An Analysis of the Proposed Amendments to the Constitution: Approved by the 210th GA (1998) and Recommended to the Presbyteries for Their Vote

B. Amending G.9.0503, G-14.0801a Regarding New Church Developments, Organizing Pastors and Commissioned Lay Pastors

Are we going to grow and how are we going to grow? Christian Schwarz in his book, Natural Church Development, says that it is the nature of all living things to grow. If the church is alive, it should be growing. If a church is not growing it means that it is dead or there is something getting in the way. Quite a challenge! And one with merit. If Charles Schwarz is right, then the task of facilitating growth in a church and the growth of churches is to identify, as best we can, restraints to growth and then remove them.

That seems to be the intent of Amendment B. It is intended to address problems in starting new churches which are created by our current polity. There are three different amendments within Amendment B. They come out of the Office of Church Growth and New Church Development of the National Ministries Division of the General Assembly Council.

B.1. On Amending G-9.0503 Regarding Changes to the Book of Order Dealing with New Church Development

This amendment permits the presbytery to authorize a commission of presbytery to carry out the duties for new church development until a session can be elected. Until a session is elected a commission of presbytery may authorize a committee of a developing congregation to exercise powers normally exercised by a session

Recommendation: This approach is innovative and balanced. It provides adequate oversight by presbytery while allowing a congregation to take as much “ownership” of their mission and ministry as they can handle. It short in can be a means of opening up avenues of growth in a supervised way while not holding tight restraints that might choke passion and initiative.

B.2. Amendments to G-14.05013f Regarding Commissioned Lay Pastors Service as an Organizing Pastor

This amendment allows presbyteries to appoint a commissioned lay pastor as an organizing pastor of a new church development.

This amendment raises issues around our historical denominational commitment to an educated and theologically trained clergy. These issues seem especially crucial in relationship to the difficulties of new church development in general and specifically to founding a church that has a “Presbyterian identity.” Management expert Peter Drucker argues that new executives should not be sent out to pioneer new divisions of a company. He wrote that they didn’t have the background or experience to make the decisions required of them.

Drucker’s analysis has application to new church development. In the best of all possible worlds, we should be raising up theologically trained pastors who have a call to found new congregations and we should have a support system in place to sustain them. However, as a denomination, we aren’t raising up a host of theologically trained pastors who are moving out into pioneering situations.

In addition, many of the new church developments exist in remote areas among ethnic minorities or in recent immigrant communities. In these situations surely it is best for someone from that ethnic minority to provide indigenous leadership. And at this point we are not sending a stream of ethnic minorities to our seminaries for training.

So what do we do? Within the past couple of years we have created a means for presbyteries to provide significant training for commissioned lay pastors and we have allowed presbyteries to give them—with supervision, for specified locations and times—almost all the powers and responsibilities of ordained clergy. This means that while commissioned lay pastors do not have the same level of training as our ordained clergy, they do indeed have training. And in many cases, very good training.

Recommendation: Upon weighing both pros and cons, with some hesitation, I believe that we should pass this amendment.

B. 3. Amendment to G-14.0801a Regarding a Commissioned Lay Pastor Serving a New Church Development or Other Validated Ministry

This amendment adjusts the book of order to support B.2., allowing a commissioned lay pastor to do everything a minister of Word and Sacrament would do in establishing a new church or other validated ministry as designated by the presbytery.

Recommendation: This needs to be affirmed in order to execute B.2

C. On Amending G-11.0404 to Aid in Implementation of the Formula of Agreement

This amendment eliminates obstacles to entering into Full Communion according to the Formula of Agreements. Specifically it allows for permanent installation in a PCUSA congregation by ministers from other participating denominations. It also addresses pension plan issues allowing for the pension plan from the originating denomination to be retained if appropriate.

Recommendation: Since our denomination has already affirmed the Formula of Agreement, then it makes sense to put in place the institutional structures to make it work well. I believe we need to affirm Amendment C.

G. On Adding a New W-3.316e to Provide for Homebound Church Members to Participate in the Lord’s Supper

There are significant number of elderly and ailing people in our congregation that can’t make it to our regular communion service. A number of them are in retirement homes within a mile of our church. One of the most nourishing things we could do for these dear people would be to provide an opportunity to receive communion on a regular basis.

The only way that we can “legally” do this according to the Directory of Worship is to send an ordained minister, accompanied by another member of the church. As much as we would like to see this happen regularly, it doesn’t.

Amendment G. provides for members unable to attend a communion service to receive communion served by two or more ordained officers under the following conditions:

a) elements must served on the same calendar day as a direct extension of the invitation to receive communion which was extended to the congregation and that b) the Scriptures and prayers are offered along with communion so that there is a unity kept between Word and Sacrament and that c) those who served have been instructed by the session or authorized governing body so that liturgical resources are available, as well as, the theological and pastoral foundations of the sacrament.

The apostolic church historically has been very careful about who has the right to serve communion. Does this amendment honor that care and concern? I believe it does. It honors the Reformed understanding that communion is a shared activity of the gathered body of Christ, who is present when two or three are gathered in his name. Instead of merely a unity of place, not possible because of physical circumstances, it honors a unity of time, requiring the serving of the elements be offered on the same day. It honors the Reformed understanding of the apostolic nature of the church in that only those who are ordained officers, that is, have received a laying on of hands and made a commitment to the faith given to the saints, may serve communion. It also honors the Reformed understanding of relationship between the Word and Sacrament as it requires a reading of the Scripture along with the elements. Finally, it honors the Reformed understanding that Christ is spiritually present in ministry during the sacrament by requiring those who serve the elements to be aware of the “pastoral foundations.” Surely the heart of all pastoral dimensions of the sacrament is that Christ himself, ministers by his Spirit, to his people as they commune with him, by partaking of his body and blood.

Recommendation: That we vote to affirm it.

This article first appeared in Theology Matters, Vol. 4, No. 6 (Nov/Dec 1998).