Court must decide whether pastor’s resignation was coerced
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, December 3, 2001
ATLANTA – A minister who says he was coerced in 1999 into resigning as pastor of Second Presbyterian Church in Baltimore wants a chance to clear his name.
The General Assembly’s Permanent Judicial Commission – the highest court in the Presbyterian Church (USA) – will announce in a few days whether the Rev. Ernest Smart gets that chance.
The central issue in the case is whether Smart’s resignation in the wake of unsubstantiated attacks against his ministry denied him due process or whether the resignation made due process irrelevant.
Target of presbytery
Herbert Valentine, a former moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA), was the executive of the presbytery when Smart was forced out of office. Valentine has strongly opposed many who have an evangelically focused ministry, as did Smart.
The minister’s resignation came at the end of a tumultuous six months during which Smart, who was called to Second Presbyterian in 1981, was embroiled in a controversy over a presbytery-induced plan to name him and a woman as co-pastors of the congregation.
From the outset, the co-pastors had disagreements, leading to the Baltimore Presbytery’s appointment in March 1999 of an administrative commission to replace the Second Presbyterian session as the governing body of the congregation.
Votes supported minister
During the six months from March to August 1999, there were rogue meetings of the session – without having a moderator present as required – and divided loyalties within the congregation. In the end, though, both the session and the congregation voted overwhelmingly that they wanted Smart to remain as pastor of the 1,000-member congregation.
But the presbytery’s administrative commission, and later the full presbytery, wanted him out.
Smart contends that he was faced with a Hopkins’ choice – resign or be tainted with allegations that were compiled by the presbytery’s administrative commission and mailed to members of his congregation even before he was confronted with the options of resigning or being forced out of the pulpit.
Allegations disseminated
In testimony before the Permanent Judicial Commission on Nov. 30, Smart says that on August 9, 1999, he met with the presbytery’s administrative commission. He said he was faced with unsubstantiated accusations and urged to resign.
During that two-hour meeting, Smart said, “I was accused of being an unfaithful minister of the Word and sacrament. They told me that they had mailed [the accusations] to the presbytery and the congregation. I said, ‘What?'”
Smart testified that he told the administrative commission that “I had had neither the reason nor desire to resign. But by 9:30 p.m., I could endure it no longer. I felt battered.”
If he resigned, he was told, there would be no further mention of the reasons for his departure – even though the unsubstantiated charges had been mailed to the congregation.
Facts not disputed
Samuel Jett Jr., the counsel for the presbytery, did not dispute the facts as presented by Smart and his counsel, Ross S. Bash, who, like Smart, is both a Presbyterian minister and a lawyer.
Simply, Jett argued, the fact that Smart resigned made it irrelevant that he might have been coerced into doing something he later regretted. Jett argued that due process – which the Presbyterian constitution requires in disciplinary cases – became irrelevant once Smart signed a letter of resignation.
But Bass, who described the confrontation between the administrative commission and Smart as a “bloodbath and a brawl,” said the question is whether the resignation was voluntary.
In its ruling upholding the action of the presbytery, the synod’s Permanent Judicial Commission offered no evidence disputing Smart’s claims or supporting its decision that Smart’s resignation settled the mattered, Bash said.
Record incomplete
“The synod doesn’t have the whole record,” he said. He cited a document in the administrative commission’s record of the case that referred to the minutes about a meeting of the Second Presbyterian session. In fact, Bass contended, and Jett did not deny, there were no minutes of that session meeting – which was one of the occasions when the session met without a moderator.
“I maintain that I have evidence that that resignation wasn’t voluntary,” Bash said. “He [Smart] had no opportunity to respond to the commission’s report.”
“His career was on trial at that meeting. After 30-plus years as a Presbyterian minister, he was given five-days’ notice. Presbyteries – all governing bodies – should set out to protect their members’ rights.”
Jett’s argument was a repetition of a single point: By resigning, Smart forfeited his right to claim that due process was denied. Therefore, Jett said, he is not entitled to a hearing.
Church still seeking pastor
Smart is not asking for more severance or reinstatement as pastor of Second Presbyterian Church, which, after three years, still has not named a committee to begin the search for a new minister.
Currently serving as interim pastor of a Lutheran congregation, Smart does want the air cleared – a hearing in which he would be allowed to confront any who might step forth publicly and accuse him of not fulfilling his ordination vows.