Untitled Page

Electronic Vote - Plenary [Amended by striking the following words in number 5: "upon request of the Presbytery and Synod" and inserting in their place the following: "upon a majority affirmative vote of the affected presbytery or presbyteries or a majority affirmative vote of the presbyteries in the affected synod or synods." by an electronic vote of 586 affirmative, 65 negative, 8 abstentions.]

Affirmative:	566
Negative:	104
Abstaining:	4

Final Text:

The Committee on Middle Governing Body Issues recommends that the 219th General Assembly (2010) direct the Moderators of the 218th and 219th General Assemblies (2008 and 2010), in consultation with the General Assembly Nominating Committee, to appoint twenty-one persons to a General Assembly Commission on Middle Governing Bodies with the understanding that the moderators, as they make their appointments, shall make an intentional effort for theological diversity. The commission shall have the following focus and powers:

1. The commission will consult with sessions, presbyteries, synods and the wider church on the mission and function of middle governing bodies. Such a process should include:

a. current diversity in the role and functions of middle governing bodies.

b. demographics and financial realities that affect the role and function of synods and presbyteries.

c. the role of each governing body in its oversight role--presbyteries of congregations, synods of presbyteries, and General Assembly of synods--both historically and in present experience.

d. relationships with General Assembly agencies in role and function.

2. The commission will develop models that reflect the roles of middle governing bodies in our polity and the changing context of our witness in the United States and their relationships with other governing bodies.

3. The commission will prepare a report to the 220th General Assembly (2012) of its findings and any recommended Book of Order changes. Recommendation for future roles and responsibilities will also be made to the 220th General Assembly about changes in middle governing bodies that may best serve the PCUSA in the 21st century.

4. The commission will implement, within the powers granted it, any decisions forwarded from the 219th General Assembly (2010) and approved by presbyteries regarding the form and function of middle governing bodies with the report to the 220th General Assembly (2012).

5. By direction of the 219th General Assembly (2010), or [~~upon request of the presbytery and synod~~][upon a majority affirmative vote of the affected presbytery or presbyteries or a majority affirmative vote of the presbyteries in the affected synod or synods], the commission is authorized to act at the General Assembly according to

a. G-13.0103m: "to organize new synods and to divide, unite, or otherwise combine synods or portions of synods previously existing;"

b. G-13.0103n: "to approve the organization, division, united, or combining of presbyteries or portions of presbyteries by synods."

6. The commission will supervise the Special Administrative Review Committee on Puerto Rico and act on any recommendations they may make within the powers given to the commission.

7. The actions of the commission shall require a two-thirds majority for approval.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

On this Item, the Middle Governing Body Issues Committee, acted as follows:

Approve as Amended

[Counted Vote - Committee]

Affirmative:	38
Negative:	4
Abstaining:	3

Final Text:

That the recommendation be approved with amendments.

1. Amend the first paragraph of Recommendation 5 as follows: [Text to be deleted is shown with brackets and with a strike-through; text to be added or inserted is shown with brackets and with an underline.]

“5. [~~In response to actions~~] [By direction] of the 219th General Assembly (2010), or upon request of the presbytery and synod, the commission is authorized to act as the General Assembly according to”

2. Add a Recommendation 7 to read as follows: [Text to be added or inserted is shown with brackets and with an underline.]

“[7. The actions of the commission shall require a two-thirds majority for approval.]”

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee on the Office of the General Assembly recommends that the 219th General Assembly (2010) direct the Moderators of the 218th and 219th General Assemblies (2008 and 2010), in consultation with the General Assembly Nominating Committee, to appoint twenty-one persons to a General Assembly Commission on Middle Governing Bodies with the following focus and powers:

1. The commission will consult with sessions, presbyteries, synods, and the wider church on the mission and function of middle governing bodies.

3. The commission will prepare a report to the 220th General Assembly (2012) of its findings and any recommended Book of Order changes.

5. In response to actions of the 219th General Assembly (2010), or upon request of the presbytery and synod, the commission is authorized to act as the General Assembly according to

a. G-13.0103m: “to organize new synods and to divide, unite, or otherwise combine synods or portions of synods previously existing;”

b. G-13.0103n: “to approve the organization, division, uniting, or combining of presbyteries or portions of presbyteries by synods.”

6. The commission will supervise the Special Administrative Review Committee on Puerto Rico and act on any recommendations they may make within the powers given to the commission.

RATIONALE

Many perceive this age as one of great transition for the Body of Christ. Our congregations and governing bodies are changing worship styles, devotional practices, their forms and functions to meet new needs and to position themselves for the future. Although some modifications have been motivated by financial necessity, the majority of these shifts are the result of the prayerful deliberations of presbyteries and synods struggling to be more faithful, more missional, and more effective stewards of their resources.

The principles of our Presbyterian Polity trust in the fundamental work of the Spirit of Christ expressed when presbyters are gathered together in governing bodies. But how are those governing bodies best organized to be responsive both to the Spirit of Christ and the changing opportunities for discipleship? Are our historical structures the best platforms for carrying our mission into the future? Where can the General Assembly carefully discern the wider scope of middle governing body form, function, and mission?

The last major examinations of the structure and purpose of middle governing bodies occurred before Reunion. Studies by the former United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. (UPCUSA) resulted in the passage of Overture H (Minutes, UPCUSA, 1969, Part I, pp. 459 ff) and the creation of regional synods, new presbytery boundaries, and redefined relationships between governing bodies. In 1968, the Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUS) convened the “Conference on Restructuring Synods and Presbyteries” whose recommendations on the meaning of middle governing bodies were adopted by the General Assembly later that year and resulted in similar restructuring (Minutes, PCUS, 1968, Appendix, pp. 251 ff). The Reunion of the streams that occurred in 1983 rearranged some boundaries but basically preserved the work of these two former studies. Thus it is fair to say that no significant study of middle governing bodies has taken place for the past four decades. The changing cultural context, the shifts that middle governing bodies are themselves already making, and a new domestic mission frontier all make this the right time, God’s time for us to examine the role, function and form of presbyteries and synods.

The General Assembly Moderator appointed this special committee of five members in July 2009, after various communications were received by OGA from members of the synod in Puerto Rico describing conflict and dissension within the synod and presbyteries. The committee met with ten leaders (stated clerks and moderators of the four governing bodies, plus the synod executive and council moderator) within the Synod of Boriquén in August 2009, and then attended the synod’s three-day November meeting in Puerto Rico. The committee has asked for feedback from all Boriquén ministers and elders through a short written survey administered by Research Services. The committee has also received numerous written communications from presbyteries and individuals about the situation in the church in Puerto Rico.

The committee believes that it is important for them to continue to function as a committee in dialogue with the church in Puerto Rico. They foresee the distinct possibility that the General Assembly may be asked to implement recommendations that the committee may make in the months ahead. For this reason, the special committee will request the General Assembly to appoint an administrative commission that would have power to act between assemblies on the special committee’s recommendation, which are likely to include the exploration of combining the three presbyteries into one and putting that presbytery into a different synod.

Therefore, the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly believes it will be important to coordinate the General Assembly’s commission work (implementing directives from the assembly), with its work as a deliberative committee (studying the future form and function of middle governing bodies), by naming this commission. The lessons learned implementing the recommendations of the Special Committee on Administrative Review and any other initiatives of the 219th General Assembly (2010) regarding middle governing bodies will positively inform the larger examination of middle governing bodies that the commission is also conducting.

The General Assembly has received numerous overtures, reports, and other concerns about the life and health of the middle governing body system. The limited time of the General Assembly does not allow for a focused and thoughtful approach to the future of middle governing bodies. A commission with the limited authority of the General Assembly can empower solutions and create new opportunities for middle governing bodies to flourish while it considers models for middle governing bodies and makes proposals to the 220th General Assembly (2012). The Committee on the Office of the General Assembly believes that the creation of this commission will provide the consultation, the leadership, and the time for these critical issues.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION

(2010) $47,667 (2011) $89,555 (2012) $36,570 - GA Per Capita

COMMENT

ADVICE FROM THE ACC

Please see ACC advice at Item 04-05.

Implications for the proposed Form of Government: Approval of Item 04-06 would have similar implications for the proposed Form of Government that it would have on the current Form of Government.

COMMENT

Assembly Committee on Bills and Overtures

Due to the financial and staffing implications, beforeauthorizing the establishment of a special committee, the assembly shall hear a report fromthe Assembly Committee on Bills and Overtures, which shall have consulted with the mostclosely related entity and a member designated from the Committee on the Office of theGeneral Assembly, as to whether the work to be assigned to the special committee could

more effectively and economically be assigned to that entity” (from Standing Rules K.1.a.).

The Bills and Overtures Committee has consulted with the staff in the Office of General Assembly and the representative from the Committee on the Office of General Assembly and finds that the work assigned to this special commission could not be done within the existing structures of the church.

GACOR Comment

The General Assembly Committee on Representation (GACOR) offers the following comment for the General Assembly’s consideration regarding Item 04-06. If the will of the body is to accept Item 04-06, the General Assembly Committee on Representation respectfully advises the 219th General Assembly (2010) to direct that a member of the GACOR be one of the twenty-one persons appointed to the proposed administrative commission.

Rationale

The creation of a commission on Middle Governing Bodies directly affects the work of committees on representation at all levels of the church.

1. According to the Book of Order, the committee on representation’s “... main function shall be to advise the governing bodies with respect to their membership and to that of their committees, boards, agencies, and other units in implementing the principles of participation and inclusiveness to ensure fair and effective representation in the decision making of the church” (Book of Order, G-9.0105b). The General Assembly Nominating Committee (GANC) and General Assembly Committee on Representation (GACOR) have complimentary and parallel, but different, roles and responsibilities. For a commission with such broad responsibilities, it is important that both the GANC and the GACOR be involved in the consultation process: the GANC with regard to recommendation of persons as candidates to serve and the GACOR to the representation and participation.

2. The commission, as it has been recommended, has broad powers, range, and scope of responsibilities that must be enumerated for faithful and informed actions. It is an unusual and unique response to a perceived need of the denomination. The GACOR had a variety of reactions to this recommendation, with some members recommending disapproval. It has struggled with its response. Having a member of the GACOR serve on the commission is a middle way to address concerns about participation and representation as well as the affect actions of the commission may have on the work of committees on representation.

Item 04-06 proposes one of the responsibilities assigned to the commission would be powers to review and recommend changes to the functions of the middle governing bodies. As a commission, the implied power would be to act on behalf of the General Assembly, if not constrained by the original action. Synods relate to the General Assembly Committee on Representation. Any changes to their make-up would affect the number of persons serving on GACOR as well as then number of entities reporting to the committee. As a locus for justice concerns for under-represented persons, synods have often been the level of church structure that deals with diversity and inclusion issues and accountability. The commission’s power to address the church’s mission and mandate, adjusting synod responsibilities and/or eliminating synods, raises concern for the GACOR that the synod work of dealing with representational and participation issues may be shifted primarily to the presbyteries.

The GACOR currently engages with sixteen synods in a ministry of mutual accountability and review. Any change to the number or functions of synods would produce significant changes in the ability of the GACOR to function. Implications for retaining this function are also changed if it moves to presbyteries. There are 173 presbyteries today. Even if this is reduced by twenty, GACOR might be asked to receive, review, and respond to over 150 annual reports in addition to the tasks it has to resource, advise, and advocate with General Assembly and its agencies. If the GACOR continued to only have the number of members equal to the number of synods, the task of encouraging the denomination to more fully “exhibit the kingdom to the world” by becoming more fully representational in its decision-making and achieving more full participation in leadership would become daunting, if not impossible.

At reunion, the new denomination made a commitment to groups historically underrepresented in the leadership of the church that the structure would dedicate resources to being intentional about representation and inclusion, and advocate for ensuring fair representation. Historically excluded groups have a lot of history with the denomination. They have experienced and witnessed injustice, and finds difficulty trusting. It is imperative that the Presbyterian church continue to uphold its commitment to diversity in the leadership of decision-making bodies and to representing the full bounty of the gifts of our members within that leadership. Without intentionality it is far too easy to pass on the opportunity to hear voices different from the dominant group. The GACOR believes that it is essential that someone whose experiences, skills, and direct interest are to “ensure fair and effective representation in the decision making of the church” be a part of the proposed commission if created, and be at the table as a full voting member in the process of reviewing the structure and responsibilities of middle governing bodies.