Metherell presents petition to moderator during GAC meeting

by Jerry L. Van Marter, Presbyterian News Service
[1-16-03]

LOUISVILLE - January 14, 2003 - In a move that has been talked about for months but landed like a bolt of lightning, Alex Metherell - an elder and surgeon from southern California - delivered a petition today to Fahed Abu-Akel, moderator of the General Assembly, that he says has the number of signatures necessary to force the first special General Assembly in history.

Metherell's appearance at a joint meeting of the executive committee of the General Assembly Council (GAC) and the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly (COGA)came as the two groups were preparing to discuss changes in standing rules and in Book of Order necessitated by last summer's GA decision to move to biennial General Assemblies following the 2004 Assembly.

Ironically, that same Assembly will now meet again.

COGA officials said the special Assembly could not be convened much earlier than mid-May. The 215th Assembly is scheduled to convene in Denver on May 24. Metherell handed Abu-Akel a notebook containing signed postcards requesting the special Assembly. Metherell had personally mailed the cards to all 554 commissioners to last summer's GA.

The Book of Order requires signatures of at 50 commissioners to the Assembly, including at least 25 Presbyterian Church (USA) ministers and 25 elders representing at least 15 of the 173 presbyteries under the jurisdiction of at least five of the 16 synods.

Metherell claimed to have 57 signatures - of 26 ministers and 31 elders from 46 presbyteries and all 16 synods.

The Rev. Gradye Parsons, the director of operations for the Office of the General Assembly, said the first task will be to attest the signatures to make sure they qualify.

Once that is done, next steps will be taken.

Metherell's petition mentions three purposes for the special meeting:

1. "Continue oversight of the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission decision in Londonderry Vs. Presbytery of Northern New England in order to effect compliance with the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA)."

2. "Respond to the growing defiance of, delinquency, and enforcement of the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA) by officers, agencies and governing bodies with respect to G-6.0106b (the commonly called "fidelity and chastity" provision of the Book of Order ) and the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission decision on holy unions (Benton vs. Hudson River Presbytery.)"

3. "Exercise all necessary powers authorized to the General Assembly under the Constitution to propose and adopt directives of officers, agencies, and governing bodies in order to deal with all matters relating to the issues detailed in items # 1 and 2 above."

The names listed on the petition (listed alphabetically, by presbytery):

Abingdon: Elder William W. Hull
Baltimore: Rev. Phyllis M. DeSmit
Central Florida: Rev. William C. Duckworth
Central Washington: Rev. Stephen G. Barker
Charlotte: Elder Mary E. Hendrick
Detroit: Elder Beatrice Thomas
Eastern Korean: Elder Yung Suk Park
Giddings-Lovejoy: Rev. Nancy Gillard
Great Rivers: Elder Ronald H. Leonard
Greater Atlanta: Rev. Russell O. McKee
Hanmi: Rev. Seung-Nam Kim
Heartland: Rev. Jodi H. Mathews
Huntingdon: Rev. Glen Eason
John Calvin: Elder Rein Vander Naald
Lake Michigan: Rev. David E. Gilbert; Elder John Somerville
Los Ranchos: Elder Alex Metherell
Mississippi: Elder Joyce Gibbens
Muskingum: Rev. Diana A. Lantz
Nevada: Rev. Bruce Kochsmeier
New Covenant: Elder Edward F. Brodie
Noroeste: Rev. Juan Bordoy-Acevedo
Northumberland: Rev. Brent F. Davidson; Elder Bob Reich
Peaks: Elder Dorothy Tatum
Pittsburgh: Rev. Jane Johnson
Prospect Hill: Rev. Brian V. Janssen
Pueblo: Elder Roy N. Hollaway
Sacramento: Rev. Margaret C. Suttle, Elder Yubang Lee
San Diego: Rev. Lisa Johnson, Elder Russ Lowe, Elder Jillene Simms
San Fernando: Elder Paul Carlson
San Gabriel: Rev. Cynthia Reyes Fillmore; Elder John van Genderen
San Joaquin: Rev. James B. Harper
San Jose: Rev. David B. Rodriguez
Savannah: Rev. David A. Long; Elder Neil Spradley
Seattle: Rev. Robin D. Caudillo; Rev. Don Waite
Sierra Blanca: Elder Terry Aiello
Stockton: Rev. Robert Mitchell
Tampa Bay: Elder David ArmstrongTropical Florida: Elder William D. Tenney; Elder Nancy Young
Upper Ohio Valley: Elder Bruce Trushel
Utah: Elder Herbert Minich
Wabash Valley: Elder John McCrum
Washington: Rev. Craig Kephart; Elder Doris M. Sawhill
Western New York: Rev. Michael R. Burkley
Western North Carolina: Rev. Bill Serjak
Western Reserve: Elder Angela A. Davis
Yellowstone: Elder Ida Norgaard

The call for a special meeting of the 214th General Assembly has been widely criticized as unwise, precipitous, and unduly expensive for a church that is struggling financially to do mission. Nothing could look less like mission than the agenda proposed by the petitioners.

But in addition, nothing could look less like appropriate General Assembly business. As a basic point, business comes to a General Assembly through overtures from presbyteries and by reports of entities, commissions and committees. The call for a special meeting certainly is not such a report, nor is it in form an overture. Indeed it proposes no specific action. It proposes: "let's meet and chat about things we see as evil."

You could not get a hearing, except at a "speak-out," at a stated GA meeting on any such tentative proposal. In fact, none of the proposed business is in order.

The first specification of business is: "Continue oversight of the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission decision in Londonderry vs. Presbytery of Northern New England in order to effect compliance with the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA)." This business is out of order as having previously been considered by the same Assembly under the so-called Shenango overture. These commissioners already voted on it, and a motion to reconsider must be made by one who voted with the prevailing side and must be made on the same day as the vote to be reconsidered or on the next succeeding day. (Robert's Rules of Order Section 37.) It could also be made as a motion to rescind at the 215th General Assembly. (Robert's Section 35.) But this way won't work.

The second specification is: "Respond to the growing defiance of, delinquency, and enforcement of the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA) by officers, agencies and governing bodies with respect to G-6.0106b (the commonly called "fidelity and chastity" provision of the Book of Order ) and the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission decision on holy unions (Benton vs. Hudson River Presbytery.)" This is out of order as General Assembly business, as stated. We have well drafted Rules of Discipline which describe in detail how to deal with the issues that trouble the petitioners. The General Assembly could only consider these issues in response to an overture which proposes a possible solution, like deleting the corrupt G-6.0106b, or clarifying its true intention.

The third specification is even less precise: "Exercise all necessary powers authorized to the General Assembly under the Constitution to propose and adopt directives of officers, agencies, and governing bodies in order to deal with all matters relating to the issues detailed in items # 1 and 2 above." The General Assembly has such powers only in response to specific proposals brought to is in the form of overtures and reports.

I have no doubt that our admirable Stated Clerk and Moderator don't need my help in handling this latest Scud missile, but in the meantime I would like to reassure those who are running around in circles wringing their hands that a proper reading of our polity shoots this one down before it does any damage. It is not necessary to spend half a million dollars to convene and rule this whole misguided proposal out of order.

Frank B. Baldwin
Stated Clerk
Presbytery of Philadelphia
215-732-1842, extension 307
Fax: 215-546-7800
fbaldwin@presbyphl.org