Administrative Commission for Living Waters Fellowship: Proposed Gracious Dismissal Agreement to Presbytery MOTION: In an effort to pursue a Gracious Dismissal of Living Waters Fellowship (aka, Suffern Presbyterian Church) from the PCUSA, in a manner that honors the guidelines of the PCUSA in such matters, and is reflective of a concern for our common Christian witness and the future ministry and mission of Hudson River Presbytery (HRP) and Living Waters Fellowship (LWF), the following motion is presented. The Administrative Commission moves: To dismiss the Living Waters Fellowship (aka, Suffern Presbyterian Church) to the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) as a mission congregation, under the supervision of All Souls Community Church of Nanuet, under the following conditions: That all original records of LWF will be turned over to the PC (USA) at the time of dismissal. This will include all minutes, rolls and documents. That a worship service of dismissal for Living Waters Fellowship be held on a date to be determined, for the purpose of grieving the end of their relationship with HRP and of asking God s blessing upon them for their future. To approve the following terms of financial consideration and support: At the date of consummation of this Gracious Dismissal Agreement, LWF will make a cash payment of $100,000 to HRP. HRP will then give the property at 81 Washington Avenue and 14 Oliver Street, Suffern, NY, to All Souls Community Church (PCA) at the request of Suffern Presbyterian Church, doing business as (dba) Living Waters Fellowship. The specific terms of this exchange are spelled out below. This $100,000 payment will include full payment of the Per Capita of $37,058.63 (through 2014), and any costs incurred by HRP for legal fees and other expenses pertaining to this transaction, with the balance of the $100,000 payment applied to the property. Additional monies will be turned over from a trust, currently in the name of Suffern Presbyterian Church (dba Living Waters Fellowship). As of February 2012, the approximate amount of the Suffern/LWF share of this trust was $55,000, which could increase/decrease based on investment 1
market conditions at the time of the distribution of the trust. A Recapture Clause regarding the property at 81 Washington Avenue and 14 Oliver Street, Suffern NY will be satisfied at the earlier of the following: 1. Five years from the date of consummation of this agreement; 2. The expenditure of $200,000 in renovation/rehabilitation expenses to the above mentioned property. (This clause will be expanded upon by the All Souls attorney and approved by the HRP attorney to address the actions should there be a catastrophic event preventing the execution by LWF/All Souls of this agreement.) 3. Should the property be sold before the earlier of 5 years or the above $200,000, the proceeds of the sale, less any capital investment made by LWF/All Souls and the amount of the initial payment applied to the property, will revert to HRP. That the Administrative Commission be authorized to oversee the implementation of these terms of dismissal, in consultation with the Budget, Finance, and Property Committee of HRP. If necessary, this could include assuming original jurisdiction of the Session of LWF. RATIONALE The Administrative Commission believes that these Terms of Dismissal provide for a gracious way of dismissing Living Waters Fellowship from the Presbyterian Church (USA) a way that honors the guidelines of the PCUSA in these matters and that reflects our enduring concern for our common Christian witness, as well as our enduring concern for the future mission of Hudson River Presbytery and Living Waters Fellowship. Brief History A Broken Relationship The Administrative Commission has come to the conclusion a conclusion which brings us great sadness - that the relationship between Living Waters Fellowship (LWF) and Hudson River Presbytery (HRP) is a broken one. The roots of this brokenness are deep and long, and both theological and personal. For some time, the congregation at LWF has felt out of step with HRP, because their beliefs and approach to the Christian faith are more evangelical and conservative than those of the majority in HRP. While there have been individuals from HRP who have reached out to LWF in a spirit of goodwill, and while representatives from LWF have been invited over the years to represent and give voice to a more conservative perspective during presbytery conversations and debates, and to participate in presbytery committees, their overriding experience has been one of not feeling welcome and, at times, of not being respected as having a legitimate point of view. Beginning in 2000, they stopped paying 2
their per capita apportionment as a means of making clear their dissent. (They did pay their per capita apportionment for 2012.) The refusal to pay per capita has caused hard feelings on the part of many in the presbytery, and a sense that LWF was not being a fully-participating member of the presbytery family. In response, LWF has said that they did not feel welcomed as a part of the family in the first place. The feelings of disappointment, anger, frustration, and brokenness are deep on both sides. Both sides feel that their grievances are legitimate, and both sides are inclined to view the grievances of the other side with suspicion. In recent years, particularly since the beginning of Susan Andrews ministry in HRP, the relationship has begun to thaw. Members of the Committee on Ministry have reached out to LWF, seeking to restore the relationship. Some of the personal hurt has begun to heal. However, the theological differences have, if anything, grown deeper. Suffern Presbyterian/LWF has long felt a significant chasm between itself and the PCUSA and HRP over issues of biblical authority and the role of Jesus Christ in salvation. With the passage of the so-called Amendment 10-A in 2011, permitting the ordination of gay and lesbian persons in the PCUSA and removing the constitutional requirement for fidelity in marriage or chastity in singleness, LWF felt that a line had been crossed for them. They began to investigate options other than remaining within the PCUSA. Considering Options After the resignation of Pastors Allen and Debbie Kemp in 2011, LWF asked Carlos Ortiz to serve as their Interim Pastor, and Heather Brown Huston (minister member of HRP) was asked to serve as Moderator of the Session. Carlos and Heather have worked faithfully and diligently over the last 18-20 months, leading the Session and congregation through a period of discernment about their future. In January 2013, the LWF Session requested that a Discernment Team from the presbytery be named to work with them in this process. In February 2013, a Discernment Team from the presbytery was named: Rev. Scott Ramsey, chair; Rev. Heather Brown Huston, moderator; Ruling Elder Jim Waters from Nauraushaun Presbyterian; Ruling Elder Judith Anderson from 1 st Presbyterian, Denton; and Ruling Elder Susan Rice, from Living Waters Fellowship. The Discernment Team began meeting with the Session in March 2013, and have met with them regularly since then. During this discernment period, two primary questions have occupied the Session. (1) Shall Living Waters Fellowship remain as a PCUSA congregation? (2) If not, with which denomination shall we affiliate? A clear answer emerged to the first question, based upon years of prayerful consideration. The Session was unanimous in its desire for LWF to leave the PCUSA. In conversations with the full congregation, this desire to leave the PCUSA has also been made evident. It was clear to the Discernment Team that staying in the PCUSA was not a viable option for the congregation. 3
There was less clarity about the second question of where to go. The congregation explored a variety of options. They investigated aligning themselves with the Evangelical Covenant Order (ECO),a new denomination organized in 2012, and sent representatives to a national conference about ECO. They investigated aligning themselves with the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC), as other congregations from HRP have done. And they began having conversations with the All Souls Church of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). These explorations have occupied the leadership of LWF for the better part of the last year. There was a good theological fit between LWF and ECO. This theological fit generated some enthusiasm. However, their sense was that the majority of ECOaffiliated congregations were outside the Northeast, which would have left them geographically isolated. Further, it would not have addressed their financial difficulties (more on that shortly). There was a somewhat good fit between LWF and the EPC. However, with the EPC, they would have faced some of the same challenges as with ECO (geographical isolation and continued financial difficulty). In addition to their theological disagreements with HRP and PCUSA, another significant feature of the life of LWF in the last few years has been financial struggles. Since the departure of Allen and Debbie Kemp, the congregation has been in a state of severe financial difficulty. They have begun laying off staff in order to stay afloat. Significant repairs to their property have been deferred and gone undone. Because of deferred maintenance, it is roughly estimated that there are between $150,000 - $200,000 of repairs that need to be made to the property. Some of these repairs are urgent; others are less so. But significant work needs to be done to the property. There was a growing sense among the leadership at LWF that, unless they discovered a new option, their congregation did not have a future. Life with All Souls Church In 2012, a conversation began between members of LWF and Pastor Will Reinmuth of All Souls Community Church in Nanuet, NY. These conversations grew out of shared ministry experiences (largely through Young Life and other mission efforts) between some of the leaders at LWF and Pastor Reinmuth. All Souls Church (ASC) was, at the time, a PCA church plant, affiliated with Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City. They were renting space in a local school. A number of the members of All Souls were new to the Christian faith, while many of the members and leaders of LWF had been Christians for a long time. There began to be a sense that a possibility might be emerging for the two congregations to merge and to share their mutual gifts with each other. All Souls did not initiate these conversations. They did not come to LWF, looking to take over a church property. The conversations emerged and developed, and both groups sensed a possibility. On more than one occasion, the leadership of All 4
Souls has communicated with LWF that, if LWF is allowed to leave with the property, that would be great. But they are interested in them as people, and not just as a piece of property. They are committed to a merger, with or without the property. However, there were some concerns on the part of LWF. Chief among these was the fact that the Presbyterian Church in America, of which All Souls is a part, does not ordain women to leadership. LWF had enjoyed and benefited from the leadership of Rev. Debbie Kemp for more than 20 years, and a significant number of the ruling elders at LWF are women. This issue was a difficult one for many, and different people have responded to it differently. As the conversation has progressed, one elder has resigned with regret because he could not in good conscience participate in a church that does not ordain women to leadership. Some of the female elders have expressed that, because of their reading of Scripture, they have always had some misgivings about women serving in positions of authority in the church. As a result, they are comfortable with moving to a denomination that does not ordain women. Other elders (both female and male elders) have indicated that, while they disagree with this particular position of the PCA, they feel that the other benefits of affiliating with All Souls Church outweigh their disagreements. And they have felt that their overall beliefs are much more in line with the overall beliefs and positions of the PCA, than they are in line with the beliefs/positions of the PCUSA. Because the PCA is a denomination that stands in the theological stream that flows from John Calvin, and because they are governed by the Westminster Standards (i.e., Westminster Confession of Faith, the Westminster Shorter Catechism, and the Westminster Larger Catechism), the Discernment Team/Administrative Commission is satisfied that the PCA is a Reformed body, whose polity is consistent in form and structure with that of the PCUSA. The motto of the PCA is "Faithful to the Scriptures, True to the Reformed faith, Obedient to the great commission of Jesus Christ. Clearly, there are significant differences between our denominations - chief among them our differences regarding the ordination of women and the ordination of gay and lesbian persons. However, we are satisfied that there is sufficient commonality for HRP to dismiss, and for the PCA to receive, the LWF congregation. Further, we are satisfied that the PCA is of sufficient permanence that we are not dismissing LWF to de facto independence. Another concern, which they have continued to work on, has been how to effectively merge the cultures of two congregations, one of which is an older congregation (LWF) with declining energy but seasoned wisdom, and one of which is a younger congregation (ASC) with greater energy. A transition team has been put into place to manage this process of merging the two congregations. Members of the presbytery s Discernment Team have shared with the Session and congregation at LWF our own concerns about this merger. In particular, we have shared with them our concerns about the unwillingness of the PCA to ordain women, 5
and our grief that their own female elders are giving up a significant dimension of their authority. However, we also recognize and appreciate the real sense of energy that members of LWF feel about the possibility of this merger. They sense a genuine renewal in the life of their congregation, a renewal in which they will benefit from enlivened worship in the new congregation, from the number of young adults in the new congregation, and from the ways they will be able to contribute to the new congregation. We are making this recommendation, therefore, with a real sense of hope and expectation for the future of the congregation, as well as a real sense of grief. We are grieving the ending of the relationship between LWF and HRP. We are grieving their women elders giving up their ordination. But we also sense that this merger offers a real and genuine path forward for this congregation, and that these recommendations offer a way to end the broken relationship between LWF and HRP with grace. Gracious Dismissal Process In 2008, the General Assembly encouraged presbyteries and synods to develop and make available to lower governing bodies and local congregations a process that exercises the responsibility and power to divide, dismiss, or dissolve churches in consultation with their members with consistency, pastoral responsibility, accountability, gracious witness, openness, and transparency. In 2012-2013, the HRP Committee on Ministry began to develop proposed Gracious Dismissal Guidelines. However, it became clear that there was a wide variety of opinions about those guidelines within the presbytery. And in the fall of 2013, the Synod PJC ruled in the case of McGee v. Presbytery of New York City that the Gracious Dismissal Policy of the Presbytery of NYC (which bore some similarities to COM s proposed Gracious Dismissal Guidelines) was unconstitutional. This denominational turbulence has made it somewhat difficult to achieve clarity about the process, and about what ought to happen. However, the Discernment Team has taken the word Gracious in Gracious Dismissal seriously. We have sought to facilitate an outcome that would be reasonable, fair, and gracious to the various parties involved. Because of the painful history and acrimonious relationship between the presbytery and LWF, this has been challenging. We have also taken the word Discernment in the name of our team seriously. We have sought to discern what God wants in this process, not simply what the presbytery wants or what LWF wants. We do not make any presumptuous claim that we have conclusively and definitively arrived at God s will. But our desire all along the way has been to discern God s will for the presbytery, for LWF, and for the property. When it became clear that a heavy majority of the Session was in favor of merging with ASC, a congregational meeting was called in June, 2013 to discuss and vote on whether LWF should seek Gracious Dismissal from PCUSA with the property, 6
in order to merge into All Souls Community Church of the PCA. The Discernment Team was present at this meeting to moderate and answer questions. This was a straw poll to give the Discernment Team a formal sense of whether the congregation as a whole supported this direction. 86% of those present voted affirmatively. This percentage was judged by the Discernment Team to be high enough to proceed with the process of determining appropriate Terms of Dismissal. A key piece of the Terms of Dismissal would have to do with the property. Shall LWF be permitted to leave with the property, and if so, what payment shall they make to the presbytery in consideration of the property?the Trust Clause in the Book of Order, states, All property held by or for a congregation, a presbytery, a synod, the General Assembly, or the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), whether legal title is lodged in a corporation, a trustee or trustees, or an unincorporated association, and whether the property is used in programs of a congregation or of a higher council or retained for the production of income, is held in trust nevertheless for the use and benefit of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) (G-4.0203) Ultimately, in PCUSA polity, a congregation s property does not belong to the congregation, but is held in trust for the larger denomination, of which we are a part. The Discernment Team also realizes that a particular congregation (e.g., LWF) has deep historical, emotional, and spiritual ties to the property in which they have been located. We have sought to balance our appreciation for their connection to the property with our appreciation for the fact that the property belongs to the PCUSA (recognizing, of course, that all property church property or otherwise belongs not to us, but to God). The practical way that we have sought to strike that balance has been through having the congregation make some payment to the presbytery in consideration of their property. The proposed terms of dismissal are based upon consideration of a variety of issues related to LWF s circumstances. With respect to financial issues, the assessed value of the LWF property for town tax purposes was $448,400. LWF also paid for a fair-market value appraisal of their property by a presbytery-recommended appraisal service (Certified Appraisal Services of Middletown, NY). The fair market value of the property was determined to be $1.55 million. Because of the wide discrepancy in the values, the DT/AC determined that using either of these values as the sole basis for payment to the presbytery was not sufficient. In conversations with LWF, it became very clear that the largest financial payment they could make at this time was $100,000. Because of their financial constraints, they simply do not have any more money available at this time. As stated earlier in this report, the payments to HRP will come in two stages. The $100,000 initial payment will include full payment of unpaid Per Capita ($37,058.63, through 2014) and any costs incurred by HRP for legal fees and other expenses pertaining to this transaction, with the balance of the initial $100,000 payment applied to the property. We anticipate that when HRP receives the LWF-share of a trust (which is currently in the name of Suffern Presbyterian Church, dba Living Waters Fellowship), and that 7
amount is applied to the property, the total amount paid to HRP in consideration of the property should be about $100,000 (assuming no significant change in the current trust value), or approximately 10% of the average between the appraised market value and the assessed value for tax purposes. On November 17, 2013, the LWF congregation voted 42 to 8, with 1 abstention, to seek gracious dismissal from the PCUSA with the property, using these Terms of Dismissal. Pastoral Care All change creates anxiety in systems. Through the processes described above, it became clear to the Discernment Team and to all the congregation that significant change of one sort or another was ahead for LWF. Thus, anxiety in the LWF congregational system was quite high. The Discernment Team focused on providing information and pastoral care to the congregation and leaders through this lengthy and sometimes unsettling discernment process. This included balancing the needs of those in favor of the PCA option, who were eager to move rapidly towards what they saw as opportunities to grow in ministry and faith, and the needs of those who were unsure and needed unrushed time to ask questions, reflect and pray about their sense of God s call to the congregation. Thus, the discernment for the congregation took almost a year. Both Session and then the Discernment Team sponsored numerous information sessions and congregational discussions in 2013 presenting the PCA option and other options to the congregation, allowing for questions and answers in large group and smaller group settings. Regular correspondence providing information about the potential decisions was made through bulletin announcements and inserts, announcements in worship by the elders and the moderator, email notifications, occasional sermon content, newsletter articles and all-congregation mailings. Pastor Carlos Ortiz and Moderator Brown-Huston also spent extensive time counseling with individuals regarding each individual s discernment processes both for the direction God was calling LWF to and was calling those individuals to in the future. Once the June 2013 straw poll vote was held, indicating a strong inclination towards exploring gracious dismissal and the ASC merger, the Discernment Team and Session worked collaboratively for LWF members to be fully informed about the potential decision and provide opportunities for individuals to explore whether the proposed congregational merger with ASC was a good option for LWF, and, as a separate question with a possibly different answer, whether each individual felt ASC was right for them. The activities described above continued, and additionally a Transition Team formed to review concerns specific to the process of potentially merging two congregations from different denominations. The Transition Team comprised of LWF moderator and elders and ASC pastor and elders arranged social gatherings, information sessions, and opportunities for congregation members to share together in fellowship, worship and ministry and sense if this connection was a good fit 8
for both sides. The leadership and congregation considered the difference in congregational culture and leadership, the changes and losses, as well as gains that both congregations would face through this merger. The LWF Personnel and Property committees worked under the advice of the Discernment Team and moderator to counsel with all church employees and all outside groups about the potential end to their relationships to LWF and to provide support and guidance for them as well. The 2013 McGee v. NYC ruling required that the Discernment Team pay special pastoral attention to the needs of all congregation members, particularly to any who might want to remain in the PCUSA as a faithful remnant. To this end, in October 2013, letters went to the 104 active members on the rolls of LWF, asking them whether they wish to go to the PCA or whether they wish to remain in the PCUSA. Only five persons indicated a wish to remain in the PCUSA (three in writing through the letter, two additional through personal conversation with the moderator). These five have been individually counseled that as the faithful remnant they have a financial right to the property in order to continue a ministry in the PCUSA. All have indicated that direction is not their desire. Two (a candidate under care of HRP and that candidate s spouse) wish to remain on the rolls of presbytery until the candidate receives a call to ordained ministry. Two others have likewise indicated a desire to remain on the rolls of the presbytery, while they continue to discern where they are being called. Accommodations to receive these persons in local PCUSA congregations if desired will be handled by the Administrative Commission. The Administrative Commission will continue to work with these individuals to discern where God is calling them, whether to affiliate with another congregation in the presbytery or some other possibility.29 of the letters received no response, including 13 certified letters which were mailed when letters could not be delivered in person. The results of the October 2013 survey letter were confirmed in the November 17, 2013, congregational vote, when 82% of the 51 present voted to seek gracious dismissal with the property and merge into ASC. Eight negative votes were cast, and the moderator urged repeatedly that those who dissented stay to meet with members of AC for counsel about further options. Four remained, all of whose views were previously known through to the AC the survey letter, and were counseled. The few remaining negative voters are unknown, as the written ballot is anonymous, and so unfortunately, any further personal pastoral care cannot be offered unless these members identify themselves to the AC. Altogether, the pastoral care of this congregation indicates that the vast majority are ready to seek gracious dismissal and discern God s call to them to worship and serve in this new Reformed context. Those who do not feel called to make that transition to ASC are aware of the ways that the Administrative Commission can continue to shepherd them until they are settled into new church homes. 9
Summary The Administrative Commission makes these recommendations with a heavy, but hopeful, heart. Our heart is heavy because of the seriousness with which we have taken this situation. The pain on all sides of this situation is significant. There is anger, resentment, grief, and confusion on the part of many in LWF and on the part of many in HRP. However, we also make these recommendations with hope hope for the renewed life of LWF as they merge into All Souls Church; hope for a gracious resolution to a broken relationship; and hope for our continued, common Christian witness in our region. Respectfully submitted, Administrative Commission for Living Waters Fellowship Teaching Elder Scott Ramsey, Germonds Presbyterian Church, chair Ruling Elder Judith Anderson, 1 st Presbyterian Church, Denton Teaching Elder Heather Brown Huston, Moderator, LWF Ruling Elder Caroline Osinga, Living Waters Fellowship Ruling Elder Jim Waters, Nauraushaun Presbyterian Church 10