Overture 04-51. On Amending Standing Rule G.2.g. and C.7. Regarding an Assembly Committee on Administrative Review—From the Presbytery of Mississippi.

The Presbytery of Mississippi respectfully overtures the 216th General Assembly (2004) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to make the following changes to the Standing Rules:

1. Amend Standing Rule G.2.g. as follows: [Text to be deleted is shown with a strikethrough; text to be added or inserted is shown as italic.]

“g. On receipt of the certified record and final decision in a case of judicial process from the clerk of the Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly, the Stated Clerk shall report the decision to the General Assembly if it is in session, or to its first session thereafter if it is not. When a decision of the Permanent Judicial Commission contains an order directed to another governing body, the Stated Clerk shall obtain from the governing body a statement of its compliance and make a full report to the next General Assembly. When a decision of the Permanent Judicial Commission contains an order directed to another governing body, the Stated Clerk shall obtain from the governing body a statement of its compliance. This report shall be referred to the Assembly Committee on Administrative Review, which shall in turn report to the General Assembly, making appropriate recommendations.”

2. Add a new section, “C.7. Assembly Committee Procedures” to the Standing Rules to read as follows:

“7. Assembly Committee on Administrative Review

“a. General Review of Synod Minutes

“(1) This committee shall conduct the annual review of synod minutes required in Standing Rule B.5.f. Members of the committee shall review the full text of each synod’s minutes.

“(2) This review shall take special care that synod minutes include a report of permanent judicial commission decisions (if any), and a report that any permanent judicial committee orders to presbyteries within the bounds of the Synod have been carried out by the presbyteries.

“b. Special review of General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission (GAPJC) decisions

“(1) All certified records and final decisions in cases of judicial process from the clerk of the GAPJC shall be reported by the Stated Clerk to this committee.

“(2) When decisions of the GAPJC contain orders directed to lower governing bodies, the Stated Clerk shall obtain from those governing bodies statements of their compliance and report them to this committee, as required in Standing Rule G.2.g.

“(3) If the committee is concerned that any GAPJC order has not been carried out by a lower governing body, it will recommend that the General Assembly specify the particular concerns to be addressed and direct the synod having jurisdiction to initiate the process of special administrative review. The synod will further be directed to report the progress of that review in its minutes to be reviewed by the next General Assembly.”

3. In the “Guidelines for Reviewing Synod Records,” found on pages 5759 of the Manual of the General Assembly, strike the text of “6.” under “General Provisions” on page 58, and insert new text to read as follows:

“6. The review of the minutes of each synod shall ordinarily occur as peer reviews by a gathering of all synod stated clerks. Their written review of each synod minutes shall be submitted to the General Assembly Committee assigned the review of the minutes, who shall attest that the minutes of each synod have been reviewed. If peer review is not completed, the synod shall submit its minutes for review by the General Assembly Committee charged with overseeing this review. The review of the minutes of each synod shall be undertaken by the Assembly Committee on Administrative Review.”

Rationale

The 215th General Assembly (2003) advised “the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly to clarify the process of administrative review on the General Assembly level, and suggest changes to the Standing Rules necessary to make the process more clear” (Minutes, 2003, Part I, p. 70). This overture is not an attempt to preempt the work of the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly (COGA), but rather an effort to ensure that this important work continues to move forward.

There is a great need for greater clarity in the General Assembly’s Standing Rules regarding the process of administrative review. This is an essential element of Presbyterian polity, expressing our connectionalism and ensuring the unity of the church. The right of administrative review is enshrined in the first four chapters of the Book of Order, which provide the theoretical underpinnings of our polity:

The radical principles of Presbyterian church government and discipline are:
That the several different congregations of believers, taken collectively, constitute one Church of Christ, called emphatically the Church; that a larger part of the Church, or a representation of it, should govern a smaller, or determine matters of controversy which arise therein; that, in like manner, a representation of the whole should govern and determine in regard to every part, and to all the parts united: that is, that a majority shall govern; and consequently that appeals may be carried from lower to higher governing bodies, till they be finally decided by the collected wisdom and united voice of the whole Church. . . . (Book of Order, G-1.0400)

f. A higher governing body shall have the right of review and control over a lower one and shall have power to determine matters of controversy upon reference, complaint, or appeal; (Book of Order, G-4.0301f)

The power of administrative review is clearly stated in G-9.0407.0411 of the Book of Order, and it is the right and responsibility, in one way or another, of every governing body of the church. The General Assembly needs to clarify its procedures for conducting both general and special administrative review so that it can fulfill its responsibilities under the Book of Order and so that the peace, unity, and purity of the church can be maintained.

1. Rationale for Changing the Way the General Assembly Reviews Synod Minutes

The General Assembly now reviews synod minutes only indirectly. Synod clerks undertake a peer review of each other’s minutes and submit their conclusions to the General Assembly. Because the General Assembly never directly interacts with the minutes, it is prevented from bringing its own concerns to bear on them. All that commissioners know about them is what the other synod clerks have told them. This certainly conflicts with the intent of G-9.0407c, which requires that “every governing body above a session shall review the records of the proceedings of the next lower governing body.” The General Assembly itself is given this task, so should it instead simply accept the testimony of someone who isn’t even a member of the assembly?

2. Need for Reviewing Compliance Reports

The General Assembly, by the Book of Order, has delegated judicial process to its permanent judicial commission, but it retains the right and responsibility of administrative review and control. Special Administrative Review specifically includes making sure “whether the lawful injunctions of a higher governing body have been obeyed” (G-9.0409a(5)). Unless a report of compliance with such injunctions is reviewed periodically, it is impossible for the General Assembly to carry out this part of its responsibilities.

3. Rationale for Combining Review and Control Measures Under One Committee

Combining the review of synod minutes with the review of compliance reports in a Committee on Administrative Review is advantageous for many reasons:

• It allows the documents to inform one another. A synod’s report on the compliance of one of its presbyteries may give additional insight to the compliance report from the presbytery itself. It may also satisfy the General Assembly that synod is doing everything that needs to be done in order to bring a presbytery into compliance, obviating the need for any further action.
  
• It provides more space and time to focus on review responsibilities. Now, the committees tasked with the pieces of review and control are distracted with other responsibilities. Having a committee tasked with this job alone should allow it to be done more thoroughly.

4. The Need for Action

We can’t deny that we live in an age of conflict within our church, much of which revolves around ordination standards. Unless there is a clear method in place of bringing resolution to these conflicts, they will fester, producing more strife and resentment. And unless the church has a method of making sure its governing bodies are in compliance with the Constitution, disobedience and thus disunity will only increase. Oversight is thus critical to ensure the peace, unity, and purity of the church. The best way to continue the troubles in the church is to let the current confusion continue.