Heartland presbytery appeals decision on per-capita ruling
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, May 11, 2004
The Heartland Presbytery in Kansas has appealed a decision by the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of Mid-America that prohibits the presbytery from disapproving loans for local congregations and denying them other services if they fail to pay their per capita and make and meet a mission pledge to support the presbytery’s programs.
The Heartland Presbytery Policy
Adopted June 17, 2003“The Presbytery Council moves that no congregation 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 payment of per capita, the making and meeting of a mission pledge, being current on Board of Pension dues, the filling (sic) of annual statistical reports and the annual reporting of pastor’s terms of call.” The appeal to the Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly, the highest court in the Presbyterian Church (USA), said the synod court committed four errors in its interpretation of D-8.0105g in the Book of Order:
- Specification 1: The decision undermines and interferes with the right of presbytery to determine its budget and policies with regard to its own budget, grant application procedures and criteria for budget administration, as established in the Constitution, G-11.0304; G-11.0103 a-c.
- Specification 2: The decision erroneously equates exercising discretion in allocating mission support with “punishing a session.”
- Specification 3: The decision improperly abridges the historic principles of church government and the right of a higher governing body to govern the lower as established in the Constitution, G-1.0400; G-4.0302f; G-4.0301i; G-9.0103; G-11.0103; and elsewhere.
- Specification 4: The decision applies an overly broad interpretation of earlier General Assembly PJC decisions and diminishes and disregards portions of their findings, reducing them to the idea that sessions possess an absolute right to designate and determine distribution of offerings and benevolences.
The Heartland case pits the presbytery against ministers of three local congregations and the session of First Presbyterian Church of Paola, Kans. The ministers and session filed a remedial action against the presbytery after it adopted a policy that required that local congregations remit their full per capita to support presbyteries, synods and the General Assembly before they would be entitled to presbytery services.
The complainants in A. Kirk Johnston et al v. Heartland Presbytery won their case in the synod court, which affirmed two previous decisions by the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission. In Session, Central Presbyterian Church v. Presbytery of Long Island and Minihan and Richards v. Presbytery of Scioto Valley, the highest court ruled that sessions could neither be compelled to pay their per capita nor punished for failure to do so.
The appeal by the Heartland Presbytery was filed on May 6. In a letter to members of the Heartland Presbytery, the three members of the presbytery’s committee of counsel for the case gave their rationale for the appeal.
“This case raises very important polity issues for not only our presbytery, but also for the entire Presbyterian Church (USA),” they said. “There is a great deal of confusion around the church about the nature of our unity in the midst of divergent understandings of our shared life. As it is General Assembly-level decisions that we believe have been misrepresented, it is necessary to seek clarification from that body. Our Synod PJC is not in a position to give an authoritative word.”