The General Assembly - a fine fickle beauty?

 Another day and another question arrives to make my brain ponder… it does help I am on holiday…😉 

Is it the powers that be that are unwilling or unable to change?

 

There is much in this question and doubtful if I could do it justice here. It is a great question often asked and for sure let me admit my own complicity in perpetuating its underlying premise. 

You see on the one hand powers that be have power because we give them power. And yet on the other hand, in Presbyterian style, they believe we hold the power. How often it is said that the General Assembly can help or hinder yet many commissioners feel powerless with most decisions already made? It is a catch 22 of our own making. And one we seem unable to unlock despite good intentions. 

My mother says of me that if there is an easy way or a hard way to do something I will choose the hard way! I get the same result, I just didn’t make it easy! Perhaps a way to understand the problem is the conversation over hybrid meetings. The counter motion was raised about reviewing how successful/useful the hybrid element of holding the GA was and to bring the review to the GA2023. Regardless of the outcome of the review the 2023 GA should be in-person only. The mover of this motion was trying to be helpful and indeed his counter motion opened the floor up to feedback very well. All of us have an opinion on the hybrid setup whether we get it or not. 

Nevertheless it is a perfect example of how we hamstring ourselves. The review had to come to the next GA and it must be in-person only with future years possibly hybrid should the review suggest it. Why? Why do 600+ people need to sign off on the review? Can such a review be done, a short paper made available to the interested tech geeks (eg posted on the GA 2022 follow up webpage when such a thing appears) and a decision made without it needing to return to the GA floor first? 

Therefore, the powers that be is more often than not a mythical creature known as the General Assembly, a fine fickle beauty whose mood is elusive and outcomes often pedantic, occasionally joyous, and perhaps exploited by those with inside knowledge. 

And that meandering tour of power leads me to change and indeed our ability to change or not.  We adapt but rarely do we change. It is far easier to adapt because that requires only incremental change.  Change happens but in small ways; a day less, the use of videos, even the use of zoom and hub were adaptations not change. 

Currently some of the most influential voices in the change happening in the church will not be responsible for its outcomes, even its success or failure. They will have retired (or have already) whilst others try to navigate their vision and its consequences which if we are honest is also a repeated cycle. Again a power imbalance and a hereditary issue long in the making. Each generation wants its opportunity to leave its mark or legacy reflected in many institutions and congregations. And let’s not forget we are not the only membership driven institution to be struggling in this era. 

For change to happen arguably we need to listen to the voices of those who will pioneer, who will hear God’s voice calling them to another place and be willing to up sticks and go. The ones who will have to live with the change, lead the change, and guide institution into a new era should be the ones who carry the most influence now. 

Yet most of them are silenced for they are neither seen nor heard.  As was repeatedly stated our inability to change our working practices or structures excludes them.  Nor will they self select because they don’t see themselves reflected in the key decision making groups. Whether we like to admit it or not we will repeatedly put a grey haired white male in the hot seat of authority, and easily justify the choice. To be fair many of them are lovely and indeed talented faith filled people. But kind of like a kidnap victim gets Stockholm syndrome, those who stray too close to the epicentre of an institution - well let’s just say they become embedded within it. Plus it is hard the push something over from the centre. Much easier from the edges…so do we really want to put the pioneers of change in the centre? Hmm…

Truly for power to be asserted and change to happen we need to embrace the generational characteristics of now and tomorrow. 

What if we had more faith in the ‘other’ and saw the strength in collaborating and sharing decision making? What if we did pick a 40-something over a 60-something? What if instead of national committees/forums holding the floor of the GA, the presbyteries presented the work of the wider church and the General Assembly was a place of power sharing and resource management! 

We, me, hold the power and we choose how to use it. Maybe the real change will happen when we take the power back and  are resourced not controlled by the centre. There must be a reason why Jesus said ‘take nothing except that which you wear’. 

Until then we will adapt but not change, survive but not thrive.