PCANews - Attachment to AC Report
2004 Report of the Strategic Planning Committee (SPC)
to the Administrative Committee as
Directed by the 31st General Assembly of the PCA
Background Summary
By the grace of God the Presbyterian Church in America has thrived for a generation. Her commitment to the inerrancy of Scripture, the Reformed faith and the Great Commission have borne great fruit, and this church has advanced in faithfulness, numbers and vision beyond any realistic expectation of our founding fathers. We give thanks to our God for these blessings and pray that he may not only keep us faithful to our past but also hopeful in our future through Christ.
Concern for and commitment to the future of Christ’s Church caused the PCA General Assembly of 2000 to take stock of the present state of this blessed church. The PCA has grown considerably since its inception. There are now more than 300,000 members and 3000 ministers. PCA members come from increasingly varied sociological, ethnic, and geographical backgrounds. There are now more than 1500 churches scattered throughout North America – a quintupling of the original number, and more than 60 presbyteries – more than tripling the original number. As we have changed, so also have our continent and culture. We minister in a world rapidly changing and markedly different from that in which the PCA was established a brief generation ago.
Acknowledgement of these internal and external changes, together with recognitions that our growth has slowed and that our greater size and complexity have created new challenges, led the 2000 General Assembly to appoint a Strategic Planning Committee (SPC) to work with church leaders and presbyteries to identify our most pressing challenges. The 2003 General Assembly then gave the SPC the assignment of prioritizing these challenges and proposing processes to address them.
REPORT SUMMARY
(Full report and rationale follow these summaries, pp. 312 ff)
The following summaries identify three priority challenges along with initiatives for addressing them that will need to be approved by the 2004 General Assembly in order for the strategic planning process to progress. These are not the only concerns that the SPC identified, but rather are the challenges that were prayerfully felt to be the most strategic to address in order to secure the future peace, purity, and progress of Christ’s church.
Priority Challenge Summaries:
1. Engaging Ruling Elders
Securing the historic blessing and critical contribution of informed and committed ruling elder leadership at all levels of the PCA’s governance for the
sake of her biblical guidance, continuing vitality, and the sustained faithfulness of future generations.
2. Preparing the Next Generation
Addressing the need for coordination of the work of the Committees and Agencies in supporting presbyteries and churches in their ministry to the needs of youth and in the development of the denomination’s next generation of leaders.
3. Organizing Resources to Better Serve Our Corporate Mission
Providing fact-based analysis and proposals regarding ways to fund, organize, and evaluate the Agencies and Committees of the denomination so that presbyteries and churches are best served for the fulfillment of our corporate Gospel calling.
First Initiative Summary—Engaging Ruling Elders
Presbyterian theology and polity call for leadership and ownership of the work of the church to be shared on a sustained basis by ruling and teaching elders in all governing levels of the denomination. The responsibility for achieving greater ruling elder participation and assuring effective ruling elder training can effectively be aided by the Administrative Committee. To accomplish this, the Administrative Committee should coordinate a temporary task force with CE&P and Covenant Seminary, as well as churches and presbyteries with well-developed training material, toward the following goals:
a. To strive to assure greater proportional representation between TEs and REs in presbyteries and General Assembly. To do this will require re-examination and recommendation for possible change of the design of presbyteries and General Assembly in ways that encourage RE interest and involvement in furthering the purity, unity, peace, and progress of the corporate church.
b. To encourage and support Covenant Seminary and CE&P in developing minimum training standards prior to ordination for REs as suggested guidelines for churches.
c. To assist Covenant Seminary, CE&P, and churches to develop training platforms that can be disseminated through the stated clerks and local churches. In addition to biblical and BCO requirements, training needs to include the way a denomination serves churches, the polity and structure of the PCA, and the importance of RE participation in church assemblies.
d. To help promote and disseminate CE&P’s training for spouses of REs and TEs.
Second Initiative Summary—Preparing the Next Generation
Christian Education and Publications should take the lead in putting together a temporary task force with representatives of Christian Education & Publications, Covenant Seminary, Reformed University Ministries, and Covenant College (and others these entities agree to involve) to address the concerns represented in this initiative. The task force should render a report to the Strategic Planning Committee by February 2005. The responsibilities of this task force would include coordinating efforts for:
a. Gathering and analyzing data to better pinpoint where we are doing well in reaching the next generation;
b. Challenging our youth on the various callings in the kingdom and with regard to the cultivation of the gifts needed for these callings;
c. Encouraging the church to talk in relevant ways to the oncoming culture;
d. Reaching multi-ethnic youth;
e. Assisting the various Committees and Agencies to work in a manner that is complementary and supportive.
Third Initiative Summary—Organizing Resources To Better Serve Our Corporate Mission
The General Assembly should restructure the present Strategic Planning Steering Committee into a Strategic Planning Committee, as a panel of highly qualified, godly individuals who should evaluate the work of the Committees/Agencies and render a report to the General Assembly. The Strategic Planning Committee should be charged with the following:
a. Evaluating how Committees and Agencies relate to and collaborate with one another;
b. Evaluating the efficiency, effectiveness, and appropriateness of Committees and Agencies regarding the respective roles assigned to them by General Assembly;
c. Evaluating the best means for effective governance and standards of accountability for the Committees/Agencies to the General Assembly;
d. Evaluating the extent to which each Committee/Agency is subject to a system of periodic external review (peers, consultants, constituents);
e. Evaluating the budgets and method of funding of each denominational Committee/Agency and making recommendations as to the best way to fund the work of the Committees and Agencies;
f. Evaluating the level of resources from General Assembly Committees and Agencies available to and needed by presbyteries and churches;
g. Examining the operations, procedures and goals of the General Assembly and making suggestions regarding how these may be improved for the sake of the purity, peace, and progress of the church;
h. Examining the operations, procedures, and goals of the presbyteries and making suggestions regarding how these may be improved for the sake of the purity, peace, and progress of the church;
i. Retaining professional consulting to help structure the process and to help gather and analyze data for presentation to the Strategic Planning Committee. Only experienced and competent Christian consultants with demonstrable knowledge and understanding of the PCA should be considered for the professional consulting role.
FULL REPORT AND RATIONALE
PCA Strategic Planning Steering Committee—Current Active members
RE TE
Joel Belz Frank Barker
Frank Brock Will Barker
Sam Duncan Wilson Benton
James “Bebo” Elkin Ric Cannada
Tom Harris Dave Clelland
Richard Hostetter Ligon Duncan
Harry Pinner Wayne Herring
John White Tim Keller
Jack Williamson Rob Rayburn
Mike Wilson Joseph Wheat
Jim Wert (serving as consultant)
The Strategic Planning Steering Committee makes the following report in response to the action of General Assembly 2003 regarding the Administrative Committee. We again want to express our appreciation for the opportunity to consider the entire work of the denomination. This has been a challenging but invigorating process.
Following is a brief chronology of the Strategic Planning Process to date:
June 2000 GA asks the Coordinators/Agency heads and a Strategic Planning Steering Committee to develop a Strategic Plan within two years.
June 2002 GA extends the process one more year
June 2003 GA receives the report of the Strategic Planning Steering Committee, Being Revived + Bringing Reformation, and extends the life of the committee one more year.
January 2004 On behalf of a sub-committee of the Strategic Planning Steering Committee, Frank Brock presents an interim report to Coordinators/Agency heads and their chairs.
February 2004 The Coordinators/Agency heads and Strategic Planning Steering Committee meet to finalize this report to the Administrative Committee.
Explanatory Index to this Report
I. Preamble
This gives an overview of the insights and perspectives gained during this last year of the planning process
II. The GA 2003 Motions to Which the Strategic Planning Steering Committee is Responding
The motions of GA 2003 regarding Strategic Planning are restated.
III. Responses to the Motions
There is a general response to Motions 1 and 2. There are three initiatives in response to the part of Motion 3 that asked the Strategic Planning Steering Committee to “develop broader recommendations for plan execution at the denominational level and/or regarding specific denominational issues and opportunities and report these recommendations to the General Assembly for their further action.” These three initiatives are briefly summarized as having to do with:
1. Engaging Ruling Elders
Securing the historic blessing and critical contribution of informed and committed ruling elder leadership at all levels of the PCA’s governance for the sake of her biblical guidance, continuing vitality and the sustained faithfulness of future generations
2. Preparing the Next Generation
Addressing the need for coordination of the work of the Committees and Agencies in supporting presbyteries and churches in their ministry to the needs of youth and in the development of the denomination’s next generation of leaders.
3. Organizing Resources for Our Corporate Mission
Providing fact-based analysis and proposals regarding ways to fund, organize, and evaluate the Agencies and Committees of the denomination so that presbyteries and churches are best served for the fulfillment of our corporate Gospel calling.
I. Preamble
At the recommendation of the Coordinators/Agency heads and the Administrative Committee, the 2000 General Assembly created a Strategic Planning Steering Committee. The Assembly formed this 24-person committee to bring to the 2002 General Assembly a Strategic Plan for the Presbyterian Church in America.
For the first time since the founding of the PCA thirty years ago, the General Assembly asked a small group of individuals representative of the church leadership to think about the overall ministry of the denomination as a whole and report back.
The denomination is a system of graduated councils/courts that connects churches in extending God’s kingdom in eternally significant ways. Individuals, local churches, and presbyteries carry out most of the ministry of the PCA. The Committees and Agencies exist only to serve and provide some services that local churches/presbyteries cannot provide alone. The denomination is not the Committees/Agencies. However, the cooperation and coordination of the work of the Committees and Agencies is critical to the welfare of the denomination because in them there is a concentration of leadership, talent, and resources which are vital to sustaining cooperative ministries of the entire Church.
Though the Strategic Planning Committee is composed of persons active in the PCA, the committee retained the services of a PCA elder and consultant who had gone through a similar process with other organizations, denominations, and para-church groups. This consultant encouraged the committee to use a two-phase process, with phase one being to develop consensus on the PCA’s Mission, Identity, Values, and Strategic Priorities. (These are outlined at the end of this document.)
This is no small task for a denomination that has grown and changed considerably since its inception. There are more than 1500 churches scattered all over North America. PCA members and elders come from increasingly varied sociological, ethnic, geographical, racial, denominational, national, and economic backgrounds. Newly emerging leaders in the denomination are less interested in some historical issues that led to the founding of the denomination and are intensely interested in having a reformational denomination in a culture radically different from the one that existed at the founding
However, by God’s grace, the 2003 General Assembly favorably received the work of the Committee and extended its life for another year. The Committee put before the Assembly a booklet, Being Revived + Bringing Reformation, which reduced to writing the PCA’s Mission, Values, Identity, and Strategic Priorities that would guide the second phase of the planning process.
In the second phase of the process, a smaller sub-committee of the Strategic Planning Steering Committee was given the responsibility of studying the PCA’s structure, resources, and leadership, and recommending the next planning steps to the Committee/Agency heads and the Strategic Planning Steering Committee. This sub-committee was composed of Ruling Elders Frank Brock, Jack Williamson, John White, Harry Pinner, and Jim Wert (consultant); and Teaching Elders Roy Taylor, Will Barker, and Ligon Duncan. This sub-committee has met for about 1½ hours every other week since the 2003 General Assembly.
The sub-committee faced a number of challenges that made its task daunting. Perhaps the most formidable is a lack of information. There are now ten Committees and Agencies of the denomination that employ more than 1000 people, steward hundreds of millions of dollars in assets, and manage combined annual operating budgets that exceed a hundred million dollars. There are more than 60 presbyteries, 1500 churches, 3000 ministers, and 300,000 members. No serious analysis has been done to ascertain where or why certain churches are growing and others are not. There is little available analysis of presbyteries, which represent the heart of Presbyterianism, to learn where churches are being planted, people are being converted, the culture is being reformed. Although the sub-committee had many years of collective experience as members of the PCA, the members had no alternative but to use mostly anecdotal or barely analyzed spotty information.
The sub-committee read the reports of those presbyteries that went through a Strategic Planning Process. The sub-committee would have benefited from more reports from more presbyteries. Members of the sub-committee met with heads of seven of the Committees/Agencies and gained valuable insights and information though this process.
Even with the limited time and lack of information, certain themes emerged that shaped the report. They are as follows:
a. As individuals, we love Christ’s Church. We are all active members of our local church. It is where we feel we most belong.
b. We decry the cultural drift away from sound doctrine and believe in the importance of the reformed church for revival and transformation through its historic commitments to doctrine, piety, culture and mission.
c. We believe in and want to affirm the importance of our denomination because we believe that our denomination maintains purity of doctrine, provides accountability and fellowship, enables stronger educational possibilities, expands the opportunity for mission, and enlarges the reformational role of the local congregation.
d. We believe that the best denomination is one that is decentralized, dynamic, and responsive to the needs of local churches and a changing culture. While the doctrine and polity of the PCA should not change, the organizational design of the denomination must be able to change if the denomination is to reform the culture of the twenty-first century. In the world of complex, socially dynamic organizations that characterize the modern world, a denomination must have flexible organizational structure and strong, capable leadership. In fact, some informed observers predict that denominations that refuse to change will be come irrelevant or extinct in the twenty-first century. We believe that there is a significant danger to our denomination of becoming essentially a loose association of quasi-independent churches where teaching elders simply hold their credentials.
e. We want to affirm the importance of the presbytery as being the most effective and least bureaucratic level of the Presbyterian system of government. We would love to see the practices of the most dynamic presbyteries shared throughout the denomination. We believe that much could be learned from studying those presbyteries having growth and an expanding ministry.
f. We are in agreement with the basic principles outlined in Chapter 14 of the BCO regarding the PCA’s Committees/Agencies. From the outset, the PCA adopted a mission and a structure that maintained that the PCA was responsible to carry out the Great Commission of our Lord but in a manner consistent with Reformed theology and ecclesiology. In the beginning, there were to be three program committees plus a service committee (the Administrative Committee), which was the Assembly’s way of declaring its interpretation of the Great Commission, which indicates three foci, namely education, world missions, and home missions. Three program committees were established on the principle that while the church’s mission is one mission, there are three distinct program areas. In 2001 the General Assembly completed the process of establishing Reformed University Ministries as a fourth separate program committee.
g. Along with the program committees, the BCO established an Administrative Committee to serve the denomination with common administrative functions. We see the need for the Committees and Agencies to work together. There must also be good administration to insure that Committees/Agencies work cooperatively to bring programs in these four areas that will serve presbyteries and local congregations.
h. The focus of this report is on the Committees/Agencies because the Strategic Planning Steering Committee is a committee of General Assembly and it is only to the General Assembly as a church court that the Committees/Agencies are accountable. The sub-committee believes strongly that Committees/Agencies need to be held accountable to work together to support churches’ and the denomination’s mission and strategic priorities. But such accountability does not necessarily imply carefully scrutinizing every single action taken; it can also imply structuring the Committee/Agency, charging the Committee/Agency with strategic directives, empowering local committees/boards that select and hold accountable able leaders, and providing sufficient resources. We do not believe that this will happen without sustained, fact based analysis of the work and cooperative effort of all the Committees/Agencies.
i. All actions of this or subsequent committees need to be subject to periodic assessment by the General Assembly so that the Committees/Agencies can have the freedom to operate creatively and reformationally.
II. The GA 2003 Motions to Which the Strategic Planning Steering Committee is Responding (see M31GA.31-43.III.1-3, pp. 137-138).
“III. Recommendations
“1. That the "Future Direction of the PCA: A Framework for Planning" be approved as edited as a working draft as reflecting the mission, vision, values, and priorities of the PCA, and be commended as its framework for strategic planning. Further, we recommend that this document be summarized and packaged for distribution to the whole denomination to promote common terminology and coordinated initiatives across the denomination. The complete planning document, along with a summary of the discussion sessions within presbyteries should be made available generally through the PCA website and in the byFaith magazine. As part of this summary, the Steering Committee should identify common issues and opportunities that surfaced through these presbytery discussions, and offer examples of successful local efforts to implement the planning framework.
Adopted as amended
[Note: See Appendix C, Attachment A, p. 300, M31GA, for text of "The Future Direction of the PCA, A Framework for Planning."]
“2. That PCA Committees and Agencies discuss the "The Future Direction of the PCA: A Framework for Planning", and indicate how their own strategic priorities are consonant with denominational direction. Presbyteries and congregations are encouraged to craft their own strategic plans by discussing the PCA identity, mission, values, vision and strategic priorities as described in the "PCA Framework for Planning" and formulate their own strategic priorities consonant with the strategic priorities set forth in this plan. We encourage them to further develop concrete objectives and initiatives that can be implemented at presbytery and local church levels, as well as a prioritized list of external resources that would aid and enhance their efforts in making progress toward their goals. We further recommend that these planning efforts be designed as broad-based efforts inclusive of ruling and teaching elders, deacons, other male and female church members, youth, and other constituents involved in the life of the church. The Strategic Planning Steering Committee will collect responses and plans from presbyteries, Committees and Agencies and summarize them by the 2004 GA.
Adopted
“3. That the Strategic Planning Steering Committee continue its work until the 2005 GA. This work will include collecting, collating and summarizing local strategic planning efforts, e.g. from presbyteries, local churches, Committees and Agencies. Further, we recommend that the Strategic Planning Steering Committee be charged to facilitate these local-planning efforts, and given adequate resources to fulfill this responsibility. To raise these resources, the Committee is authorized to contact individuals, local churches and presbyteries to solicit contributions. To further support such efforts, we recommend that the CE&P Committee assemble and publish a collection of denominational resources available to presbyteries and local churches to assist them in their planning efforts. The Strategic Planning Steering Committee is encouraged to develop broader recommendations for plan execution at the denominational level and/or regarding specific denominational issues and opportunities and report these recommendations to the General Assembly for their further action. Finally, we encourage the denomination to continue to hold up the work of this committee in prayer.”
Adopted
III. Responses to the Motions
Response to GA Recommendation 1
Being Revived + Bring Reformation is available in the PCA bookstore and website. Some churches, presbyteries and committees are using the booklet which is helping to promote common terminology and to coordinate initiatives. Since GA 2003, Chesapeake Presbytery went through a strategic planning process and forwarded their report to the Steering Committee and Committee/Agency heads.
Response to GA Recommendation 2
The committee is aware that some of the Committees and Agencies are already working to develop strategic plans consonant with the PCA’s Identity, Mission, Values, Vision and Strategic priorities. Reports from MNA, PCAF and RUM have been received and forwarded to the AC.
Responses to GA Recommendation 3
The 2003 GA asked the Strategic Planning Steering Committee to “develop broader recommendations for plan execution at the denominational level and/or regarding specific denominational issues and opportunities and report these recommendations to the General Assembly for their further action.” Before rendering the committee’s recommendations, we would like to restate the four PCA Strategic Priorities that guide this report:
(1) Empower church health and growth for new and existing churches local and worldwide
(2) Develop leadership for the future
(3) Increase denominational understanding and effectiveness
(4) Engage the culture—timeless truths for our times
In light of this theology and history and these Strategic Priorities, we submit the following initiatives and recommendations:
INITIATIVES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
First Initiative—Engaging Ruling Elders
¨ Initiative
Presbyterian theology and polity calls for leadership and ownership of the work of the church to be shared on a sustained basis by ruling and teaching elders at all assemblies of the denomination. The responsibility for achieving greater ruling elder participation and assuring effective ruler elder training can effectively be aided by the Administrative Committee. To accomplish this, the Administrative Committee should coordinate a task force with other Committees and Agencies, especially CE & P and Covenant Seminary, as well as churches and presbyteries with well-developed training material, toward the following goals:
a. Strive to assure greater proportional representation between TEs and REs in presbytery and General Assembly. To do this will require re-examination of the design of presbyteries and General Assembly in ways that encourage RE interest and involvement in furthering the purity, unity, peace and progress of the corporate church.
b. To encourage and support Covenant Seminary and CE&P to develop minimum training standards prior to ordination for RE’s as suggested guidelines for churches.
c. To assist Covenant Seminary, CE&P and churches to develop training platforms that can be disseminated through the stated clerks and local churches. In addition to biblical and BCO requirements, training needs to include the way a denomination serves churches, the polity and structure of the PCA, and the importance of RE participation in church assemblies.
d. To help promote and disseminate CE&P’s training for spouses of REs and TEs.
· Rationale for the first initiative
Participation. From the inception of the PCA, the vital involvement and significant leadership of ruling elders has been a distinctive and a blessing. Having assemblies where ruling and teaching elders work side by side to further the mission of the PCA can be significantly aided by the Administrative Committee’s coordination of a temporary task force devoted to this purpose. The AC proposes the docket of the General Assembly, and the General Assembly Local Arrangements Committee is a sub-committee of the AC. This does not mean that the Administrative Committee should develop training materials or do training. However, we recognize that the Administrative Committee is in position to help coordinate and evaluate ruling elder informational needs, because its regular involvement, coordination and contact of pastors and stated clerks, provides needed insights into the type of training materials needed and the avenues of distribution that can be most effective.
Biblical church government calls for ruling and teaching elders but there is a lack of ruling elder participation sometimes at the local church level, often at the presbytery level and, especially, at the General Assembly level. Active informed ruling elder involvement is necessary for the health of the entire church in matters of doctrine, polity, spiritual vitality and cultural engagement. The goal of this initiative is increased participation by ruling elders in all aspects of church life according to gifts, recognizing differences in gifts and roles.
General Assemblies and presbyteries foster purity, unity, peace and progress of the corporate church. Church assemblies need to have the explicit objective of being ruling elder friendly to insure that the gifts and abilities that ruling elders can provide are utilized. The structure of committees, the preparation of the docket, etc. need to encourage joint ruling/teaching elder participation. Greater participation of ruling elders can contribute to the practical engagement of the church and the culture and safeguarding of sound doctrine. Failure to achieve this engagement potentially abdicates these responsibilities to a “professional class” of ministers.
General Assembly and presbytery meetings are held to fulfill their constitutional responsibilities. Such meetings may also provide opportunities for nurturing fellowship, training for ministry in the local church, setting strategic direction and priorities, and discovering ministry resources. The committee believes that more prominently including these additional elements in the format of our meetings will make the meetings more relevant to the ministries of the local church.
Each session, presbytery and General Assembly needs to have a docket where those assembled expeditiously resolve matters vital to the life and health of the church and its role in extending God’s kingdom. Ruling elders must feel that their input is needed and that the matters being discussed are worth the time and effort that is being asked. Business should not be denigrated or slighted but rather allowed to have the focus its importance requires. It is also important that the fellowship and education of the church at a national level be enhanced for her corporate functioning. There must be an appropriate amount of time given to an assembly with a clear benefit from doing so.
Training. The local pastor is responsible for most elder training. There are also several Committees/Agencies that help with elder training, such as Covenant Seminary, CE&P, MNA and AC. However, the Strategic Planning Steering Committee understands that the present focus is diffused and believes that focused attention can be coordinated effectively at this time by a taskforce led by the Administrative Committee. Such focused attention and coordinated effort is vital for something so basic to the welfare of the denomination.
With the technology that is available, excellent training material on DVDs and web sites could be developed that would train RE’s to be cognizant of the denomination’s Strategic Priorities and engaged in the process of implementing these at the lowest but most important level, the local church and presbytery. The genius of Presbyterian government is not only the local church but also the presbytery, where churches work together to address the needs of the entire presbytery.
It is also important, however, that REs understand the use and limits of church assemblies when these assemblies become judicial courts. Because of actions in various PCA church courts, it appears that the body is sometimes confused about the distinctive PCA polity. While all forms of Presbyterian Church Government hold certain basic biblical principles in common, the so-called “grass-roots” polity of the PCA is unique in our adherence to the Preliminary Principles of the First General Assembly of 1789. We need to reaffirm PCA polity (governance) and have comprehensive training in polity, as expressed in our eight preliminary principles found in the preface to the BCO. “The power of all church courts in PCA is exclusively moral and spiritual. This spiritual power is completely separate from, and is to be kept separate from, civil coercive power, just as planets moving in concentric orbits BCO 3-4.” Officer training should include instruction in individual spiritual qualifications, practical knowledge of the Bible, Reformed theology, and involvement in ministry, as well as in polity.
Second Initiative—Preparing the Next Generation
¨ Initiative
Christian Education and Publications should take the lead in putting together a temporary task force with representatives of Christian Education & Publication, Covenant Seminary, Reformed University Ministries, and Covenant College (and others these entities agree to involve) to address the concerns represented in this initiative. The task force should render a report to the Strategic Planning Committee by February 2005. The responsibilities of this task force would include coordinating efforts for:
a. Gathering and analyzing data to better pinpoint where we are doing well in reaching the next generation;
b. Challenging our youth on the various callings in the kingdom and with regard to the cultivation of the gifts needed for these callings;
c. Ensuring that the church is talking in relevant ways to the oncoming culture;
d. Reaching multi-ethnic youth;
e. Assuring that the work of the various Committees and Agencies is complementary and supportive.
· Rationale for the second initiative
A key to the future effectiveness of the PCA is the passing on of the heritage received by this generation of leaders to the next generation. This will involve deploying our denominational resources to help the rising generation realize the goals of Christ in this world and the Spirit’s gifts for accomplishing these goals. There are many methods to stimulate the next generation: individual mentoring, vacation Bible school, retreats and conferences, youth ministers, Reformed University Ministries, Covenant College, and Covenant Seminary.
Since the early part of the twentieth century, formal education has had an increasingly influential role in shaping American’s world-view and since the 1950s media has become far more influential in the lives of youth. If the church is to help young people develop a biblical world-view, it must supplement and shape the work of Sunday school teachers and youth leaders. The PCA’s teachers are products of secondary and higher education, which most often have a pervasively human-centered world-view.
Youth ministers, Covenant Seminary, Covenant College and Reformed University Ministries all seek to help young people develop a biblical world-view. Many of these graduates of secondary and higher educational institutions will someday serve the church as teachers and leaders. Covenant Seminary has received a very large grant from the Lilly Foundation, which created the Youth in Ministry Institute (YiMI) and should have experience and resources to help these efforts. Because of the dynamic relationship between today’s high school and college students and tomorrow’s church leaders, the PCA’s largest graduate education institution should fill a key leadership role in the various educational initiatives.
Third Initiative—Organizing Resources to Serve Our Corporate Mission Better
¨ Initiative
The General Assembly should restructure the present Strategic Planning Steering Committee into a Strategic Planning Committee as a panel of highly qualified, godly individuals who should evaluate the work of the Committees/Agencies and render a report to the General Assembly. The Strategic Planning Committee should be charged with the following:
a. Evaluating how Committees and Agencies relate to and collaborate with one another;
b. Evaluating the efficiency, effectiveness and appropriateness of Committees and Agencies regarding their respective roles assigned to them by General Assembly;
c. Evaluating the best means for effective governance and standards of accountability for the Committees/Agencies to the General Assembly;
d. Evaluating the extent to which each Committee/Agency is subject to a system of periodic external review (peers, consultants, constituents);
e. Evaluating the budgets and method of funding of each denominational Committee/Agency and making recommendations as to the best way to fund the work of the Committees and Agencies;
f. Evaluating the level of resources from General Assembly Committees and Agencies available to and needed by presbyteries and churches;
g. Examining the operations, procedures and goals of the General Assembly and making recommendations regarding how these may be improved for the sake of the purity, peace and progress of the church;
h. Examining the operations, procedures and goals of the presbyteries and making recommendations regarding how these may be improved for the sake of the purity, peace and progress of the church;
i. Retaining a professional consultant to help structure the process and gather and analyze data for presentation to the Strategic Planning Committee. Only experienced and competent Christian consultants with demonstrable knowledge and understanding of the PCA should be considered for the professional consulting role.
This will need to be a hard working committee willing to spend significant time and resources to gather information and render difficult judgements regarding the structure, resources and personnel of the PCA. The members of the committee must be independent and objective in their analysis. Members must be uniquely qualified and possess the following skills: theological understanding, organizational and analytical experience and church history (especially PCA). The members of the committee must have considerable integrity and the respect of their peers. Therefore, the recommendation is that the larger Strategic Planning Steering Committee that has served through February 2004 be reduced to a more functional size. The ongoing group, which will be known as the Strategic Planning Committee, will be composed of ten men, five ruling and five teaching elders, none of whom should head one of the denomination’s committees or agencies. We express our thanks to the past members for their service.
The following are recommended to serve as members of this committee:
REs TEs
Frank Brock (chair) Frank Barker
Joel Belz Will Barker
Harry Hargrave Ligon Duncan
Glen Fogle Dave Clelland
Jack Williamson Bill Lyle
Knowing that any planning process requires accurate information and adequate input as well as continued oversight and encouragement to enable full participation and success, we propose that this committee consult regularly with the Committee/Agency heads as its work progresses and involve other experts, participants and survey instruments as deemed appropriate. The Strategic Planning Committee will render a final report to the Administrative Committee at least two weeks prior to the spring meeting in 2005 (normally at the end of March). Timing of responses to the committee may require an extension of the work to 2006.
We recommend that the Strategic Planning Committee, in conjunction with Committee/Agency heads, develop a budget. Once the budget is established, Committee/Agency heads and Strategic Planning Committee members need to seek funding from the churches and other sources as was done at the outset of this strategic planning process.
· Rationale for studying the structure of the PCA’s Committees/Agencies and presbyteries.
The present structure of the denomination was designed when the denomination was much smaller, the Committees were fewer, there were no Agencies, and resources were more limited than now. The Assembly wanted to avoid the failures of the previous denomination.
The General Assembly represents the entire denomination and is charged with oversight of the denomination’s Committees and Agencies. Though the present governance structure of elected committees/boards, committees of commissioners and votes by the General Assembly works reasonably well for each Committee/Agency, the General Assembly must have a way to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of all PCA Committees and Agencies as a whole. The Strategic Planning Steering Committee recommends that study of the structures needs to look at the following:
a. Performance criteria. We must develop criteria that will be used in assessing the performance of each Committee/Agency. Such criteria need to assess at least the centrality of mission, the use of resources, and the ministry to which resources are directed. Though it is impossible to assess spiritual outcomes, the churches of the denomination need timely, accurate, factual information about each Committee/Agency to allow churches to decide on the effectiveness and efficiency of the Committee/Agency.
b. Cooperation. No matter how well a particular Committee/Agency does its own work, an essential part of any outside evaluation is the extent to which that Committee/Agency cooperates with the other Committees and Agencies of the denomination.
c. Budget. A sub-committee studying the structure of the denomination needs to have an adequate budget. Similar efforts indicate the cost will be between $150,000 and $300,000. While this is a sizeable amount of money, the present Strategic Planning Steering Committee has been hampered throughout its existence by a lack of resources to gather information and analyze it. Without such analysis, any future committee will find it hard to make informed, thoughtful recommendations that will result in a healthier denomination.
d. Relationship between Committees/Agencies and presbyteries. As the Strategic Planning Steering Committee considered the structure of the denomination, it was apparent that some presbyteries are very active and effective while others are less active and effective. Having the presbyteries direct and control more of the denomination’s ministry seems to be a worthwhile goal, but further study is needed to see how the Committees/Agencies could facilitate such a goal and how to fund such a goal.
e. Strategic direction of the denomination. Other issues were raised during the planning process, such as a feeling of disenfranchisement (by some large and some small churches), cultural non-awareness, alternate credentialing and growth of ethnically targeted churches, current assembly designs/processes and women’s issues. Further study is needed to determine how Committees/Agencies can take church-wide concerns and develop them into programs relevant to the presbytery and local church to help them be more reformational.
f. Responsive, nimble, and relevant. It is no secret that the churches of the PCA give more resources to ministries outside the control of the Assembly than to the PCA’s own Committees/Agencies. In addition, there are many dynamic independent ministries that draw primarily from the PCA. The goal of PCA Committees/Agencies is to serve the churches. Every effort needs to be made to make the denominational Committees/Agencies as organizationally dynamic as independent ministries, without losing theological integrity. Theological wrangling, bureaucracy, and archaic structures may have contributed to cultural disinterest in denominations. Presbyterian government does not have to be traditional to be biblical. Our forefathers were revolutionary in the way they created structures responsive to the culture of their day. We need to think reformationally ourselves. The sub-committee needs to think about how this denomination can have the greatest impact on a technological, diverse and secularly educated culture. We believe that the “grass roots” idea of the PCA can become a powerful contributor to enable the denomination to have fruitful local, innovative, effective ministry without a top-heavy layer of church government. However, this does not negate the impact that effective Committees/Agencies can have in realizing this hope. We need to offer suggestions of new structure or restructured Committees/Agencies that would better serve the presbyteries and churches of the PCA as we seek to be revived and bring reformation to our nation and the world.
g. Always being reformed. Because we live in a rapidly changing world that requires of organizations flexibility and adaptability, there needs to be a way for the General Assembly to express its collective opinion on the structure of the denomination. It must be anticipated that those responsible for the oversight of Committees and Agencies will always focus on the work of that committee or agency. There must be some way for the denomination to express its support of the work of that Committee/Agency, as it pertains to the denomination as a whole.
· Rationale for studying the funding of the committees, agencies and presbyteries of the PCA.
As the Strategic Planning Steering Committee considered the present resources available to the Committees/Agencies, it was apparent that the various Committees/Agencies have very different funding models. Some agencies are almost entirely dependent on church partnership giving while some agencies ask no funding at all. This creates confusion over where the churches’ money is going. We believe that this may be caused by the fact that the Committees/Agencies are in fact providing three different kinds of services without the churches recognizing these differences:
a. Services essential to the operation of a denomination. The clearest example of this is the work that AC does: planning and administering an annual General Assembly, review of presbytery records, judicial process, constitutional questions involving the Westminster Standards, Book of Church Order, and Rules of Assembly Operation, Interchurch Relations, Nominating Committee, minutes of the General Assembly, advice to presbyteries, churches, and individuals, PCA Office Building, etc.
b. Services paid primarily by the recipient. Perhaps the clearest examples of this are paying for books ordered through the denominational bookstore, paying tuition at Covenant College, paying premiums to RBI for insurance, etc.
c. Services of such magnitude and strategic importance that collective church support is the only realistic alternative. Perhaps the clearest examples of this are a worldwide mission agency, a seminary, presbytery-based ministries to colleges and universities, publication of Sunday School materials, or an affordable Christ-centered college.
The Strategic Planning Steering Committee believes that further study should address at least the following seven issues:
a. Equity. The sub-committee needs to strive for determining means of equitable funding among Committees and Agencies. While a uniform system of reporting operating budgets may be impossible, there needs to be a mechanism to ensure that partnership shares are developed using the same assumptions and criteria, delineating cost centers along the lines outlined above.
b. Proximity. People like to give money to local things where they can see the results of what they are giving to. The genius of Presbyterian government may be the idea of presbytery yet there is little connection between presbytery funding and denominational Committees and Agencies. (Interestingly, RUM has a financial model based in presbyteries and is very successful.) Any funding proposal for the Committees/Agencies needs also to consider funding means for presbyteries, with some way of encouraging the stronger presbyteries to help the weaker.
c. Proportionality. Churches have different levels of ability to support the PCA denominational causes. Any alternative funding discussion should, at least, include consideration of a proportional-giving plan that would involve a certain percent of the operating budgets of churches going to Committees/Agencies and a certain percent going to presbyteries. (An example might be that churches would be urged to give a certain percent of their operating budget to the work of the Committees/Agencies and a certain percent to the work of their presbytery and a certain percent to help fledgling presbyteries.)
d. Strategic and innovative. God’s people invest most in innovative, responsive and strategic ministry. Within the PCA we have many capable local church leaders committed to our reformed principles but often their energy and leadership is being expressed in informal networks outside the purview of the denomination. What can we learn from this? How should the Committees and Agencies appropriately respond to this?
e. Transparency, accountability and results. A fifth observation is that people want to know that they are giving where there is sound financial management and clear, measurable objectives. These Committees/Agencies all believe that their ministry is important but local churches find it difficult to compare the work of the ministries with one another. It is hard for churches to know how to distinguish the most critical needs.
f. Denominational support. A sixth observation is that some churches want help from the Committees/Agencies but often do not support them. The churches of the denomination need to provide the Committees/Agencies the financial support necessary to serve the denomination without the Committees/Agencies spending excessive resources in fund raising. The PCA is more than a place for the teaching elders to hold their credentials. Churches have a responsibility to either support the approved denominational Committees/Agencies or sever the relationship. As we have reviewed the most recent available data, it would appear that of the 1189 churches reporting, 659 churches gave at a level equal to or greater than 2% of their operating budget.
g. Research, coordination and strategic thinking. Any study of funding needs to especially consider funding for the Administrative Committee. As the earlier documents of the Strategic Planning Committee attest, administration is a necessary part of the work of the denomination. Administration is a spiritual gift that God uses to enhance opportunities for ministry. The Administrative Committee can serve the denomination best by collecting and analyzing data, coordinating information flow between agencies, organizing the activities of GA assigned tasks and committees, disseminating “best practices” to churches and presbyteries, etc. Such important behind the scene activities cannot be supported with the funding presently being received. Since the activities of the Administrative Committee are largely unseen, it is difficult to raise money for the work that is currently being done and projects that should be done which are of vital and strategic importance to the denomination as a whole.
Conclusion—A Call to Prayer
We recommend that the General Assembly call upon the churches and presbyteries to commit to special seasons of prayer and repentance, between now and the 33rd General Assembly, that God’s Spirit will bring revival, reformation and renewal of ministry vision to the members, churches, presbyteries and General Assembly of the PCA; and asking specifically for the leading and power of the Spirit in the work of the Strategic Planning Committee. We recognize that God moves when His people pray, and that unless He moves, any plan will be in vain: “Unless the LORD builds the house, its builders labor in vain. Unless the LORD watches over the city, the watchmen stand guard in vain.” (Ps. 127:1) “Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,” says the LORD Almighty. (Zech. 4:6)
EXCERPTS FROM BEING REVIVED + BRINGING REFORMATION,
RECEIVED BY GA 2003
¨ The PCA Identity
The Presbyterian Church in America is a covenant community of churches committed to:
→ Biblical inerrancy and authority. The denomination’s foundational commitment is to the Bible as the inspired Word of God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice.
→ A reformed-covenantal theology. The denomination’s office-bearers subscribe in good faith to The Westminster Standards.
→ Mutual accountability. The denomination follows an ecclesiastical connection yet “grass roots” Presbyterian church government and Biblical church discipline, as reflected in The Book of Church Order.
→ Cooperative ministry. The denomination seeks to accomplish more together than the separate units of the church could accomplish on their own (local church, presbytery, General Assembly, networks, and like-minded brothers and sisters in the Church Jesus Christ).
¨ The Mission Statement
→ The mission of the Presbyterian Church in America is to glorify and enjoy God by equipping and enabling the churches of the PCA to work together to fulfill the Great Commission by making disciples of all nations, so that people will mature as servants of the triune God, will worship God in spirit and truth, and will have a reforming impact on culture.
¨ The PCA Values
The PCA as a denomination and among its member churches will pursue all the following defining values:
* These have been alphabetized to avoid any sense of priority.
→ Accountability to one another privately and through the church corporately for personal holiness.
→ Cooperation by engaging in ministry together as local churches, presbyteries and as a denomination, and with like-minded churches in North America and the world.
→ Faithfulness to the Holy Scriptures as the inspired, inerrant Word of God.
→ Fidelity to the reformed faith as the system of doctrine most consistent with the Word of God.
→ Love to the one true and living God, to fellow Christian, and to our unbelieving neighbors.
→ Obedience to fulfilling the Great Commission.
→ Prayer that fulfills biblical models and instructions.
→ Worship that is God-centered, Biblically based, participatory, historically informed and culturally appropriate.
¨ The PCA Vision
The PCA, through the General Assembly, its Committees, Agencies and Presbyteries, should guide, connect and support local churches and presbyteries so that they work together to fulfill our mission statement.
→ A succinct motto for this vision is “Being revived and bringing reformation.”
From BCO Chapter 14
“The initiative for carrying out the Great Commission belongs to the Church in every Court level, and the Assembly is responsible to encourage and promote the fulfillment of this mission by the various courts.”
“The work of the Church as set forth in the Great Commission is one work, being implemented at the General Assembly level through equally essential committees.”
“The committees are to serve and not to direct any Church judicatories. They are not to establish policy, but rather execute policy established by the General Assembly.”
“The Committees are to serve the Church through the duties assigned by the General Assembly.”
“The General Assembly Permanent Committees are the Administrative Committee of the General Assembly, Committee on Christian Education and Publications, Committee on Mission to North America, and Committee on Mission to the World.”
