As the standing committees completed their work, and the
plenary body took its first actions on their recommendations, the volume of
business to track is enormous. (Tracking it is the responsibility of the
tracking team in OGA, headed for the umpteenth year in a row by veteran Jim
Collie of Santa Fe Presbytery, right.)
As the recommendations on high-profile items came forth on
Tuesday, the profile of this Assembly took shape. This is an Assembly dominated
by progressives – I would say about a 2:1 ratio, which is easily the largest
differential since reunion. By contrast, the 2010 Assembly, which put forth
Amendment 10-A and the new Form of Government was about 54-46 on the
progressive side. It is apparent that not only did the evangelical wing of the
church not mount an organization, they did not bother to put forth candidates
for commissioners.
On Tuesday, the Marriage Issues committee recommended
adoption of both items being touted by the progressive Covenant Network: Item
10-3, an authoritative interpretation of W-4.9001 which would give pastors
discretion to perform same-sex marriages (or not to perform them) according to
the dictates of their conscience, under the laws of their jurisdiction; and
item 10-2, a proposed amendment to W-4.9001 that would reframe the explanation
of marriage to a covenant between two persons (rather than “a man and a woman.”)
They passed the committee by votes of 51-18 and 49-18, respectively. (Committee
votes on these issues tend to skew more progressive than plenaries, in part
because the committees listen to the stories of those most deeply affected
during the open hearings. Many times, a committee has put forth a more
progressive recommendation only to have the minority report prevail on the
plenary floor.) One commissioner on that committee told me that one reason they
adopted both items was to communicate to the church that they were not trying
to make an “end run” of the presbyteries, which have to vote on amendments, but
not authoritative interpretations.
If approved by the full Assembly, the authoritative
interpretation would take effect immediately on the adjournment of the
Assembly, and would not be affected by a negative vote of the presbyteries on
the proposed amendment. That comes up
for action Thursday afternoon.
The standing committee on Middle East issues, by a 45-20
voted to recommend divestment from the three targeted companies (HP, Caterpiller,
Motorola Solutions) that are profiting from supporting the Israeli military
occupation of Palestinian territory. They did so by recommending approval of
the more modest proposal of New Covenant Presbytery (item 04-04) with a clarifying
amendment saying, “This action on divestment does not mean an alignment with
the overall strategy of the global BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanctions)
movement.” Personally, I think that is too nuanced to change the headline in
the secular media, if the Assembly concurs. A more radical statement offered by
Grace Presbytery (04-02) that would have labeled the Israeli occupation and
sanctions “apartheid” failed in committee by a single vote (33-32), but will
still have to be voted on by the full Assembly.
In the committee I resourced, on Mid Council Issues, the
recommendations of the Mid Council Commission were passed on to the Assembly
with overwhelming approval following an amendment increasing the maximum number
of synods to 12 from the eight originally proposed (there are 16 now). In a
separate action, the standing committee rejected appeals by the Commission and
recommended that the Synod of Puerto Rico be exempted from consolidation given
its unique cultural identity. A bizarre proposal to form a single synod with
regional offices dedicated to various functions is being put forth as a
minority report. If approved, the amended Commission recommendations would
still require the synods to make a proposal by 2016 or that Assembly would be
expected to appoint an Administrative Commission to recommend boundary
realignment to the 2018 Assembly.
While the amendment increasing the number of synods alleviates
some of the anxiety regarding wholesale upheaval of the synod transformations
currently underway, it still is merely a technical fix on an adaptive challenge
facing the church. By continuing to push the threat of an Administrative
Commission to force consolidation, it subordinates mission to structure,
instead of supporting a more organic structure that emerges from the evolving
mission needs of presbyteries. It remains to be demonstrated how larger, more
distant synods enhance the mission of presbyteries and congregations. But, as I noted in my preview blogs, the
inertia behind a second two-year commission’s recommendations is hard to overcome.
More personally, the Mid Council Commission demonstrated
disrespect and contempt of synods and their leaders, offering thinly veiled
accusations in the form of pastoral palliatives like “we know that change is
hard to embrace and synod executives are fearful of losing their jobs.” That
completely disregards both the major transformations in synods over the last
four years, as well as the public commitments of persons such as myself to
transitional (i.e., temporary) employment to facilitate change. They owe the synods and us an
apology.
On Wednesday, following a morning set aside for reading
reports, the Assembly convened in plenary session to begin consideration of
committee recommendations. The first
item of business was the “division of the house” on the controversial vote to
permit the moderator to poll presbytery executives as an advisory group. The
persistent rumor – reported in Monday’s blog – that this was an effort to
influence the Middle East issues has been denied by the executives promoting
the motion. (That blog post was picked up by the Presbyterian Outlook and
linked on their Facebook page, increasing page views tenfold.) Equipped with
electronic voting devices, the division of the house taken this afternoon
rejected the motion by a 52%-48% margin, rendering moot the concerns as to
whether a 2/3 majority was necessary.
Then, employing a change in the standing rules adopted last
Assembly, the plenary body disposed of 131 items of business via a “consent
calendar” – which approves non-controversial items in an omnibus motion. About
15 items were removed from the motion for debate during their respective committee
reports.
But the biggest news today was the Assembly’s approval – for
the second time in four years – of a recommendation to add the Belhar
Confession to our Book of Confessions. It will now be sent to the presbyteries
for their votes, and if 2/3 approve, it will be added to our confessions at the
next Assembly. That is much more likely
this time (it was disapproved in 2011) since the major resistance came from
fears it would mandate gay and lesbian ordination. Post 10-A, the wind has been
taken out of the sails of that argument.
Of note to my friends in the Synod of the Sun, Grace Presbytery commissioner Dan Klein offered a memorial minute Wednesday night for Sara B. Moseley, former moderator of the General Assembly, synod icon, and a truly gracious individual.
Thursday will be a big day of business, including action on
the same-sex marriage recommendations.
We will see if the crying YAAD appears (more on this tomorrow).