Subscribe to RSS
"As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord." (Joshua 24:15)

Help This Ministry

Sign Up 

 For a free subscription to The Layman and/or our weekly e-mail news alerts, click here.

 

[Back to Listing]

PCUSA Form of Government Task Force

The ‘COR’ issue is the core issue

By Carmen Fowler , The Layman, Posted Friday, January 22, 2010

LOUISVILLE, Ky. – Insufficient on issues of representation. That seems to be the collective judgment of the members of the Presbyterian Church (USA) General Assembly Advisory Committees on Women’s Concerns (ACWC), Racial Ethnic Concerns (ACREC), and Social Witness Policy (ACSWC).
 
Rev. Dan Williams, co-moderator of the Form of Government (FOG) Task Force, and Mark Tammen, director of Constitutional Services, sought to address serious concerns voiced by the various committees, which centered on concerns about the church’s witness to justice issues, the commitment to inclusiveness, and the Committee on Representation (COR) issue.
 
Williams reported that the Task Force added the phrase “prophetic witness” at three places and that the commitment to inclusiveness is grounded in the marks of the Church, particularly in the areas of unity and catholicity. [1]
 
Then he moved the conversation to the COR issue. One of the ways the Task Force approached its charge to maximize flexibility was to have very few “named” structures beyond requirements for a nominating committee at all levels, a permanent judicial committee for each counsel above the session, as well as an “office” and an Advisory Committee on the Constitution at the GA level.
 
The discussion referred to the reality of life in many presbyteries.
 
“Right now, many presbyteries are having a very difficult time staffing all the structures,” Williams said. “The system is being stretched and stressed. People tell us with joy how they’re getting around the FOG in order to do what they’re doing.”
 
Many presbyteries are out of compliance with the current FOG requirement of a free-standing COR.
 
The new FOG proposes that each council (formerly known as session, presbytery and synod) shall develop procedures and mechanisms for promoting and reviewing that body’s implementation of the church’s commitment to inclusiveness and representation. Councils above the session shall establish by their own rule committees or entities to fulfill required functions that are currently listed by name in the FOG. (emphasis added)
 
The notion that greater flexibility will actually yield greater compliance was met with broad skepticism by the advisory committees’ members.
 
ACREC Co-Chair Cynthia Holder Rich said, “I think the Task Force underestimates the hegemony of our denomination. They’re not finding racial ethnic candidates to fill out their Committee on Representation because they’re not concerned. …White people don’t let other people in unless you say ‘you have to.’ The rules were written so that other people get a voice. I’m concerned that less representation will occur if we do away with the Committee on Representation requirement. There are voices at the table that would not otherwise be at the table.” 
 
Williams responded, “The nFOG proposal uses ‘shall’ language. What we don’t say is that it has to be done in this way.”
 
In response to Holder Rich’s question regarding the number of presbyteries that are currently out of compliance with COR, both Williams and Tammen admitted they do not know.
 
GA staffer Chris Iosso observed that, “the document tilts toward the presbytery from the GA. The structuring of the church changes and there’s a large-scale shift and we may not be able to calculate what the justice changes may be. … My worry is that it’s thinner at the GA level than it should be as Presbyterians, moving toward the presbytery moves toward the congregational level.” 
 
That accurate observation appears to trouble the people on the three advisory committees of the GA.  
 
Williams then used an analogy about limiting the number of hoops that have to be jumped through at every level of church governance. A representative from the National Association of Presbyterian Clergywomen volleyed, “I think I get it. But, being racially inclusive is not a hoop. Women’s ordination is not a hoop. Promoting social witness policy is not a hoop. I see these as fundamental to who we are as Presbyterians.”  
 
Williams answered, “the proposal utilizes the concept of foundational principles. The hoop analogy is intended to be related to structures only, not to theological concerns. …We have tried to limit the number of lists in our proposal. Every time you create a list, you’re inviting people to ask what’s not on the list but should be there? There are two ways of thinking at work in the church today: one says that if the FOG doesn’t expressly say it, it’s not permitted; the other says that a governing body should have the power and authority to do what it sees best as long as it’s within the bounds of our foundational principles. The first way of thinking has kept us embattled. We’re trying to move the denomination toward the second way of thinking.”  
 
All of this requires a great deal of mutual accountability based on an ethos of shared trust. That currently does not exist in the denomination and Williams admitted that it is essential to the nFOG working.  
 
Tammen added that “the nFOG anticipates a more robust administrative review. It calls for consultations between councils of the church and in that context the right questions might be asked more often and with more satisfactory results.” 
 
Williams acknowledged that nFOG “is not designed to work without trust and love. That involves accountability. We’re not going to use the FOG to play games with one another. But until we recover the trust and love, we’re still going to have these systemic problems.”
 
The FOG Task Force was initially formed by action of the 217th General Assembly in 2006 and re-formed by action of the 218th GA in 2008. Their final report is available online. The task force was charged to preserve the denomination’s foundational polity, focus the FOG on providing leadership for local congregations as missional communities, preserve the presbytery as the central governmental unity, providing sufficient authority and flexibility to address the challenges of our new millennial world. [2]
Footnotes:

[1] 1.0403 Unity in Diversity
“As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:27–29).
The unity of believers in Christ is reflected in the rich diversity of the Church’s membership. In Christ, by the power of the Spirit, God unites persons through baptism regardless of race, ethnicity, age, sex, disability, geography, or theological conviction. There is therefore no place in the life of the Church for discrimination against any person. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) shall guarantee full participation and representation in its worship, governance, and emerging life to all persons or groups within its membership. No member shall be denied participation or representation for any reason other than those stated in this Constitution.

[2] Minutes, 217th General Assembly (2006), Part I, p. 366; assembly action, pp. 38-39. [Access GA Minutes from Table of Contents. Go to Wednesday, June 21, 2006, 1:45 p.m., Report of Assembly Committee on Church Polity (05).]
The five elements of the task force’s charge:
(1) The new Form of Government shall preserve our foundational polity (perhaps most concisely laid out in the first four chapters of the current Form of Government).
(2) The focus of the Form of Government shall be on providing leadership for local congregations as missional communities.
(3) The presbytery shall continue as the central governmental unit, as it has been throughout most of our history. The Form of Government shall provide sufficient authority and flexibility to allow the presbytery to assist congregations in addressing the changing cultural, economic, and societal challenges in our new millennial world. The FOG Task Force shall take notice of and address the institutional and structural impediments that currently cripple so very many of our presbyteries.
(4) The new Form of Government shall provide flexibility at all levels, granting authority while permitting governing bodies to develop the structures to carry out their respective missions.
(5) The FOG Task Force shall be guided by the principles proposed by Recommendations 1-4 from the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church, using those principles as a guide for its own processes and deliberations.

DISCLAIMER: The Layman Online is a news and information resource. We welcome letters and commentaries from readers. Letters and commentaries are selected for publication based on their clarity and brevity, subject to editing, and also are chosen to represent a diverse set of views on as many issues as possible. These letters and commentaries are provided as an informational service and do not necessarily indicate an endorsement by The Layman Online or the Presbyterian Lay Committee.