News & Events

Assembly begins with presentation by Lynn Paterson of Tearfund. Focus on Uganda and recent troubles. Tragic stories of real people having lost loved ones.

Report of Board of Trustees - James Fraser.

You can find his address HERE

Questions…..
Dr Iain D Campbell. Legal action in Peru. Can we have update - financial implcations?
A: we wish to avoid legal action and are trying to pursue a process of discussion. We cant talk numbers.

Report moved and seconded.

Three amendments

1) Re Bonar Bridge. Pg 19 petition. Wants to change deliverance to : proceeds of sale to held in behoof of the congregation - ie congregation to have access to funds.

2) Identical in principle to 1) - this time in resepct of Kilwinning. Dr Ian Maciver.

3) Angus Howat. Asking BoT to combine the Nominations Committee with the Assembly Arrangements Committee.
Speakers.

Charles Douglas.
re pg 12 - pension fund. wanted to draw attention of asembly to work of pension committee - commends their work.
Also pg 17 = 16 North Bank St - plans to change it into a cafe/bookshop. asks prayer for this new venture.

Peter Morrison.
Strategy Committee. Refers to survey of Presbyteries. Report went down to Presbyteries. There is frustration at how presbyteries handle their business. constitues a serious hindrance to work of church. This is golden opp to redress matters.
Highlight two things from deliversance.
Quinquennial vistations: Presbyteries listen to reports and do nothing. These visits are key tool.
Assembly deliverance items to sessions. We JUST note them. Not good. We should take decisions of Assys seriously. NB the word INSTRUCT. 

The superior court. ie General Assembly. Significant progress has been made.
However we had to admit defeat on the respresentation of elders of working age. We must keep this discussion going.

We have to pay attention to find interface between “process” and “intended outcomes.” One request: keep discussions open.
Finally : commend work of strategy committee

Donald Jack. speaks of grants available to congregations who have major repairs. There are varous bodies who give grants to charities. wanted to know if the BoT can themselves apply for grants whilst giving grants to individual congregations. THinks there should be ATMs in every congregation.

Callum Iain Macleod.
- re b4 - guidance for contributors. Wants to highlight the helful leaflet on “giving” - published recently. Thanks to Bob Akroyd for creating it.

Clive Bailey
Thanks the convenor for his kind words about Colegio in LIma. The increase in finances of the scholl is not just down to me but staff - 110 of them who have contributed to the well being of school. One in particular : Maria Rodrigues - shes at the coal face of financial turn around and I record my thanks to her. She took finan cial decisions which we would find painful. For example it was the practice of parents to defer as long as possible what they paid. This led to debt of alarming proportion. The decision was taken not to allow children to retun to school if in debt. I feared that a lot of children would not return BUT only two did not return. We have now shrunk debt to less than 1 %. Thank you for your support.

James Beaton
- speaks about Dr Maciver’s amendment.

Colin Macdonald
Draw attention to Compliance section. Thanks Muriel Macleod.
Points to legislation on vulnerable adults. Message must get over to church about what it required. We must ask co-ordinators to share this around with elders etc. Have to make risk assesment as to who applies in first and second year.
Training is huge problem. Not going ahead at present but we ve arrangement with CoS.
Another area: how we deal with ex offenders in congregations. we have made up pack for that. Call Muriel if problem. There is procedure.
We are all responsible for protection of vulnerable in congregations.

Colin Dow
Our Deacons Court was going to be petitioning the GA to pull back proceeds of a sale from Trustees BUT not any more. Our minds changed by letter from Rod who assured us that the Trustees are investing money wisely. 

Angus M Macleod
Remittances of congregations. Lots of congregations which are not self sustaining and cannot afford their ministries. We should take seriosuly leaflet on tithing. We currently contribute 5% of our incomes. If we were tithing, we would create more than £5 mil. Our defecit would be cleared overnight.
pg 27 law and advice. Buildings held by FCC. eg Scalpay where we worship in draughty building because FCC have taken ours over. They also froze 80,000 assets and offered to pay us the amount plus 20k if we would hand over the title deeds of the building. Calls for a composite demand for return of all buildings from FCC - for all buildings.

Murdo Murchison
Pays tribute to work of Rod Morrison. An unsung hero.
A few years ago I wasnt convinced about the selling of the flats. But now Ive come round to see how difficult it is to keep them.
Im concerned about taking money from secular trusts who have a humanist agenda.
Real challenges lie ahead financially for the church.
Speaks about a fellowship meeting they started in their house 5 years ago. You might be able to do similar thing. Once every month. supper at 8:30 after church. then singing followed by speaker (a variety) giving testimony. then questions. we get around 35-50 attending.

David Lipp
re amendment of Dr Ian Maciver. How many large sums of money are there in congregtional accounts which are doing nothing?

James Fraser - replies and sums up
- is happy to accept all amendments.
Comments on two themes:
1) Income. Glad that leaflet has gone down well. Would be great if tithing became reality.
2) Capital. we do not give grants. we give loans. Access to money is available according to the relevant Assembly Acts.
Im also please with continuing to centrally hold fulds.

Close.

DIscussion Session. Item for discsion is starred on page 11. Finance overview.

Afternoon Session

The following debate concerns the decision taken last November at the Plenary Assembly which allows congregations to use hymns and musical instruments if their sessions so wish.
There are several overtures asking the Assembly to send the decision down through the Barrier Act so that Presbyteries can discuss and approve or otherwise.

There are five overtures.
1) Synod of N America
2) Western Isles
3) Glasgow
4) Kirk Session of Lochs Free Church
5) Kirk Session of KNockbain Free Church

(BA = Barrier Act)

1) Synod of N America. 
Rev KD Macleod.My heart is heavy. I disagreed with Novembers plenary. And the way it was done. Importance of the Barrier Act. It is safety net. Not designed to slow things up. Specifically it recognises that the Assy does not have lordly binding powers. It is possible that as Assy can be influenced powerfully by gifted men. After Nov we empowered ourselves to do away with the Barrier Act. The BA reaches more respresentation with the feedback coming to the next Assy as a stronger opinion of the church. It doesnt take it all away from the Assy - it is then better equipped to take decision.
The setting of the presbytery is more free for men to ask questions.
Youre saying that this is not an issue. But when it is a matter that threatens you it then becomes an issue. IE we have set a precident. I plead with you - do not get rid of the safety net.

Questions?
Marcus Florit. Are you aware that 25% of the presbyteries have a tiny number of congregations? I cant help that.

David Lipp: Plenary had all ministers and equal number of elders. why then speak about representation? A: more elders are in presbytery.

Gordon Matheson: are you aware that the 1910 act is the only act in our history under BA? Yes
did you vote for a motion which would have repealed the 1910 Act? Yes.

End of Quesions

2) Western Isles. Callum Macleod.
1) The appointement of 2010 P Assy - there is a notable silence with regard to BA. How do we interpret this silence. BA is default position. Was also reflected in the advice given by clerk. Letter from Board of Trustees stated clearly that there would be BA. Quotes from letter.  IE this was our understanding when we established Pl Assy. There was to be no debiation from establshed procedure.
2) Terms of BA is sudden alteration. Was the decision of Nov a sudden alteration - yes. The possibility of change was there but details and natire of change was not known until 16th Nov - 2 days before Pl ssy convened. Change is sudden - hence should be BA. Can the decision be considered as a binding rule? Every officebearer asked to assert maintain…. - touches matters constitutional. Should hence have been sent to Presbt under BA. Was the decison a major alteration? The decision has virtually wiped the slate clean. Quotes Kennedy Cameron. Change is sweeping.
The mind of the church. Quotes the BA itself. All ministers and ruling elders are entitled to judge for themselves. A plenary Assy comes far short of the BA. A large number have not had the opportunity to judge for themselves. This is a plea to restore ecclesiastical order in order for peace and harmony.

Questions….
David Meredith. Would you say that your suggestion - that all ministers within a presbytery have a say - is a radical departure? A: I’m only quoting from the practice.
Q: But you were saying that presbyteries should consist of every elder? A: No. Only that every elder should have right to judge.
Q: Can you show us the constitutional documents? A: I believe that the BA is part of constitution. Q: Didn’t answer the question. What are constitutional docs?
Donald Macdonald (Retired) comes forward and states what constitutional docs are. But can’t remember source of info.

3) Presbytery of Glasgow. Alex Cowie.
Speaks to paragraphs 2 and 3.
This overture is not perfect, but seeks to correct wrong procedure. We all owe to church our agreed procedures.
Hope we will achieve workable procedure.
Plenary Assemby met “as appointed”. This happened because the GA decided it should. But it went down under BA. The BA was basis of the Plenary Assembly. Thereafter, the GA of 2009 said the matter was to be decided at the 2010 November Plenary Assembly.
Did the Plenary Assembly have power to make the change? Big may mean better, but did it have power to put into effect a change like this?
The usual standing orders governing a GA were to be the basis governing the Plenary Assembly. I know of no legislation which altered that finding.
I think the BA is the simple route. Plenary only applies to the number of representatives. Not to its powers to do what it likes. The BA is used regularly to prevent innovation and securing harmony.
There is no suggestion of the BA being used to bring us back to the pre-Plenary situation.

Questions:
Daniel Sladek: I was always under the impression that because the Plenary Assembly was called under BA, what was the point in havng a Plenary, if its decisions were to go down under BA?
A: To be more representative.

Question: Would this not take us back to pre-Plenary? A: That would not be realistic.
Colin MacDonald: Did the previous GA not ask the Plenary to dispose of? Does not that means what it says? A: This is exactly where the problem came from. These words were taken as full authority.

Colin Dow: Is there a higher court in church than GA? And if it is the highest court, how can it be said to have acted ultra vires? A: The Plenary took to itself authority it was not given.

Norman Smith: Can the Chair and Principal Clerk give us their interpretation of what was done?  A: The decision lies with the Assembly.

4)  Lochs Session. Murdo Macleod.
Don’t want to repeat what has been said. There are many who could live better with the decision if there was confidence in the decision. They are looking for clarity. Not just about the decision, but about the enactment. If we go back to 2010 GA, I understand that it instructed two things: 1. The BoT produce a report and 2. the Plenary be appointed “to dispose” of it. This happened, and Plenary Assembly met and decided not in favour of the BoT, but counter motion. Hence, the point is competence to “enact” this motion. The decision was taken on the basis that BA HAD BEEN fulfilled. But there is a process of referral in getting approval. Consultation involves bodies with right to be consulted. This is not consultation - this is requirement for approval. Presbyteries have right to receive the proposal in form of overture. Presbyteries deferred debating the matter until such time as this proposal came to them. It didn’t come. In my view, this has not passed the required tests. Many of our people are not clear - hence, I can do no other but support motion that the decision was ultra vires. Organisations which try to bypass legislations always stumble.

No Questions.

ORDER OF DAY

Delegates:

Mr Ian Gordon (Chief Executive of Bethany Chritian Trust)

Rev. Gareth Burke (Evangelical Presbyterian Church of Ireland)

Rev. Prof. A. le Dries du Plooy (Reformed Churches in S. Africa)

Return to Previous Issue…
4) Petition from Knockbain Free Church - Farquhar Renwick
When the Plenary Assembly was discussed at Inverness Presbytery, I had questions: is it able to override the BA? The answer was NO. There wasn’t an option. We were reinforced by the fact that there was only one issue. The standing orders were same. Can only agree to submit same in form of overture. We were told by Chair of BoT that if Plenary resolved to change, then it would come down through BA.
We as a Presbytery made a decsion (before Plenary) that we would not discuss this major issue because it would be discussed when it came back to presbyteries under BA.
We acted on basis of what chair of BoT said - we unanimously agreed. A great deal has been made of spirit of Plenary. But my position is : I decided not to say anything - I agree that I miscalculated. But I bit my tongue because I told myself there was the cushion of the BA. Was this right? It was wrong to say it has to come back down and then for the Plenary to say no. I hear people say there was no sudden innovation. If it had come down to BA, we would have had year to reflect. We have had people leave our denomination. I would have thought that we of all denominations should have been meticulous? How does the person know what the minister believes with respect to worship? - Only in his vows. Their meaning has been changed. We have broken covenant.
We have to decide important matter: whether it’s going to put seal of approval on something fundamentally wrong. I trust this will not happen.

Questions:
D. Meredith. Give background to your statements about the Inverness Presbytery. A: The reality is that we have never discussed worship at Inverness. 

Moderator: It is not helpful to refer to specific people who make motions - just their decisions.

Farquhar: Wanted to ask the Moderator about his advice in November. Moderator repeated his advice, but also said that the Plenary should decide.

Walter Matheson: wants to quote from BoT report to Plenary, which said that it was up to Plenary to decide the matter of BA. Farquhar said that he was unaware that this issue may not come down via BA.

Break for Dinner…

To resume again at 6:30pm.

Moderator opens sederunt by reading 1 Thes 4.

Please see separate update for Wednesday Evening Report.