My previous post suggested four men (two TEs and two REs)
from each presbytery as delegates to the Assembly. Responses have wondered
about other ways of determining the number of delegates; for example, determining
the number of delegates by the size of the presbytery or suggesting a much
larger number of delegates. Also some suggested that one of the problems with
preceding proposals for a delegated assembly was that men simply enjoy having
the time to meet with other elders that they haven’t seen in a year.
While I recognize that some would like a larger attendance,
even at a delegated assembly, four from each presbytery struck me as the right
amount. It is a small enough number to enable the GA to function as a committee
of the whole (in other words, no more “Committees of Commissioners”) and is
sufficiently representative. In dealing with the “more representatives for
larger presbyteries” question, it seems to me that the four per presbytery also
avoids the problem of larger presbyteries having too much sway. In addition,
the delegates from each presbytery would be instructed that they are going as
representatives of the entire presbytery, thus perhaps giving greater
representation to small churches.
In addition to the above, I would suggest that GA meet
biennially. There is, as far as I can tell, no good reason for annual meetings.
The reports and budgets of the denominational committees and agencies can be
done on a biennial basis, as can review of presbytery records. In fact, having
to submit records only every two years instead of every year may help some of
our delinquent presbyteries come into accord with requirements.
As for the fellowship aspect of GA: if you take a look at
the docket of GA, there is currently precious little time for fellowship,
especially as each year the assembly seems to press harder and harder to get
done before Thursday evening. As a result, fellowship takes place late, after
the evening services, or it takes men away from the assembly itself, resulting
in one-fourth to one-third of the commissioners commonly being absent from
counted votes. My suggestion is that in the years between assemblies there be a
“conference of presbyters.” It would be set up something like an academic
conference. It would begin Monday evening with a plenary session presentation
by someone picked by the GA on some topic relevant to pastoral work. Then, Tuesday
through Thursday there would be smaller sessions, much like those currently
done in the early mornings at GA. I would suggest two session periods each
morning and one session period in the afternoon. There could be several
alternatives at each of these periods, perhaps dealing with a general theme,
but not required to. With only three session periods during the day, and with
the evenings entirely free, there would be plenty of time for fellowship.
Perhaps a final plenary session could close things out on Friday morning. REs
would certainly be encouraged to attend, but since this is not a meeting of a
court of the church, the presence or absence of REs would not be a problem. TEs
could use this as a week of study leave, since the various presentations would
be applicable to their pastoral labors.
This is admittedly a big-picture proposal. The devil is in
the details, and perhaps these suggestions would not work. But unless we begin
talking about alternative ways to doing GA, it is not going to improve.
There's actually no reason that non-delegates couldn't still come to GA for the fellowship aspects. Those who really want it can still pay for the privilege.
ReplyDeleteI like it. I was not there this year, so how many hours (both in Committee and on the floor) did GA debate whether to *officially* pray for those standing up for pro-life and traditional marriage?
ReplyDeleteWe all agree on the issues; and we all agree that we should pray. But spending so much time debating whether to officially pray or not (despite Matthew 6), seems to me to be one result of meeting every year.