Kirkpatrick calls presbytery action 'disappointing' 'Presbyterians must uphold the Constitution' By Parker T. Williamson The Presbyterian Layman Friday, December 11, 1998 Clifton Kirkpatrick HARARE, Zimbabwe -The Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick, stated clerk of the Presbyterian Church (USA), said in an interview with The Presbyterian Layman that he has received news that the Presbytery of Northern New England has lifted its requirement that one of its congregations obey the Constitution. Kirkpatrick, who is the chief constitutional officer of the denomination, said that the presbytery's action is "disappointing and very troubling." The stated clerk said that without access to all the facts relating to the case, he will not comment on its judicial aspects. "One thing is clear - and I have said this all along - Presbyterians must uphold the Constitution," he said. Kirkpatrick said he was part of a small, unofficial group that signed a Call to Sabbatical last Spring, just before the Charlotte General Assembly, in the hope that it might "calm things down" by avoiding court cases and more legislative battles. He said that he regards the Northern New England action as a set back. Asked if, in his opinion, initiating a remedial case against the presbytery's action would constitute a violation of the "Call to Sabbatical," Kirkpatrick said, "Well, the Call to Sabbatical was never anything official, and we must lift up the Constitution … but we don't know all the facts here. We don't know if the congregation or the presbytery actually did anything, took an action, that violates the Constitution." Kirkpatrick appears to be making a distinction between actually violating the Constitution's ordination requirement, e.g., ordaining a person in defiance of the rule, and just talking about it. He said that what the presbytery did "certainly does not help us at this time," and that he was concerned that actions like this one could escalate dissension in the denomination. "Would initiating judicial action against the presbytery in the light of its December 5 statement, be regarded a violation of the terms of your Call to Sabbatical?" Kirkpatrick was asked. "Well, I guess you have to know who did what first, and I don't know all the facts." He said that on the face of it, the presbytery action did appear to be a provocation and that it should be made clear that obeying the Constitution is not optional.

Presbytery allows congregation to defy Constitution By Robert P. Mills, Dec. 8, The Layman Online

Call to Sabbatical reports from May/June, 1998

News From the PCUSA, News Updates

Home, · Archives, ·The Presbyterian Layman, History of the Lay Committee, ·Letters & Editorials, Book Reviews, · Resources, · Links