Top Ten Issues before the Assembly: Part 7

Disclaimer:  The opinions contained herein are my own and are not intended to represent those of the Advisory Committee on the Constitution or any other person or entity.

Number 4:  The Elimination of Synods?

One of the most anticipated items before the Assembly is the report of the Mid Councils Commission (formerly the Middle Governing Bodies Commission).  It is an extensive -- in some ways, monumental -- report with multiple recommendations.  The recommendations of concern in this post are numbers 1-4, which propose the elimination of synods as "ecclesiastical councils of the church."

First, some background on the Commission. The commission was formed as a response to an overture from the Synod of the Southwest, and a parallel request from the Office of the General Assembly in 2010.  Its charge included consulting church-wide on the mission and function of mid councils (presbyteries and synods) and "develop[ing] models that reflect the roles of middle governing bodies in our polity and the changing context of our witness...." It consists of 21 persons, with at least one representative per synod.  I served as constitutional resource to the Commission on behalf of the Advisory Committee on the Constitution (see disclaimer above!!!). 

The originating overture was concerned with the financial viability of some synods and sought to find creative ways of doing the business of synods.  However, another overture in 2010 sought to eliminate synods altogether, and was "answered by" the action forming the commission.

The Commission report recommends (1) that the Book of Order chapter on synods be struck in its entirety, to take effect at the end of the 222nd General Assembly (2016); (2) that certain ecclesiastical functions of synods be assigned to five regional administrative commissions of the General Assembly; (3) that the judicial functions of Synods be assigned to an unspecified number of regional judicial commissions; and (4) that the Office of the General Assembly send to the 221st General Assembly (2014) the necessary editorial and enabling amendments to accomplish the first three recommendations.  The report envisions that synods could continue to exist as "multi-presbytery partnerships" to perform missional and fiduciary functions.

The elimination of synods would constitute a major change in our polity. There is nothing in our polity that requires synods, per se.  Nevertheless synods have performed important functions for nearly 300 years (if approved, they would be dissolved on the 300th anniversary of the formation of the first colonial synod).  Some synods have extraordinarily large foundations and trusts; others have been engaging in vital mission.  Synods have historically performed an important function in monitoring and enforcing our commitment to racial-ethnic inclusiveness.  I am told this is the sixth attempt since reunion in 1983 to eliminate synods.  Synods have survived for a reason.

The Commission seeks to advance a polity that is more "flat, flexible, and faithful."  It may well be time to reconsider the role of synods, which for the typical pew-sitter are the least comprehensible councils in the church.  However, the Commission's recommendations are flawed in some key points:

• The "Pig in a Poke":  The Assembly (and potentially, the presbyteries) are asked to vote on a plan to eliminate synods without seeing the specific plans for what would succeed them.  Without seeing how regional administrative and judicial commissions would be structured, how they would be composed, and what specific powers they would be given, there is a lot of trust being expected from the church at a time when distrust is at a peak.
• Timeline:  Transition plans from existing synods would need to be submitted to the 221st General Assembly (2014), only one year after the vote to eliminate them might be decided.  The plans would have to be implemented by the 222nd General Assembly (2016).  If there are problems or controversies surrounding these plans, or if the enabling amendments are defeated, or implementation of transition plans hit a snag in the civil arena, it is entirely possible that there could be multiple situations where ecclesiastical or civil jurisdiction could be in question or even non-existent come July 2016.
• K.I.S.S.:  not the 80's rock band, but the acronym for "keep it simple, stupid!"  Is it really simplifying our polity to eliminate synods in favor of two separate commission structures of the General Assembly and numerous "multi-presbytery partnerships"?  An alternative proposal from the Presbytery of St. Andrew would commit to reducing the number of synods from 16 to as few as six.  That might be a more elegant solution.
• Experimental Presbyteries:  Another recommendation in the report calls for a season of experimentation with presbytery structure, allowing for certain non-geographic and "porous" presbyteries to be established.  The merits of this proposal will be discussed in a future blog post, but for our current discussion, let me point out that if the presbytery recommendations are adopted, it would increase the need for strong synod structures to oversee the new presbyteries and address issues that may arise.

Will this be the time when synods are finally eliminated?  Perhaps, but don't bet on it.  My personal assessment of the church tells me that the Assembly (or, perhaps the presbyteries) will vote between the choices of eliminating synods or adopting non-geographic presbytery models.  But even if the decision to eliminate synods fails, it is a better-than-even bet that the St. Andrew overture, reducing the number (and possibly function) of synods will be adopted.

The Commission has nevertheless done extraordinary work, and has challenged the church to rethink our ecclesiastical structures.  The above issues may be worked out in committee, or some form of compromise accommodation may emerge.  Or, the Assembly may move forward anyway, issues notwithstanding.  What is clear to me, however, is that the church is indeed headed toward a more flat, flexible, and faithful governance, even if the timing and stops on our journey may not be set at this time.

Next:  Israel, Palestine, and Divestment