Scott’s Column: General Synod 2017

In preparation for writing this column I looked back at my last General Synod report, from 2013 when Michael and I were in Long Beach.  That report was enthusiastic about the new directions for the Church established at that meeting.  This year I’m not as enthusiastic.

I missed the 2015 Synod because of my paternity leave, but it seems that the overall vision and direction of 2013 has been neglected the last two years with new staff leading the church according to different priorities.  Also, I dislike the current centralization.

A decade ago when we were debating unified governance, I supported it and felt that the fears of centralized power that some expressed were unlikely to transpire.  But already the Synod has voted to disband the Collegium of Officers and invest more authority in the General Minister and President.  Plus, the Board seems to have taken on some power that should best be left to the Synod.  Given that Michael was just elected to the Board, at least I’ll have a venue for expressing my criticisms.

I felt that this synod missed some opportunities to celebrate work done by the church during the biennium, though we did have some significant moments, such as a recognition of the youth who had led the protests at Standing Rock.

What I do enjoy about Synod, is the good effort of the diverse people present to discern God’s call for what we are to say and do.  I was assigned to the committee working on two resolutions—one declaring gun violence a public health emergency and calling on federal public health funding to research the issue and the other calling on the church to proclaim a bold witness for God’s creation in the wake of the administration’s withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Climate Accords.

The committee work was an expression of the Spirit, I believe.  Someone would raise an issue, often an objection to a line or a word, and then the group would work to move in that person’s direction and to accommodate their concern.  Then someone else would express a point, and the effort would continue.  Working on the climate change resolution, there was one point when we had four versions of one sentence on the screen and I raised my hand to offer a fifth.  I thought the moderator might get exasperated with me. When I read my wording, which I had hoped would express the best ideas from the four other versions and do so in more theological language, the committee was pleased and quickly adopted it.

Our committee ended up approving both resolutions unanimously after we amended them.  There were skeptical and conservative persons in the committee who helped to make them better resolutions.  Both easily passed the overall General Synod.

I’ll have more to say in various venues in the upcoming weeks and months. Plus, you can read more detailed daily reports and reflections on my personal blog.

Peace,
Scott