Some day, some day. . .

Now I have no idea of the intentions of the person who offered the hep B & C amendment. I have no reason to believe it was not in good faith. BUT, the process led to screwing over a good piece of business. If there could have been more discussion with the folks who brought the original overture, or the maker of the motion, or smaller groups, or more time etc. than we might have avoided what ended up to, in effect, the killing of a lot of good work that had been done for AIDS/HIV.

So, sure, perhaps it was all intended to make the church stronger. At the end of the day, i’m not sure it did, however. Hopefully, as we learn from these experiences, we will continue to make the church stronger as we address the policies that hold us back.

Sound responses – this clarification helped.

Your suggestions for GA surprise me, actually – I assumed these things already happened! I have yet to attend GA (in a non-digital sense, that is), but I assumed that worship and business, for instance, happened in the same space. If that is not the case, then I certainly agree – that is an excellent suggestion! So too with roundtables, etc – all excellent ways of getting people to interact with one another rather than check in and check out.

My one further question, however, is this: you said that people were “more interested in polity fights than truly making the church stronger,” but aren’t these polity fights exactly that? If not, then what would help the church be “stronger” in this sense?

Sorry for pushing you on this, but I love a good Presby convo.

I didn’t mean to draw a line of correlation from our PC(USA) form of government to our decline in membership, but rather point out that at GA this year we sometimes seemed more interested in polity fights than truly making the church stronger. It’s not that our polity leads to decline, but that GA, as we have done it recently, doesn’t lead to deep wrestling with decline in very helpful ways.

Don’t get me wrong, at a basic level I’m all about our polity which I do see as having enormous benefits over other denominations. But, on the other hand, we can miss the polity forest for the trees — or something like that.

Re your yes/no question, here’s an example. When I moderator session meetings I do so not with a planning a discussion about, simply, whether we do something or not, whether we say YES or NO. Instead, we discuss, we pray, we listen to each other, and often other opportunities present themselves that wouldn’t have if I took a very hardline approach: we must answer this question with a strong YES or NO.

Sure, GA is really tricky in terms of its size, but there are alternative ways of meeting. To begin with, what if we met in round tables instead of rows? What if we really got to know one another, especially those with whom we disagree, rather than just stand at mics and disagree first? What if we emphasized more of our core values and common calling than the questions that divide us? What if we had communion and worship in the plenary hall? What if we weren’t overcome with deadlines and late nights? What if interest groups stopped writing delegates’ speeches?

I don’t know the answer. But here’s the thing: I think we must think of better ways to make the assembly a more supporting, spiritual, more faithful less political event. So, I guess I’m not arguing for a better form of government (though, actually, the new Form of Government is much better), but a new way of working together within our polity. And, by the way, I think these are issues many presbyteries are wrestling with and they are making changes in how they conduct meetings. I’m just waiting for GA to catch up.

While I enjoyed your post, I’m confused about your statements concerning the presbyterian form of government. More specifically, I am not entirely sure how you draw a direct line between our form of government and the decline in membership. If anything, our form of government seems to have made us one of the most maleable denominations in the country, and – while I, too, am often frustrated with the slow pace of it all – we have moved far quicker than most other instituions.

I suppose, then, that I would like some clarification as to what would be a “better” form of government? Obviously episcopal polity has the ability to make great changes quickly, but often the reverse happens (i.e. – the Catholic church) or there are problems that arise from changing very rapidly (i.e. – the Episcopal church). Congregational polity, by contrast, doesn’t necessarily maintain a cohesive denominational identity – which may or may not be bad – but can also be just as prone to lack of change.

Moreover, you distaste for voting “yes” or “no” on subjects just seems odd. The fact that presbyterians get to vote AT ALL is a pretty rare thing, and it has to do with empowering people. Also, I’m not entirely sure what the alternative would be to a “dualistic” mentality – when running any organization, one must make decisions, and compromises are usually formed in committee (just like the American government, which doesn’t seem to be running out of citizens anytime soon).

All in all, while I understand your misgivings with our polity, i’m not entirely sure THAT is the reason people are leaving churches. I would – again – be open to new suggestions as to how we could run things better, but you don’t offer any in your blog post. What is the better way?

matt

(Utica, NY, she is the current moderator and also was blogging @ http://leaningdownstreams.blogspot.com/

As one who was parlimentarian of my high school FFA chapter, I love watchng the process. We certianly are decent and in order. I finally figured out the very high tech red, green and yellow things people held up, particularly the picture above. I guess if you got borred you could have had a spontaneous game of badmitton in the aisles.

Maybe someday I’ll attend a GA and see/feel for myself what it’s like – until then, I enjoyed the Twitter #ga219 traffic and Meg F’s blog and yours and the live feed. The sense of community was profound for many of us – thanks for being one of the links.

Sarah

I enjoyed your blogging – thanks for adding your voice and for the virtual friendship! Have safe travels back.

Robert