Living in tension with the Body of Christ

I am a Christian, which means that I am intimately connected to other believers. We are children of God. We struggle to be faithful together. We disagree, but just because I disagree with the foot doesn't make that foot any less part of the body.

I am also a Presbyterian. My parents are Presbyterians. My grandparents are Presbyterians... largely by choice. Particularly because we believe that as the priesthood of believers we can seek out the will of God together, vote, and struggle on together. We have no bishops or any individuals (including pastors) that can make unilateral decisions on almost anything. This, however, means that at times each of us must struggle in the minority... worry about our conscience... wonder how God will overcome our failures.

In the second part of our Consitution, the Book of Order, it states

G-2.0105 Freedom of Conscience
It is necessary to the integrity and health of the church that the persons who serve it
in ordered ministries shall adhere to the essentials of the Reformed faith and polity as
expressed in this Constitution. So far as may be possible without serious departure from
these standards, without infringing on the rights and views of others, and without obstructing
the constitutional governance of the church, freedom of conscience with respect
to the interpretation of Scripture is to be maintained. It is to be recognized, however, that
in entering the ordered ministries of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), one chooses to
exercise freedom of conscience within certain bounds. His or her conscience is captive to
the Word of God as interpreted in the standards of the church so long as he or she continues
to seek, or serve in, ordered ministry. The decision as to whether a person has departed
from essentials of Reformed faith and polity is made initially by the individual
concerned but ultimately becomes the responsibility of the council in which he or she is a
member.

We have to respect that our brothers and sisters, although differing from us, are still struggling to serve the same Lord.

And although many struggle nationally in our church regarding ordination standards, marriage definitions, and sexuality. Yesterday I struggled with something much more intimate, personal, and painful: discrimination.

We, as a presbytery, yesterday elected a very well qualified man, who seems to be an excellent candidate and a fervent servant of Jesus Christ, to the office of stated clerk.

The problem? The search process had not been an open one. Only 3 candidates were considered, no position was advertised. Also, the effective salary of the past stated clerk, a woman, was $36,000 in 2012. The proposed for her was $38,000 in 2013. The effective salary given to this new stated clerk is $55,000. This was either a 52.8% increase or a 45% increase respectively compared to the original salaries noted above.

Both had additional benefits. The explanation was because her benefits had cost more, the cash equivalent of her entire benefits were thus given to the new stated clerk, plus he received "post-retirement benefits" which are much less expensive. Even with that, the overall package increase was still 12%, in a year when our presbytery moments before eliminated a different staff position and cut $130,000 from our overall budget to balance it.

I voted in the minority, but as a member of presbytery, I must state that we made this decision together.  Below is the protest I have submitted to our stated clerk to be contained in our minutes as a small effort to clear my conscience. I believe we are the church and we do not walk out ever on those who love the Lord Jesus Christ... period. But just as our choices at times pain our parents, the choices of our brothers and sisters sometimes pain us. Lord, in your mercy, hear our prayers.

I, Lindsay Woods, voted in the minority. I am protesting this vote for the following reasons. 

As one of the foundations of presbyterian polity, F-1.0403, we declare 

"The unity of believers in Christ is reflected in the rich diversity of the Church’s

membership. In Christ, by the power of the Spirit, God unites persons through baptism

regardless of race, ethnicity, age, sex, disability, geography, or theological conviction.

There is therefore no place in the life of the Church for discrimination against any person.

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) shall guarantee full participation and representation in

its worship, governance, and emerging life to all persons or groups within its membership.

No member shall be denied participation or representation for any reason other than

those stated in this Constitution."

I believe that this election stands against this foundation of Presbyterian polity. The search process was closed for this position. The job description was not made public and no one was invited to apply for this position, unless privately. We did thus not even make a concerted effort to guarantee full participation or representation in the process of this election. This is even more troubling in light of the fact that in the last 3 years, 6 staff have been eliminated or have left the staff of the presbytery. All 6 are women, 2 of which are women of color. Since that time, two, now three, staff have been brought on to either replace those women or to newly created positions. All 3 are white men over the age of 50. There were options to delay this election, bring on said candidate as an interim while a full search was made, or request that the current stated clerk remain on for a few months so that a fair search process could be completed. The candidate himself proposed options such as these, and the Presbytery council was comfortable proposing a candidate that they had interviewed, having only reviewed 3 potential candidates, and only interviewing one. 

I also believe that the compensation package reflects a break from the above foundation of Presbyterian polity. The Presbytery Council, which updated the job description, stated that the changes were minor, adding only some new responsibilities for digitization and preaching. The Presbytery Council confirmed that the job description was still for a 3/4 time position. There was not a 50+% increase in responsibility or the position would have been full time. In no way does this justify a 52.7% increase from the 2012 effective salary of the stated clerk. The only explanation is that because we do not have to pay full pension dues (instead post-retirement dues) we increased the effective salary. This, to me, reflects discrimination based on retirement or non-retirement status, and has no place in the Church of Jesus Christ. 

I am saddened that the body of which I am a part felt this was a just and faithful decision, and I regretfully submit this protest. 

Thank you.