Last year the General Assembly approved recommendations brought by the Task Group that significantly altered the way in which PCI manages and discusses policy prior to a General Assembly, introducing, for example, regional / presbytery conferences and a ‘Green Consultation Paper Stage’, where significant changes in policy or controversial matters would be considered prior to coming to a General Assembly. This gives more opportunity for debate and the consideration of pressing matters. The first Green Paper will be discussed on Friday. This afternoon the focus of General Assembly members was on the second part of the Task Group’s remit – dissent.
The report came on the second full day of business at the all-Ireland denomination’s principal decision-making body, which is meeting in Assembly Buildings in Belfast. The annual meeting brings together ministers, elders and others from the church’s 500-plus congregations, alongside a number of partner churches and organisations from home and overseas.
Having consulted with PCI’s 19 regional presbyteries and reflected on responses, the report made clear that the primary place for debate and discernment takes place in the various courts of the church, Kirk Sessions, Presbyteries and the General Assembly itself. It also affirms the need to enable and encourage biblically and theologically informed discussion. The report does not, however, preclude discussion and debate elsewhere, as the report explains.
Addressing the Assembly the Decision and Dissent Task Group, Very Rev Dr Noble McNeely said that the General Assembly valued the forum that it has for debate, “we have the freedom to ask questions and express opinions, and we work to come to a consensus on issues and make decisions that we pray are constructive and contribute to the faithful witness of the church.
“All those in the ordained leadership of the Church have the right to contribute to the discussions and to be a part of the decision making process. All members of the Assembly are equally valued and their contributions are significant and important.
“The Task Group in its report affirms the significance of good biblically and theological informed discussion and debate. We also value the spirit in which debate takes place and the demonstration of grace and humility in the manner that views and interpretations are exchanged. The Assembly does not curb disagreement and dissent, when individual conscience and private judgment is valued, there will always be room for the expression of protest,” he said.
He explained that the Task Group based its report on four controlling factors: (i) the Scriptures as PCI’s final authority (ii) the subordinate standards which set forth important doctrines the Church believes (iii) the premier authority of the courts of the church and (iv) the right of conscience and private judgment.
The report states that ‘Ministers and elders therefore should ensure that any public statements they might wish to make in connection with matters under consideration by the courts of the church are both
personal to them and provisional upon any decision taken by such courts’ (p48 para 4.3 (iii)).
With regards to the issue of ministers or elders who serve in public roles on other organisations or bodies, Dr McNeely explained that the Task Group also realised “…that they may on occasions promote a very different position to that of PCI…” He also spoke of the use of traditional or social media to challenge a policy or decision of the General Assembly.
On this point the report states that, ‘The views expressed on such media may be personal or the position adopted by a group of which the minister or elder is a part. There is, however, a responsibility to be clear at all times that this is the capacity in which the person is speaking and that they are not representing the Church’s position’ (p49 para 4.5).
On this issue, Dr McNeely said that the Report affirmed three key points, (i) those in ordained leadership who oppose a decision of the Church, should primarily use the courts of the church to have their questions and concerns addressed (ii) it is not appropriate to use traditional or social media to undermine the church’s policy on an issue, and also the church’s processes of debate and decision making, finally (iii) the way to alter decisions of the Church is currently through Memorial and notice of motion to rescind a previous decision.
At the close of the debate, members voted to accept the overwhelming majority of the report and the affirmations contained in it with regards to the parameters of dissent, but wanted greater clarity on what it meant to ‘…publicly promote a view which undermines a stated position of the church, whether doctrinal, moral, or administrative.’ This was referred back to the General Council for further consideration, with a report and recommendations
The General Assembly is livestreamed on here on this website. All public sessions will be livestreamed until the Assembly’s close on Saturday, 24 June. You will find the business before the Assembly here and the Reports that will be discussed here. You can follow proceedings live via Twitter @pciassembly using the hashtag #PCIGA23.