Presbytery calls for pastor’s
job, congregation will appeal
By Edward Terry, The Layman, January 11, 2010
NORTH CANTON, Ohio – Muskingum Valley Presbytery has decided to oust First Presbyterian Church Mansfield’s Rev. Dennis Allison, despite the pleas of a busload of parishioners who want their pastor to stay.
A group of First Presbyterian Church Mansfield members unload their chartered bus at the Muskingum Valley Presbytery meeting Jan. 9 at John Knox Presbyterian Church in North Canton, Ohio.
During a special presbytery meeting on Jan. 9, First Church, Mansfield members of all ages defended Allison in the face of accusations about the pastor’s job performance and attitude, the congregation’s attendance and membership losses in recent years and an administrative commission’s conclusion that the only way for the congregation to move forward is with a “clean slate.”
Also speaking out were several current and former members who agreed with presbytery that it was time to fire the congregation’s pastor of more than 15 years.
Allison and the Mansfield session refute the allegations in the report and have accused the presbytery of violating the pastor’s right to due process in calling for his dismissal. But the impassioned pleas were trumped by the administrative commission’s recommendation. The presbytery voted 47-24 to accept the disputed report and dissolve the pastoral relationship. The motion called for Allison to leave by March 1 and the session to recommend an appropriate severance package.
The congregation plans to appeal the decision to the Synod of the Covenant, and a stay of enforcement was granted by a vote of 40-27 keeping Allison in place as the process continues.
In conflict
In its report, which was accepted by voice vote, the administrative commission called for Allison’s job based on:
Related Story
Pastor, session: Presbytery ignored due process
- conflict within the congregation in which previous resolution attempts had failed;
- loss of membership, attendance and financial support;
- intimidation of members, officers and staff by the senior pastor;
- irregularities in membership rolls;
- and concerns over the session’s handling of financial and fiduciary responsibilities.
Its recommendations include starting over with a “clean slate” of ordained staff and a review of non-ordained staff.
Presbytery officials are not commenting since the case remains unresolved. Mansfield’s leadership, however, is vocal in its criticism of the presbytery’s actions and two years of what it considers “meddling” in the congregation’s business.
“This process set up by Muskingum Valley Presbytery has allowed people to go behind the backs of the session and the pastor, and to tie in as a faction with the committee on ministry, administrative commission or the general presbyter,” Allison said. “In so doing, they circumvent the process of allowing the leaders of the local church to be pastors and elders.”
In its counter to the allegations, the Mansfield session claims:
- the constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA) was bypassed;
- the establishment of an administrative commission and its recommendation were based on erroneous information as a result of not following the constitution;
- the congregation is healthy;
- and the disruption of the presbytery has been detrimental to Mansfield’s healing process.
The session also argues that the administrative commission was neither tasked with investigating the potential dissolution of the pastoral relationship nor was it empowered to do so, and it never had the required congregational meeting required by the Book of Order. The session contends that the administrative commission was set up to remove the pastor.
The session stands by that position, even though the presbytery on Saturday argued that it had followed the PCUSA constitution.
‘Due process’
The session contended it had not been given the opportunity to face its accusers, one of several reasons it said the presbytery violated the Book of Order in forming an administrative commission and advising Allison’s dismissal. At the special meeting, several former and current members did speak against Allison and Mansfield’s direction in recent years.
When asked at the meeting for a reaction to accusations that it violated Allison’s rights, administrative commission chairman Douglas Drushal said it had consulted with presbytery Stated Clerk Marty Radcliff, who assured them they had followed the Book of Order. Drushal added that Saturday’s meeting was the “due process.”
The administrative commission was formed in December 2008, and made a preliminary report on its findings in June 2009. “It’s fair to say anybody who wanted to contact us has had plenty of opportunity,” Drushal said.
In the meeting packet, the presbytery also attempted to answer the due process complaints.
The presbytery argues that because the administrative commission is making a recommendation to presbytery, a hearing is not required under the provisions of G-9.0505 in the same way as if the administrative commission itself were dissolving the relationship.
“Our polity presumes that individuals and groups will be treated with respect and fundamental fairness, which in the case of dissolving (a) pastoral relationship must minimally provide ‘the opportunity to be heard and the consideration of respective positions,’” Muskingum Valley’s statement said. “Current G-9.0505 provides clear procedure when the commission itself is taking the action. The Advisory Committee on the Constitution finds less clarity when the commission has determined to ask the presbytery to dissolve the relationship.”
Allison and his supporters maintain that due process still was violated, and that Saturday’s meeting was not the proper venue for the accused to face accusers and for the congregation’s meeting with the administrative commission where the pastor can hear the concerns of members.
“That is not due process,” Allison said. “That is not how the constitution, as I understand it, is set up. We have a process and in a serious matter, even though charges are not brought, I still have the right to counter these things in a proper setting.”
When asked why he didn’t speak out at Saturday’s meeting, Allison said he didn’t view a presbytery meeting as a proper forum.
“I’m not going to stand there and cross examine my parishioners in front of that group,” he said. “If I lose my job, fine – but I’m not going to treat people that way. That was not the place or way to do this.”
On the floor of presbytery, Allison’s supporters greatly outnumbered the critics who chose to speak. A contingent from Mansfield chartered a bus for the 90-minute trip to North Canton for the meeting. The crowd was so large that the sanctuary was at capacity and the choir area had to be used. The Mansfield youth, accompanied by Allison and Youth Minister Denise Conrad, filled the entire choir area.
Several youth members nervously stepped to the microphone and stood up for their church’s leadership.
Still, there was a strong contingent supporting the administrative commission’s report and the action to remove Allison. One spoke of a list of 90 individuals who have left the Mansfield congregation or expressed dissatisfaction. An Alliso
n supporter later pointed out that her name was on the list, even though she knew nothing about it and was in full support of her pastor.
Allison, on Monday, pointed to that incident as one of many reasons why a presbytery meeting was not the proper forum for such an administrative action.
Seeking middle ground
As the meeting was winding to a close, there were attempts to compromise. Two suggestions to delay the divisive administrative commission recommendation for a focus on more discussion and healing were discussed.
One commissioner offered action requiring Mansfield to give proof of outreach to disaffected members, a psychological examination for Allison and reconciliation training for the congregation. Though appreciative of the attempt to find middle ground, Mansfield session member Larry Pabst said the congregation already has had such training and delaying a vote on the administrative commission’s recommendation would not help.
“We need peace and settlement to move on,” he said.
The substitute motion was rejected, but then was followed by another suggestion more in line with Matthew 18. A new Muskingum Valley commissioner, who was not familiar with the history at Mansfield and the many facets of the dispute, suggested a “healing service” be organized at Mansfield. It too was rejected.
Send reactions, responses or comments on this story to laymanletters@layman.org. Please provide your name and hometown when writing letters for publication.