| NewFOG: Too Much Change, Too Much Uncertainty, Unintended Consequences, Especially Now. |
| Written by Casey Jones | ||||||
| Tuesday, 24 May 2011 20:15 | ||||||
|
Although I had not planned to write in opposition to newFOG, I have decided to do so now . There were two tipping points for me: 1. The passage of Amendment 10A introduces a large change into our church, and I think that on top of that newFOG will be more change than we can reasonably deal with in a year! 2. In talking to a number of presbytery stated clerks, I note that many of them have serious reservations about newFOG but also feel that because of their positions, they cannot take a strong stand against it. Since I am not a presbytery stated clerk, I feel free to repeat some of what I have heard: NewFOG is advertised as helping us become more of a missional church, but what I am hearing is that with the requirement that each session adopt a manual of operations and decide all over again on things like notice and quorum for congregational meetings and a host of other things, sessions and congregations will be forced to look not outward- but inward in coming up with all these rules and procedures. At our last meeting of Presbytery’s Council, our stated clerk was preparing, if newFOG passes, to help all of our congregations, including many without a pastor, write manuals of operation—a daunting task. 2. As it is now, within the PC(USA) there is a great deal of predictability across the denomination in the areas of polity and procedure because we are all under the same Form of Government. For example, every presbytery will have a Committee on Ministry. This means that ministers of Word and Sacrament moving from one presbytery to another, or a ruling elder moving to church in a new presbytery, might be the “new kids on the block” in that new presbytery, but at least everyone is playing by rules that are familiar to all across the denomination. Under newFOG, each presbytery might have vastly different rules, disadvantaging all but the long-time insiders in that presbytery. Also as a denomination, when we make changes to the Form of Government, they are widely debated and scrutinized. Under newFOG, important changes made by a particular presbytery or congregation will likely often have much less light shining upon them while they are being considered. This may result in policies and procedures that have been less carefully thought-out. 3.”King Clerk.” One clerk from another presbytery whom I respect very much noted that “knowledge is power.” She noted that in her presbytery the clerk knows the most about the rules particular to that presbytery. She surprised me by imagining a situation under newFOG where, since each presbytery has its own rules to replace many provisions now in the Form of Government, the clerk of that presbytery will know all these rules the best and therefore could become a sort of “King Clerk.” (I note that this thought came from this presbytery stated clerk, not from me.) I hope remaining presbytery commissioners will vote against newFOG. It is a bridge too far at this time. Winfield Casey Jones, D. Min. is a member of the Presbytery of New Covenant and serves First Church Pearland, Texas. He currently serves on presbytery’s General Council. He has chaired the following presbytery committees: Committee on Ministry; Nominating Committee; Evangelism Committee. He was a candidate for GA stated clerk in 2000 and 2008. He has been a local pastor for 32 years and taught his presbytery’s officer training on the proposed newFog. This article may be reproduced. Your Responses (3)
Thomas Fultz
said:
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed|
Mobile, AL The PC(USA) does not need to move any further toward "strong local control" and less connections. The nFoG must not be adopted! |
p.w. gregory
said:
|
lambertville, nj Prime Minister Thatcher when she was leading the UK made the comment about Socialism as a means to operate in general. "Sooner or later you run out of other people's money to spend". Applied to the PCUSA, sooner or later, you run out of the trust, confidence, or inherent good will of others to conduct your business, and sooner or later you run out people, period. There is nothing wrong per se in the pace or speed of institutional change or transformation, nor with the scope, big or a little at a time. Though Max Weber observed over 100 years ago that social institutions near the point of collapse tend to re-write the rules of the organization in a last ditch effort for relevency. Of course his context was the decaying Hapsburgh empire in the 19th century. As I have stated in the past, the PCUSA social compact (1983-2011) is gone, null and void, love it, hate it, embrace it, or run away. The only choice one has to such profound change is do you choose to be a part of, or not. I think it is the "not" part that will be worked out in the church courts and civil in the years to come, one church, one clergy, one presbytery at a time. But sooner or later, you run out of people. |
L. Lee
said:
|
Mukilteo, WA The vote for/against the N-Fog is split evenly. Why are so many voting for this change? No one voting for this is really sure what this change will mean....that is disconcerting. I believe, the vote for N-Fog is evidence of the frustration and lack of trust in the national leadership and the very core foundation of the PC(USA). This lack of trust in the very form of government that has held churches connected for years (i.e. Presbyterianism) is the cause of many voting for this ammendment. It is so sweeping a change, yet it gives autonomy to pastors, sessions and that seems to be desirable to being structured under the old Form of Government or Book of Order and under a leadership you can't trust. Pastors want to choose how to "individualize" their ministry and the question is will this undermine our connectional nature. When you can't trust your leaders then you want more controll of your own ministry base. However the result may be to replace "order" with free choice, local option, and perhaps chaos for the Presbyteries and courts. As a member, I have to ask if this is the same denomination I chose to live out my faith years ago and if I want to continue to be working for it's growth now. Sad as it is, the battles of the last years will now move to the local level - the congregation and its members - to decide which side they want to be on and the N-Fog will not be able to stop the "blood shed". |
Write a Response
