Hot-button Issue #3: Synods

Ed. note:  It is my hope that this blog brings wisdom and insight into the business before the Assembly. My desire to report fairly does not mean that I do not have opinions on the matters presented, or that the posts are opinion-free. In the matter of synods, I have a greater investment than most: I am employed by a synod, I served as constitutional adviser to the first Mid Councils Commission, and I helped draft the response of synod executives to the report of the second Commission.

Okay, so maybe changes in synods are not likely to raise the hackles of most Presbyterians, but as someone who has been significantly engaged in the mission of synods my entire ministry, the future of synods is for me at least a “hot-button issue.”  And, how it is addressed will have an impact on every Presbyterian.

As the least understood of all the councils of the church, synods become an easy target for organizational anxiety.  With increasingly tight budgets, people look at the annual per capita assessment – typically around $2 to $5 (the Synod of the Sun is the only synod without a per capita) – and wonder if having synods is necessary or wise.

In 2010, the General Assembly approved overtures from the Synod of the Southwest and the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly (COGA) seeking the formation of an administrative commission with the charge to consult with the church, review the mission and function of middle governing bodies (as presbyteries and synods were then known), and to report “new models” they might recommend. All other related overtures to the assembly (including one from New Hope Presbytery to eliminate synods) were answered with this response. 

In the course of its work, the commission (known as Mid Councils Commission I, or MCC1) was sidetracked by the anxiety among Evangelicals over the adoption of Amendment 10-A, permitting the ordination of sexually active gays and lesbians. The Evangelicals sought structures such as non-geographic presbyteries and synods in which they could associate only with like-minded Presbyterians. The Commission also brought back a recommendation to eliminate synods as “ecclesial bodies” and to “repurpose” them as “missional partnerships.”

The 2012 Assembly rejected all of the major recommendations of MCC1 recognizing (at least as I saw it) the necessity of synods as intermediate administrative councils of the church. Urged by COGA, it nevertheless reconstituted the Commission with a specific charge to look at the future of synods. (Perhaps not surprisingly, COGA managed to secure one-third of the seats on this commission.) This commission – MCC2 – has recommended that synods be reduced in number from the current 16 to no more than eight and that a plan to do so be developed by the synods themselves and submitted to the 2016 Assembly. If such a plan is not forthcoming, or is not approved, the 2016 Assembly would create a commission to recommend a plan to the 2018 Assembly.

There is great power in inertia, and it will be difficult for the Assembly to reject the recommendations of a second commission. Nevertheless, the executives of fourteen (of sixteen) synods represented at a recent meeting (including me) unanimously approved a response to the MCC2 report asking the Assembly to disapprove the recommendation. The response notes:

• Creative change is already happening within and among synods across the denomination         
• It is not clear how consolidating synods advances the mission of the church
• Consolidation would divert untold dollars and energy working out legal and relational issues
• The unique characteristics of each synod pose challenges for consolidation
• Consolidation creates problems of scale that impede relationships, accountability, responsiveness, and contextuality.
• The process for consolidation is too vague and lacks clear information on financial implications.

Should the Commission’s recommendations be adopted, however, do not look for change to come quickly. Without a process or funding in place, the sixteen synods will be hard-pressed to produce a plan in time for the 2016 Assembly (one synod only meets every two years). Any consolidation imposed by the Assembly in 2018 would likely take years to complete, given the possibility of civil lawsuits over the disposition of synod assets in one or more jurisdictions.