General Assembly Council prioritizes

program areas amidst controversy

By Paula R. Kincaid

The Layman Online

MONTREAT, N.C. – Looking through the lens of the impact on evangelism and discipleship, elected members of the General Assembly Council set priorities for the program areas of three divisions of the Presbyterian Church (USA).

National Ministries	Congregational Ministries	Worldwide Ministries
High Priority
Evangelism Leadership Nurture & Support Mission Financial Services Racial Ethnic Congregational Enhancement	Curriculum Mission Interpretation Stewardship Youth and Young Adult	Global Education & International Leadership International Evangelism International Health Ministries Mission Personnel Care Presbyterian Hunger Program
Medium Priority
Church Leadership Connection Racial Justice Social Justice Urban Ministries Office Women’s Ministries	Marketing Pastor, Educator, Lay Leader Support Theology and Worship	Ecumenical Partnership: Area Offices Global Awareness & Involvement International Volunteers Office Mission Service Recruitment Presbyterian Disaster Assistance
Low Priority
Church and Society Higher Education: Organizational Support Higher Education Ministries National Volunteers Washington Office	Conference Ministry Peacemaking Spiritual Formation Theological Education	Ecumenical Program Facilitation Interfaith Relations Jinishian Presbytery & Synod International Partnerships Self Development of People

Elected members were divided into three groups to assess the programs of Congregational Ministries, National Ministries and Worldwide Ministries. They ranked the programs as a high, medium or low priority, based on evangelism and discipleship, two emphasizes that the General Assembly established as high priorities for the denomination.

The PCUSA staff will use the prioritization process to prepare the 2002 budget, which will be presented at the February 2001 meeting of the General Assembly Council.

“This process was done 100 percent by the elected people,” said Peter Pizor, chair of the General Assembly Council. He said that in previous years, the council’s input on the budget came after the budget was in spreadsheet form, which was prepared by the staff.

“What we have done in this round,” he said, was open the process up to the elected people from the very beginning.

John Detterick executive director of the General Assembly Council told the group that the “high rankings and low rankings have nothing to do with importance. Everything we do is important. Everything we do serves someone.”

Flawed theology

In a discussion of the process on the final day of the council meeting, council member Sheila W. Coyle of Louisiana, questioned the rationalization of ranking a program area which is a people-to-people ministry against a marketing area or financial service.

“It was extremely hard to do that and unfair to do that especially looking at it through discipleship and evangelism,” she said.

“We thought you should look at all program areas,” said Detterick. “Everything that is part of our ministry and program needs to be looked at.”

Douglas W. Oldenburg, former moderator of the General Assembly, said the theological criteria of the process was missing.

“What does it mean to be faithful to our theology? What does it mean to be faithful to the traditions on which Presbyterians stand?” he asked. “It was not as much a part of process as I wish it had been.”

People’s needs and wants are important, he said, but the most important thing is to be faithful. “Some things have to be done to be faithful to Jesus Christ whether people want it or not.”

Oldenburg said part of the denomination’s witness in public policy is the Washington Office, which was ranked by the committee scrutinizing the National Ministries Division close to the bottom of its low priority rankings. He also mentioned the higher education and peacemaking programs which were also ranked low by the committees. “All these are the reasons I’m a Presbyterian and they are all at the bottom,” he said.

Jeffrey G. Bridgeman, a council member from California, responded to Oldenburg by saying that the “things Doug Oldenburg said brought him to this church are what have let me down. … I think we need to continue being aware of representing the whole church. I think as we look at this list it is a coming together of the whole church.”

Council member Adelia D. Kelso of Louisiana said she felt the theology presented was “most unhelpful. As I understand Reformed theology we are to live on behalf of people. As a white, able-bodied woman, I must live on behalf of the racial ethnic,” she said. “As a heterosexual, I am to live on behalf of the homosexual. I think the theology behind this is deeply flawed,” she said.