Survey discloses undercurrent of dissatisfaction with PCUSA
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, September 28, 2006
LOUISVILLE, Ky. – For the most part, the elected members of the General Assembly Council, GAC staff and 119 middle-governing body staff members wore happy faces during their serendipitous exercises this week – but not everybody was pleased.
The denomination circulated among council members a 15-page, single-spaced, small-print report modestly titled, “MGB questionnaire responses.” The document disclosed some seething problems that continue to create a backlash within the denomination.
Without comment, the document listed answers from both the GAC and the presbytery and synod executives. Most of them were printed anonymously.
Also, some of the comments were the sort that are rarely heard at GAC meetings when council members frequently fret about their PR and guard their language not to induce news stories that further rile Presbyterians in the pews.
One GAC member essentially described the purpose of the first-ever joint meeting of the council and leaders of the middle governing bodies and his or her expectations:
“This is my feeble attempt to offer some input for the Louisville meeting late next month. Less important than specific issues or questions, it seems to me that the most important goal is some level of trust or confidence. All around us people are reacting to the GA or to PUP or to threats to withdraw, etc. I believe we need to discover ways to be the legendary ‘non-anxious presence. … The questions ya’ll raise are good ones and important. I’m just not sure that we can or should move too quickly … and I find myself feeling old and believing that energy should be expended wisely, compassionately and effectively.”
Another council member also urged caution: “Don’t let special interests hold you hostage or sabotage your efforts. Invite, but don’t require, middle governing bodies and congregations to join you.”
The comments from the presbytery and synod leaders were often more pointed.
One called for “better communication between GA staffers committed to peacemaking efforts and those of us in the ‘hustings’ about the wisdom of things like meeting with Hezbollah.”
A presbytery executive expressed what has become a growing concern about finances. “Many presbyteries are trying to develop a vision for the future while dealing with disgruntled congregations that are withholding per capita or threatening to withdraw from the PCUSA. Offers of matching grants have little value for presbyteries that have nothing in reserve.”
“Communicate?” wrote one respondent. “That Louisville has to get out of the middle of the politics of our denomination. Far too many people believe the national staff has a liberal bias/agenda. I need GAC to articulate a neutral position re ordination, divestment, Trinity document, etc.”
“We need you not to promote a personal agenda or to act heavy-handed in a controlling or dictating way,” one executive said. “We need you to act with servant leadership. We need you to give away yourself and your position for the new life and health of the church, rather than trying to protect your own turf. If you are getting ready to take an action that you know will be controversial, we need you to consult us and get our feedback first, being willing to change your mind and not take the action at all if you hear from us that your action will cause a greater lack of trust … in our fragile denomination.”
One middle governing body leader complained that “our diversity, once a source of creativity, seems now to have become an unmanageable cancer. We could use a unifying vision or mission to unite us, which seems to have come to our Biblical foreparents when they cried out in desperation and repentance. I understand that the Presbyterian Coalition … is struggling to find the future and that one option is to begin a dialogue with the PCUSA leadership towards a gracious separation. Will we have a creative, prayerful response or simply shut them down?”
Another said, “I need to have a reason for advocating this church, and over the last several years I have not been given a reason for that to happen. So my tendency has been to talk about the presbytery and to advocate the presbytery, but to distance myself from the larger church when it comes to the mission and ministry of churches in this presbytery.”
Several respondents expressed concern about the financial stability of their regional bodies. “There is significant concern about the financial viability of many of our presbyteries,” one said. “Congregations are increasing the percentage of their designated giving because they see mission priorities differently from the GA.”
Another executive was worried about the joint GAC-middle governing body meeting. “This meeting can be a good start … if it involves ‘talking to’ instead of ‘talking at.’ I have attended ‘talking at’ forums in Louisville where the staff talked at us instead of with us. … In my humble opinion, there is not enough humility in Louisville.”
The trust factor was on the minds of many of the respondents. “We need to discuss together how to rebuild trust into our system, which is in such short supply. We need to talk about how we can stop ‘shooting ourselves in the feet’ with these national forest fires that keep getting set off, like ACSWP meeting with Hezbollah and John Knox/Westminster Press publishing a book accusing George Bush of being behind the 9/11 attacks. Maybe you don’t realize how these things are killing us, and how much work this creates for us at the presbytery level. We want to find ways and reasons for congregations to reconnect with presbyteries, not give them excuses to remain independent.”