Will GAC, presbytery and synod executives address moratorium issue? By John H. Adams The Layman Online Wednesday, August 16, 2006 Just as the denomination's lawyers recommended in their "privileged and confidential" documents published by The Layman Online, several presbyteries have instituted aggressive tactics to claim local church property owned by congregations considering leaving the denomination. But the moderator of the New Wineskins Association of Churches has asked denominational leaders to call for a moratorium on such tactics. Depending on how General Assembly Moderator Joan Gray and others react to that request, the General Assembly Council, during its meeting Sept. 26-29 in Louisville, Ky., might have the opportunity to discuss the moratorium. The council has scheduled about 10 hours of joint discussions with presbytery and synod executives. Both middle governing bodies are being pressured not to allow congregations to separate from the Presbyterian Church (USA) with their property unless they pay a negotiated settlement. The presbyteries are responsible for enforcing the denomination's claim on local church property – although there is nothing specific in the Constitution that forbids a presbytery from allowing a church to leave with its property without a settlement. But the recent Advisory Opinion Note 19 added teeth to the threat to take the property claimed by the departing congregation. It warned that if presbyteries fail to "take appropriate action," synods could be empowered to intervene through administrative commissions. In its preliminary information about its first meeting since the 2006 General Assembly, the council has not spelled out what will be discussed during the joint meeting with the synod and presbytery leaders. It faces a number of possible ways of dealing with the request from Dean Weaver, the New Wineskins moderator, who made his request for a moratorium in a letter to Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick and Gray. 1. The council members and the executives of the middle governing bodies can ignore the request entirely. In light of the controversial statements by denominational lawyers on property-law enforcement, doing nothing would heighten suspicions of additional behind-the-scenes efforts to employ additional draconian measures to claim church property. 2. They can go into executive session to discuss the issue and issue a press release afterwards – a tactic the council has used in the past to shield its members from criticism of their considerations and comments. 3. They can follow the suggestion 2006 General Assembly, which urged the church "to conciliate, mediate, and adjust differences without strife prayerfully and deliberately" – and in open session. That language was used in the authoritative interpretation that allows ordaining bodies to declare that the constitutional prohibition against ordaining practicing homosexuals and adulterers is a nonessential. Weaver's letter requesting a moratorium was dated August 5 – four days before The Layman Online published the secret papers of the denomination's lawyers. He apparently was not privy at that time to the content of the letters. His request to Gray and Kirkpatrick asked for a Sept. 1 response. But the joint sessions of the council and the executives of the middle governing bodies provide the opportunity for the key players in property law enforcement to consider whether the PCUSA should be as forbearing toward congregations distressed by the General Assembly actions as it has been toward the advocates of ordaining people who are constitutionally forbidden from holding church offices.

Respond to this article

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