Congregations’ sessions would have final say on changes to New Wineskins’ Constitution
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, June 20, 2005
EDINA, Minn. – The New Wineskins Convocation within the Presbyterian Church (USA) concluded its first national assembly on June 18 by approving in principle a draft constitution that is still a work in progress – “wet cement,” as Wineskinners described it.
One plank, which was not a part of the original, was added to the document by an overwhelming vote that further shores up the voice and vote of local church sessions. The New Wineskins Constitution recognizes that congregations – and not its higher governing bodies – are the lifeblood of the Presbyterian Church (USA) because they provide the people, the money, and the vision for the church.
The addition requires that any change in the draft constitution’s “theological essentials” or “ethical imperatives” be approved by three-fourths of the sessions of affiliated congregations, which numbered 85 at the end of the four-day meeting. Other constitutional changes would require affirmation by a majority of the sessions.
While there were only a handful of standing votes against giving sessions the final say on constitutional changes, the proposal was the most discussed during the assembly – with strong convictions on both sides.
The full draft document of the New Wineskins constitution has not been publicly released, but New Wineskins leaders say it will be posted on their Web site after numerous, mostly minor, changes are included. Those changes were reviewed by the delegates on June 18 and affirmed.
Robert L. Howard, one of the 190 voting delegates at the convocation, proposed the constitutional process for amending the constitution. His proposal covered two time periods, from now until Dec. 31, 2006, while New Wineskins operates as a corporation under the leadership of a board of directors, and beginning on Jan. 1, 2007, when it would become a national body led by a New Wineskins National Network – which is, in some ways, similar to the PCUSA’s General Assembly.
“I sincerely believe that the key to moving amendments is that the sessions will retain control of the destiny of this entity,” Howard said.
The Rev. Dean Weaver, one of the co-moderators, supported the proposal. “I believe Bob’s way is the better way.”
Another delegate said, “It should be included because we don’t want to go back to Egypt.”
But some delegates favored a process similar to the current amendment process in the PCUSA. For constitutional changes to the Book of Order, the General Assembly approves a proposal and submits it to the denomination’s 173 presbyteries for ratification. A simple majority is required for approving a change in the Book of Order. A change to The Book of Confessions requires the affirmation of two-thirds of the presbyteries.
“The reason we’re in the mess we’re in is not because we’re in presbyteries,” said one delegate, who did not identify himself. “We’re in this mess because we don’t have any theological unity. … This is not going to take us out of Egypt.”
The New Wineskins leaders did not require delegates to identify themselves. They noted that many in the movement could face criticism from some leaders in presbyteries, the General Assembly and the denomination’s staff and that they didn’t want to require the delegates to put themselves in harm’s way.
During the first time period, until Jan. 1, 2007, Howard’s proposed constitutional amendments will require:
Essential tenets and ethical imperatives
- 1. Three-quarters vote of the New Wineskins Board of Directors.
- 2. Approval in writing by a three-quarters vote of all endorsing sessions. (Any session failing to report its vote to the NWI Board of Directors within 60 days after receipt of the proposed amendment from the NWI Board would be excluded from calculating the three-quarters supermajority.)
- 3. The amendment would be considered effective upon certification by the vote of the NWI Board of Directors.
Amendments to other portions
The same process would be followed for other portions of the constitution. But, instead of a three-quarters majority of the NWI Board and the sessions, changes could be approved by majority votes of both bodies.
In both cases, proposed constitutional amendments could be submitted from a petition of 10 percent of the endorsing session and approval in writing by the majority votes of the endorsing sessions.
After Dec. 31, 2006, the same process would continue – with the National Network assuming the role of the NWI Board of Directors. But there would also be another national body in place – the Global Mission Network. Its members subscribing to the essential tenets and ethical imperatives would also have to give three-quarters approval to proposed amendments to those documents.