Forced per-capita payments would further erode PCUSA
By Kirk Johnston, Special to The Layman Online, June 1, 2006
Denomination groups
back forced per capita
The writer’s commentary addresses an overture by the Presbytery of Baltimore that calls for an authoritative interpretation that would compel sessions to remit full per-capita requests to support higher governing bodies.
The denomination’s Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly support the overture despite the historical authority of local church sessions to decide how to spend the tithes and offerings of their congregations.
In addition to Johnston v. Heartland, key court rulings that have affirmed sessions’ right to withhold or redirect per-capita money include:
- John Minihan and J. Randall Richards v. The Presbytery of Scioto Valley (2003)
- Session of Central Presbyterian Church v. Presbytery of Long Island (1992)
- Westminster United Presbyterian Church v. the Presbytery of Detroit (1976, UPCUSA)
For a detailed assessment of per-capita issues:
“Responding Faithfully: Making Decisions about Financial Support of PCUSA Governing Bodies in Times of Disorder” Because of our successful remedial complaint (Johnston et al vs. Heartland Presbytery), I have received mail from commissioners to the 217th General Assembly on June 15-22 asking my view on the current overture to make per-capita payments mandatory. Here is my response.
If the proposal to force all churches to pay per capita is passed:
1. We will lose the historic practice and principle of a session’s right over benevolences. The rights and responsibilities given to session in Book of Order G-10.0102a,c,d,g,h,i,j,o,p (and supported by a long case history) would be diminished and in some cases lost. Sessions have a responsibility to balance the power of other governing bodies.
This proposal fractures an important connectional bond of shared leadership. It violates a session’s rights and partnership in discerning mission. It makes us more Episcopal in structure. In fact, approving this proposal is so novel a change that it would open the church to this charge: that by abandoning a key, original constitutional principle (as well as two hundred years of practice), it has rendered unenforceable other constitutional claims – including property. In effect, it opens the door for objecting churches to say: “The constitution we agreed to no longer exists. You have left us.”
2. We will lose more members and more per capita income than before. It is a truth that, whatever we tax or encumber by forced payment, decreases the amount of the thing taxed. That’s true for cigarettes. It would be true if we taxed children. And it will certainly hold true if per capita is made mandatory.
When mandatory, it becomes a tax on membership. Membership will decrease dramatically in at least three ways: 1) A great body of churches will find the change so offensive to historic principles of the church and to the right of conscience that they will leave with their property. 2) Members will leave churches where the majority is not so offended or no action is taken. 3) Most churches will keep membership rolls very tight and probably immediately trim membership – most likely outstripping any effect of current per-capita realities.
3. We will lose any input in Louisville spending and we will lose a constitutionally protected right of protest. This overture is a response to churches like Paola that are grieved in conscience and have protested current policies. Many sessions have said that they can no longer discern the clear cause of Christ in many denominational initiatives and actions. We have stated in effect: “You have not used per capita to enforce the constitution in regard to ordination and same-sex marriages. You seem unwilling or unable to articulate and implement General Assembly Council policy that points to salvation in Christ alone. Please show us how per-capita monies spent rescuing the World Council of Churches, the National Council of Churches, the Presbyterian Health, Education and Welfare Association, the Washington Office and others, represent the clear call of Christ. Per-capita dollars are not a franchise fee or a cost of being Presbyterian. They are the love gifts of believers. They have been dedicated to Christ. We cannot in good conscience or good stewardship give to you money given to us to serve the Gospel of Jesus Christ when there are many other missions who are much clearer about the Love of God in Jesus Christ.”
So many churches have made similar decisions that per-capita receipts are down. Some presbyteries cover up the protest by sending the money anyway. What has been Louisville’s response? Not a reconsideration of values – but an effort to take the money by force as this proposal seeks to do. When a similar proposal was passed by Heartland Presbytery, it was judged unconstitutional by unanimous GAPJC decision.
Mandatory per capita is not consistent with our past. All appeals for mission dollars should instead be made to the cause of Christ. Our Head is Jesus – let’s not lose our Head.
The Rev. Kirk Johnston is pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Paola, Kan. Half-jokingly, half seriously, he describes himself as the director and sole (for now) member of the “Let’s Not Lose Our Head” Foundation for reviving the PCUSA.