Straight Ahead

Thoughts of a conservative, Southern Presbyterian minister who also happens to be totally blind, with comments about theology--and everything else, too, from sports and the South to politics and favorite food. Anyone can comment.

Saturday, July 08, 2006

Representative of Whom?

Straight AheadRepresentative of Whom? In the PC(USA) Book of Order, it is said that we are a representative form of government. That's part of what Presbyterianism means. Yet, the overwhelming majority of our presbyteries choose their commissioners to General Assembly by variations on rotation representation. By that I mean that the representatives are chosen by geographic distribution within the presbytery, length of time since that particular minister or church has been represented at the GA, size of church, and other factors that go into the formula. How can this be said, in any sense, to be representative? Whenever I protest this kind of pseudo-representation, I get an argument something like this: "Well, we're not supposed to be representative of our presbyteries. We're supposed to be listening to the Holy Spirit." But this is patently lame. The denomination sends hundreds of representatives from Louisville to act as "resource persons" for the General Assembly. Every interest group within the denomination from all across the political and theological spectrum is represented. Is it to be assumed that my ability to listen to the Holy Spirit, were I to be a commissioner, is impeded simply because I was chosen in a fair and representative election of my presbytery? Is it unreasonable to assume that if 73% of the presbyteries in the last vote on the "fidelity and chastity" amendment chose to retain this provision, a fair and representative election of presbytery commissioners to the General Assembly might have resulted in a different outcome regarding the PUP Report at the 2006 GA held in Birmingham? Is it reasonable to assume that a fair and representative election of presbytery commissioners might have considered actions at the General Assembly to address the projected loss of nearly 200,000 members from our denomination between 2005 and 2007? Can we really be so self-righteous as to assume that we are listening solely to the Holy Spirit? I think there are other voices that are being heard. There are definitely other voices we need to hear. Every presbytery needs to move toward a fair and open election of synod and General Assembly commissioners if this denomination is ever going to get back in touch with its constituents--or with the Holy Spirit.

6 Comments:

  • At 7/08/2006 07:32:00 PM , Blogger The None Zone said...

    So are you saying that discernment is not scriptural?? Or that everybody has her/his own idea of how the Holy Spirit is leading??

    That's the trick. Sometimes it is easier to look behind and see where God(?) led us as opposed to leading us. How do we "know" where God is leading when we see through a glass dimly?

     
  • At 7/08/2006 09:47:00 PM , Blogger Daniel Berry said...

    I believe it is very important to seek the will of God. We do this by study and reflection on His Word, by prayer, by discussion, and in many other ways. To suggest however that the process of a fair and open election of General Assembly delegats would somehow hinder us from hearing the Holy Spirit is hardly reasonable. Do we think that when Christians vote for their elected officials, they are never seeking the will of God? Is it impossible to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit if we know what people are thinking about the important issues of the day? Besides, as I pointed out, our Book of Order clearly indicates that our Presbyterian form of government is to be representative. It can hardly be said to be representative when I don't even know what my commissioners are thinking.

     
  • At 7/09/2006 12:34:00 AM , Blogger The None Zone said...

    To Sid Leak,

    Why are you basing your idea of God as being distant on Old Testament texts only when, at least I thought, Presbyterian and Reformed believed also in the New Testament and the concept of "God With Us"=Emmanuel and is not God in the flesh in the person of Jesus? Did not Jesus/God in the flesh die on the cross??? That was a real death the way I understand it. Is it possible to identify any closer with humanity than that??? And even when we look at the Book of Job, we see that God cares for us--God even comes down to meet Job and fills in the gap of distance. Re-read the ending of Job.

     
  • At 7/09/2006 01:11:00 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    At the end of Job, God also says to the 3 friends, "I'm mad as hell at you guys because you weren't right like Job was" (Thomas G. Long's paraphrase I got in class years ago.

    I'm not denying the incarnation. I just believe there's a difference between the incarnation and this direct communication with God that certain people claim to have. Regarding the latter, that is why, most of the time, I'd rather "laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints."

     
  • At 7/09/2006 10:26:00 PM , Blogger The None Zone said...

    brother makarias,

    Job was ultimately indicated as opposed to his so-called friends who had nothing, really to say that made sense to Job. Job challenged the teachings of the day and God still called him, "My servant Job" as in the beginning of the book. The point also is, unlike Job's friends, Job is humbled before God and knows his rightful place.

    Define what "direct contact with God" is. Daniel, is this (direct contact with God) what you are taliking about or what most people say is discernment. I thought you were pretty clear as to what you mean by discernment.

     
  • At 7/12/2006 03:52:00 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    I share your concerns about the selection and election process for GA Commissioners.

    Another related issue is the reapportionment of the presbyteries.

    Unfortunately, most presbyterians seem more interested in arguing over the latest fiasco than fixing the system.

    As the presbyterian blogger network and other informal networks increase, I see these new networks being the voices for major changes in the denomination.

    It is pretty silly to see that the South Atlantic Synod has 16 presbyteries and 290,000 members, while the Northeast Synod has 22 presbyteries and 220,000 members.

    Of course, those in power will fight tooth and nail against any change that upsets their power base.

    The United Methodists reapportioned their conferences in 2000 and the conservative conferences in the south gained power and the northern liberal conferences lost power.

    Bottom line. We need to start with the basics to make the selection and election of GA Commissioners a representative process and not a rotational process and we need to reapportion the presbyteries so that geographic areas who have lost thousands of members also lose voting power.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home