An overview of the PCUSA strategy documents (‘The Louisville Papers’)
By Michael R. McCarty, Special to The Layman Online, February 8, 2007
In late summer of 2005, at about the time of the first convocation of the New Wineskins Initiative in Edina, Minn., members of the staff of PCUSA headquarters in Louisville, Ky., prepared and secretly distributed to all presbyteries two legal strategy documents titled “Processes For Use By Presbyteries In Responding To Congregations Seeking To Withdraw” and “Church Property Disputes: A Resource For Those Representing Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Presbyteries And True Churches In The Civil Courts.” Recipients were apparently instructed to keep the existence of the documents a secret. These documents are now known collectively as “The Louisville Papers.”
Winter Convocation scheduled
The New Wineskins Association of Churches will hold its Winter Convocation on Feb. 8-9 in Orlando, Fla.
The convocation will be held at First Presbyterian Church in Orlando, with the Rev. Dr. Sameh Maurice as the preacher and teacher. More complete information is available on the Web site of the association.
In fact, they remained a secret until shortly after the second convocation of the New Wineskins Initiative in Tulsa, Okla. At that time, an unknown person released the documents to the press. While no one knows why they were released, it may have been in response to the PCUSA stated clerk’s refusal to ask for a moratorium on legal action against churches opposed to the liberal drift of the PCUSA, best evidenced by the receipt of the Trinity report and the adoption of the PUP report by the 217th General Assembly in Birmingham.
Taken together, the two documents represent a punitive legal game plan to be followed by lawyers representing the PCUSA in the event that one or more churches seek to disaffiliate from the denomination. The content of The Louisville Papers demonstrate that a church that does not have a lawyer of its own is going into a knife fight unarmed. The Louisville Papers were written by lawyers for use by lawyers. (It appears that the Office of the General Counsel authored one and the director of the Department of Constitutional Services, an attorney, prepared the other.)
It is clear that the plan has already been implemented in part. In early 2006 (six months or more before the existence of the documents was revealed), the executive presbyter of the Presbytery of Eastern Oklahoma began to implement part of the plan when she filed clouds on the legal title of every church in that presbytery.
As will be obvious, The Louisville Papers are recognized by many as clearly un-Christian in both tone and content, one more indication of the increasing humanist-pluralist drift being experienced by the PCUS) in the early 21st Century. Because of the import of the harsh strategy and tactics proposed for use against churches that are exercising their right of conscience, it is important for each member of each congregation to have at least some familiarity with them. What follows is a brief synopsis of the key parts of the documents.
1. Anyone who might consider leaving the PC(USA) is a sinner. Moreover, the PCUSA is identified as “Christ’s Church,” to the amazement and consternation of many other Christians worldwide. (“The Office of the General Assembly is aware of Presbyterians who feel compelled not only to abandon their vows and promises, but who are willing also to rend the fabric of the church and sinfully threaten the peace and unity of Christ’s Church.”)
2. Lawsuits against dissenting congregations should identify them as schismatics, even in the titles of the complaints. One document gave this suggested example of a complaint title: “Presbytery of Middle Wyoming v. The Schismatic and Purported Covenant Presbyterian Church of Landsburgh.”
3. Presbyteries should take steps to secure local church property by filing affidavits in public court “for the purpose of warning all persons the title to the real property is in dispute.” “Moreover, send a letter to all banks and other institutions that hold accounts for the particular church.” That letter would claim the presbytery has jurisdiction over the church; inform bankers and other institutions about the denomination’s property trust clause; and direct them to release no assets or change their title pending notice from the presbytery.
4. Presbyteries should also “[p]ut the presbytery’s and the local church’s insurance companies on notice.” The purpose is to prevent the dissenting congregation from using its insurance coverage to pay attorneys’ fees in a property dispute.
5. Presbyteries should change the locks and “secure” the property.
6. Presbyteries are told that their lawyers should try to get the case before judges with whose religious affiliations (specifically, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Methodist and Roman Catholic) would make them sympathetic to the property claims of hierarchical denominations. The recommendation warns against going before a Baptist or Congregationalist judge or one from an unaffiliated church.
7. “Certainly, the Presbyterian Church (USA) (PCUSA) does not refer to itself as a hierarchical church. When speaking to a civil court, however, it is important to use the language the court uses. … Firmly present the PCUSA to the court as a hierarchical church.”
8. Presbyteries should claim in court that they are the “bishops” of the PCUSA. “For a judge from an Episcopal system (Catholic and Episcopalian), it is very helpful to say, ‘The presbytery is the bishop.'”
9. “The majority vote of a congregation is presumed to control. If the presbytery learns that a congregational majority is inclined to disaffiliate from the denomination, it should look for a “loyal minority” in the congregation and declare it the “true church” with rights to the property. If a loyal minority cannot be found, the presbytery should simply declare the congregation dissolved and take the property.
10. “If schism is likely, use an administrative commission. [T]he presbytery should be clear that the commission may assume jurisdiction of the session upon some triggering event or action of the session.”
11. “The presbytery can often identify an action that would further steps toward schism and direct the minister not to do them.” When a minister “persists in a work disapproved by” the presbytery, the presbytery “may assume the minister has renounced the jurisdiction of this church. … If a minister has already engaged in an active advocacy of schism … then the presbytery must proceed to appoint an investigating committee” to consider disciplinary action.
12. Working with its administrative commission, the presbytery has a number of options for dealing with congregations in property disputes: It can dissolve the congregation, and use the assets for “starting a new immigrant fellowship;” it could enter into a “long-term lease with the schismatic group;” it can sell the property to the “splinter group.”
Michael R. McCarty is an elder in Forks of the Brandywine Presbyterian Church in Glenmoore, Pa., and a member of the New Wineskins Association of Churches’ Strategy Team (2006-2007). This article originally appeared in the final report of the New Wineskins Association of Churches’ strategy team and is included in A Time for Every Purpose Under Heaven. It is reprinted here by permission.