Facing budget deficits that resulted in a loss of 34 missionaries and weary from voting on Book of Order amendments dealing with sexuality, commissioners to the 213th GA voted to go to biennial General Assemblies beginning with 2005. Now that six months have passed, and there has been time to reflect on such a drastic change, we should ask what serious effects biennial GAs will have on the church and whether the next GA ought to reverse the decision and restore annual GAs. Consider these reasons to restore annual assemblies:
Charting Our Course As A Denomination
The annual GA is an opportunity for the elders from local congregations to give vision and direction to the church. The investment of significant time and financial resources is well spent. No presbytery or session would consider reducing its number of meetings by half because those bodies are ruling bodies that are responsible for setting the direction and determining the objectives of the body.
Decision-Making Power Is Meant To Be Vested In Our Elected Leadership In Our Form Of Government
The accountability of hired GA staff to the elected GA will be reduced significantly by biennial Assemblies. The result will be more decision-making power vested in bodies less representative of our local congregations.
The grass roots of the church—our congregations and presbyteries—will give up a major portion of their decision-making prerogative to national staff and the General Assembly Council (GAC) if we meet only every other year. Staff are already moving in that direction. After the GAC recently adopted a statement that spoke strongly against military action against Iraq, Vernon Broyles, associate director of social justice, who helped write the statement, told the GAC, “If we go to biennial assemblies, it will become more and more important for the council to address these issues.” The statement on Iraq was written by the staff leadership team, at the suggestion of Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick.
No Cost Savings Likely By Going To Biennial Assemblies
Commissioners to last June’s GA were told that the annual savings for the national, synod and presbytery budgets would be 5 million dollars. Costs as reported by the Presbyterian News Service (10/25/02) now are projected to be much less: only about $815,000. And, the cost savings will be further reduced by the cost of the off-year gatherings called for by last June’s GA action. It is clear there will be no cost savings and, in fact, the actual cost of both the off-year gathering and the biennial may be significantly higher than the cost of current annual GAs.
Deluge Of Business
Currently, GA commissioners must be familiar with and prepared to vote on more than 700 items of business. On the first day of the last GA, fewer than 20% of the commissioners had read all the papers. The majority of those items of business come from the offices of GA. Entities like the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy, General Assembly Council, the Committee on the Office of GA, meet at least 3 times per year, generating business that eventually must come before a GA. Without first finding a way to decrease the business before the GA, commissioners to biennial GAs will be forced to delegate more business to staff, refer it to another GA, or vote without adequate knowledge of the issues.
Participation By Presbyterians In Their Form Of Government
Participation by Presbyterians in the life of their church will be decreased by biennial assemblies. In order to address the increasing imbalance between advisory delegates and commissioners, the Committee on the Office of General Assembly (COGA) is proposing that the number of commissioners be increased from about 554 to 816—a 47% increase. (This must be voted on by the next GA and then the presbyteries). However, since commissioner participation in two annual General Assemblies equals a total of 1108 Presbyterians compared to a total of 816 at each biennial Assembly, participation by Presbyterians in their form of government is nonetheless significantly decreased by going to biennial assemblies. There are better ways to correct the imbalance between commissioners and advisory delegates than the drastic step of biennial GAs.
Currently, people elected to national level committees serve for 3 year terms with the possibility of re-election for a second 3 year term. COGA is proposing that those classes be changed to 4 year terms to coordinate with biennial GAs. This will limit the number of Presbyterians who are able to participate in national level leadership.
Biennial GAs will foster the sense of disconnect that many congregations feel from the national level. The Presbyterian Church is a connectional church and the GA is our ultimate connectionalism in action. The GA is the place where presbyteries and local sessions participate most fully. Congregationalism is already rampant in our denomination with congregations emotionally and/or financially opting out of their responsibilities to our connectionalism. Biennial assemblies will encourage that disconnect from the national level.
Disruptive Delays In Bringing Closure To Denominational Concerns
Voting on Book of Order changes will be dragged out for 2 years and Book of Confessions changes will take 4 years. Can anyone imagine the detrimental impact it will have on the denomination to vote on sexuality amendments over a two year period? We would be embroiled in far more controversy for longer periods.
The Requirement For Increased Years Of Service
The GA moderator pool of candidates will be significantly decreased. Few pastors, seminary professors, or elders can leave their jobs for 2 years. Suggestions that the vice-moderator substitute for the moderator in order to lessen the demands of the position, substitutes an appointed person for the person elected by his or her peers and will limit the positive impact of the Moderator’s unifying presence, vision, and healing ministry in the church.
Resolving conflicts
We should acknowledge that our denomination is divided on many issues. Just as no pastor would counsel a husband and wife in a troubled marriage to talk less frequently, so too in our denomination, communication is essential to resolving differences. Annual assemblies allow us to come together, to meet the people in denominational leadership and to communicate the work of the church back to our presbyteries. One person drew an analogy between biennial GAs and a visit to the dentist. He commented that while visits to the dentist were costly and often painful, waiting two years between visits did not improve the situation—it made it exponentially worse.
Conclusion
The vote of the last GA to implement biennial GAs has put the church on a path that will undermine our connectionalism, limit participation by Presbyterians in the decision-making of the church, and foster more divisiveness. It will not provide a cost savings to an ailing budget and may in fact exacerbate budget concerns when Presbyterians feel more disenfranchised and disconnected from their national leadership and opt out of financially supporting a system in which their voice is increasingly limited and marginalized.
This article first appeared in Theology Matters, Vol. 8, No. 6 (Nov/Dec 2002).
.jpg){kind=link}