing body of the PCUSA, has authority over the lower governing bodies. "The [synod] Commission has, this day, the opportunity to uphold a Presbyterian – rather than a congregational – polity. We urge the Commission – and all presbyters – to uphold the right of the larger part of the Church to govern a smaller, and to find the Heartland Presbytery's policy a legitimate exercise of its responsibility to be a careful steward of the funds entrusted to it by its member churches." Furthermore, the presbytery argues that its policy does not constitute punishment. "It neither assumes nor implies that a Session is 'obligated' to pay per capita (or to meet any of the other criteria). It does not attempt to coerce any action by the sessions involved. It only states a policy regarding eligibility to receive financial assistance. Therefore, the Heartland policy does not punish a congregation …" In fact, the presbytery declares, sessions are free to determine how they use their funds. The complainants' briefs urge the court to declare the Heartland policy unconstitutional. They call the policy "draconian … odiously discriminatory … heartless" and "a flawed attempt by presbytery to usurp the powers and infringe upon the duties of sessions." And they argue that there is a higher "head of the church" than Presbyterian governing bodies. "Our Church is a divine institution and we are called to model the One, who is the founder and head of the church. If a Presbytery's policies and conduct are faithful to Holy Scripture and model Christ, every member and every session will find such a model irresistible and voluntary financial support will follow to meet all of its needs." The complainants are represented by Robert L. Howard, an elder at Eastminster Presbyterian Church in Wichita, Kan. Howard is the retired chairman and senior counsel for the largest law firm in Kansas and immediate past chairman of the Presbyterian Lay Committee. Archive stories February 25, 2004 August 27, 2003 Per capita resources

Respond to this article

Home · Archives · The Layman · PLC Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Feedback · Links