A False Consensus for Moderator?

The office and role of moderator can have a significant effect not only on this Assembly, but also on the future of the church. The moderator not only presides over the business of the Assembly, but then has two years of office in which she or he can put a “stamp” on the denomination. Neal Presa has used his two years to promote Belhar and to highlight changing ecclesiology. Our departed friend Cindy Bolbach put the full weight of her office behind adoption of the new Form of Government. The moderator is an official ambassador for the denomination around the world. And, the moderator makes appointments to various task forces of the church between assemblies, and selects the committee leadership for the next assembly. It is a powerful and prestigious office.

Which is why the extensive discussion, voting, and pageantry associated with the election of a moderator is important. The moderator becomes a living symbol of the unity of the church. However, the (lack of) range of candidates for this year's Assembly may mean that the election will generate a false consensus, the appearance of unity without the substance that is generated through the give and take of different points of view.

Selection of the moderator is often one of the most difficult actions to predict. Commissioners weigh two different factors – first, how well the candidate corresponds to their vision of and for the church, and second, whether the person has a personality and presence that will bear up under long meetings and the stress of late night plenary debates. Veteran Assembly wonks always say the decision depends most heavily on the question-and-answer period just prior to the vote. This is the commissioners’ opportunity not only to hear the candidates, but to “try them on for size” regarding their personality and presence.

Kelly Allen

The “race” for moderator this year is more like a friendly “amble.” There are three candidates who are “standing” (we don’t say “running” – it sounds too ambitious) for the office, and there is little to distinguish them from one another theologically.

Kelly Allen, from Mission Presbytery, is pastor of University Presbyterian Church in San Antonio, and is a teaching elder. Her website is www.kellyformoderator.com.

Heath Rada

Heath Rada, from Western Carolina Presbytery, is the former president of the Presbyterian School of Christian Education, and most recently CEO of the Richmond chapter of the American Red Cross.  He is the only ruling elder among the candidates. His website is www.heathrada.org.

John Wilkinson

John Wilkinson of Genesee Valley Presbytery, is pastor of Third Presbyterian Church, Rochester, NY, and a teaching elder. His website is www.johnwilkinsonpcusa.com.

(The official handbook on all candidates can be downloaded here: https://www.pcusa.org/resource/2014-moderatorial-cadidates-handbook/ )

All three of these candidates would be categorized on the moderate-to-progressive side of the theological spectrum. This is the first Assembly in memory without a clear conservative choice.  Of the three, Wilkinson – a co-founder of the Covenant Network – has the most progressive credentials. Allen and Rada are in the moderate-to-progressive category.

If there is one notable distinction among the candidates, it may be in the choice of their vice-moderator candidates. Rada is the only one to tab a racial-ethnic candidate, Larissa Kwong-Abazia of New York City. Wilkinson nabbed MaryAnn McKibben Dana, a rising star among the NextChurch crowd. Allen’s choice, Leslie King of Austin would appear to offer less name recognition or balance – but you can only glean so much on paper. I have met and respect all three moderatorial candidates and think we would be well-served by any of them. I am closest, personally, to Heath Rada, whom I have known for 24 years. I would be pleased if he were elected, but I can’t say I would be displeased with any of the candidates.

This one will come down to the Q&A. Your guess is as good as mine. Should be an interesting vote.