wfn.org | [PCUSANEWS] Review of stated clerk's election will cover a

[Deeanna Alford <dalford@CTR.PCUSA.ORG>]

04338
July 29, 2004

Review of stated clerk's election will cover a process without many rules

by Leslie Scanlon
The Presbyterian Outlook
Reprinted with permission

LOUISVILLE - The Committee on the Office of the General Assembly will
conduct an investigation involving concerns that the process used in the
stated clerk's election on July 2 might not have been fair.

	And that investigation is likely to lead to a bigger conversation
in the Presbyterian Church (USA) about whether more specific rules should
be adopted for electing a stated clerk - now there basically are no rules
governing campaigning for that office - and about whether the
behind-the-scenes efforts to influence commissioners at General Assembly
are acceptable or sometimes go too far.

	What is not up for reconsideration, however, is the outcome of the
election, in which the Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick, an experienced and popular
figure within the church, was elected on the first ballot to a third
four-year term.

	While the COGA investigation was ignited by what happened in this
year's stated clerk's election, the context in which it will be conducted
is broader than that. Assembly veterans are well aware that part of what's
being alleged here - that questions commissioners were to ask of candidates
were planned and circulated in advance - has been common practice for years
in moderators' elections.

	Advocacy groups within the church openly acknowledge that they try
to influence commissioners' thinking both before and during the Assembly
(some groups, for example, advertise daily "briefing" sessions they offer
to commissioners). And the idea that there would be a floor strategy as
commissioners discuss controversial issues during committee meetings or a
plenary session would not take Assembly insiders by surprise at all.

	What could be asked in this investigation, however, would be
whether anything happened this time that went beyond the norm - that would
or should be considered out-of-bounds.

	And it may be a time to ask, too, whether in an increasingly
politicized process in an intensely divided church, the rules as written
now are sufficient, or need to be changed. One commissioner, for example,
drew applause when she said she was tired of mean-spirited, anonymous
flyers being placed in her mailbox - don't do that any more, she said.

	It's also not clear what precisely are the allegations of possible
funny business involving the July 2 election. There was mention - first by
candidate the Rev. Linn "Rus" Howard - of a list he said he fished out of a
garbage can giving "friendly" questions (presumably, friendly to one or
more of the candidates) to be asked during the one-hour
"question-and-answer" session.

	And later the Rev. Timothy Harrison, a commissioner from Elizabeth
Presbytery, said he had "grave concerns" about the process used and made a
motion, which eventually passed by a whopping margin, calling for the
investigation. Harrison referred to a list with suggested questions for the
candidates and the names and seat numbers of specific commissioners who to
ask them.

	"This deeply grieves and concerns me," Harrison said, adding that
he feared the voices of some commissioners could be marginalized if the
process for calling on commissioners during the question period were not
fair.

	But there are many unanswered questions - including whether the
commissioners Harrison mentioned on the list were actually called on to ask
their questions.

	Even if some were, there's also the question of whether that
happened because some kind of shenanigans were involved - some effort to
intentionally skew the asking of questions - or because those people did an
exceptionally expedient job of getting to the microphones in the plenary
hall first.

	In an interview, Rick Ufford-Chase, who is moderator of the 216th
General Assembly and was in charge of calling on questioners at the
microphones, did provide some answers.

	First, he said he has never seen any list of questions to be asked
or people who were to ask them. If such a list matched the order in which
he called on people, "it would have been a phenomenal coincidence,"
Ufford-Chase said. "I had no idea there was any such list."

	Second, Ufford-Chase supports the investigation - he said so to the
Assembly.

	Third, during the question-and-answer session, Ufford-Chase made
his own decisions about which microphones to call on in which order, and he
did so trying to strike a balance of calling on ministers and elders, men
and women, commissioners and advisory delegates, a balance he told the
commissioners explicitly at other times that he was trying to achieve.

	"I can tell you categorically the moderator was making his own
calls about who to call on," said the Rev. Gradye Parsons, associate stated
clerk and director of operations of the Office of the General Assembly, who
was assisting on the platform during the election. "He had no input from
anybody but himself."

	Fourth, in his own campaign for moderator Ufford-Chase was advised
that it's common practice for candidates' supporters to organize in advance
questions to ask - he said he was told, "This is what everybody does and
you should do it, too." But "I refused to participate in that,"
Ufford-Chase said, because it didn't feel right to him, and "tactically I
felt it was entirely unnecessary," that things would go just as well if he
answered whatever questions happened to come up.

	Kirkpatrick said during a news conference after the election that
he had seen a copy of the prepared questions mentioned by Howard, but had
not been involved in preparing the questions nor had he requested that
particular commissioners ask questions. "I thing that does happen from time
to time," Kirkpatrick said. "Half the questions (the candidates were asked)
were those on the list."

	It's also arguable whether the questions that were asked did
inherently favor any one candidate over the others.

	The candidates were asked, for example, what does it mean to
preserve and defend the denomination's Constitution, as the stated clerk is
expected to do? What advice should be given to young adults frustrated by
bickering in the denomination's leadership? What are their hopes and
expectations for the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of
the Church? What experience have they had that would prepare them for
managing the Office of the General Assembly (it was after this question
that Howard referred to finding the list in the garbage can, saying that
three of the four questions that had been asked so far came from the list,
and adding: "I thought this was an unscripted debate.")

	In the closing hours of the Assembly there was a motion made to
send the investigation to a group other than the Committee on the Office of
the General Assembly - with the suggestion that there might be an
appearance of impropriety, of too much closeness between COGA and
Kirkpatrick - but that proposal failed after it was pointed out that COGA
is an elected body of the General Assembly.

	COGA will meet next in October and likely will discuss then how to
proceed with the investigation, said Steve Grace, an elder and lawyer from
Michigan who is COGA's new moderator. But there already has been mention of
the possibility of changing the standing rules.

	The Stated Clerk Review and Nomination Committee, on which he
served, also has concerns about the standing rules. "We were worried about
the politicizing of the election" this year, he said, and about the lack of
clear guidance to candidates about how to conduct their campaigns.

	Currently there are no formal rules governing campaigns for stated
clerk - unlike with the every-Assembly elections for moderators, where the
standing rules specify, for example, spending limits and when campaigning
can take place (basically, it's usually a "meet-and-greet" the candidates
for a few hours in a hallway at the convention center before the Assembly
starts).

	But the stated clerk's election takes place only once every four
years, so there's been less attention given to rules for that election.
Asked if this year's election was more political than such elections have
been in the past, Grace responded: "Oh, I think so, sure."

	Someone stuffed anonymous flyers in commissioners' mailboxes
decrying Kirkpatrick's "Failed Leadership Record," referring to the
PC(USA)'s budget cuts and membership losses, and stating, "Our denomination
is failing due to ineffective leadership."

	Another referred to public stances the denomination has taken -
saying, for example, that "We support the removal of the Ten Commandments
from public buildings" - and said that under Kirkpatrick's leadership,
"this is how the PC(USA) has come to be known. Vote for a change in
leadership. Stop the slide and recapture the spirit."

	Signed letters were also place into commissioners' mailboxes noting
Kirkpatrick's endorsements by more than 20 former General Assembly
moderators, by all the presidents of the Presbyterian seminaries and by 93
of the presbytery and synod stated clerks.

	All of this sparked a lively hallway discussion of what's fair and
what's not.

	One thing that representatives of advocacy groups seemed to agree
on was that some level of trying to win commissioners' support has, for
years, been common practice at the General Assembly.

	If questions were suggested for commissioners to ask, "quite
frankly that type of thing is done often and there's nothing sinister or
upsetting about it," said the Rev. Jim Berkley, issues analyst for
Presbyterians for Renewal, an evangelical group that ardently supports the
PC(USA)'s ordination standards. "That type of thing has been done over the
years by all different sides."

	Pam Byers is executive director of the Covenant Network of
Presbyterians, a group working to try to change the PC(USA)'s ordination
standards to allow non-celibate gays and lesbians to be ordained. Asked if
questions have been suggested to commissioners before, Byers answered:
"That's been known to happen ... with a view to raising up issues that
commissioners ought to know what the candidates think about them."

	The Rev. Bob Davis, the second-place finisher in the stated clerk's
race, said, "It's fine to have commissioners with questions prepared" and
in previous years, "I've done it. I've helped commissioners frame
questions. It's in large part to be of service to the Assembly," because as
a result "we've seen a reduction in the number of frivolous questions,
throw-away questions, that take up time."

	And people involved in past campaigns said candidates typically
practice in advance answering the types of questions they expect might be
asked - both "friendly" ones and those that could put them in a tough spot.
The questions asked this year "seemed reasonable for a stated clerk's
election," Davis said.

	How far all this should go, however, isn't always something on
which people necessarily agree.

	Berkley, for example, wrote some weeks ago - before the Assembly -
in his online "Berkley Blog" that a group of commissioners who served on
the National Issues committee at the 2003 Assembly in Denver was
"practically vilified" for consulting together before they arrived in
Colorado about the controversial "Families in Transition" paper. The
committee ultimately approved a draft of the paper that those commissioners
presented, rather than what was originally proposed to the committee,
Berkley wrote. And the commissioners had counsel from "seasoned observers,"
Berkley wrote - people who were not commissioners, but who assisted them as
they wrote their alternative draft.

	After the Denver Assembly, Alan Wisdom from the Institute on
Religion and Democracy - a conservative special interest group - was added
to the team charged with further rewriting the Families paper, and is said
to have played a significant role in its revision.

	Berkley argued in his blog that "commissioners NEED and deserve
such appropriate counsel, and should not be browbeaten into shunning input
and collaboration. Why would we ever want decisions made only on the spur
of the moment by the ill-prepared and poorly informed?"

	And he said in an interview that he hopes any rules changes that
might be proposed would not cut off such contact by advocacy groups with
commissioners - which usually takes place, Berkley said, when particular
commissioners indicate that they're open to the conversation. "Resourcing
commissioners is absolutely fair," Berkley said. "Talking with
commissioners, stating one's points of view, getting information before
them" and explaining the weaknesses of the other side's positions helps to
make better-informed commissioners, he contends.

And Berkley said the "red badges" do it to - meaning national staff
members of the denomination, who typically wear name tags with red
backgrounds.

	"There are some people who have this purist idea that nobody has
any influence over commissioners at all," Berkley said. "It's ridiculous
... Commissioners still make their own decisions. They are not children."

	There are some limits , however. Only commissioners and advisory
delegates (and a few technical support types) are allowed into the
commissioner seating area of the plenary hall. And there are not supposed
to be communications with commissioners while the Assembly or the
committees are in session - although some cynics tell stories of hand
signals and of commissioners who leave the voting area to consult with
people at the back of the room.

	And there's at least the technological potential for such things as
instant messaging or text messaging on cell phones, although
representatives of the advocacy groups say they have not detected that
happening - and say if that were being done other commissioners might
notice and complain.

	And Berkley is not alone in arguing that, as long as the rules are
followed, it is appropriate for advocacy groups to try to make their case
with commissioners

	Byers said the Covenant Network provides what she calls practical,
procedural advice to help commissioners - many of whom are attending their
first Assembly - understand the issues and how to do what those
commissioners want to accomplish. And "of course we'll offer opinions" on
particular issues, Byers said, adding those opinions are usually published
and publicized in advance.

	But there is a line, a delicate balance, Byers said, between
assisting commissioners and manipulating them. "What we do not do is write
speeches for people," Byers said, "especially YADs," meaning youth advisory
delegates.

	"One of the clear ethical guidelines we operate from is honoring a
person's conscience," said Michael Adee, a field organizer for More Light
Presbyterians, the most strident supporters of non-celibate gay and lesbian
ordination. "We really strive as faithfully as possible not to cross lines
that might suggest that if a person doesn't vote a certain way ... he or
she is not a good Christian or not a faithful Presbyterian."

	Adee also said "we strive to maintain a transparent method" -
speaking at the open hearings, sharing personal stories, leaving background
materials with More Light identification in commissioners' mailboxes, and
being especially vigilant not to cross any lines of propriety with youth
advisory delegates. "I'm concerned that we not intimidate commissioners or
try to control things so much that the (Holy) Spirit cannot be at work,"
Adee said.

	Davis, who leads the Presbyterian Forum, said "I think there have
been episodes in the past where individuals have gotten out of line but
have been reined in" by the advocacy groups. "If you cross the line, it
backfires," Davis said. "To get lost in the Mickey Mouse" of improper
manipulation means "you lose your integrity and you lose your ability to
effect the kind of change you want to effect."

	And Harrison, the commissioner who asked for the review, has since
resigned his General Assembly commission.

	Editor's note, by Jerry L. Van Marter: The full text of the
document candidate Linn "Rus" Howard said he found in a garbage can,
alluded to during the question-and-answer period, and subsequently
furnished to the Presbyterian News Service:

	Questions to pose to stated clerk nominees

	What are your hopes and expectations for the work of the Task Force
on the Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church?

	What are the non-negotiables among us Presbyterians?

	The Stated Clerk is responsible for a large staff and managing the
complex relationships of the General Assembly. What experiences have you
had to prepare you for these responsibilities?

	One of the critical issues of our time is the relationship between
various faith communities. What should the Stated Clerk do to promote
positive interfaith relations?

	The Standing Rules of the General Assembly indicate that the Stated
Clerk will "preserve and defend" the Constitution. Share with us your
understanding about this aspect of the Stated Clerk's ministry.

	What can and should the Stated Clerk do to promote Christian unity?
Share with us your track record in ecumenical leadership.

	How would you explain our denomination's position relative to gays
and lesbians and what would you do to bring healing among us with our
differences on these matters?

	What would you do as Stated Clerk to help bring understanding and
respect among groups of Presbyterians who disagree?

	Some overseas partner churches have expressed concern about actions
being considered by our General Assembly. What could or should the Stated
Clerk do about this?

	The PCUSA is continuing to lose members. What can and should the
Stated Clerk do to help the PCUSA become a growing church?

	(Special question for a YAD) What would you say to a young adult
who could not get excited about our church because of all the bickering and
debate?

	NOTES: On Friday morning go quickly to the microphone as the fourth
Stated Clerk nominee completes his 5 minute speech. If you are not at the
front of the line you may not be recognized. If the question you were going
to asked has already been posed, go to another question on the list. Listen
to the other questions so that your question will not be a repeat.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, please send an email to
pcusanews-subscribe-request@halak.pcusa.org or
pcusanews-unsubscribe-request@halak.pcusa.org

To contact the owner of the list, please send an email to
pcusanews-request@halak.pcusa.org