wfn.org | [PCUSANEWS] Kirkpatrick rebuts 'constitutional crisis' charges

[PCUSA NEWS <PCUSA.NEWS@ecunet.org>]

Note #7512 from PCUSA NEWS to PRESBYNEWS:

Kirkpatrick rebuts 'constitutional crisis' charges
02450
November 8, 2002

Kirkpatrick rebuts 'constitutional crisis' charges

Claims are based on 'misunderstandings,' Stated Clerk tells church leaders

by Jerry L. Van Marter

LOUISVILLE - In a bluntly-worded memorandum to synod and presbytery
executives and stated clerks this week, General Assembly stated clerk the
Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick insisted "there is no constitutional crisis" in the
Presbyterian Church (USA).

Responding to what he called "misunderstandings circulating in the media,"
Kirkpatrick said the 190 judicial commissions in the denomination - one for
each of the 173 presbyteries, 16 synods and the General Assembly - are
"faithful commissions in their careful and important work" and that "further
action by a General Assembly - regular or special session - to intervene
directly in a judicial process would create just such a crisis."

Two Presbyterians have launched campaigns to force Kirkpatrick and the
General Assembly to intervene in a number of cases around alleged "defiance"
of the constitution by churches and individuals who oppose G-6.0106b - the
commonly called "fidelity and chastity" provision of the PC(USA)'s Book of
Order.

Paul Rolf Jensen, an attorney in suburban Washington, DC, has filed more than
20 G-6.0106b-related complaints in presbyteries around the country. In a
letter to Kirkpatrick he also sent to various media, Jensen demanded that
Kirkpatrick force judicial commissions in some of those presbyteries to bring
his complaints to trial.

Alex Metherell, an attorney in Laguna Beach, CA, who was a commissioner from
Los Ranchos Presbytery to last summer's 214th General Assembly, says he has
garnered requests from 44 commissioners to force a special session of that
Assembly to address the "constitutional crisis." The Book of Order stipulates
that a special meeting "shall" be called "at the requestof 25 elders and 25
ministers, representing at least 15 presbyteries under the jurisdiction of at
least five synods, all of whom must have been commissioners to the last
preceding stated meeting of General Assembly." Metherell says his list of
petitioners meets those requirements.

Metherell and Jensen are both members of St. Andrews Presbyterian Church in
Newport Beach, CA.

The full text of Kirkpatrick's memo, dated Nov. 6, 2002:

One of the great strengths of our beloved denomination is the Constitution
that describes our office and defines our functions as we engage in ministry
and mission together. I praise God for your faithful service under it, and I
am so very grateful that the vast majority of Presbyterians treasure and
abide by it.

My office, like I suspect many of your offices, has received claims of a
supposed "constitutional crisis." I believe those claims to be based upon a
number of misunderstandings about our Constitution. These misunderstandings
are circulating in the media and I am concerned that they are causing
confusion in the church. Therefore, let me set the record straight. I commend
the following to you and hope that this information will be of help.

Misunderstanding #1:  Nothing is being done to uphold our Constitution.

Like you, I know these claims to be patently inaccurate. Many of the
governing bodies you serve have undertaken judicial and administrative
processes. The Office of the General Assembly has spent countless hours
serving as a resource to and for you and to parties on all sides of disputes
by training judicial commissions, providing advisory opinions on our
Constitution, and staffing the General Assembly's Permanent Judicial
Commission and the Advisory Committee on the Constitution. One of the marks
of the covenant that binds us together is the careful, thorough, and
sometimes?lengthy process our Constitution sets up to address defiance and
sin, while providing due process and the opportunity to defend oneself. These
are hallmarks of our polity.

Protecting rights, and presuming innocence and good faith, may not be the
most efficient ways to arrive at determinations of compliance, or of guilt or
innocence. But these components are tangible expressions of the bedrock
principles that underlie our covenant.

Misunderstanding #2:  The 214th General Assembly failed to take action to
uphold the Constitution.  
An overwhelming majority of the commissioners to the 214th General Assembly
affirmed the regular process described in our Constitution, which empowers
the governing bodies you serve to determine that "the proceedings have been
regular and in accordance with the Constitution" (G?9.0409a) and to "correct
or restrain wrongdoing" (D?1.0101).

This claim about the 214th General Assembly's actions stems from a
misunderstanding of the judicial process. Our Constitution assigns the
responsibility for judicial process to our judicial commissions at the
presbytery, synod, and General Assembly levels; it does not provide for our
governing bodies to directly engage in judicial processes. The 214th General
Assembly specifically reaffirmed this process and urged all governing bodies
and judicial commissions to abide by it.

Misunderstanding #3:  Further action by a General Assembly is needed to
resolve the supposed "Constitutional crisis."

There is no Constitutional crisis. The powers of the General Assembly in
judicial matters are limited by the Constitution; these powers are assigned
to the Assembly's judicial commission (G?13.0103o). Further action by a
General Assembly?regular or special session?to intervene directly in a
judicial process would create just such a crisis. Our Constitution places
authority for disciplinary and remedial matters in judicial commissions. Just
as a synod cannot reach into congregations, neither can a General Assembly
bypass synods. The actions of judicial commissions can only be reviewed by
the next higher judicial commission.

Neither a General Assembly nor its Stated Clerk can defend the Constitution
by defying it. 

Misunderstanding #4:  Judicial commissions have not been faithful in their
work.

One hundred and ninety permanent judicial commissions are in our system and
are faithfully served by nearly 2,000 Presbyterian ministers and elders. The
Rules of Discipline wisely entrust the most authority over the broadest range
of issues to the body most local to the situation, that is, the body most
likely to have knowledge and understanding of the particular situation.
Please continue to resource and support these faithful commissions in their
careful and important work. Most of you do that so well that the church
hardly knows about this whole system. 
	
I invite you to continue to consult with staff of the Office of the General
Assembly at any time. The Office of the General Assembly has released a
number of advisory opinions and resources on these subjects. We have advisory
opinions on administrative review (#1) and dissent and defiance (#2). We also
have numerous resources on judicial process (Polity Reflections 1?5) and the
role of the Clerk in the process (Polity Reflection 46). These resources can
be found at www.pcusa.org/oga.
	
I pray that God will strengthen you as you continue to fulfill your
responsibilities in this difficult time in the life of the church. I am
thankful to be partners in ministry with you in the name of Jesus Christ. I
continue to pray that God will bless you in your service to the church. 

*** For instructions on using this system (including how to UNJOIN this
meeting), send e-mail to mailrequests@ecunet.org
------------------------------------------
Send your response to this article to pcusa.news@pcusa.org

------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send an 'unsubscribe' request to

pcusanews-request@halak.pcusa.org