New Wineskins delegates approve dismissal clause
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, July 24, 2006
TULSA – The delegates to the second annual New Wineskins Convocation approved a single phrase about “the possibility of congregations being dismissed from their presbyteries” that put the Presbyterian Church (USA) on notice that they are seriously considering separating from the denomination.
That phrase was the most hotly debated issue during a July 21 plenary session for the 168 voting delegates who attended the convocation. Overall, 686 people attended the convocation, according to New Wineskins leaders. Among those attending were two representatives of the denomination, including Mark Tammen, an attorney in the Office of the General Assembly, and representatives of congregations who wanted to take a closer look at the emerging New Wineskins Movement.
Several of the delegates objected to the dismissal phrase, saying it would put a target on their backs in their presbyteries.
Even Dean Weaver, New Wineskins co-moderator and pastor of Memorial Park Community Church in Allison Park, Pa., offered to exclude the dismissal language but to continue that strategy out of concerns for others.
“I’m personally OK with the bull’s eye on my back,” Weaver said. “But I would be willing to lay that down because of the trust that’s in this room. If striking that language with that understanding would help, then I would be happy doing that.”
But after a lengthy debate, a large majority voted by voice to keep the dismissal language in their strategy plan.
They did, however, modify the New Wineskins’ proposed action plan that listed the dismissal proposal as the first order of business for a newly formed nine-member strategy team that is to make its recommendation at the third annual New Wineskins Convocation on Feb. 8-9 at First Presbyterian Church in Orlando, Fla.
The proposed action plan called for the strategy team’s recommendation to “include but not be limited to dismissal of congregations from their presbyteries.” It then listed other assignments for the strategy team.
The approved language sent the dismissal proposal to the back of the list. It said the strategy team’s assignment will include “an examination of Biblical, spiritual, missional, congregational, strategic and legal considerations, and the possibility of congregations being dismissed from their presbyteries.”
Another contested plank in the proposed action plan was over a proposal to formalize the name of the group for incorporation purposes – and, possibly, for receiving congregations leaving the PCUSA. The New Wineskins leaders recommended that the name be the New Wineskins Association of Churches. Some delegates preferred that the name be the New Wineskins Association of Presbyterians.
In another voice vote, the majority decided to keep “Presbyterians” out of the incorporated name, although there is a reference to the “historic Reformed tradition” in the New Wineskins strategy document. The exclusion of any Presbyterian connection from any reference in the action plan for congregations and the New Wineskins Initiative was a clear refutation of the Presbyterian Church (USA).
To ease fears about repercussions in their presbyteries – including such possibilities as presbyteries sending administrative commissions to assume control of New Wineskins congregations – delegates were permitted not to use their names or identify their congregations when they spoke during the plenary session.
On the dismissal issue, two delegates seemed to sum up the arguments.
One, calling for omitting the language on dismissal, said, “It seems that what is happening here is a spirit of fear. The real decision is 1) either leave the language in and take the risk of the target on our back or 2) try to help those congregations not prepared for the arrows.”
The other, asking that the dismissal clause be retained, argued, “We have those who were headed toward the exit yesterday and we have those who stay and fight. There is going to have to be some patience on both sides of this continuum. When you gut this No. 4 [the dismissal proposal], you ignore those who are on the way out the door, and we can’t do that. The greater offense to those who are headed to the exit would be gutting this language of dismissal.”
Another delegate argued that the dismissal language should remain intact because “people are yearning for something concrete.”
Besides the dismissal issue and the formal naming of the New Wineskins Association of Churches, the delegates approved a call for a congress of renewal leaders later this year. “The purpose of the congress will be to pursue common ground towards a preferred future,” the statement said.
They also approved a statement saying that, “The Association shall focus on developing networks and relationships with common cause partners.”
For congregations, the delegates approved a six-point action plan:
1. “Confess Biblical truth.”
2. “Inform members of the congregations of the current constitutional and confessional crisis which necessitates the creation of a new wineskin.
3. “Take steps to see that the property of congregation is protected so that it may serve Jesus Christ and his Great Commission as discerned by the congregation.”
4. Enter formal relationships in New Wineskins ministry networks.”
5. Call upon sessions and presbyteries to affirm as essential current ordination standards as they exist in the Book of Order and Confessions so that no exceptions will be offered or recognized within their jurisdictions.”
6. “Work together to discern the future of our relationship with the Presbyterian Church (USA). Such discernment will take time, and sessions and presbyteries can begin immediately, asking themselves questions such as:
- a. Do the changes approved by the 2006 General Assembly create a constitutional crisis?
- b. Do the changes create a state of Biblical and confessional defection?
- c. Have the changes damaged or compromised the PCUSA’s ability to exercise legitimate governance over lower governing bodies?
- d. Has the covenant that binds our congregations and presbyteries together been breached?
- e. Have the changes minimized or eliminated our covenantal obligation to abide by the polity and discipline of higher governing bodies?
- f. What will be the future relationship between this session and the PCUSA?
- g. What future steps will our session take to address our concerns with the PCUSA?”
7. “Recommend that sessions redirect or designate all General Assembly per capita and mission giving to intentionally support ministries which reflect our faith and missional priorities.”
8. “Meet with other, like-minded Presbyterians.”
9. “Provide financial support for the New Wineskins Association of Churches.”