Advertisement

Beyond Prayer: How do we begin to turn the Denomination around?

I have recently read and susequently re-read Robert Bullock's carefully crafted series on the current state of the denomination and those elements that have had an effect on our present malaise. Following this process I have also read articles in Presbyterians Today and The Layman, all dealing with elements of the same concern.


As I have pondered over these thoughtful treatises I have been forcibly struck with the fact that, in each instance, we give cognizance to a series of root issues. But if we do not face up to the fact that unless we take steps to initiate immediate remedial action to address them the downward spiral, which is presently consuming us, will continue unabated. We seem reticent to address positively these obvious issues, even though we repeatedly acknowledge the awesome toll they are taking on our once proud denomination.

We have taken one important corrective step, and that is the decision to move to a biennial General Assembly format. But that, in and of itself, will not address the other major issues that are strangling us unless we begin at the same time to clean up and streamline the entire process.

I would submit to you, that in this new format we must give the commissioners ample time to personally digest the issues which they, in their respective committee assignments, will be called upon to address. Further, that they be permitted to study these issues in the light of their own personal understanding, without the stifling presence of outside influencing factors. I refer to the continuing absurdity of a cloying cadre of GA-imposed “advisors,” who without question are there to push the prevailing party line. Let the commissioners come to their own conclusions after study and research, and further, charge them with that responsibility.

I have long considered this procedure as not only costly, when one considers the fact that in Denver there will essentially be as many staff people as there will be commisioners, but it is to my mind an insult to the intelligence and native capabilities of those dedicated individuals who have been elected by their presbyteries to serve in this responsible capacity. Further, the GA should issue a call to those bodies to send their best and brightest and not just relegate this selection, as is too frequently the case, to an honorary status.

At a time when the scarcity of money is becoming a very real concern, the downsizing of the presently cumbersome GA meeting process would not only exhibit a positive sign of good stewardship to our constituency it would greatly enhance the overall efficiency of the process with what I opine would be a far more credible end result. We could even reduce the cost of the meeting itself by removing it from its present carnival sideshow concept to a more concise, uncluttered and vastly less costly process. In so doing we could move to smaller less costly venues with far less demand on the local organizing bodies and accordingly a more cohesive response.

Let me now address another aspect of this issue which has been touched on in a very thought-provoking way in Presbyterans Today in an article titled ” A Balancing Act” by Margo Houts. It deals with the whole matter of ” God alone is Lord of the conscience ” — the process of voting “one’s conscience” — which is constantly drummed into elder commisioners or session members at every judicatory level.

As an ordained elder for 50-plus years, I can never recall the use of this clause being as prevalent as it has been within the span of the past 10 years, the most damaging and divisive 10 years in our modern history. This to my mind has become a pervasive, if not invasive, aspect of our life together as Presbyterians and I would submit, that it is the very genesis of much of the discord and rancor emanating from our process today.

We have been far too long hobbled by what may well be perceived as the unwitting or perhaps witting misrepresentation and abuse of “God alone is Lord of the Conscience” by some elements within our structure. They are zealously in pursuit of their own agenda, to the complete disregard of the damaging fallout such self-centered, tunnel-vision perspectives are wreaking on a denomination that is staggering from repeated attempts to push divisive issues on its constituency. In this process we continue to alienate that great middle mass of our denomination who are in reality our lifesblood.

Because all of this transpires in a capsulated, pressure-cooker environment, with commissioners, who are for the most part political neophytes, and because of time constraints ill-prepared, pressured, beleaguered and battered with the strategic weaponry of “voting their own conscience” they have no real opportunity really to exercise the most important element of all, good God-given common sense, or perhaps better stated an untainted sense of what is, in the light of God, truly good for the whole.

I sincerely believe that our act of “conscience” goes beyond the concern for what “I” think because that act also affects what other people think and feel and therefore “I” have to build into my process of evaluating my response not only to how “I” can personally live with my decision, but in turn how “I” can live with my fellow man after rendering my decision. As a commissioner one cannot be an autonomous entity operating in a realm of self-concern to the exclusion of the entity one is there to serve. In this vein I sincerely believe we have permitted ourselves to be diverted from the true historic intent of voting one’s conscience, and in the process we have thrown the baby out with the bath water.

In conclusion, it is time to clean up our act. We have the opportunity with our move to a biennial Assembly to streamline the whole process, cut out the non-essential fat, dispense with the double cost of the advisor concept, provide commisioners with ample time to study the issues at hand in the light of clear conscience and give them the opportunity to use their gifts of common sense in an atmosphere that is conducive to producing a thoughtful, prayerful result, unharried and unfettered.

Let’s give our people the sense of dignity as well as credit for being capable of arriving at sound and just decisions which are good for the whole of our denomination, and not the factions that would seek to impose their will on others at the already demonstrated cost of schism and discord which is tearing us apart. Until we honestly face up the to impediments in our process and exhibit the courage to correct them, restoring at the same time sound due process, we will continue to disintegrate on the rocks of discontent. It is time we began to think and act on those things which will foster the integrity of the denomination as a unified body of Christ, and not a loosely wrapped entity of conflicting ideologies which is proving self-destructive.

Line

James K. Babcock, an elder and member of First church, Bozeman, Mont., is a trustee for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Foundation and chair of Yellowstone Presbytery’s Mission Implementation Task Force.

Send your comment to The Outlook. Please give your hometown.

LATEST STORIES

Advertisement