Advertisement
Holy Week resources and reflections

Judicial Commission rules on per capita pledge question

A presbytery cannot require a congregation to pay all of its per capita or to fulfill a mission pledge in order to receive financial assistance from the presbytery, the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission has ruled.

The ruling helps answer the ongoing question of what presbyteries can do -- or not do -- when congregations refuse to pay all or part of their per capita assessments, often to protest positions taken by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). And it affirms a decision issued last April by the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of Mid-America.

The General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission, the PC(USA)'s highest court, had earlier ruled, in July 2003 in the Minihan v. Scioto Valley Presbytery case, that a presbytery can't force a session to pay per capita, the per-member assessment that the General Assembly sets, and it can't punish a session for failing to pay per capita. While paying per capita is not mandatory, in a connectional system it is strongly encouraged, the judicial commission ruled in that case, stating that withholding funds "as a mean of protest or dissent" is "a serious breach of the trust and love with which our Lord Jesus intends the covenant community to function."

A presbytery cannot require a congregation to pay all of its per capita or to fulfill a mission pledge in order to receive financial assistance from the presbytery, the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission has ruled.

The ruling helps answer the ongoing question of what presbyteries can do — or not do — when congregations refuse to pay all or part of their per capita assessments, often to protest positions taken by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). And it affirms a decision issued last April by the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of Mid-America.

The General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission, the PC(USA)’s highest court, had earlier ruled, in July 2003 in the Minihan v. Scioto Valley Presbytery case, that a presbytery can’t force a session to pay per capita, the per-member assessment that the General Assembly sets, and it can’t punish a session for failing to pay per capita. While paying per capita is not mandatory, in a connectional system it is strongly encouraged, the judicial commission ruled in that case, stating that withholding funds “as a mean of protest or dissent” is “a serious breach of the trust and love with which our Lord Jesus intends the covenant community to function.”

This latest ruling, issued Oct. 18, came in a different case, this time involving Heartland Presbytery and a challenge to a policy that Heartland adopted in the summer of 2003. Heartland’s policy stated that only congregations with “full participation” in the life of the presbytery, including making per capita payments, would be eligible to get help from the presbytery in receiving grants or obtaining loans. The presbytery’s support is crucial when a church applies for a loan to buy land or finance construction because in the PC(USA) system church property is held in trust by the presbytery for the benefit of the denomination.

Just months after Heartland presbytery adopted its policy, it was challenged by

the session of First United church in Paola, Kan. and by two pastors, A. Kirk Johnston and Laurie Johnston. Kirk Johnston is pastor of the Paola church, about 25 miles south of Kansas City, and his wife, Laurie, serves as stated supply at Hillsdale church, a few miles away.

Both First United and Hillsdale have withheld per capita, using those funds to support mission work the congregations consider a better use of funds than giving the money to the denomination. 

The Synod of the Mid-Atlantic Permanent Judicial Commission ruled April 3 that the PC(USA) constitution provides “that the session (of a congregation) has sole responsibility to distribute the gifts of the people” and that Heartland’s policy had a “coercive force” that was not acceptable. Heartland presbytery appealed, arguing that that ruling would interfere with the right of a presbytery to determine its own budget.

But the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission ruled on October 18 that while presbyteries are required by the PC(USA) constitution to develop budgets, those responsibilities can’t be construed in such a way as to violate other aspects of the constitution.

The presbytery argued that no congregation has a “right” to receive a grant or loan, so its policy couldn’t be viewed as punishment. But the judicial commission disagreed, ruling, “a congregation’s failure to pay per capita apportionments or to fulfill a mission pledge cannot be made a condition of eligibility to request a presbytery’s financial assistance.”

The ruling also stated that Heartland’s policy “closes the door to positive dialogue between governing bodies who are partners in mission.” The policy would prohibit certain dissenting congregations from applying for financial assistance “without any opportunity for inquiry into the reasons underlying the congregation’s nonpayment,” the ruling states.

The ruling does say, however, that failure to pay per capita can be one factor among many that the presbytery considers when deciding how best to allocate its limited financial resources. In other words, withholding per capita can’t alone be reason for refusing to provide financial support, but it can be one factor among others that is considered. The judicial commission ruled, “it is within the right and discretion of a presbytery to consider a congregation’s financial participation in the life of the larger church as one of the many relevant factors as it crafts policies and exercises pastoral care.”

The synod’s ruling last spring vacated and set aside Heartland’s policy, and that decision still holds.

LATEST STORIES

Advertisement