The New Synod Option

Some Biblically orthodox Presbyterians, including Presbyterians for Renewal, are advocating for some sort of New Synod model. The Presbytery of Santa Barbara has submitted such a proposal to the 219th General Assembly. You can find the Santa Barbara proposal here:

http://www.pc-biz.org/Explorer.aspx?id=2321

This idea would leave the congregations that favor the ordination of Self-Acknowledged Practitioners of Homosexual Acts (SAPHAs) within the current system of presbyteries and synods. Those presbyteries and congregations that object to the ordination of SAPHAs would be allowed to withdraw into a New Synod. All the synods and presbyteries would remain within the PCUSA, and thus continue to use the resources of the Board of Pensions.

This proposal has been advanced with the best of intentions, and its proponents are truly trying to find a way for Presbyterians to live together in the midst of our current constitutional chaos. If such a solution were to be adopted it would, nevertheless, be a pyrrhic victory for Biblically Orthodox Presbyterians.

In order for this proposal to provide relief of conscience for its members, the presbyteries of the New Synod would have to deny the validity of any ordinations that took place in the rest of the synods. This would not be possible, even if the Santa Barbara proposal were adopted, because G-9.0103 would remain within the Book of Order: “The governing bodies are separate and independent, but have such mutual relations that the act of one of them is the act of the whole church performed by it through the appropriate governing body.” As long as the New Synod remains within the PCUSA, it would thus continue to state, by its actions if not by its words, that ordinations of SAPHAs, even if done by other congregations or presbyteries, would be done in the name of the New Synod.

At the very least, the presbyteries of the New Synod would have to accept ministers from presbyteries in the other synods only after examining them as if they were coming from a completely different denomination. The New Synod model would therefore require the de facto if not the de jure division of the PCUSA into two distinct churches.

In addition, the result envisioned by the New Synod proposal would practically be very difficult to achieve. Many Presbyterian congregations are not of one mind concerning the ordination of SAPHAs, so, in order to provide relief for their consciences, individual members would be required to shift their membership to congregations that held their opinions. While this might be possible in urban areas with many different Presbyterian congregations, many rural areas are only served by one congregation. What option would dissenting members of those congregations have? Into which presbytery and synod would they go?

Because the New Synod model would allow congregations to withdraw from existing presbyteries to join presbyteries within the bounds of the New Synod, this proposal could result in a greater number of smaller and weaker presbyteries, which would necessarily have more difficulty maintaining their programs and supporting their budgets. On the other hand, if presbyteries were to maintain a healthy number of members, they would have to be geographically larger, and thus more dispersed. They would thus provide less intimate fellowship and accountability for their congregations.

Finally, the New-Synod Model would doom Biblically Orthodox Presbyterians to political irrelevance. By concentrating orthodox congregations within a small number of presbyteries, the rest of the presbyteries would fall increasingly under the sway of those who favor the ordination of SAPHAs. Those presbyteries would increasingly outvote the presbyteries of the New Synod at future General Assemblies.

A similar scenario has worked itself out within the politics of the United States, as African Americans cooperated with Republicans to create congressional districts with large concentrations of blacks throughout the South. While this did create more opportunities for black candidates to be elected to congress, it also concentrated many potential Democratic voters into a few districts. Because of the concentration of their opponents, Republicans found it much easier to win election in other Southern districts, and the region which had once been solidly Democratic shifted rather quickly to Republican dominance. Black Democrats gained purer districts, but by doing so, they ensured the victory of their opponents.

Retreating into the ghetto has never been a good political tactic.