February 25, 2010: Devolution
I am still stunned about yesterday's Presbynews article by Jerry Van Marter regarding the proposal to create a commission with the authority "to organize new or realign existing presbyteries and synods in response to actions of the 219th General Assembly or requests from presbyteries or synods." Maybe I am the only one to feel this way; but my jaw dropped, I sat back in my chair and felt all the wind whistle out of me. I did not see it coming.
If approved, this step has the potential to be the ultimate game-changer.
My hat is off to the Stated Clerk for making this General Assembly suddenly a lot more interesting.
The proposal for this COGA commission is likely to have a bigger impact than debates over ordination standards, marriage, and Israel -- combined. Why? Because, if approved, the fallout of decisions on those issues will be worked out by this commission.
It may be the single, most-important piece of business coming to the General Assembly since the 1983 reunion because, in effect, it puts in place the mechanism for undoing reunion.
The paragraph in Jerry's article to which I keep returning is this:
At Presbyterian reunion in 1983, middle governing body boundaries were realigned “but basically preserved the work of these two former studies. “The structure coming out of reunion is clearly devolving,” Parsons said.
"...is clearly devolving."
The implication of that phrase is enormous. Though it is true and though I have been saying the same thing for several years now, it is still stunning to see that in quotes as the official position of the chief constitutional officer of the denomination. Regardless whether commissioners approve the establishment of the commission, they are going to have to wrestle with the meaning of the "is clearly devolving" structure. I am somewhat surprised that there has not been more reporting and more discussion about this during the meetings of the General Assembly Mission Council (GAMC) and the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly (COGA) that are taking place this week.
Nonetheless, if commissioners do approve the commission; every congregation and every presbytery will have to figure out how they plan to navigate the devolution. It will not be a hypothetical "what if at some point in the future?" -- it will be a question of "what are we going to do right now?" Where do we go? With whom do we connect? How do we go forward?
What happens if enough presbyteries seek to establish non-geographic synods; that is, more than one additional non-geographic synod? For example, could there be an Evangelical Synod of Southern California and Hawaii and a More Light Synod of Southern California and Hawaii? (The real question, obviously, is who gets Hawaii?) Could a congregation in Phoenix or Boise or Atlanta or Philadelphia become a part of a non-geographic presbytery in a non-geographic synod?
Please keep in mind that these are not necessarily bad questions to be asking. Instead of perpetuating a downward death spiral, these are exactly the kinds of questions that need to be posed in order to consider alternative ways of going forward.
Still, approving a commission with this much power is not something to take lightly. It is like there are layers to this idea; each hour, I come across something new.
What do you think? Am I making too much of this?
Follow on RSS
Back to 219th General Assembly Prep Index
Posts older than June 20, 2008: Archives