tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7560220615271337359.post7430417944083316868..comments2024-03-12T08:04:47.314-07:00Comments on Naming His Grace: Commissioners in the lions' den?Viola Larsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09146967423654966140noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7560220615271337359.post-75327168125178233012014-06-17T16:07:29.596-07:002014-06-17T16:07:29.596-07:00In Committee 4, at least, it rather looks like the...In Committee 4, at least, it rather looks like the lions won.will spottshttp://wspotts.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7560220615271337359.post-42887328516815293862014-06-17T13:40:43.598-07:002014-06-17T13:40:43.598-07:00Thanks, Jim. I think that explains the phenomenon...Thanks, Jim. I think that explains the phenomenon pretty well.<br /><br />But the patent unfairness and appalling corruption of it still stinks rather strongly.will spottshttp://wspotts.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7560220615271337359.post-9211424547788240702014-06-17T11:29:39.414-07:002014-06-17T11:29:39.414-07:00Will, I think it is a naïve niceness on the part o...Will, I think it is a naïve niceness on the part of commissioners, who are nearly all rookies. Commissioners come with practically no experience; the staff and wonks of GA bring all kinds of experience with which to run things to get the result they believe to be best. Naiveté meets a political machine, and the political machine wins.<br /><br />Commissioners are unsure and tentative, so the sure hand of experience and greater knowledge and power seems like a good thing to follow. Basically, commissioners roll over and let the establishment herd them wherever it wants to take them. It's kindness and misplaced trust on the part of the commissioners. They don't want to rock the boat, and they're not sure what they believe or how things ought to go. Along comes an "expert" to tell them, and they get into line to follow.<br /><br />The two easiest things for a GA to do are: 1) follow the direction given by those in charge (who are assumed to know better) or 2) put off any major decision to the next GA, after an expensive (and usually rigged) special committee or task force arrives at foregone conclusions.<br /><br />It's not necessarily evil. After all, what pastor goes into a session meeting with no plan for how he or she hopes business items are resolved? Those who live all week, all month, all biennium with issues definitely have their opinions about what OUGHT to be decided, unless something goes wrong. It would be wonderful if wise, deeply biblical, can't-go-wrong leaders could put in place a smooth process for God-honoring decisions to naturally emerge. GA could convene, marvel at what plans brilliant and dedicated servants of the church have come up with, rubberstamp the plans without much fuss, and see the sights of whatever city in which GA is held.<br /><br />But the reality is that power bases deeply entrenched in the structures of the PCUSA bring to GA an agenda that most evangelicals simply cannot be comfortable with. So GA becomes a biennial battle. The great problem is that GA is anything but fair! The entrenched powers get the free publicity, an enormously bloated amount of time before the commissioners to make their case, advocates with "expert" hats to bolster their case, and the impetus of leaders at every level vigorously pushing the agenda. The evangelical faithful have none of these advantages. The playing field becomes an inclined funnel that leads toward the goal box that evangelicals try desperately to defend. It quickly becomes a losing proposition.<br /><br />Jim Berkley<br />Roslyn, WAJim Berkleynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7560220615271337359.post-43908488053350841502014-06-17T09:52:05.793-07:002014-06-17T09:52:05.793-07:00Jim - you are right. That is the way it has been ...Jim - you are right. That is the way it has been in my observation (admittedly, over a much briefer period than yours).<br /><br />But that is immoral, unethical, and unchristian. So why do you suppose it is that Presbyterians tolerate it? <br /><br />Is it a dislike of conflict? Is it intimidation in the face of officials? Is it denial - it is bad, and it is about the PC(USA) - therefore it can't really be happening ...? Is it stupidity? <br /><br />I don't get it.will spottshttp://wspotts.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7560220615271337359.post-43794219980492436962014-06-17T01:11:31.075-07:002014-06-17T01:11:31.075-07:00This is SUCH typical politicking at GA's uneve...This is SUCH typical politicking at GA's uneven playing field. Add up the time that non-commissioner voices have had the ear of the committee to argue divestment, and compare it to the time anti-divestment voices have been heard, and it would probably be on the order of 10:1. GA is so very much controlled by special interests that have an inside track on power. They get all the breaks, nearly all the precious time to make their case, and everyone's money to work with. This is an excellent case in point.Jim Berkley, Roslyn, WAnoreply@blogger.com