New tools for the body of Christ

The assembly took dramatic action Wednesday on two significant issues. First we approved the addition of the Confession of Belhar to the Book of Confessions. Then that night we voted to accept by a two-thirds margin the report from the task force on a new Form of Government. Both proposals now go to the presbyteries for their approval or disapproval.

The Confession of Belhar is one that grew out of the reconciliation process in South Africa following the end of apartheid. It addresses specifically the issue of racial discrimination, but more broadly speaks to discrimination of any sort. Its core message is one of unity. A deeper reading of it within the context of our divisions over social, political and theological perspectives demonstrates to me that the confession will have resonance beyond the issue of discrimination.


When it came to the proposed new Form of Government, there was considerable debate on the floor of the assembly, even a substitute motion that would have delayed the report for further study and comment by the presbyteries (which was defeated). The proposal has been the subject of study and debate for at least four years.

There is no doubt the document is not perfect. There were calls for more input from presbyteries, but presbyteries have had ample opportunity to offer suggested changes. Many did, and the General Assembly committee reviewing the proposed new Form of Government amended it further. It was that further amended document that we approved.

I have heard discussions on both sides of the issue. As someone who sits in the pew, it's hard for me to see how a form of government relates to the practice of my faith. As an elder and member of session, I understand that the Church needs to define its standards, set rules for adhering to those standards and create an outline for governing ourselves. What is at issue is how we will do those things. Do we want a constitution that strictly outlines our form and functions, which would be consistent from congregation to congregation, presbytery to presbytery, and synod to synod? Or do we want a constitution that defines who we are but leaves defining the functions of these bodies to the bodies, which may create diverse structures across the denomination?

That's the central question we must answer. And now it will be up the presbyteries, which are closest to the membership, to decide. It is my hope that all presbyteries will do the "due diligence" by studying the document, debate its merits or lack thereof and make a decision that is in the best interest of God's Church.