I just have to say, the singing is amazing (not mine of course). Over 800 people singing makes a very, very powerful sound!

From the Mid Council Commission II Committee, an overture was passed to “Direct that a new configuration of synod boundaries be established [based on an emerging sense of purpose, partnership, context, and call through a collaborative process between the synods and presbyteries resulting in no more than ten to twelve synods. The synods will report to the 222nd General Assembly (2016).”

The language used in the overture was “To recommend to the 223rd General Assembly (2018) the boundary changes necessary to achieve a total of no more than 10-12 synods, if there remain synods and presbyteries that have been unable or unwilling to engage in a collaborative process of reconfiguration.”

The most anticipated issue for the day was an overture from Middle East Issues calling for the divestment of Presbyterian Foundation and Presbyterian Board of Pension investments to be divested from three corporations (Hewlett-Packard, Caterpillar, Inc.and Motorola Solutions) “and not to reinvest in these companies until the Mission Responsibility Through Investment (MRTI) Committee of the PC(USA) is fully satisfied that product sales and services by these companies are no longer in conflict with our church investment policy. This action on divestment does not mean an alignment with the overall strategy of the global BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanctions) movement.”

This is a very complex issue! The reference to ‘our church investment policy’ concerns companies that are making a profit in in situations that are non-peaceful, in this case in the midst of the conflict between Israel and Palestine. The major controversy surrounds the perception that by divesting from these companies we appear, to some, to be divesting from Israel itself and, therefore, appear to be siding with Palestine in the conflict. That perception is exacerbated by the global BDS movement, which is aimed directly at divesting from companies doing business with Israel.

Divestment from Israel is not the intent of the overture, but sometimes perception prevails. Having heard from many Jewish ecumenical partners, the perception of divestment of Israel seems to be prevailing among them.

The other side of the argument is that more often than not, it is only when economic pressure is applied that progress for peace is made. The Palestinians have made a commitment to non-violent means to accomplish this peace, and what they are asking us to do is hardly heroic – stop supporting companies who are allowing their product to oppress us and destroy our homes.

That’s a simplified summary of the issue, as the debate (including amendments, minority reports, and more amendments) lasted for over three hours in the Plenary session. Many had strong feelings on the issue, and many had conflicted feelings on it. It was closest vote on any overture at GA this year. It passed 310 in favor, 303 against.

This will be my final blog from GA, due to an early morning of meetings, and then I will be traveling home. Yay! This has been an invaluable experience of meeting new friends, seeing how our highest church governing body works, and learning about the things that presbyterians care deeply about. It has been an opportunity to become aware of and informed about the ministries and mission of our denomination. I understand why people who have served as Commissioners to GA continue to attend subsequent GA meetings as observers. You will experience the passion of the church and the Spirit of God here. Passion and Spirit will catch you off guard, overwhelm you and deepen your faith in this divine/human institution called the church. It has been a privilege!
Dave

To congregations of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.):
Grace and peace to you in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Earlier today, the 221st General Assembly (2014) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) approved a recommendation from its Assembly Committee on Civil Union and Marriage Issues allowing for pastoral discretion to perform “any such marriage they believe the Holy Spirit calls them to perform,” where legal by state law.
They also approved a recommendation to change language in the Book of Order to indicate that “marriage involves a unique commitment between two people, traditionally a man and a woman.”
Both decisions came with much thought, discussion, and prayer, and clearly the entire body that is the PC(USA) will be interpreting these actions for some time.
Please know that the same triune God in whom we place our hope, faith, and trust in is still in control, and that the assembly’s action today is the result of deep discernment to hear God’s voice and discern God’s will.
We concur with the feelings expressed by Teaching Elder Commissioner Jeffrey Bridgeman, moderator of the Assembly Committee on Civil Union and Marriage Issues, during his presentation to the assembly.
“The apostle Paul tells us that ours is, in fact, ‘the ministry of reconciliation’ as ‘ambassadors of Christ,’ and he died for us so that we might be reconciled, that we might become reconcilers,” Bridgeman said.
In this season of both happiness and sadness over the assembly’s decisions, we call on you to remember the overflowing grace and love God gifts us with, and to take seriously our charge to bestow the same grace and love on one another.
In the name of Jesus Christ our Lord,

Ruling Elder Heath K. Rada
Moderator, 221st General Assembly (2014)

The Reverend Gradye Parsons

Stated Clerk of the General Assembly

Ruling Elder Linda Bryant Valentine

Executive Director, Presbyterian Mission Agency

As everyone probably knows by now the breaking news out of General Assembly yesterday was the passing of two overtures from the Committee on Civil Unions and Marriage. The first overture that passed, overwhelmingly, was an “Authoritative Interpretation” (AI) on the Directory for Worship. The AI gives Teaching Elders (Pastors) permission to perform marriage ceremonies for all people, in states where it is legal. The AI is not binding, which means a pastor may, out of personal conscience, decline to perform a marriage ceremony. In addition, the Session of each church may approve or disapprove of a ceremony for a same gender couple being performed in that church’s building. The pastor would then be free to perform the ceremony in another appropriate setting.

The second action taken was to recommend a change to the wording in the section on marriage in the Directory of Worship. Specifically, where it says that marriage is between a man and a woman, the wording would be changed to “two people (traditionally a man and a woman)”. The words “(traditionally a man and a woman)” was, in fact, an amendment moved on the floor of the General Assembly, by John Wilkinson, of Third Presbyterian Church, in Rochester. He made the amendment out of pastoral concern for those churches who are deeply troubled by the overture. This particular overture, since it is a change in our constitution, will be sent to every Presbytery over the next12 months, for approval or disapproval.

While the overture to change the wording in the Directory for Worship must go to every presbytery to be voted on, and, if approved by 3/4 of the presbyteries, wouldn’t take effect for 12 months, the Authoritative Interpretation takes effect immediately. In the event that the overture being sent to the presbyteries fails, the Authoritative Interpretation will still stand. A majority of presbyteries must approve the overture for the change to be made to the Directory of Worship.

The actual wording of the overture is that “when a couple requests the involvement of the church in solemnizing their marriage as permitted by the laws of the civil jurisdiction in which the marriage is to take place, teaching elders (or commissioned ruling elders serving congregations) have the pastoral responsibility to assess the capabilities, intentions, and readiness of the couple to be married, and the freedom of conscience in the interpretation of Scripture to participate in any such marriage they believe the Holy Spirit calls them to perform. Exercising such discretion and freedom of conscience under the prayerful guidance of Scripture, teaching elders may perform a marriage service for any such couple in the place where the community gathers for worship, so long as it is approved by the session; or in such other place as may be suitable for a service of Christian marriage. In no case shall any teaching elder’s conscience be bound to conduct any marriage service for any couple except by his or her understanding of the Word, and the leading of the Holy Spirit.”

If that is as clear as mud, I understand. The media is not being all that helpful with its misinterpretation of what was actually passed. The General Assembly is also preparing a FAQ, and as soon as I have that I will share it with you. This is an important discussion for all of us to have, and will be easier to have in person, after I return from GA.

By now, you must know, that I support this overture, as I supported the overture from 2010 on the ordination of Gay or Lesbian Teaching Elders (Pastors). Pastorally, I know that not everyone agrees with or supports this Authoritative Interpretation. So, my strong concern is that we talk, that we share our opinions, our feelings and our faith positions on this, and that most importantly we continue, as we have in the past, to live together in our diversity.

The GA also passed important overtures from other committees as well, including efforts to strengthen ecumenical relationship with other denominations and religions, an overture on gun violence, an overture to strengthen the Peacemaking offering, and many others. If you go to pc-biz.org, you can see all of the committee’s overtures presented and what action was taken by the General Assembly.
Dave

On Wednesday the General Assembly approved the addition of a new confession to our Book of Confessions, The Belhar Confession. When you get a chance, you can read the confession at http://www.pcusa.org/belhar

“The Confession of Belhar is a powerful confession of Christian faith that emerged in South Africa during the years of Apartheid. It is named for the city in South Africa where it was first adopted. It is a statement that focuses on three themes, Unity, Reconciliation, and Justice, in a church environment where racial separation made it impossible for brothers and sisters in Christ to worship together or come to the Lord’s Table together. Churches around the globe have recognized the power and theological insight of Belhar as an expression of Scriptural truth for their own contexts.”
PCUSA/Belhar

Historically, the confessions have been written in response to particular situations. For example, the Westminster Confession spoke specifically to the role of the monarchy and the sovereignty of God. The Barmen Declaration addressed the sin of idolatry during the rise of national socialism in Germany in the 1930’s.
In these cases, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has made the judgment that these confessions written in particular situations articulate for the PC(USA) who we are, what we believe, and what we resolve to do. Only two of our eleven confessional statements were written by the Presbyterian Church. Each of the others has been adopted as our confession.

“The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is again facing a critical time in its history. We are rent apart by division and schism, we have yet to directly confront and confess the racism that has been a significant force in our own history, and we have shown a failure of resolve to make courageous stands for justice. We believe that the Confession of Belhar, a profound statement on unity, reconciliation, and justice in the church, comes to us as a word from God for this particular time and place for the PC(USA).” The Special Committee on the Confession of Belhar

On Monday, I wrote about an overture that recommended Teaching Elders (Pastors) “to assume the moral responsibility of participating in the administrative costs of this church by paying per capita each year, as other church members do”. My objection to this overture had to do with the language of ‘moral responsibility’ (see my blog from Monday “Per Capita” for more explanation). The overture was passed in our committee, which meant it would go to the whole General Assembly for a vote. Today the overture came before the whole General Assembly and it was voted down (which should prove to all of you how very wise your pastor is – sorry, it’s getting very late :).
Dave

On Tuesday, my committee (General Assembly Procedures) spent the day reviewing minutes, and motions, from the Committee to Review Biennial Assemblies. The CRBA was formed in 2010 to review and suggest changes for biennial meetings. Some of the changes are merely tweaks, others are hopefully more substantive.
Carol McDonald (Chair of the Committee to Review Biennial Assemblies) explained how she hopes one change in the way GA does things will allow more room for the Spirit of God to work among us.
“On Thursday morning, June 19, the plenary meeting of the Assembly will be a time for conversation and discernment, rather than a time for debate.  The Moderator of the Assembly, in partnership with the Stated Clerk, will select two critical/key/potentially contentious issues being brought to the plenary from two of the Assembly Standing Committees.  Each committee Moderator will make a 5 minute presentation to the Assembly – being clear about what it is the Assembly will be asked to vote on.  Following each presentation, groups of 8 will be invited to be in conversation: a.) What did you hear that might lead someone to support the committee’s recommendation(s)? b.) what did you hear that might keep someone from supporting the committee’s recommendation(s)?  Following the small group conversations, the Assembly Moderator will ascertain that what the Assembly will be asked to vote on is clear and will then lead the Assembly in prayer. The hope of the Biennial Review Committee is that this non-parliamentary plenary with informal discussion of key issues will hopefully change the way critical and contentious issues are then debated and decided upon.(1)  It is our prayer that all commissioners and advisory delegates, during this time of conversation, will have both the opportunity to speak and the privilege of being heard.”
This will be an unusual departure from the way we do things, ‘decently and in order’, as Presbyterians. Two of the most potentially contentious overtures that will be brought from committees to the main floor this year have to do with Israeli/Palestinian issues and Civil Union and Marriage issues. Say a prayer for GA as it tries to ‘discern God’s will’, not only on these overtures, but everything that comes before it on the floor.
Our daily schedule at GA has gone like this so far. On Saturday afternoon, the whole assembly met together from 2:30-midnight. Sunday morning was left open for attending a local church, and then at 2:30pm the the whole assembly met until 5:00pm. At 7:30pm were began work in our committees, adjourning at 10:00pm. Monday, we met in our committees from 9:30am-9:30pm. Tuesday we met 8:30am-5:00pm. It’s a bit of a marathon. I’m exhausted, but it’s a ‘good tired’. I have not been bored for a single moment. Tuesday afternoon, a couple of us were thinking of taking in a Tigers baseball game at 7:00pm, since we had the evening free. By the time we adjourned at 5:00pm I was so tired I went back to my hotel and crashed for the evening. We have Wednesday morning free, as we finished our committee work Tuesday afternoon, and then we begin meeting as the whole assembly Wednesday afternoon at 2:30pm.

Dave
Random Quotes
“The answer to “how?”, is “yes”. Don’t focus so excessively on the ‘how’ that it blocks the imagination of ‘yes’. Rather, say ‘how….how fascinating’. (Chair of Committee to Review Biennial Assemblies)

“You cultivate what you celebrate.” (GA Commissioner)

“At the end of a long day of meetings you develop what’s known as ‘after 9:00pm sarcasm’.”

Do you know when the Presbyterian church first started asking congregations to contribute Per Capita? It was in 1807. There were only 13 colonies at that time, and the General Assembly met in Philadelphia every year (it moves around the US now). Those traveling far distances to attend the GA were obviously burdened with greater cost than those living in relative proximity to Philadelphia. First, a request was made to presbyteries close to Philadelphia to contribute to the travel expenses of those living further away. That request was denied. The next year General Assembly approved an overture to begin collecting Per Capita from every presbytery in order to equalize the cost of all commissioners attending GA.

Grayde Parsons (I love that name), our General Assembly Stated Clerk, shared that story as he spoke to an overture before our committee. In essence the overture asks the General Assembly to approve a request that Teaching Elders (The Book of Order’s official title for Pastors) “to assume the moral responsibility of participating in the administrative costs of this church by paying per capita each year, as other church members do”. The motion to approve the overture passed, and will now go to a vote of the whole General Assembly.

Teaching Elders are not members of the congregation that they pastor. They are members of the Presbytery in which they pastor. Thus the overture seeks to include Teaching Elders in the opportunity or responsibility to participate administrative costs of the church by pay paying per capita. I voted against the overture. I am not opposed to Teaching Elders paying. In fact I pay the voluntary per capita amount that we ask members of our congregation to pay. I voted against it because I was opposed to the wording “to assume the moral responsibility …” Per cap it is not a moral responsibility. I have never told any member of our congregation that it is their moral responsibility to pay the per capita. It is a benevolence offering, and the Presbyterian Church’s Permanent Judicial Commission has also ruled that per capita is a benevolence offering on the part of members of local congregations. It is not my way of saying I don’t want to pay per capita. I do it gladly. Neither is it a question of semantics or splitting hairs. I do not want to lose the meaning of paying one’s per capita as a benevolence, a gift, generously given by either a member of the congregation or a Teaching Elder.