 Kirkpatrick issues a spate of decrees to enforce his view of PCUSA constitution By John H. Adams The Layman Online Monday, November 20, 2006
He has used his office as a bully pulpit and intimidator to enforce the property trust clause, payment of per-capita apportionments and to stymie presbyteries from attempting to follow what they believe the constitution requires. He has had an impact. Under pressure from Kirkpatrick, complaints have been filed against three of the 11 presbyteries that approved resolutions to strictly observe constitutional "fidelity/chastity" ordination requirements in the Book of Order (G-6.0106b). In addition, presbyteries have sent administrative commissions to local churches to try to prevent congregations from leaving the denomination and to stake a claim on their property. As Kirkpatrick recommended, some presbyteries have taken steps to block access to lines of credit for local congregations, thwart their attempts to get insurance to indemnify their officers from personal liability in the face of civil lawsuits filed by the denomination, and to oust ministers and elders who advocate leaving the denomination. Kirkpatrick has issued four major documents, most of them, he says, to promote the "peace, unity and purity" of the PCUSA. The list includes: 1. The "privileged and confidential" strategies for dealing with congregations considering leaving the denomination because of its departure from Biblical and constitutional requirements. The so-called "Louisville Papers," which were written by lawyers who work for Kirkpatrick, contain rigid, and many evangelicals contend, unchristian tactics to confiscate property, remove ministers, include elders and trustees as defendants in lawsuits and take over control of local congregations. They include:
"Schism" targets "Presbyterians who feel compelled not only to abandon their vows and promises, but who are willing, also, to rend the fabric of the church and sinfully threaten the peace and unity of Christ's church. We are concerned that some seem willing to take for themselves the authority to ascribe within which 'certain bounds … of the Reformed faith' (G-6.0108b) we all must live." Kirkpatrick asserts that it is "the General Assembly (with the concurrence of our presbyteries for constitutional matters) that determines what is 'indispensable'" and that "it falls within the purview of the presbytery to determine whether schism exists within a congregation." Opinion 17 declares that the presbytery must determine which members represent the "true church," a phrase used only in the property chapter of the Book of Order. Kirkpatrick does not explain how a presbytery might decide that a group – as few as one – represents the true church. The presbytery is also "responsible for confronting advocates of schism." The clear implication of Opinion 17 is that the "true church" is comprised of members who are willing to remain loyal to the denomination by accepting departures from Christian orthodoxy if they conflict with General Assembly actions or Kirkpatrick's constitutional interpretations. Kirkpatrick also says "the presbytery determines which members represent the true church" and that it is "responsible for confronting advocates of schism," a line that echoes the counsel of his lawyers in "Church Property Disputes" – "Let the schismatics seek Caesar's help." Advisory Opinion 17 adds, "If the presbytery determines that the pastor is inciting schism within a congregation, it may remove or authorize its [administrative] commission to remove such a schismatic minister of the Word and Sacrament from service to that congregation."
Without providing any evidence, Kirkpatrick said his office "reminds the church that not once in our history has schism ever advanced the gospel, but rather, always has diminished it." He did not mention the impact of the two most recent withdrawals from the mainline denomination, the Presbyterian Church U.S. in 1971 and the Evangelical Presbyterian Church in 1983. Since leaving the PCUSA, those evangelical denominations have substantially bolstered Presbyterian evangelism throughout the world. The declining PCUSA, which has lost more than 45 percent of its members since 1967, today employs 251 full-time foreign missionaries. The PCA, with only 10.7 percent as many members as the PCUSA, employs 519 missionaries. The EPC has only 2 percent as many members, but employs 71. 3. Kirkpatrick's Advisory Opinion 19, "Implementing the Trust Clause for the Unity of the Church." In Advisory Opinion 19, Kirkpatrick says, "The constitutional provisions under which congregations hold property for the benefit of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) arise out of and reflect our theological conviction that this denomination constitutes one indivisible body, which itself is part of the body of Christ, and which encompasses not only the visible church today but our forebears and heirs in the one holy, catholic, and apostolic church." He declares, "There is not a unilateral right of a Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) congregation to depart from the denomination or its presbytery of membership. The relationship to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) of a particular church can be severed only by constitutional action on the part of the presbytery." That polity, he adds, "guarantees a formal meeting of presbytery as the forum in which loyalist minorities of whatever size might press their claims that they were sufficient in numbers and dedication to continue a church in its connectional relationship within this denomination." Kirkpatrick says, "There are also significant restrictions on how and under what circumstances a presbytery may release a congregation" and that "all such decisions must be made solely upon the basis of advancing the mission of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in the presbytery's geographic area." Kirkpatrick addresses in generalities the obligation of presbyteries to ensure "effective witness" and, citing a 1973 ruling by the mainline Southern denomination, declares that an "'independent' or 'congregational' Presbyterian church is an anomaly which runs counter to the notion that we are a 'family' of churches and dismissal must therefore be made to another church within the family group.' The policy of not allowing members and ministers to be cut loose with no ties indicates the historic Presbyterian policy of ecclesiastical connectionalism." Kirkpatrick adds, "The idea of holding property in trust has always been part of the Presbyterian theology and practice as has been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court (Watson v. Jones, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 679 (1872) He does not mention later Supreme Court rulings that declare church property disputes may be settled by "neutral principles" of law and that many courts no longer recognize the hierarchical decree in Watson v. Jones. Advisory Opinion 19 also addresses the independence of presbyteries who believe that implementing Kirkpatrick's draconian provisions for securing church property could impair the peace, unity and purity of the church. "If a presbytery fails to carry out these constitutional responsibilities," he says, "the synod may be required to intervene." Citing Book of Order provisions – but not requirements – Kirkpatrick says synods "may" review the presbyteries processes and decisions; "may" direct the presbytery to appropriate action; or "may assume jurisdiction over the presbytery's powers." Such interventions, as Kirkpatrick asserted, "may be required" – but they are not required. Advisory Opinion 19 concluded with Kirkpatrick's appeal to presbyteries "to witness to the church's visible oneness, to avoid division into separate denominations that obscure our community in Christ, and to live in harmony with other members of this denomination, so that we may with one voice together glorify God in Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit; and all sessions, congregations, presbyteries, and synods to renew and strengthen their covenanted partnership with one another and with the General Assembly." 4. Kirkpatrick's Sept. 8, 2006, letter to the stated clerks of the denomination's 173 presbyteries. This letter was one of Kirkpatrick's most sweeping arguments to enforce the constitution on his terms. Ironically, he introduced his arguments by appealing to "all governing bodies, as we face difficult issues, to be engaged in 'processes of intensive discernment through worship, community building and collaborative work." He noted that the 2006 General Assembly "also encouraged us prior to decision making to engage in the spiritual disciplines of prayer, discernment of the will of God, and seeking to hear God's voice through the voices of those in our community." Kirkpatrick said, "I am particularly concerned about proposals that I hear are coming to some of our presbyteries that are not in accord with our Constitution and its authoritative interpretations (which also have the binding authority of the Constitution itself). I hope, in your role as stated clerks, you will join me in reminding Presbyterians that while dissent and advocacy for change are deeply engrained Presbyterian values, no presbytery by any vote margin has the authority to take actions that are not in accord with the Constitution, or to set aside its provisions." Kirkpatrick addressed proposals "that are of particular concern to me," including actions by presbyteries:
Kirkpatrick has yielded none to Presbyterians who are distressed by the direction of the denomination and have themselves spent considerable time in prayer and discernment of God's will. When the New Wineskins Association of Churches asked Kirkpatrick and General Assembly Moderator Joan Gray for an enforcement moratorium so that they could do just as he advised, the denomination's leaders said no – even though Kirkpatrick himself initiated an enforcement sabbatical in 1998, asking Presbyterians not to press for enforcement of G-6.0106b. In an August 5 letter to Kirkpatrick and Gray, Dean Weaver, co-moderator of the New Wineskins Convocation, asked them "to work with us to help create an environment of real peace during these troubling times" and to "exercise the leadership of your respective offices and lead the way through these turbulent waters through compassion and understanding." "[W]e cannot comply with your request to set aside portions of the Church's Form of Government. Such action is beyond our powers as moderator and stated clerk of the General Assembly," they said. Kirkpatrick initiated 1998 sabbatical But in 1998, when he was besieged by complaints about ordinations that violated G-6.0106b, Kirkpatrick managed to get leaders from both sides of the debate to agree to issue a "call for sabbatical." In May 1998, his office issued a press release saying that the "sabbatical would be a time to refrain from seeking legislative and judicial solutions to our conflicts so that they may be dealt with in our congregations and presbyteries primarily in a personal and pastoral manner. A sabbatical would be a time to engage in reflection and repentance, a time to listen to God together, and a time to reaffirm and to celebrate our life and mission together as God's people." In effect, Kirkpatrick has declared that it became unconstitutional to follow the constitution since the 2006 General Assembly approved an authoritative interpretation allowing ordaining bodies to declare G-6.0106b nonessential. One irony of his tactics has been his contention that nothing has changed because the standards remain in place. But the leaders of many congregations believe otherwise. More than a dozen have begun steps to leave the denomination – most hoping to retain their property. Kirkpatrick argues that those who seek a more Biblically faithful relationship, either as independents or allied with other denominations, are schismatic. He prescribes punitive measures in hopes of making them back down or leave their property. Money is clearly an issue. The cash-strapped denomination and presbyteries are being wedged into rigid enforcement to oust the dissidents and claim their property and assets or require exorbitant exit fees even if they are merely considering alternatives to remaining in the denomination. In the past, Kirkpatrick has appeared to prefer that the denomination repeal G-6.0106b – or at least disarm it through what eventually became the strategy adopted by the 2006 General Assembly as recommended by the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity. Notice of partisanship Kirkpatrick's January 3, 2002 letter to stated clerks of presbyteries and synods served notice of his partisanship in the decades-long debate about whether to ordain practicing homosexuals and adulterers. In that letter, he expressed sympathy for the denomination's liberals, but sternly warned evangelicals. He acknowledged that there had been numerous violations of G-6.0106b and that "some in the church seem to be less than vigilant in upholding the provisions of our constitution." And, while he declared that the constitutional requirement was not optional, he added, "I am well aware that there is considerable debate about the wisdom of this provision in our Constitution in light of our historic Presbyterian polity." "However, until such time when this or a similar amendment is approved, G-6.0106b is the 'law of the church' and should be upheld," he said. But Kirkpatrick's tone in that same letter changed when he addressed proposals for a "gracious separation" in the PCUSA and withholding per-capita apportionments, which is constitutionally permitted. "Such actions are unconstitutional, and I urge that they stop," Kirkpatrick said. "It is a violation of our ordination vows to promote schism or the defiance of constitutionally sanctioned governing body directives." Kirkpatrick has made no comparable threat against ministers or ordaining bodies or church officers who publicly declared that they defied the constitution. When he wrote his Jan. 3, 2002, letter, Kirkpatrick was under siege because he would not enforce the constitution. He dismissed that criticism as "efforts to 'politicize' the judicial process. "Recently, there have been calls on my office to hold public discussions with interested parties about judicial process and issues currently pending before judicial commissions and for clerks to be not only the 'clerk of the court' but also the 'prosecutor.'" But he claimed, "Such approaches will undermine the confidentiality and the integrity of our judicial process, and I will not accede to them, and I urge you not to as well. The role of the Stated Clerk is to uphold the Constitution, offer advisory opinions on its implementation, and to facilitate a fair process for judicial cases and commissions. The stated clerk of any governing body is one who facilitates the judicial process while remaining absolutely non-partisan." |
|||
Respond to this article |
|||
| Home
· Archives
· The
Layman ·
PLC
Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
|||
