Heartland
Presbytery files
brief in per-capita case
By John H.
Adams
The Layman Online
Friday, August 20,
2004
Heartland Presbytery in
Kansas and Missouri has filed a 17-page brief that asks the General
Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission to let the presbytery deprive
congregations of loan guarantees and mission funds if they fail to remit
their full per-capita requests and fail to make and meet a presbytery
mission pledge.
The brief, dated August 18, asks the denomination's highest court to
vacate the ruling of the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of
Mid-America. The complainants in the case have not yet filed their
brief.
Heartland Presbytery policy
Adopted June 17, 2003
"The Presbytery Council moves that no congregation be
considered eligible to request assistance from the presbytery in the
form of mission support, shared grants or loan guarantees unless
that congregation has demonstrated its full participation in the
fiscal and ecclesiastical life of the presbytery including the
payment of per capita, the making and meeting of a mission pledge,
being current on Board of Pension dues, the filling (sic) of annual
statistical reports and the annual reporting of pastor's terms of
call." |
On April 3, the
synod
court said Heartland's policy of making mission support, shared
grants or loan guarantees for local congregations contingent on
per-capita and mission payments was unconstitutional. It did not vacate
requirements about Board of Pension dues, annual statistical reports and
reporting the terms of a pastor's call because those are constitutional
requirements.
The General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission has ruled twice –
Minihan
vs. Presbytery of Scioto Valley and Session
of Central Presbyterian Church v. Presbytery of Long Island
(page 18) – that local congregations cannot be forced to remit
per-capita requests or be punished for failure to do so.
The case against Heartland Presbytery was brought by three pastors and
the session of First Presbyterian Church in Paola, Kans. The name of the
case has been abbreviated to A. Kirk Johnson, et al v. Heartland
Presbytery. Johnston is the pastor of the Paola congregation. His
wife, Laurie Johnston, also a party to the case, is pastor of Hillsdale
Presbyterian Church in Hillsdale, Kan. Both are growing evangelical
congregations. Also signing the complaint was Tom Sparks, who later
accepted a call to a congregation in Florida.
The complaint came after the presbytery's initial denial of a loan
guarantee to the Hillsdale congregation because it was not remitting
per-capita requests to support the General Assembly budget.
In its appeal, Heartland makes some of the same arguments it made in
the synod case. It contends that the policy it adopted in June 2003 is
not punitive. Furthermore, Heartland says "every PJC must uphold
acts by governing bodies that defend and preserve our common purposes,
rather than our individual interests."
The brief lays out the presbytery's principal arguments, including:
- The synod court's decision "undermines and interferes with
the right of presbytery to determine its budget and policies with
regard to its own budget, grant application procedures, and criteria
for budget administration …"
- Loan guarantees "are legitimately considered presbytery
mission decisions."
- "It is neither punishment nor coercion to establish
criteria that exclude certain congregations from particular mission
support."
- "The criteria present in the Heartland policy are
legitimate. Participation in the fiscal life of the larger church is
relevant in the awarding of grants, loans and loan guarantees."
- The synod court's "decision improperly abridges the historic
principles of church government and the right of a higher governing
body to govern the lower…"
- "The decision provides an overly broad interpretation of
earlier General Assembly PJC decision, and diminishes and disregards
portions of their findings, reducing them to the idea that sessions
possess an absolute right to designate and determine distribution of
offerings and benevolences."
In its previous rulings, the denomination's highest court has
allowed presbyteries to take only one action against congregations that
choose not to remit per-capita requests sought by the General Assembly,
synods and presbyteries. The exception was in the Central
Presbyterian Church v. Presbytery of Long Island case. Then, the
court said the presbytery had the right to publish a list of
congregations that paid their full per-capita and those that didn't.
|