The Reformation of the Church: Electing Commissioners to General Assembly

The PC(USA) General Assembly speaks to two audiences concurrently. It speaks to those within the PC(USA) through its actions, reports, and resolutions. It also teaches the world what the church believes. Paul writes in 1 Timothy that obeisance by the Church to God’s commands makes the Church an effective witness to those outside the Church.

The General Assembly is not an isolated, mystical entity. It is comprised of Elders and Ministers of Word and Sacrament who were elected by their presbyteries to serve as commissioners to the General Assembly. The procedure for this is laid out in the Book of Order, G-13.0102.

The actions of the General Assembly (GA) are the result of votes by those GA commissioners sent by the presbyteries. If Presbyterians are dissatisfied with the actions of a General Assembly, they are, in fact, dissatisfied with the vote of the majority of commissioners elected by the presbyteries. For example, since 1997 three General Assemblies have voted to amend the Book of Order to remove the ordination standards of “fidelity and chastity.” Each time, a majority of the presbyteries voted against such removal. However, a majority of presbyteries that voted to uphold the ordination standards also elected a majority of GA Commissioners who sought to remove those standards.

Clergy and elders, as leaders of the church, have a responsibility to guard it against false teaching. They ought to assure themselves that the GA commissioners elected by their presbytery will exercise the authority given them—the very authority Christ has entrusted to the guardians of the church—according to the Word and will of Christ.

The responsibility for General Assembly actions lies first with church members who elect elders to their session and call their minister, and secondly, with the ministers and elders who are sent by the session as the commissioners to presbytery (presbyters) and who in turn elect the GA commissioners.

Serving as a commissioner to General Assembly is not a reward for long service, active participation in presbytery activities, or popularity. Serving as a commissioner to General Assembly is a calling given by God. A person’s inward call must be recognized and affirmed by presbyters in their election of that person to serve as GA commissioner. Presbyters should take their responsibility to discern a person’s call by God seriously. They should satisfy themselves that the person knows Scripture, seeks to live in accordance with its teachings, and knows the constitution of the church including the Book of Confessions and the Book of Order. There is no biblical or constitutional diversity requirement to send commissioners to GA who the presbytery is aware will act in opposition to Scripture’s clear teaching.

Presbyters cannot bind a GA commissioner’s conscience to vote a certain way at the General Assembly. Presbyters have a responsibility, however, to know a GA commissioner nominee’s understanding of Scripture, especially on issues that will be voted on at GA. If the GA commissioner nominee disagrees with any part of Scripture, the Book of Confessions or Book of Order, the presbyters should discover that and it should be part of their discernment of whether indeed this person is called by God. God does not call people as leaders who reject his Word and substitute their own.

Other factors might also be weighed in discerning a person’s call. Is he/she physically able to endure the exhausting ten days of meetings from early morning to late at night (GA has sometimes gone until 1:00 am in the morning) that includes substantial walking to and from hotels, convention center, and committee rooms? Is the person able to read and digest the over 1000 items of business he/she will have to consider and vote on? Is the person able to effectively use laptop computers since the GA is now paperless?

Responsibility to Examine Candidates

In 1978, the Presbytery of Pittsburgh received a resolution from the session of the First Presbyterian Church, Carnegie, Pennsylvania requesting that time be docketed during a meeting of the presbytery so that nominees for commissioners to the upcoming GA might be individually questioned. There were controversies in the church in 1978 just as there are today in the church and the requesting session decided it was important to learn more about the commissioner nominees before they were voted on. The request was granted and time docketed.

Complainants protested and the case was eventually brought before the General Assembly’s highest court, the GA Permanent Judicial Commission (GAPJC). The GAPJC upheld the right of the presbytery to examine GA commissioner nominees and even went as far as to state:

a procedure that merely allows members of a presbytery to be informed as to the present attitudes, beliefs, and philosophies of nominees who propose to represent the presbytery in the General Assembly after their election … in our judgment, does not preclude the nominee, if subsequently elected as a commissioner, from fulfilling his or her constitutional obligation or indeed limit the opportunity of the Holy Spirit to guide both him or her and the Assembly. To the contrary, it merely allows the members of the presbytery to make an informed judgment as to the persons it desires to elect to represent the presbytery in the highest judicatory of the church, each presbytery being entitled to such representation under the provisions of the Form of Government.

To prohibit members of a presbytery from making an inquiry of nominees (none of whom in this case were required to answer the inquires) as to their present attitudes and philosophy on issues deemed important to the presbytery would result in depriving presbytery members of a right to make a meaningful and intelligent choice in their election of commissioners.1

Presbyteries can be grateful for the Presbytery of Pittsburgh’s example in 1978 and can implement similar ideas in their own presbyteries’ election procedures.

One Presbytery’s Example

The procedures in Los Ranchos presbytery also serve as an excellent model. Presently, the election rules of Los Ranchos presbytery state:

Those planning to be nominated to be commissioners to General Assembly shall provide the Stated Clerk’s office with a completed, standardized biographical resume and responses to four questions. This form shall be submitted prior to the meeting of election, with sufficient time to be reproduced for all presbyters to have in hand at the time of voting.2

The four questions mentioned above are the following:

1. What do you believe the church is called to do in this world?
2. How did the Scriptures mold your faith?
3. How have you sensed God’s call to serve as a commissioner to General Assembly?
4. What do you see as the most significant issue(s) coming before this year’s General Assembly?

A two-minute nominating speech is given followed by a two-minute “Why I deserve your vote” speech by the nominee. These speeches, supplemented with the material written by each nominee in response to the questions, allows the presbyters to properly discern whether a person has been called by God to be a commissioner to the GA. It allows the presbyters to discern whether a commissioner nominee is equipped to watch over the church’s doctrine and theology, and guard the flock from false teaching.

Other presbyteries have enacted election rules stipulating that the presbytery’s nomination committee must present more than one nominee per open commissioner slot and an open question and answer period be held at presbytery immediately prior to the election. Some presbyteries have also placed in their election rules the requirement of a written statement by each nominee and alternate (with sufficient time before the next meeting) and contact information.3 Questions from the floor are lawful but some presbyteries have found it helpful to place specific provisions in the election procedures to afford the opportunity for presbyters to examine the nominees during the election meeting.

Changing the Presbytery’s Election Process

Only a handful of presbyteries have election procedures in the standing rules that allow for such examination. Many presbyteries have no election procedures in the standing rules of the presbytery. To effectively examine potential GA commissioners, election procedures should be in place that allow for the examination. In order to create or amend such election procedures, a simple process needs to be followed.

A session must send an overture to the presbytery that requests that the presbytery create (or re-visit) policies for electing commissioners to General Assembly. It may overture the presbytery to do some of the following:

• Nominate at least two persons for each minister and elder commissioner slot allowed by the Book of Order;
• Require a verbal presentation from each minister and elder nominee;
• Allow a question and answer period;
• Provide a printed biographical resume of each nominee and alternate at least one presbytery meeting prior to the election meeting including contact information;
• Provide the written answers of each nominee and alternate at least one presbytery meeting prior to the election meeting regarding specific questions (e.g. the four questions Los Ranchos uses).

Once the overture is submitted to the presbytery, supporters of the overture should ensure that presbyters are aware of the benefit this overture would produce and that the presbyters will be present to vote the day the overture is taken up. If approved, a change to the election procedures in the standing rules is made (or, in the case where there are no election procedures, they are created).

Presbyters who take their God-given responsibility as guardians of the church’s faith seriously need adequate procedures to elect GA commissioners. If presbyters create such procedures today, the actions of the 2010 General Assembly will more faithfully reflect Christ’s will revealed in Scripture.

This article first appeared in Theology Matters, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Mar/Apr 2009).