Synod, GA asked to review ‘inherently unconstitutional’ action By Robert P. Mills The Presbyterian Layman Sept/Oct, 1997 In a May 27 decision, declared “clearly unconstitutional” by its own acting stated clerk, Milwaukee Presbytery adopted a Covenant of Dissent announcing “we cannot agree to abide by the recently passed amendment to G-6.0106b (‘amendment B’) …”. In response to this action, and the failure of higher governing bodies and denominational officials to defend the Constitution, Rev. Roger Hawthorne has filed requests for administrative review, a procedure that may form the basis for judicial actions. The covenant adopted by Milwaukee Presbytery was written and circulated by Stonecatchers, a radical activist group formed to defeat Amendment B (G-6.0106b). Stonecatchers is now campaigning to adopt Amendment A, which would gut the Constitution’s current ordination standards. Hawthorne, pastor of Grace Church in Milwaukee, addressed his letter to Ernest Cutting, stated clerk of the Synod of Lakes and Prairies, and to GA Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick. He cited G-12.0102n and G-13.0104k, which give synods and GA the responsibility to oversee the work of lower governing bodies. He said that Milwaukee Presbytery’s action “commits the presbytery to ignore the Constitution”; that the action “was subsequently described by the Rev. Carl Simon, acting stated clerk of the Presbytery of Milwaukee and at the time a member of the General Assembly’s Advisory Committee on the Constitution, as ‘clearly unconstitutional’ ”; and that Kirkpatrick “has been quoted in official denominational publications saying such action is ‘inherently unconstitutional.’ ” Hawthorne’s letter further stated that “subsequent to the presbytery’s action, the moderator, first vice moderator, and second vice moderator and the moderator of the presbytery’s General Council instituted discussions toward the end of forcing ministers of Word and Sacrament and elders individually and as sessions of particular congregations similarly to desecrate their ordination vows and to compel sessions to undertake actions which the sessions know to be unconstitutional, thereby creating an emergency within the Presbytery of Milwaukee.” Synod review requested Therefore, Hawthorne asked the Synod of Lakes and Prairies to: “(a) initiate without further delay administrative review of the actions of the Presbytery of Milwaukee at its May 27 meeting and subsequent thereunto, “(b) immediately take steps to safeguard funds, properties and other assets of the Presbyterian Church (USA) within and otherwise in the care of the Presbytery of Milwaukee lest such funds, properties and assets be expropriated by the powers which have seized control of the presbytery … “(c) and to take whatever steps shall prove necessary to effect and restore constitutional government to the Presbytery of Milwaukee.” GA review requested Moreover, Hawthorne requested the General Assembly to: “ (a) initiate without any further delay administrative review of the Synod of Lakes and Prairies to ascertain why unconstitutional actions duly reported in official publications of the denomination have not resulted in the requested administrative review … “(b) ascertain how the Stated Clerk of the General Assembly can be aware of actions which he himself pronounces ‘inherently unconstitutional,’ but has failed to initiate administrative review, “(c) and initiate procedures to ensure in the future that both the General Assembly and the synods will exercise oversight and order of the presbyteries and that the presbyteries will exercise oversight and order of the sessions and congregations to ensure that they conduct themselves in a constitutional manner.” Further implications The results of the requested administrative reviews have implications far beyond Milwaukee Presbytery. According to statistics posted on the Stonecatchers web site, 57 of the PCUSA’s 11,400 sessions have pledged to defy the denomination’s constitution, as has Twin Cities Area Presbytery. Each governing body that has signed such a covenant could be subjected to similar procedural challenges.

Home · News · PLC Publications · The Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links