I wanted to give a few more updates on the PCA General Assembly for those of you who weren't there and who care what the PCA is doing. There were 27 overtures presented this year and I am not up on all of them. I missed some of them because I was outside catching up with old friends at the time they were discussed and I have not seen the actions posted on them. A couple of particular interest to me were overtures regarding the New Perspective and Federal Vision and regarding calling a pastor.
By my count there were at least five overtures having something to do with the Federal Vision/New Perspective/Auburn Avenue Theology, ranging from a request to erect a study committee to declaring the Auburn Avenue theology heterodox and asking the GA to assume jurisdiction and institute process against a particular advocate of the Auburn Avenue theology.
For reasons I don't quite recall our Bills and Overtures committee issued a majority report recommending we not form the study committee. There was a minority report from the B&O committee recommending we do form the study committee. The minority report prevailed in the assembly, so there will be a report at the next General Assembly on this matter. I gather that all of the other motions regarding FV/AA/NP are subsumed under this - if anyone can tell me differently, please leave a comment.
I was a bit surprised that the majority report of our Bills and Overtures Committee recommended we not do this. It seems to me that the FV/AA/NP are such hot issues that they lend themselves to such a study and that it would be helpful to the church as a whole. So, I am glad the minority report prevailed.
I hope no one has too high of hopes that the committee will have a full report on this next year. The FV, AA and NP are not all the same thing, nor do any of them have a definitive definition. It will take a good deal of sorting and study just to define the issues, much less to evaluate and pronounce upon them. So, I do see this as a thing which could take some time.
The other issue of interest to me was an overture asking that we add an appendix to our Book of Church Order on procedures for calling a pastor. This overture stated that when a pastor wants to candidate with another church he must inform his current session before doing so. Similarly, if a search committee wanted to contact a particular pastor, that search committee would have to contact the candidate's session before doing so.
The rationale behind this is that there is often a good deal of duplicity in the pastoral search process. Search committees show up at churches looking at a pastor and basically lie to the people they meet at the church, making up some reason for their being there that is untrue. I suppose pastors sometimes lie to their churches when seeking another pastorate.
This overture was voted down, so there will be no such addition to our BCO. I was not in favor of this, but it raises some good issues. Ultimately the overture addressed the potential sins of pastors and search committees and in doing so it was appropriate. On the other hand it didn't address the potential sins of the pastoral candidate's current church and/or current session. One important statement in the overture was this:
When a pastor becomes dissatisfied with his present situation, more often than not he will confide with other teaching elders, rather than his own session. In most cases his final decision to make a change is made in concert with another session and pulpit committee, which has their own best interests in mind. They are not thinking of the problems that could occur in the church from which the new pastor comes.
That is indeed true, but two things must be kept in mind. Pastors in the PCA are members of the presbytery, not the local church. Thus, their direct line of accountability is to the presbytery, i.e. fellow teaching and ruling elders. Secondly, it needs to be kept in mind that just as "another session and pulpit committee" may only have their best interests in mind, so a local church may only have its best interests in mind and often is unaware of how it may be mistreating its current pastor.
Having said that, I'm glad the brothers brought this up - it does raise some good issues, it just didn't address all of the issues that need to be addressed in that regard. And, a note to anyone from my own congregation or presbytery who may be reading this - I have no agenda here, I am treated very well by my session and my church and love where I am at.
Quick Update - John Hendryx at Reformation Theology has more on the FV/NP/AA stuff here. Be sure and check out the comments for fuller information.
Also blogging on the GA is Rev. Chris Polski.
And, doing a much thorough job of blogging the GA was The Last Lonely House - check out all of the posts titled "Live from Atlanta."
I too have pondered the candidating process, but from a different angle. At times the pastor is part of the problem in his current congregation. And will replicate that problem in a new setting (funny how that works- kinda like serial marriage). But the search committee cannot talk to the current Session to discover this problem. Nor is Presbytery able to penetrate this veil until it is too late (I am a Minister & His Work chair and have seen this problem too often). The absence of channels of communication is problematic.
Posted by: cavman | June 27, 2006 at 03:33 PM
With the process of candidating, I am reminded of what Richard Pratt (RTS Orlando) said about the ministry. If you make your living by your faith, you will lose one or the other. Why tell your session you are looking with the definite possibility they will can you.
Also, as a former PCA teaching elder who was the curious (and non-biblical) animal called an assistant pastor, the power rests not in presbytery but the session to unload the minister without much fuss. I remember one of my ruling elders saying to me, "We thought we would try you for 6 months and we could always cut you loose". This was after a major move of my family from SC to south FL. This does not inspire a minister to trust his session.
Calling and job are strange bed fellows.
Posted by: K. Payne | June 27, 2006 at 07:18 PM