Wednesday, May 14, 2014

A Statement from Synod Leaders

THE VIEW FROM THE FIELD: CONSIDERATIONS OF SYNOD LEADERS
REGARDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MID COUNCIL COMMISSION

Prepared by leaders of fourteen PC(USA) synods (complete list below)

­Summary

·         The gathered synod leaders appreciate the work of MCC2 and share their vision to repurpose synods as missional communities with an emerging sense of “purpose, partnership, context, and call.”

·         We endorse Recommendation 4 (Standing GA Committee on Mid Councils) as a way of increasing accountability and guidance for synod mission.

·         We oppose Recommendations 1 and 3 (and by extension, Recommendation 2) because
o   They impede the transformation of synods as missional communities by replacing the organic change process that is currently working with an imposed structure and process;
o   They make contextualization of mission more difficult by increasing the distance between decision-makers and mission contexts, and introduce problems of scale;
o   They misdirect financial and human resources and energy away from mission to focus on structural and relational issues attendant to merger;
o   They operate on a false assumption that having larger synods will invigorate mission.

·         We express concern over the proposed process of boundary realignment due to lack of clarity concerning responsibility and funding, and vagueness of the charge.

A Way Forward

We the gathered executive leaders of diverse synods of the PC(USA) are grateful for the hard work of discernment undertaken by the General Assembly Commission on Mid Councils (“MCC2”). We share with the Commission a vision for the repurposing of synods as communities with an emerging sense of “purpose, partnership, context, and call,” and for greater accountability and mutuality in the pursuit of contextually identified mission goals. While we may differ in our assessment of the current state of synod mission vitality, and the need and process for boundary realignment, we wholeheartedly endorse Recommendation 4 of the MCC2 report as a helpful contribution to the ongoing revitalization of the missional purpose of synods:

4.  In order to ensure that the responsibilities listed in G-3.0502 are fulfilled, establish a “Committee on Mid Councils” and charge it to engage in a process for the ongoing strengthening and nurturing of the mid councils of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), with particular emphasis on collaborating with the synods of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to support clarity as to their ecclesial and missional identity, purpose, structure, and strategies by amending Standing Rule C.1.a. as follows: [Text to be added is shown as italic.]
“a.    The Stated Clerk shall propose the number and designation of assembly committees to the General Assembly, which shall include a Committee on Mid Councils. The Stated Clerk shall present the proposed committee structure to the General Assembly for consideration and ratification at the first assembly meeting at which business is transacted. In making these proposals, the Stated Clerk shall consult with the appropriate General Assembly entity or entities, and may consult with other persons.”

We support the goal of fostering partnership and collaboration with the General Assembly in holding synods accountable to their mission goals, and to their ongoing participation in Christ’s mission in the world. The creation of a General Assembly Standing Committee on Mid Councils is one way to accomplish this without the disruption, expense, and distrust created by forced synod realignment.

Nevertheless, as the Assembly considers the recommendations of MCC2, we wish to draw their attention to the following considerations. The concerns and questions fall into two categories: those which arise from recommendations 1 and 3 which we believe should prompt the Assembly to vote “no” on those recommendations, and possible issues regarding the process envisioned that would need to be addressed should the recommendations be adopted.


Considerations Arising from Recommendations 1 and 3:

1.  Direct that a new configuration of synod boundaries be established through a collaborative process between the synods and presbyteries resulting in no more than eight larger regional synods, each with an emerging sense of purpose, partnership, context, and call. The synods shall report to the 222nd General Assembly (2016).
3.  Recommend that the 222nd General Assembly (2016) direct its Moderator, in consultation with the Stated Clerk, to appoint an administrative commission for the following purposes:
a.  To assist synods and presbyteries who have been engaged in a substantive plan for reconfiguration but have been unable to resolve particular issues in their process.
b.  To recommend to the 223rd General Assembly (2018) the boundary changes necessary to achieve a total of no more than eight synods, if there remain synods and presbyteries that have been unable or unwilling to engage in a collaborative process of reconfiguration.

1. Issues of mission vitality and purpose

a. Resource misdirection. Mergers redirect time, energy, and resources inwardly rather than outwardly. Even a simple merger will require attention to many legal, structural, and cultural issues. The history of such mergers at both presbytery and synod levels suggests that even a simple merger would require several years and tens of thousands of dollars to complete successfully. Should synods be geographically divided, legal expenses related to asset distribution can add significantly to that total. A single civil case over asset distribution could impact both mission effectiveness and available resources catastrophically.

b. Forced partnership. Recommendation 1 envisions mergers that foster “an emerging sense of purpose, partnership, context and call.” These require two elements, trust and relationship, which take time to develop. Mergers created under time constraint or by fiat of the General Assembly are not conducive to developing vital partnerships with a shared purpose.  

c. Mission strategy disruption. MCC1 served the purpose of igniting conversations within and among synods, resulting in significant transformation of existing synods. This is not the same PC(USA) as existed in 2010. Fifteen of 16 synods have already or are in the process of leadership transition, usually accompanied by transforming missional discernment and restructuring. Synod transformation is already happening under existing structures. Artificially disrupting this with mergers and new discernment processes undercuts the very intent of the recommendations and drains enthusiasm and inertia from these initiatives. Now that synods have engaged the process in good faith and with exciting results, why undercut it?

d. The creation of ever larger synods creates increased obstacles to building the relationships necessary for vital mission and discernment. Thousand-mile reaches in some synods would result in fewer face to face meetings, and increase travel weariness among commissioners.

2. Issues of mission context. The forced consolidation of synods raises concerns related to mission context:

a. There are historical issues and relationships that are not resolved easily or quickly (e.g., Northeast/Trinity; SoCal & Hawaii/Pacific).

b. Some contiguous synods share little in common regarding theological orientation and mission culture. For example, there would be problems with a programmatic synod (Lakes and Prairies) being consolidated with a reduced function synod (Rocky Mountains). A synod which does not receive synod per capita (Sun) would have budgetary and financial issues with one that does (Mid-America). Synods with clearly divergent theological orientations (e.g., Covenant/Living Waters; SoCal & Hawaii/Pacific) would have greater difficulty building trust and relationship.

c. Presbytery issues must be resolved first. Many presbyteries are in a process of mission discernment for a variety of reasons. These presbyteries require a “holding environment” – a safe and stable synod context to explore their options. In some cases (e.g., Sierra Blanca in the Synod of the Southwest), those options could have direct bearing on synod boundaries. The highly contextual nature of mission discernment requires that structural realignment happen organically from the local context outward and upward. Top-down strategies inhibit rather than foster purpose, partnership, context, and call.

3. Issues of synod parity. The merger of whole synods poses concerns of parity of synods, and problems of scale. The denomination has geographically small synods with high membership, and geographically large synods with low membership. Merging contiguous synods into no more than eight from the current sixteen could lead to scenarios such as:

·         A synod stretching from Canada to Mexico with less than 3.6% of the total PC(USA) membership (Rocky Mountains/Southwest; 2012 statistics)

·         A synod of relatively small geography with over 20% of the total PC(USA) membership (Northeast/Trinity), or one of medium geographical size with over 28% of total PC(USA) membership (South Atlantic/Mid-Atlantic)

There are comparable issues of parity regarding financial contributions, which roughly parallel membership. Endowed and reserve assets vary widely among existing synods. The disparity could increase significantly with regional mergers.  In addition, unequal proportionality of representation and influence would continue to be a problem.




                                                     The sixteen synods of the PCUSA

4. Important questions to consider

a. Does forcing structural change at the mid-council level invigorate mission? This option is already present and available to synods and presbyteries should they determine it is advantageous to their mission strategy.

b. Are top-down strategies the best way to address mission contextually? 21st century mission is highly contextual. Recommendation 1 recognizes this, but the effect of both Recommendations 1 and 3 is to remove mission revitalization from its local context. Synod mission revitalization is already happening under current polity and structures. The existing mechanisms are working and do not need to be modified.

c. In light of the significance of context to mission, how is moving to fewer synods going to benefit the church? The argument that a more functional synod could benefit a less functional one through merger is a red herring. Mergers are as likely or more likely to generate dysfunction as they are functionality. There are alternative ways of caring for less effective synods that do not risk what is already working well.

d. Is synod realignment a “quick-fix” approach to a church-wide and trans-council problem? The issue of mission structure needs to address the whole governance system from sessions to the General Assembly.


Considerations regarding implementation should the recommendations be adopted

1. The “collaborative process”. Recommendation 1 calls for “synods and presbyteries” to engage in a “collaborative process” resulting in a proposal for realignment. It is not clear from the recommendation what is intended by the word “collaborative”. Is it intended that synods and presbyteries would participate as full partners in this conversation? That synods and presbyteries would have common participation but differential roles and responsibilities? Or, that synods would be required to consult with presbyteries in the realignment process? If the first, the process as envisioned raises constitutional questions regarding the processes of mission coordination and oversight required by our Constitution by shifting greater authority for regional mission strategy to presbyteries. This could have real consequences for relationships between councils within specific contexts.

2. There are no provisions or mechanisms to assure representation of historic, emerging and marginalized communities in the consultation and implementation process. These communities have historically looked to synods for representation and inclusion. We feel that the proposed process would further alienate these constituencies.

3. Funding and facilitating the process. The report does not include a statement of financial implications for the process, suggesting that the cost of the necessary gatherings and consultations to effect a shared recommendation would be borne by the synods as an unfunded mandate. We believe a skilled facilitator from outside Office of the General Assembly would be required to guide the conversation among 16 synods and 172 presbyteries. This would also require significant lead time to fit schedules and to develop a process that engages the necessary conversations.

4. Vagueness in the charge. The charge that “synods shall report to the 222nd General Assembly (2016)” leaves open the possibility that there could be multiple reports and competing recommendations. Apart from a clear shared process, synods might be tempted to enter into preemptive partnerships and/or competitive postures that are contrary to our calling to be a community of “faith, hope, love, and witness.”

Synod leaders contributing to this report:

Covenant: Raafat Zaki; Lakes and Prairies: David Crittenden; Lincoln Trails: Carol McDonald; Living Waters: Terry Newland; Mid-America: Landon Whitsitt; Mid-Atlantic: Warren Lesane; Northeast: Harold Delhagen; Pacific: Jane Odell; Rocky Mountains: David Ezekiel; South Atlantic: Heahwan Rim; Southern California & Hawaii: Doska Ross; Southwest: Conrad Rocha; Sun: Dan Saperstein, Valerie Young; Trinity: Bruce Stevens. Synods are listed for identification purposes only.
____________________________________________

Appendix:  Summary of Synod Changes and Initiatives since 2010

Alaska-Northwest:  In 2013, the synod adopted a minimum function model, eliminated all synod programs, and distributed real and financial assets to presbyteries.  The synod convenes the minimally required once every two years.  There is no synod office; and one part-time stated clerk is the only employee.

Boriquén (Puerto Rico):   In 2012, following the report of the Special Committee on the Administrative Review of Boriquén, appointed by the Moderator of the 219th General Assembly, many changes have taken place in Boriquén.    Among those changes, the use and focus of the Synod’s camp at Guacio has been altered to include a working farm where local people are employed to raise crops, provide food for the local community, and,  while providing employment, is also a form of teaching new farming techniques.   The Synod has also begun to engage that part of  Puerto Rico that is predominantly Roman Catholic by reaching out to the poorest of the poor to address needs of after-school care, hunger and clothing.

Covenant: The Synod of the Covenant has undergone several visioning and discernment processes in the last seven years. New vision and objectives were identified and mission/ministries redeveloped, and organizational re-alignment successfully implemented.  In addition to resourcing and supporting the mission of its presbyteries, the SOC focuses on marginalized communities in relation to social justice and health care, hunger and poverty, and incarcerated and returning citizens.

Lakes and Prairies: The Synod of Lakes and Prairies is experiencing a transition facilitated by two different task forces focused on the future since 2010. During this transition the Synod has been in regular conversation with the Synods of Lincoln Trails and Mid-America exploring possible synergies, and its 16 presbyteries are exploring new ways of meeting, staffing and providing resources to their congregations. The Synod will see significant staffing changes in 2015.

Lincoln Trails: The Synod of Lincoln Trails is in the midst of a season of transition.  Even as we anticipate the retirement of our Executive, we continue our commitment to developing, nurturing, and supporting leaders across our region - working with newly ordained Teaching Elders, Commissioned Ruling Elders and those preparing for the specialty of Transitional Ministry.  We enjoy partnerships with the Synods of Mid-America and Lakes and Prairies as we support the new “Just.Good.Food.” hunger initiative and Theocademy.

Living Waters: The Synod of Living Waters continues to be focused on the shared ministry of our presbyteries and their congregations. Facing the changing landscape of Mid Councils in recent years, the synod transitioned into a virtual and paperless office, downsized our staff, and secured administrative support by contracting with one of our presbytery’s office and staff. The moves have served to strengthened our global mission project (Living Waters for the World), our extensive support of Campus Ministry across our region, and our presbyteries in their support of one another and their congregations.

Mid-America: The Synod of Mid-America’s life and purpose is centered around a set of 12 Missional Priorities, each naming a particular group we intend to serve and the tangible ways our work will benefit them.  Various programs to emerge from this approach include Theocademy (a free video education series), Gathering for Pastoral Sustenance (serving new pastors), and the Innovation Fund (working with our presbyteries to fund new ministries), among others. Additionally, the Synod engages in traditional direct presbytery support through an Executive Forum, support for staff searches, and other resourcing needs.

Mid-Atlantic: The Synod of the Mid-Atlantic is excited about resourcing 14 presbyteries by providing information, encouragement, and finances. After 12 years of transition and transformation, four committees composed of synod commissioners place significant energy and effort into providing scholarship for students (high school and seminarians); grants to small churches, retired pastors, special funding for presbytery initiatives when two or more presbyteries come together around a common mission project, gatherings for racial ethnic caucuses, Presbyterian Women, Women of Color, Presbyterian Men and related groups.

Northeast:  The Synod of the Northeast has been engaged in a significant process of discernment regarding its future call and purpose.  We have now adopted a New Way Forward (www. synodne.org) which charts our missional calling and purpose moving into God’s future. This includes a renewed understanding that we are a regional community of presbyteries and congregations learning to respond to God’s call to become agents of divine justice, transforming the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in the Northeast into a community of hospitality and welcome for all.

Pacific: The Synod of the Pacific is a 'Mission-Support' synod in addition to performing its required ecclesiastical functions.  The Synod provides comprehensive support services for its presbyteries and congregations in fulfilling the mission of the church by providing administrative, financial investment and loan, personnel, health and benefit, and mission treasury services; in addition to funding opportunities for multi-presbytery gatherings and workshops around common interests.  A significant benefit of the Synod's Services is the excess revenue generated each year which is distributed back to its eleven presbyteries for their mission and ministry.

Rocky Mountains: The Synod of the Rocky Mountains initiated downsizing in 2007 which has resulted in the elimination of almost all programming, the dissolution of most staff positions, the disencumberment of property, and the movement towards reduced functioning.  The Synod has chosen to give itself to supporting and resourcing its eight presbyteries – the locus of mission, vision, and ministry coordination in the various regions within the Synod.  The Synod of the Rocky Mountains has chosen to pour its remaining resources and assets into supporting the presbyteries so that each may effectively navigate the difficult challenges of huge geographical size, diminishing funding streams, declining church membership, and shifting cultural climate.   

South Atlantic: The Synod of South Atlantic has accomplished a major revision of the Manual of Administrative Operations and restructuring of committees to align the Synod’s support to ever changing ministries in the bounds of the Synod.  Currently the Synod of South Atlantic engages with a variety of Network Ministries for its sixteen Presbyteries and its racial ethnic groups, as well as specific types of groups (i.e., network of smaller congregations, chaplains’ group, etc.).  The Synod also has realigned financial assets to provide ministry grants to various groups (seminary students, Christian educators, Campus ministries, etc.).

Southern California & Hawaii: Since 2010 the Synod of Southern California and Hawaii has accomplished a major downsizing and realignment of staff which resulted in removal of almost all synod programming. The eight presbyteries within the synod are now going through major transitions regarding leadership and finances; this is leading to focused conversations about possibly sharing staff, changing presbytery boundaries, and/or rethinking priorities. Currently the synod is in an 18-month "Season of Experimentation and Discernment" that will affect how it provides service to its presbyteries in the future. We continue to give financial and staff support to racial ethnic pastoral leadership and a chaplaincy consortium as well as matching grants for new churches and worshipping communities.

Southwest: Beginning in October, 2011 the Synod began a comprehensive revisioning of its work and mission as it seeks to support its Presbyteries in their support of congregations.   The final plan was submitted to selected leaders of each Presbytery for final review, comment and suggested changes and was adopted in October, 2013.   The new vision, among other things, calls for continued dialogue between the Synod and its Presbyteries, in a variety of formats, including a consultation later in 2014 to further encourage and stimulate interaction between our mid councils about how to proceed into the future in serving Christ and his mission and ministry in our part of God's world and beyond.  Finally, the Synod has embarked upon a partnership with the new immigrant fellowships/NCDs in it Presbyteries to make the transition from treating them as NCDs to recognizing them as Domestic Mission Fields that require alternative modes of funding and recognition as integral parts of our faith community.

Sun: In November 2012, the synod adopted “A Plan for the Future” which radically reoriented the synod’s work from governance to mission, reduced staff from eight to two, and jettisoned “executives” in favor of “co-leaders”, including one specifically for mission and partnership. Synod resources are supporting the growth and development of grassroots mission networks with whom the synod partners in a process of organizational development through specially trained consultants. A major synod mission initiative, Solar under the Sun, has installed 60 solar generators in the developing world, typically in partnership with Living Waters for the World.

Trinity: The Synod of the Trinity lives as a partnership of  16 presbyteries to proliferate mission through nurturing regional community, providing skilled consultation and financial resources  for presbyteries in a rapidly changing context, developing leaders through training and coaching, encouraging mission partnerships and framing a regional perspective.  The Synod is increasing its efficiency and effectiveness by keenly focusing its shared mission priorities and clarifying commissioner and staff roles, responsibilities and authority to discover a new way of faithfully working together to serve God in an ever-changing world.