Advertisement

GA 2010: nFOG Q&A illustrates polity differences

MINNEAPOLIS— The proposed Form of Government revision that the 219th General Assembly will consider this week might be considered like an architectural plan, some members of the task force which proposed that revision suggested.

On July 3, several pre-assembly workshops took place just prior to the General Assembly opening for business, providing commissioners, advisors and observers an opportunity to take part in a series of Riverside Conversations. These conversations provided a time for detailed discussion of several key assembly issues, including one on the proposed new Form of Government.

FoG task force members Dan Williams and Carol Hunley opened the conversation by spelling out the proposed revision, likening it to an architectural plan. The plan provides the exterior structure while presbyteries and congregations provide interior layout and design for day-to-day working and living, they said.

Following a time for discussion in smaller groups, there was a time for a question-and-answer session. One audience member, when comparing current polity with the new proposal, described it as the difference between “walking a dog on a leash versus letting the dog, surrounded by an invisible fence, have freedom to move around.”

Many questions were raised: What about synods? Does the new Form of Government proposal leave room for the ordination of homosexuals? Is the new form more “missional?”

Through those questions, it became clear that those participating in this Riverside Conversation care deeply about the structure of the polity of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

LATEST STORIES

Advertisement