Minister challenges presbytery refusal to OK loan for expansion
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, September 8, 2003
The pastor of a growing evangelical congregation in Paola, Kan., has asked a synod court to declare that the Presbytery of Heartland violated the Constitution by punishing his congregation for its session’s decision not to pay its per-capita apportionment to support the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA).
The remedial complaint by the Rev. A. Kirk Johnston of First Presbyterian Church said the presbytery violated the constitution by prohibiting presbytery approval of his congregation’s efforts to secure a permanent loan for church expansion.
Johnston’s congregation has a temporary construction loan of $1.2 million for a $2.2-million project that was under way when the presbytery adopted a new financial policy on June 17.
That policy says “no congregation [will] be considered eligible to request assistance from the presbytery in the form of mission support, shared grants or loan guarantees unless that congregation has demonstrated its full participation in the fiscal and ecclesiastical life of the presbytery including the paying of per capita, the making and meeting of a mission pledge, being current on Board of Pensions dues, the filling of annual statistical reports, and the annual reporting of the pastor’s terms of call.”
If allowed to stand, the presbytery’s financial policy would jeopardize the congregation’s ability to get a permanent loan for the project. With rare exception, all local church property in the PCUSA is held in trust by the presbytery for the denomination and local congregations cannot take out loans on their property without presbytery approval.
But church law – affirmed in two decisions by the PCUSA’s highest governing body, the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission – says local church sessions have the authority to decide how to spend the tithes and offerings contributed by their congregations.
Furthermore, the courts have declared that local congregations cannot be punished by the presbyteries for failure to remit their per-capita apportionments, whether for reasons of conscience or inability. The presbyteries are responsible for collecting per-capita gifts that support presbyteries, synods and the General Assembly.
“The presbytery unconstitutionally attempts to mandate to sessions and congregations the payment of per capita and mission pledges,” Johnston says in his complaint, which was filed with the Synod of Mid-America. “Our Constitution provides in G-10.0102h, i, and j, that the session has sole responsibility to distribute the gifts of its people.”
The complaint, which seeks to have the synod court order that the presbytery’s policy is punitive and, therefore, must be abandoned, cites two cases in which the denomination’s highest court affirmed the historical right of sessions to choose which benevolences, including per-capita requests, they will support:
“The General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission affirmed that right in Session, Central Presbyterian Church v. Presbytery of Long Island (Minutes 1992, page 179) and reaffirmed the ruling of that case in Minihan and Richards v. Presbytery of Scioto Valley, Remedial Case 216-1, July, 2003. Those cases state that presbyteries may not compel a session to transmit the per capita assigned to it under G-9.0404d of the Book of Order. Those cases hold that the term ‘benevolences’ in G-10.0102i includes per-capita funds. The term also includes mission pledges.”
The complaint also said, “The Presbytery unconstitutionally attempts to punish a congregation for failure to pay per capita or failure to make and pay a mission pledge by denying a congregation the right to be considered for loan guarantees, shared grants, or mission support based solely on the criterion of whether discretionary contributions have been made. The authoritative interpretations of our constitution by the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission consistently hold that a session may not be punished for failure to pay money to a presbytery.”
The complaint asked the synod court to declare the Heartland Presbytery policy “irregular because in Session, Central Presbyterian Church … the Commission said that a presbytery may prepare a list of churches which pay or do not pay per capita, but that ‘A church may neither be compelled to pay nor punished for failure to pay any amounts pursuant to a [per-capita] plan.’ The Commission further stated that ‘coercive actions, such as demanding payment, assessing interest, or otherwise penalizing a church which is behind in making payments was not permitted.’ The ruling in Session, Central Presbyterian Church was reaffirmed in Minihan v. Presbytery of Scioto Valley.”
Under the presbytery’s financial policy, the complaint says, “First United Presbyterian Church Paola Session, its pastor and staff would be forced to seek other loan guarantors, find its own support and mission help -i.e. to act on its own as owner of property. At the same time our constitution makes no ‘local’ provision for ownership of property. Presbytery’s action unconstitutionally disconnects Paola. This action creates a double jeopardy – making it impossible for the Paola Session to pursue its growing mission, fund its ongoing building program and keep faith with the constitution.”
Johnston also complains that, “By usurping the congregation’s right to distribute the gifts of its people (G-10.0102h, i, j,), Heartland Presbytery’s action mutes the rightful witness to higher Governing bodies, of any congregation acting to best steward gifts given to the cause of Christ.”
The 551-member Paola congregation has grown by 42.4 percent and its contributions have increased by 58 percent since 1992. Contributions increased by 11.2 percent from 2001 to 2002.
The presbytery, on the other hand, is facing declining membership and revenue. It has lost more than 10 percent of its membership since 1992 and is projecting mission budget deficits of $10,538 in 2003 and $30,242 in 2004.
The total bill for the Paola congregation is $12,805.24, including $2,851 the congregation’s session has decided to withhold in per-capita funds requested to support the General Assembly.