Bob Davis of Presbyblog fame and fortune has been doing a walkthrough of the items coming before the General Assembly (P.C.U.S.A.) in June. Today his post is on the G.A.C. Mission Work Plan 2009-2012 (Recommendation #31). I'm on the G.A.C. and one of only two people who served on the last two mission work plan groups. I wrote a post about the M.W.P. last month. (Click here.)
Reading Bob's post reminded me of an experience I had a couple of years ago where the work plan team met with a handful of Presbytery Executives to get their feedback and input on the mission work plan. We explained that we believed the G.A.C. needed to be more collaborative and less top-down. Our focus needs to be on developing strong congregations. To which we got an adamant response. "You're not listening! The G.A.C. needs to be more collaborative and less top-down. You need to focus on developing strong congregations." 🙂
Davis writes:
There is throughout this statement a blurring of lines that is at the very root of what has paralyzed the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). In short, the GAC perceives itself to be the church at the same time it is an institution designed to serve the church. It is trying to do everything for everyone while also relying on the obedience of everyone else to do what it says. …
…The denomination is an institution, it is not the church. It is an institution devised in support of the church. Thus, when the GAC mixes in and takes on tasks that are the responsibility of the people of the church, it ends up confusing things and actually inhibits the work of the church.
For example, the first line of the strategic goal in evangelism is, “The General Assembly Council will proclaim in word and deed the Gospel of Jesus Christ by:…”
I do not want to discourage anyone from proclaiming the gospel. Yet, when the GAC takes on the role of being the proclaiming body, it is a distraction and usurps the responsibility of the people of the church. …
Could the Evangelism goal be interpreted as a usurpation of the work of others? I suppose. We were not attempting to write these statements with lawyer-like precision. The plan was written so the underlying operational goals would "flesh out" strategic goals like Evangelism. All G.A.C. work is also to be done in the context of C.A.R.E., elaborated preceding the goals.
The primary locus of ministry is in individual Christians' lives as they live in community with other believers. All other institutions exist to help make this ministry stronger. Middle governing bodies assist congregations and each other, while the G.A.C. assists these bodies as they assist their communities. Some functions can best be done at a denominational level, but increasingly the work of the G.A.C. is a collaborative networking and resource role.
At the end of this month, for the first time ever, the G.A.C. will have a completely "goals and objectives" driven structure. Operational goals will answer strategic goals. Operational objectives will answer operational goals. Operational objectives will be answered by operational outcomes (that are measurable.) These outcomes will be supported by lower outcomes down to the individual staff level. For the first time, the G.A.C. will have a reasonable handle on all the work being done and be able to focus it according to a new vision of collaborative service. There is much work to do but this M.W.P. is a major leap forward.
Any commissioner wanting to chat, feel free to comment on the blog or contact me.
Leave a Reply