MINUTES OF THE STATED MEETING
PRESBYTERY OF GREATER ATLANTA
February 8, 2014
Memorial Drive Presbyterian Church, Stone Mountain, GA
INTRODUCTORY MATERIAL
Moderator John Fountain opened the meeting with prayer at 9:00 am. George Tatro, pastor of Memorial
Drive Church welcomed the body. Stated Clerk, Donna Wells declared a quorum.
WORSHIP
Worship began with a procession of the validated ministers of the Presbytery. Together we affirmed in a litany
of thanksgiving for validated ministers.
Kate McGregor Mosley preached a sermon entitled “Spiritual Gifts”.
Rev. Rob Sparks was installed as the Moderator of the Presbytery.
An offering of $2561.97 was received to benefit the Pastor’s fund for emergencies.
The meeting concluded with the commissioners writing on strips of cloth their spiritual gifts which will be
woven together into a quilt by the group Re: loom. This quilt will be presented at the next presbytery meeting.
COMMUNICATIONS
For Information:
1. The Presbytery of Santa Barbara has concurred with our overtures regarding background checks and
renunciation as well as concurring with the similar overture on renunciation originating from the
Presbytery of Western Reserve.
2. The Stated Clerk has received correspondence from the session of Oak Mountain Presbyterian Church
requesting their desire to engage in the Gracious Separation Process. This has been referred to the
Committee on Ministry who has appointed the following members for the PET team: Rev. Amy Arnold,
Greenville; Elder Dennis Blackmon, Carrollton; and Rev. Sandi Wilmesherr, Summit of South Fayette.
Admit to Record:
1. That the minutes of the ordination of Alison Leigh Campbell to specialized ministry be admitted to
record. The ordination took place at Central Presbyterian Church in Atlanta, GA on October 27, 2013.
2. That the following people served on the commission to ordain Carolyn Christie as a contract call
associate pastor at Northminster Presbyterian Church on November 3, 2013:
Rev. Mark Lomax, First African Presbyterian Church
Rev. Jill Oglesby Evans, Emory Presbyterian Church
Rev. Robby Carroll, validated ministry
Rev. Patrick Day, Northminster Presbyterian Church
Elder David York, Central Presbyterian Church
Elder Betsy Smith, Shallowford Presbyterian Church
Elder Connie Conrad, Emory Presbyterian Church
3. That the minutes of the ordination of Carolyn Christie as a contract call associate pastor at
Northminster Presbyterian Church on November 3, 2013 be admitted to record.
4. That the following people served on the commission to install Carrie Ann Bowers as associate pastor of
Buford Presbyterian Church on November 24, 2013:
Rev. Corey Ingold, Buford Presbyterian Church
Rev. Lyndsay Slocum, Roswell Presbyterian Church
Rev. Kathy Dawson, validated ministry
Elder Dave Forder, Buford Presbyterian Church
Elder Kyle Kilch, Shallowford Presbyterian Church
Hamilton Barnes, Peachtree Presbyterian Church, Guest of the Commission
Dana Isaac, Buford Presbyterian Church, Guest of the Commission
5. That the minutes of the installation of Carrie Ann Bowers as associate pastor of Buford Presbyterian
Church on November 24, 2013 be admitted to record.
6. That the following people served on the commission to ordain Sunghee Hammersley to the validated
ministry of hospital chaplaincy on January 12, 2014. The ordination took place at Northside Hospital in
Atlanta, GA.:
Rev. Jonathan Ball, validated ministry
Rev. Elizabeth Luangphakdy, validated ministry
Rev. Jihyun Oh, validated ministry
Elder Sharon Gregory, Crossroads Presbyterian Church
Elder Mary Dyche, Morrow Presbyterian Church
The following were guests of the commission:
Amani Legagneur (United Church of Christ)
Brent Bond, South Baptist Convention
Mishella Williams, African Methodist Episcopal Church
Dave Zusmannts, Evangelical Lutheran Conference
Jason Hammersley, PCUSA
Neill Horner, Wesleyan
Heather Bardole, United Church of Christ
Maressa Penderman, Unity Fellowship Church
Sarah Reddish, CBF
Jeachue Kang, PCUSA
MyungJin Chae, PCUSA
7. That the minutes of the ordination of Sunghee Hammersley to the validated ministry of hospital
chaplaincy on January 12, 2014 be admitted to record.
8. Approve the commission to install Morgan Morse Hay as the pastor of First Presbyterian Church in
Peachtree City, GA on January 26, 2014:
Rev. Jan Tolbert, Carrollton Presbyterian Church
Rev. Tom Tewell, validated ministry
Rev. Leigh Jones, Presbyterian Church of the Resurrection
Elder Rebekah Hay Groover, Trinity Presbyterian Church
Elder Steve Pelham, LaGrange Presbyterian Church
Elder Phil Hamilton, First Church Peachtree City
9. Approve the commission to ordain Sharon Gregory to the validated ministry of hospital chaplaincy on
February 23, 2014. The ordination took place at Crossroads Presbyterian Church in Stone Mountain,
GA.
2
Rev. Karen Allamon, Rock Springs Presbyterian Church
Rev. Tom Hagood, Columbia Presbyterian Church
Rev. Sunghee Hammersley, validated ministry
Elder Nancy Hulse, Crossroads Presbyterian Church
Elder Zeena Regis, Oakhurst Presbyterian Church
Richard Allen Farmer, American Baptist, guest of the commission
Beth Leonard, Tapestry Church, Presbyterian Church of America, guest of the commission
Joan Stevens, North Georgia Presbytery, guest of the commission
For Recommendation:
1. That all minister members of the presbytery have the permission to serve communion in the context of a
presbytery related activity. (approved as part of the Omnibus motion.)
2. That the following items be approved as part of the Omnibus Motion:
Approval of February 8, 2014 docket
Approval of the November 14, 2013 minutes with typographical corrections
Approve the Teller Committee as members of Memorial Drive Church
Admit to Record items of the Communications Report
Admit to Record items of Committee on Ministry Report
Admit to Record items of the Committee on Preparation for Ministry Report
Admit to Record items of the Council Report
Admit to Record the Financial reports from Operations
Recommendation item from Communications (listed above)
Recommendation item #2 in Council report to elect members to the nominating committee
Recommendation items from the Nominating Committee
Recommendation to dissolve the Administrative Commission for Church of St. Andrew
The above motion was approved with no extractions.
COMMITTEE ON MINISTRY
Admit to Record:
1. Dissolve the pastoral relationship between Winston Lawson and Hillside Presbyterian Church and grant
him the status of Honorable Retirement. Effective date: January 31, 2014.
2. Appoint Marvin Simmers as moderator of Hillside Church until the time an interim is hired. Effective
date: February 1, 2014.
3. Dismiss Jason Hammersley to the Presbytery of Coastal Carolina in order that he may accept the call of
pastor to the Ebenezer Presbyterian Church in Coats, NC. Effective date: October 12, 2013.
4. Conclude the Interim contract between Barbara Hughes and Crossroads Presbyterian Church, effective
December 31, 2013 due to the calling of their new pastor.
5. Approve the following validated ministers with permission to labor outside our bounds: Simone Kim,
Meda Stamper.
6. Conclude the contract call associate relationship between David Carter Florence and Druid Hills
Church. Effective date: December 15, 2013.
3
7. Approve the movement of Billy Honor from Designated Pastor to Installed Pastor per congregational
vote. Effective date: December 1, 2013.
8. Approve the pastoral relationship between Richard Farmer (American Baptist) and the Crossroads
Church along with a COM covenant to be monitored by the Committee on Ministry. Effective date:
January 1, 2014.
a. Salary & Housing
55,000
b. SECA supplement
4,208
c. Medical Insurance
13,795
d. Life Insurance
550
e. Retirement
6,050
f. Auto/Travel
2,000
g. Continuing Education
1,000
h. Vacation is 4 weeks
i. Continuing education is 2 weeks
9. Appoint Roosevelt Winfrey as moderator of Crossroads Church. Effective date: January 6, 2014.
10. Approve the extension of the Commissioned Lay Pastor agreement between William L. Harris and the
Oak Mountain Church. Effective date: December 8, 2013.
11. Dismiss Michael Sorrell to the Presbytery of New Harmony per their request. Effective date: October
8, 2013.
12. Dismiss Christin Johnson to Sacramento Presbytery in order to accept the call as pastor of Woodland
Presbyterian Church in Woodland, CA. Effective date: November 12, 2013.
13. Approve the Honorable Retirement of Vernon Gramling. Effective date: January 1, 2014.
14. Dismiss M. Ellen Anderson to the Presbytery of the Peaks per her request when the way be clear.
Effective date: February 8, 2014.
15. Approve the contract call agreement between Chris Price and the Friendship Church. Effective date:
December 1, 2013.
16. Approve the appointment of Cece Murphey as moderator of Philadelphia Church while Spencer Frye is
recovering from surgery. Effective date: January 1, 1, 2014.
17. Approve the terms of call for Brady Radford and the Oakhurst Presbyterian Church for the position of
associate pastor. Effective date: December 9, 2013.
a. Salary and Housing (to be divided by pastor)
43,000
b. SECA is 50%
c. Full Pension including dental
16,152.36
d. Continuing education
1,000
e. Auto allowance
3,600
f. Four weeks vacation
g. Two weeks study leave
18. Dismiss Don Richter to Mid-Kentucky Presbytery per their request. Effective date: January 1, 2013.
19. Approve the Honorable Retirement status of William McKissick. Effective date: December 16, 2013.
4
20. Approve the terms of call for Michelle Hwang (Baltimore Presbytery) as the associate pastor of Central
Presbyterian Church. Effective date: January 27, 2014.
a. Salary and Housing to be divided
60,000
b. FICA allowance
4,590
c. Full Pension with Disability
d. Continuing Education
1,800
e. Auto vouchered
3,600
f. Business and professional expenses
1,500
g. Cell Phone
600
h. Dental
393
i. Medical Deductible
500
j. Four weeks vacation
k. Two weeks study leave
21. Approve the contract call extension between Meg Jackson-Clark and Dallas-Dodd Presbyterian
Church. This is a part time position. Effective date: January 1, 2014.
a. Salary
4,500
b. Housing
16,500
c. Future Care/for retirement savings
1,800
d. Continuing education
2,000
e. Business/Professional expenses
1,000
f. Four weeks vacation
g. Two weeks study
22. Dismiss Katherine Higgins to New Hope Presbytery per their request. Effective date: July 7, 2013.
23. Approve the interim contract between J. Gregory McMinn and the Timberridge Church. Effective:
November 1, 2013.
a. Salary
35,000
b. Housing
15,000
c. Auto Expenses
1,000
d. Continuing Education
3,600
e. Full Pension
f. Four weeks vacation
g. Two weeks study leave
24. Approve the extension of the contact call associate position between William Nisbet and Roswell
Church. Effective date: November 1, 2013. This is a part time position.
a. Salary
19,655
b. Housing
18,000
c. SECA
2,880
d. Medical deductible
5,676
e. Contribution to 403b
4,344
f. Auto expenses
1,000
g. Four weeks vacation
h. Two weeks study leave
25. Dismiss Joseph Reid to Sheppards & Lapsley Presbytery per their request. Effective date: August 15,
2013.
26. Approve the contract call pastoral relationship between Bobbie Wrenn Banks and First Breman
Church. Effective date: January 1, 2014. This is a part time position.
a. Housing
21,800
5
b.
c.
d.
e.
Future care, 403(b) plan
First Call Pastors Program
Vacation is 4 weeks
Continuing Education is 2 weeks
1,200
360
27. Rescind the action to transfer Bill Davis to the presbytery of Plains and Peaks. Effective date: January
6, 2014.
28. Dismiss Cader Howard the Presbytery of the Twin Cities per their request. Effective date: September
1, 2012.
29. Change the designation of Robert Thomson to member at large. Effective date: February 1, 2013.
30. Validate the ministry of Reggie Avant as a Staff Chaplain at Grady Memorial Hospital. Approve the
housing allowance declaration of $20,000. Effective date: January 8, 2014.
31. Validate the ministry of Trace Haythorn as the Executive Director for the Association for Clinical
Pastoral Education. Approve the housing allowance declaration of $$35,000. Effective date: January 8,
2014.
32. Validate the ministry of Dorothy Akoto as a Chaplain Intern at the VA Medical Center. Effective date:
January 8, 2014.
33. Validate the ministry of Jane Fahey as the Coordinator of the Pastoral Residency Program at Central
Presbyterian Church. Approve the housing allowance declaration of $8,750. Effective date: January 8,
2014.
34. Change Kate Taber to Field Staff for the General Assembly and approve her call as the Facilitator for
Peacemaking and Mission Partnerships for the Middle East. Effective date: January 26, 2014.
35. Received and approved the following annual reports with declared housing allowances:
Adams, Ann Clay
15,000
Ball, Jonathan
33,600
Ball, Shannon
0
Blankinship, Chip
30,000
Brinkmeyer, Kimberly (LeVert)
23,000
Calvo, Randy
32,344
Carroll, Robby
45,000
Chappell, Victoria
0
Chase, Heather
10,500
Cheptu, Grace
0
Choi, Byong Kie
0
Clayton, Kimberly
0
Coleman, Will
0
Colussy-Estes, Kate
0
Cook Joannah
0
Daniel, Beth
0
Daniel, Thomas
62,440
Davis, Bill
0
Ditzel, Drew
0
Donado, Nelson
22,000
Douglas, Mark
22,500
Drummond, William
0
6
Duncan, Kerry
Eldridge, Frank
Elling, Drew
Fisher, Joy
Florence, Anna Carter
Fouse, Clay
Freeman, Alice Schaap
Furlough, David
Goodrich, Catherine Dodson
Graham, Jack
Gramling, Vernon
Gray, Joan
Hambrick, John
Haney, Marsha Snulligan
Hayden, Sara
Haynor, Sharol
Hickcox, Alice
Hill, L’Anni
Hill, Penny
Hill, Richard
Hughes, Dana
Janzen, David
Jarrell, Robbye
Jenkins, Alan
Johnson, Beth
Johnson, Julie
Kilburn, Bettina
Kim, Simone
Kime, Katie Givens
Kreutzer, Bruce
Lee, Haemin
Lee, Young Han
Leonard, Maggie
Livengood, Thomas
Luangphakdy, Elizabeth
Majoros, Lisa
McDonald, Sandra
McKissick, William
Miller, Karen
Morgan, John
Mosley, Kate McGregor
Oget, Margaret Aymer
Oh, Jihyun
Oliver, Lonnie
Ostrowski, Beverly Friedlander
Owens, Larry
Park, Timothy
Parker, Rebecca
Petersen, David L.
Pipkin, Tom
Pitts, Carol
Read, Timothy
Rinker, George
0
0
0
25,000
0
0
0
32,000
18,504
0
31,000
19,999.22
26,950
0
18,000
0
0
0
50,000
0
0
0
19,500
0
45,000
0
25,000
0
0
16.000
0
0
6,600
21,000
0
32,000
0
0
0
0
13,000
0
24,000
28,000
25,000
40,000
0
0
50,000
0
18,000
0
34,500
7
Roberts, Paul
Robb-Dover, Kristina
Small, Glenn
Sandell, Cliff
Seaton, Carol
Smith-Purcell, Libby
Stamper, Meda
Teegarden, Kimbrell
Tewell, Thomas
Thomson, Robert
Thomas, Jay
Thomas, Jannan
Tucker, Scott
Weber, Callie Curington
Ward, Peter
Weber, Jerry
Wells, Donna
Weitnauer, David
Wise, Frederic
Yoder, Christine
Yoo, Hee-dong
30,000
0
5,400
0
0
20,000
0
0
60,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
32,720
15,000
0
0
60,000
0
For Recommendation:
1. Committee on Ministry recommends this policy be approved. The suggestion for this policy came from
Council to the Committee on Ministry based on the Administrative Commission Report regarding Jeff
Peterson-Davis. If approved, it will become a policy of our Committee on Ministry.
Administrative leave for co-pastors
When a co-pastor or co-associate (co-pastor #1) has been placed on paid administrative leave because of
allegations of sexual abuse, paid administrative leave shall also be considered for the remaining co-pastor or coassociate (co-pastor #2).
Such consideration for co-pastor #2, shall be determined per the process as outlined in the Rules for Discipline
D-10.0106 and shall clarify that no written statement of an alleged offense was received about co-pastor #2.
Rationale:
When leaders of a congregation discover that sexual misconduct accusations have been made against one of their
teaching elders, initial reactions may be intense and varied, depending on the circumstances. Responses may
include: denial, anger, fear, loss, guilt, hurt, anxiety, grief, helplessness, shame, feelings of having been betrayed,
and defensiveness. Past abuse in the lives of congregants can re-surface and cause individuals to withdraw from
fellowship or to feel unsafe. A number of other factors can complicate the reaction of a congregation, e.g.,
identified victims who are minors, publicity, the prominence of the identified offender, and legal involvement.
Church leaders often do not realize that the congregation could be an associate victim of the misconduct. A copastor who remains in such circumstances is given the tremendous burden of handling pastoral care, response to
the community, steps to ensure a safe church environment and adequate processing of intense feelings within the
church, including the co-pastor’s own feelings of grief and anger. In the case of co-pastors or co-associates who
are married, the continuing presence of one spouse in a clergy couple after the other has left a staff because of
abuse allegations undoubtedly has a chilling effect on the willingness of any potential victims to come forward.
The above policy was defeated by a count of 91 yes, 101 no
8
2. Approve the re-write of Policy 5a and b on the Validation of Ministries. This is a second read with input
from our validated ministers.
POLICY # 5a
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE VALIDATION OF MINISTRIES IN THE PRESBYERY OF
GREATER ATLANTA
FOR THOSE SEEKING ORDINATION
It is anticipated that those seeking ordination will become teaching elders. Therefore, in compliance with the
Book of Order, (G-2.0503) “a teaching elder…shall be engaged in a ministry validated by that presbytery…” and
it shall:
 Demonstrate conformity with the mission of God’s people
 Serve and aid others, and enable the ministry of others
 Give evidence of theologically informed fidelity to God’s Word
 Be carried on in accountability for its character and conduct to the presbytery
 Include responsible participation in the deliberations, worship and work of the presbytery and in the life
of a congregation of this church
As a large metropolitan area, many are drawn here because of the variety of opportunities. Others are restricted
geographically due to their spouse’s employment.
In addition, a new reality of the church is the aging of both our members and the dissolving of our congregations.
This reality calls us to a new sense of flexibility and creativity in new ways of defining pastoral service. Many
who are qualified for parish ministry are unable to find such positions.
In an attempt to consider new realities while being faithful to the Book of Order regarding validated ministries,
the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta puts forth the following criteria for validating ministries for ordination.
Guided by the General Assembly which categorizes various ministries (see Book of Order G-2.0503a1-4) and
when the additional criteria is met, the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta will ordinarily ordain those who are called
to:
1. Chaplaincy: in a variety of commonly recognized contexts such as military, correctional, healthcare, and
educational institutions
2. Overseas Mission
3. Seminary Professors
4. Clinical Pastoral Education Supervisors
5. Governing body such as in the General Assembly or the Presbytery
6. Presbyterian related agencies such as Presbyterian Homes, and The Foundation
7. Recognized Christian Pastoral Counseling Center
8. Serving another denomination in a pastoral context
9. Non-installed pastoral positions within our bounds
10. Tentmaking if serving a PCUSA congregation within our bounds
11. Campus Ministry
Additional Criteria to be met regarding the above:
1. Any hospital residency program must be for a minimum of one year.
2. The supervisor for any validated ministry must state that ordination is required for the position.
3. The person must be affiliated, or will affiliate if just relocated, with a local congregation in the
presbytery or be involved with judicatory work on the Presbytery, Synod or GA level.
4. Each minister will ordinarily maintain his/her permanent and/or primary residence within the area
commonly known as greater metropolitan Atlanta.
5. The expectation is that each validated minister will attend at least one Presbytery meeting a year.
9
Ministries seeking validation beyond the above list, will still be reviewed in the application process.
APPLICATION PROCESS
An application is required to seek validation. The appropriate application for someone seeking ordination is
Form Two.
If the subcommittee of COM does not approve the request for validation, the applicant may appeal to a subgroup of COM comprised of the two co-chairs of COM and the two co-chairs of the Care of Church
Professionals by contacting the stated clerk and requesting such an interview.
If both an application and appeal if requested, does not produce validation, the person will not be ordained.
ANNUAL REPORTS
As indicated by the Book of Order, every minister serving in a validated position is required to submit an annual
report regarding your work. Our annual reports ordinarily are sent out in October/November in order to have
them received by the end of December.
A minister will be notified up to two times if an annual report has not been received. After the third notification,
which will be by certified mail, if the report is not received, the minister shall be placed on the inactive rolls of
the presbytery. After one year of being on the inactive roll, if contact with the Stated Clerk has not been
established, the minister shall be removed from the rolls.
The above policy was approved by voice vote
POLICY # 5b
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE VALIDATION OF MINISTRIES IN THE PRESBYERY OF
GREATER ATLANTA
FOR THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY ORDAINED
In compliance with the Book of Order, (G-2.0503) a teaching elder…shall be engaged in a ministry validated by
that presbytery…” and it shall:
 Demonstrated conformity with the mission of God’s people
 Serve and aid others, and enable the ministry of others
 Give evidence of theologically informed fidelity to God’s word
 Be carried on in accountability for its character and conduct to the presbytery
 Include responsible participation in the deliberations, worship and work of the presbytery and in the life
of a congregation of this church
The Presbytery of Greater Atlanta has many types of ministries for which a teaching elder could be validated.
As a large metropolitan area, many are drawn here because of the variety of opportunities. Others are restricted
geographically due to their spouse’s employment.
In addition, a new reality of church is the aging of both our members and the dissolving of our congregations.
This reality calls us to a new sense of flexibility and creativity in new ways of defining pastoral service. Many
who are qualified for parish ministry are unable to find such positions.
In an attempt to consider these realities while being faithful to the Book of Order regarding validated ministries,
the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta puts forth the following criteria for validating ministries for those who are
ordained.
10
Guided by the General Assembly who categorizes various ministries, (see Book of Order G-2.0503a1-4) when
the additional criteria is met, we will validate the ministries of to those who are called to:
1. Chaplaincy: in a variety of commonly recognized contexts such as military, hospital, correctional,
healthcare and educational institutions
2. Campus Ministries
3. Overseas Mission
4. Seminary Professors
5. Governing body such as in the General Assembly or the Presbytery
6. Presbyterian related agencies such as Presbyterian Homes and The Foundation
7. Recognized Christian Pastoral Counseling Center
8. Serving another denomination in a pastoral context
9. Tentmaking if serving a PCUSA congregation within our bounds
10. Ecumenical organizations that have a specific relationship to the PCUSA and/or the Presbytery of
Greater Atlanta
Additional Criteria to be met regarding the above:
1. Any hospital residency program must be for a minimum of one year.
2. The supervisor for any validated ministry must state that ordination is recommended or required for the
position. The applicant will also have the opportunity to discuss on the application why the ability to
administer the sacraments enhances their ministry.
3. The person must be affiliated, or will affiliate if just relocated, with a local congregation in the
presbytery or be involved with judicatory work on the Presbytery, Synod or GA level.
4. Each minister will ordinarily maintain his/her permanent and/or primary residence within the area
commonly known as Greater Metropolitan Atlanta.
5. The expectation is that every validated minister shall attend at least one Presbytery meeting a year
Ministries seeking validation beyond the above list, will still be reviewed in the application process.
APPLICATION PROCESS
An application is required to seek validation. The appropriate application for someone who is already ordained
and seeking to have their ministry validated Form One.
If the subcommittee of COM does not approve the request for validation, the applicant may appeal to a subgroup of the Committee on Ministry comprised of the two co-chairs of COM and the two co-chairs of the Care
of Church Professionals by contacting the stated clerk and requesting such an interview.
If an application is not approved and if a requested appeal does not produce validation, the person (if already a
member of the presbytery) will be placed on the minister-at-large of the presbytery. We do not have a timeframe
for ministers staying on the minister at large roll; as long as the minister continues to reside in our bounds,
worships in one of our churches and submits their annual reports.
We do not accept transfers of ministers who are at large.
ANNUAL REPORTS
As indicated by the Book of Order, every minister serving in a validated position is required to submit an annual
report regarding your work. Our annual reports ordinarily are sent out in October/November in order to have
them received by the end of December.
A minister will be notified up to two times if an annual report has not been received. After the third notification,
by certified mail, if the report is not received, the minister shall be placed on the inactive roll of the presbytery.
11
After one year of being on the inactive roll, if contact has not been established, the minister shall be removed
from the rolls.
The above policy was approved by voice vote
3. Approve a new policy entitled 5c:
POLICY 5c
Confirming Ministry in the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta
Adopted by COM on August 17, 2013
As ministry takes different forms at this time in history, it is clear that God is using many people in a wide
variety of ways to expand, strengthen and increase the Kingdom.
The Presbytery of Greater Atlanta recognizes that Teaching Elders may be engaged in worthwhile and valuable
ministries which do not meet the criteria for validation as spelled out in the Book of Order and the Presbytery’s
guidelines for validating ministries. At the same time, the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta believes it is useful to
commend these ministries by placing them in a category called Confirmed Ministry.
Therefore, when an ordained minister is engaged in ministry which does not meet the criteria for validation, the
Committee on Ministry through its CVCP & ML sub-committee will recognize the ministry by granting it the
status of Confirmed Ministry.
The status of Confirmed Ministry is an internal mechanism for the presbytery. Ministers will not be received on
the basis of a Confirmed Ministry status. The status will be reported in the Admit to Record section of the
Committee on Ministry Report to each presbytery meeting. For purposes of the General Assembly, the minister
will still be considered a member at large. Congregations may also wish to recognize those serving in
Confirmed Ministry at an appropriate time during worship.
The above policy was approved by voice vote
RESOLUTION OF GRATITUDE AND THANKSGIVING FOR THE MINISTRY
OF REV. DR. WINSTON A. LAWSON
Whereas:
Rev. Winston A. Lawson was called as pastor of Hillside Presbyterian Church on May 1, 2001, and has
served this church, community, and Presbytery faithfully for almost thirteen years, always seeking to follow
God’s commandment to love our neighbors
And Whereas:
Winston A. Lawson, reached out to the community surrounding Hillside and beyond, collaborating with
other congregations to develop the DeKalb County Consortium of Churches, which serves the diverse needs of
this community
12
And Whereas:
Winston Lawson, along with George Wirth, Charles Black, and Connie Lee, recognized the need to
combat poverty, reduce violence, support refugees, aid ex-offenders and their families, build bridges of
understanding with our neighbors here and in Jamaica, and thereby created the Partnership Ministry of Hillside
and First Presbyterian of Atlanta in 2002
And Whereas:
Winston Lawson visited the sick and shut-in, prayed with those in prisons, assisted the homeless,
supported those who are the most vulnerable in our society, comforted the grieving, opened the doors of the
church to the community, and gave generously of his time and resources
And Whereas:
Winston Lawson served the denomination in many ways—as Staff Associate of the General Assembly
Mission Board of the PCUS in Atlanta from 1977 to 1981; was a founding member of the Pulse New Church
Development Committee, chaired Atlanta Presbytery’s Evangelism and Social Outreach Committee and
Worship Planning Committee for several years
Be it therefore resolved
That Rev. Winston Lawson be granted the status of honorable retirement as of January 31, 2014. The
Session and members of Hillside Presbyterian Church congratulate him as he retires as minister and teaching
elder after fifty years in ministry, salute him for his faithfulness to God and his community, wish him and his
wife Verona God’s speed, as they follow the path that God has chosen for them, and surround them with all our
love, prayers and gratitude.
So resolved this 13th day of January, 2014
Deloris Bryant-Booker, Clerk of Session
EXAMINATIONS
The following people appeared before the Examinations Commission to be examined in the areas of Bible,
Polity, Worship and Sacraments and Theology. When coming for ordination, the candidate also preached a
sermon. The Commission recommends reception for the following individuals:
Bobbie Wrenn Banks (candidate of Greater Atlanta) has been called as the contract call pastor for First
Presbyterian Church in Bremen. Effective start date: January 1, 2014. Reception upon ordination.
Sharon Gregory (candidate of Greater Atlanta) has been called to the validated ministry of hospital chaplaincy.
Effective date: upon ordination.
Michelle Hwang (Baltimore Presbytery) has been called as the associate pastor of Central Presbyterian Church.
Effective date: January 27, 2014.
Yeonkon Jeong (candidate of Greater Atlanta) has been called as a contract call associate pastor at Korean
Community Presbyterian Church. Effective date: upon ordination.
Jane Kagia (candidate of Greater Atlanta) has been called to the validated ministry of pastoral counseling.
Effective date: upon ordination.
Nick Setzer (candidate of Charleston-Atlantic Presbytery) has been called as a contract call associate at
Northminster Presbyterian Church. Effective date: upon ordination.
The following people were examined on the floor and individually approved for reception by voice votes.
13
COMMITTEE ON PREPARATION
Information:
Policy #12 was amended to read as follows: “A new (within last 6 months) MMPI is required of all
inquirers/candidates who have been in the process for more than 4 years. Additional ministry assessment may be
required by the committee.” The Leadership Team is also investigating a ministry assessment tool for
international students.
Admit to Record:
1. The following church received a session orientation:
New Life
2. The following person was enrolled as an Inquirer as of shown date:
Carlton Johnson, First African
December 5, 2013
3. Annual Consultations were conducted for the following persons:
Jeanne Simpson, Eastminster
Lenora McFarland, Decatur
Yeonkwon Jeong, Korean Community
Bobbie Wrenn Banks, North Decatur
Paula Couch, Oakhurst
Myung Jin Chae, Good News Garden
Bethany Benz, Oakhurst
4. The following persons were certified ready to receive a call:
Rebecca LeMon, First Atlanta
Yeonkwon Jeong, Korean Community
Jeanne Simpson, Eastminster
5. The following candidates received a call:
Jane Kagia, Care Counseling Center of Georgia
Sunghee Hammersley, Chaplain Northside
Yeonkwon Jeong, Korean Community
For Recommendation:
The Committee on Preparation for Ministry recommends the following inquirer be enrolled as a candidate as of
shown date:
John Harrison, Central
December 5, 2013
The above motion was approved by voice vote. Moderator Sparks asked the Constitutional questions and Karen
Allamon offered a charge and prayer.
COUNCIL
For Information:
14
1. In preparation for the General Assembly, the council and the elected GA commissioners engaged in the two
hour Study on Marriage paper at its January meeting.
2. We are pleased to announce that a new partnership is in the works. This is a group of PGA Youth Workers
who have begun to collaborate together. If that sounds like something you wish to connect to, please contact
Rev. Amanda Osenga at Amanda@ndpc.org.
3. The Council along with the Committee on Ministry has reviewed the proposed changes to the Gracious
Separation Polity of the Presbytery. It is being presented as a first read and you may find it in the addendum
portion of the handbook.
4. The Council Appointed Task Force to shepherd the recommendations that arose from the Administrative
Commission’s Report regarding Jeff Peterson-Davis, has submitted an update for the Presbytery’s
information. Please find this update in the addendum portion of the handbook.
5. Council approved the following 2015 dates for Presbytery meetings:
February 21, 2015
May 14, 2015
August 22, 2015
November 10, 2015
Admit to Record:
Presbytery Council - Annual Report for 2013
The Council met ten times during 2013 for business and for visioning and planning. We continued to refine our staff,
and entered into a contract with the Rev. Penny Hill to serve as Executive Presbyter through June 30, 2015. We also saw
the resignation of Neema Cyrus-Franklin from the Presbytery staff. The Presbytery is currently staffed by the Executive
Presbyter, the Stated Clerk, two full-time Congregational Consultants, a Director of Operations, a Financial Support
Specialist and part-time contract staff for communications.
Three churches completed the Gracious Separation process, with the Church of the Redeemer being dismissed, the First
Presbyterian Church of Peachtree City and Smyrna Presbyterian Church remaining in the PCUSA. A fourth church, First
Church Douglasville, began the process in 2013. The experience of working with the policy led Council to form a task
force to review and revise the policy. A first read will be presented at the February 8, 2014 Presbytery Meeting.
The Tri-Presbytery New Church Development Commission also underwent changes when the Northeast Georgia and
Cherokee Presbyteries withdrew. The PGA New Church Development Commission continues with their work, while a
task force reviews the work and powers of the commission. They will bring any changes needed to the Presbytery for
approval.
Calvin Center was incorporated as a new non-profit, 501(c)3, corporation and hired Paul Fogg as their Director. This
will enable them to work with other entities in some new ways.
Council recommended and Presbytery approved the formation of a special Administrative Commission to reach a
determination of truth in the charges against Jeff Petersen-Davis. The Commission brought their report to the August
meeting of Presbytery and their recommendations were approved. Council is still in the process of implementing some
of those recommendations to help bring healing to the victims of abuse.
In November, the Presbytery, in conjunction with Cherokee Presbytery, hosted the moderator of the General Assembly,
Rev. Dr. Neal Presa.
The Council continues to listen to the concerns of the Presbytery and to look at trends in the national church to be
proactive and responsive to the needs in our presbytery in our ever-changing world.
15
For Recommendation:
1. The Bills and Overtures Committee had not met and therefore, this overture was discussed by the Council. This
overture comes from the Session of Covenant Presbyterian Church. Council brings this to the body with no
recommendation.
Overture to the 221st General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
Food Sovereignty for All
Humanity is confronted with the tragedy of hunger in a world that produces enough food for all to eat. PC(USA) church
partners and fraternal organizations around the world are calling for food sovereignty as a way of building prosperous,
healthy, equitable and sustainable food and farm economies everywhere. This includes supporting fair trade; the right to
food and water, access to land; ecological agriculture and health-giving food; more localized decision-making, and
equity for everyone throughout the food system.
This overture calls on individuals, congregations, mid councils, and ministries of the Presbyterian Mission Agency and
the Office of the General Assembly to do the following:
1) Pray for people within the food system in the U.S. and overseas, from producers devoting their lives to feeding people
but who are often undercompensated and lacking respect, to workers throughout the food chain, and to consumers
lacking access to affordable fresh, healthy food
2) Study food sovereignty, food justice and other applications of Biblical and Christian values to fairness and
sustainability throughout the food system, using educational materials compiled on a single PC(USA) web page.
3) Support and participate in community conversations, forums and assemblies where people directly affected by the lack
of affordable and healthy food provide significant input and leadership about defining community needs and solutions.
4) Support and develop faith-based and other food sovereignty initiatives overseas and in our communities, with special
emphasis on impoverished areas, always in concert with those directly affected. Faith-based initiatives in the U.S. may
include sponsoring community gardens; hosting farmers markets, community kitchens, market gardens, food
microenterprise development and cooperative buying clubs; and promoting purchase of locally and sustainably grown
food.
5) Work with Presbyterians, PC(USA) partners, as well as interfaith and secular groups and coalitions on initiatives and
campaigns whose purpose is to achieve food sovereignty. This may include efforts to reduce negative influences of large
multinational corporations on food and farm system practices and on policies that may be detrimental to producers,
workers and consumers.
6) Join with Presbyterians, PC(USA) partners, and interfaith and secular groups and coalitions working to end large scale
land grabs and return unfairly obtained land to communities, and to implement genuine agrarian and aquatic reform
programs and base national and international governance structures on the ‘Voluntary Guidelines for Land and Natural
Resources Tenure’ from the Committee on World Food Security in order to provide secure access to land, forestry and
fisheries for communities.
7) Advocate for food, farm and trade policies at all levels that protect family farmers and God’s creation, and support the
building of just and sustainable local food economies.
RATIONALE:
The PC(USA) recognition of hunger as a problem of inequitable distribution of the abundance of has been on the the
forefront of ministry and mission. Working together towards Food Sovereignty is vital in the face of widespread injustice
including hunger in the United States and in many other countries. The work of the PC(USA) historically and currently
has been one of working toward the fulfillment of the concept of Food Sovereignty for All. The lack of political will, and
16
systems designed to maximize profit rather than ensure the right of food to all have caused a disparity which this
denomination has steadfastly addressed. Adopting the concept of Food Sovereignty for All is critical in furthering and
fulfilling the Word of Gospel of Jesus Christ. Hear it in his word as well as in the words of the Old Testament prophets
and poets, indeed those that follow:
The Word of the Lord: “Happy is the one whose help in the God of Jacob, whose hope is in God the Lord, who made
heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, who keeps faith forever; who executes justice for the oppressed; who
gives food to the hungry.” Psalm 146: 6-7. Blessed be the word of the Lord.
‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a
stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit
you?’ “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine,
you did for me.’ (Matthew 25: 37-40)
Book of Confessions 9.4.c: The church cannot condone poverty, whether it is the product of unjust social structures,
exploitation of the defenseless, lack of national resources, absence of technological understanding, or rapid expansion of
populations. The church calls every man to use his abilities, his possessions, and the fruits of technology as gifts
entrusted to him by God for the maintenance of his family and the advancement of the common welfare. It encourages
those forces in human society that raise men's hopes for better conditions and provide them with the opportunity for a
decent living. A church that is indifferent to poverty, or evades responsibility in economic affairs, or is open to one social
class only, or expects gratitude for its beneficence makes a mockery of reconciliation and offers no acceptable worship
to God. (9.4.c)
Background: Food Sovereignty is a set of principles, policies and practices which reflect the "right of all people,
communities and countries to define agricultural, food and land policies that are ecologically, socially, economically and
culturally relevant. Food sovereignty holds that all people have the right to safe, nutritious and culturally appropriate
food and food-producing resources. This framework calls for actions and strategies on local and global levels to address
the root causes of hunger." (Interfaith Food and Farms Partnership, "Food Sovereignty for All: Overhauling the Food
System with Faith-Based Initiatives")
Groups such as La Via Campensina, an international movement, is one of the many organizations which addresses the
root cause of hunger. It consists of millions of peasants, small and medium scale farmers, women landowners and
indigenous persons who are addressing the current food, poverty, and climate crisis.
In 2007, a declaration on Food Sovereignty from the Forum for Food Sovereignty held in Mali, set forth six attributes of
the concept. Excerpts follow. (2)
1. Focuses on Food for People: Food sovereignty stresses the right to sufficient, healthy and culturally appropriate food
for all individuals, peoples, and communities. It rejects the proposition that food is just another commodity for
international agribusiness.
2. Values Food Providers: Food sovereignty values and supports the contributions, and respects the rights of women and
men, peasants and small scale family farmers, pastoralists, artisanal fishers, forest dwellers, indigenous peoples, and
agricultural and fisheries workers, including migrants who cultivate, grow and harvest and process food.
3. Localizes Food Systems as it puts providers and consumers at the center of decision-making on food issues; protects
food providers from the dumping of food and food aid in local markets, and resists government structures, agreements
and practices that...promote...inequitable international trade and give power to remote and unaccountable corporations.
4. Makes Decisions Locally: Food Sovereignty seeks control over and access to territory, land, grazing water, seeds,
livestock and fish populations for local food providers. These resources ought to be used and shared in socially and
environmentally sustainable ways which conserve diversity.
5. Builds Knowledge and Skills: [It] builds on the skills and local knowledge of food providers and their local
organizations that conserve, develop and manage localized food production and harvesting systems, and that pass on this
17
wisdom to future generations. Food Sovereignty rejects technologies that undermine, threaten or contaminate these, e.g.,
genetic engineering.
6. Works with Nature: [It] seeks to heal the planet so that the planet may heal us; and rejects the methods that harm
beneficial ecosystem functions, that depend on energy-intensive monocultures and livestock factories, destructive fishing
practices and other industrialized production methods.
Principles of Food Sovereignty challenge the current model which favors trade of large amounts of food going over
borders. The principles also challenge the idea that richer countries and financial organizations should favor themselves
over less wealthy countries. The rationale is that if wealthy countries can grow massive amounts of a food, then it should
grow it for the world. Meanwhile, low-and middle-income nations may export food (cash crops) to richer nations,
leaving them little opportunity to raise their own nutritious food, as cash crops strip their land and may leave less time
and money for self-care. "This logic favors a food industry reliant on industrial-scale farming, monocropping, and
massive inputs of fuel, fertilizers, and pesticides. The beneficiaries are the corporate middlepeople who consolidate,
arrange, package and ship the food around the world...and profound hidden costa are enacted on our planet as a whole:
polluted water, air, and soil, deforestation; acid rain; species extinction; and climate change. The corporate food system
wreaks countless ecological harms." (3) (pg 8, 27)
There is a relationship with much of the corporate world and inequity in the social structure. Whereas there are certainly
corporations which work to help uphold just practices, there are many which continue be headed in the opposite
direction. Some estimates suggest that half of the world’s largest economies are multinational corporations. A key
difference between organizations is whether they are essentially profit-making or whether they work to provide a service
while remaining economically viable. (Wilkenson, Pickett. The Spirit Level. Pg. 246-7). These authors provide research
that suggests that further improvements in the quality of life no longer depend on further economic growth; it depends on
“community and how we relate to each other.” (p. 247)
In the RELUFA Cameroon Food Sovereignty program, vulnerable communities in the semi-Saharan Far North Province
are thriving through their participation in the RELUFA network's Food Sovereignty program. Having been organized to
run their own communal grain banks, farmers in 34 villages now ward off speculators at harvest time. Instead of selling
their yields to merchants who hoard the produce to maximize profits later in the year, the crops are stored in the village
granary. When families run out of their own reserves, they can take grains on in-kind credit and pay back this loan from
the next sorghum harvest later in the year. [Food Sovereignty video]
There are many other examples of models of Food Sovereignty in Presbyterian Hunger Program’s Joining Hands
program.
Meanwhile, in the United States, many farmworkers are still not afforded adequate rights. Organizations such as the
United Farm Workers and the Coalition of Immokalee Workers have made great strides in improving labor conditions.
Yet, still often workers "perform strenuous physical labor without the protections of sick leave, overtime pay, or health
insurance. They are exempt from the National Labor Relations Act that protects workers' rights to form unions and
bargain collectively...Farmworkers are twice as likely to live below the poverty line, and most earn an average of
$10,000 to $12,000 per year." (ibid) p. 75
The concept of 'land grabs' is of grave concern. "The purchase and lease of vast tracts of land from poor, developing
countries by wealthier nations and international private investors has led to debate about whether land investment is a
tool for development or force of displacement", reports the Oakland Institute, an independent policy organization
working on social and environmental issues such as the land grab. (See www.oaklandinstitute.org)
"Over the last four years, there has been a significant increase in land-based investment, both in terms of the number of
investment projects and the total land area allocated. Industrialized nations and private foreign investors have driven
demand for arable land in developing regions, particularly in Africa, but also in South America, Central Asia and
Southeast Asia. Governments are interested in the lands for purposes of food security and biofuel production. Both
governments and private investors are attracted by policy reforms that have improved the investment climate in
18
developing countries, as well as arbitrage opportunities afforded by the extremely low cost of leasing land in these
regions.
While only fractions of arable land in developing regions are being used for agriculture, demand for strategic swats next
to irrigation and shipping sites is growing with greater investment. These areas and other lands are frequently in use even
though occupants’ have no legal rights to the land or access to legal institutions. As demand for land assets increases and
governments and multilateral institutions promote investment in national lands, displacement and affected livelihoods are
becoming serious sources of international concern." (Oakland Institute).
Water rights are also a huge concern. Access to water and sanitation is a basic human right according to the United
Nations General Assembly. Corporate Accountability International notes that human rights to water is a basic obligation
of governments. Access is best afforded when the management and control of water is in the hands of the public. They
note that "political interference by private water corporations threatens the ability of communities to guarantee the
human right to water for all. Attempting to gain a foothold in the water market (estimated to be $400 billion-plus), global
corporations use their vast resources to gain influence in international governing bodies such as the U.N. and funders like
the World Bank. The water industry’s tactics include promoting policy models that grant more corporate control over
water, institutionalizing corporate partnerships with policymakers, weakening regulations and investing in water rights
and trading." (stopcorporateabuse.org)
Fair trade versus free trade is a part of the concept as well. A concern at this time is the Trans Pacific Partnership (TTP)
free trade agreement, under negotiation among 11 countries. This agreement is largely being negotiated in secret. Many
groups including labor unions and churches opposed this agreement. It liberalizes trade possibilities and leads to more of
an unregulated market. This would allow corporations to operate with less accountability and rules.
The above overture was approved by voice vote.
2. Council places into nomination the following people listed in bold below to serve on the nominating
committee: (this is part of the omnibus motion)
Class of 2014
(2009) (RE)
(2009) (TE)
(2013) (TE)
Helen Stark, College Park
Craig Goodrich, Trinity Atlanta
Brady Radford, Oakhurst
Class of 2015
(2013) (RE)
(2010) (RE)
(2010) (TE)
Mardee Rightmyer, Eastminster
Jerry Leath, Church of the Master
Louly Hay, HR
Class of 2016
(2013) (TE)
(2014) (RE)
(2014) (TE)
Shannon Ball, Validated ministry
David York, Central
Dana Hughes, member at large
BILLS AND OVERTURES
For Recommendation:
1. The following overture was received from the sessions of Oakhurst and North Decatur Churches. Both
sessions have endorsed the overture and request that it be brought before the body for action. This
overture originally was approved the San Francisco Presbytery. Under the new Book of Order
provisions, two presbyteries must concur with any overture before it becomes official business of the
19
General Assembly. Therefore, The Presbytery of Greater Atlanta is being asked to concur with this
overture already approved by San Francisco. To concur with an overture is to approve it as is.
The Bills and Overtures Committee wishes to provide some brief historical notes on the issue of
divestment that we learned as commissioners at the General Assembly in 2012.
Point one: PCUSA has demonstrated a public witness to the connection between financial practices and
peace and justice issues for over 30 years. The Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee
(MRTI) makes recommendations related to investments of PCUSA monies (billions of dollars of assets
in the Foundation and the Board of Pensions)
Point two: At the last Assembly (2012) the MRTI, recommended for the first time, that the PCUSA
divest from the three companies listed in the overture below. The GA vote for divestment failed by a 2
vote margin (333-331) in favor of a minority report (369-290-8) which instead called for positive
investment.
Point three: the financial implication for these companies is minimal because the denomination has
reduced investment in them to a minimum amount while retaining sufficient stock to maintain voice and
vote at shareholder meetings.
Point four: The extended debate and narrow vote at the Assembly reflects the divisive nature of this
issue on how to respond to injustice in the Middle East
The Bills and Overture Committee reminds the Presbytery that the General Assembly agrees as a whole that
there are issues of injustice and violation of human rights in the Middle East. However, the question of what is a
faithful, appropriate response in dealing with this injustice remains open. We as a committee are not making a
recommendation regarding this overture, acknowledging that we reflect the diversity of opinion as seen in the
church as a whole. We encourage each commissioner to inform and prayerfully reflect for themselves.
The Overture is as follows:
On Divestment from Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions
In service to God’s love and justice for all of the people of Palestine and Israel, and in accord with international
law concerning self-determination and human rights, the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta overtures the 221st
General Assembly (2014) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to:
1. Instruct the Presbyterian Foundation and the Board of Pensions of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), to
disinvest from Caterpillar, Inc., Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions, in accord with our church’s
decades-long socially responsible investment (SRI) history, and not to reinvest in these companies until the
Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee of the PC(U.S.A.) is fully satisfied that product sales
and services by these companies are no longer complicit in: a. the building and security of illegal Israeli
settlements, which U.S. foreign policy, and most recent U.N. fact-finding mission determine to be an
obstacle to peace;
a. the construction and maintenance of walls and fences that illegally encroach upon Palestinian lands,
destroying Palestinian rights to own property and pursue livelihoods;
b. the management of checkpoints that dehumanize Palestinians and cut off innocent civilians from their
property and natural resources;
c. contributing to and profiting from the relentless, 5 decade long, military occupation of the Palestinian
territories.
2. Affirm that this action underlines the worsening situation in Palestine, calling attention to:
a. the occupation of Palestine, which destroys lives and entire cultures, and for the sake of justice between
Jews, Christians, and Muslims, that it needs to end;
20
b. the violation of Palestinian human rights; through home demolitions, constricting movement for work,
school, personal needs, business, essential (and emergency) medical care; and the illegal mass political
imprisonment of Palestinians;
c. the disproportionate impact on the Christian minority due to restrictions on family unification, housing,
the isolation of Bethlehem and other conditions of occupation;
d. the failure to attract investors to Palestinian businesses choked by the occupation matrix, the blockade of
Gaza and restrictions on the West Bank economy, which adds more than 20% to business costs in
Palestine.
3. Recognize that while the 220th General Assembly called upon the church to pursue only nonviolent
investment in Palestine and Israel, we still profit from companies engaged in violent pursuits in Palestine, by
providing equipment and materiel supporting illegal occupation, contrary to our church position.
4. Direct the Stated Clerk to:
a. Communicate this action to all other PC(USA) councils and entities, and invite and strongly encourage
those groups and organizations that hold assets in Caterpillar, Inc., Hewlett-Packard and Motorola
Solutions to disinvest as well.
b. Inform our ecumenical partners of this action, nationally and globally—particularly within Israel and
Palestine—encouraging them to hear this witness and to also consider applying socially responsible,
human rights criteria to other companies in their portfolios that are complicit in the occupation of
Palestine.
5. Direct the Presbyterian Mission Agency and the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy to monitor
developments in international law and related to the occupation, to continue to advocate conditioning foreign
aid for Israel to compliance with humans rights law, and to
support all measures designed to provide for viable statehood and a shared Jerusalem, including
protection for Christian and Muslim and well as Jewish holy places.
RATIONALE:
This rationale is in 4 parts:
1. Activity of the 2012 (220th) General Assembly with highlights of the report of the Mission
Responsibility Through Investment Committee (MRTI) concerning its decades-long corporate
engagement with companies profiting from non-peaceful pursuits in Israel/Palestine.
2. Conclusions from the February 2013 fact-finding report of the United Nations General Assembly
Human Rights Council regarding the human rights situation in Palestine.
3. Key maps showing current conditions in Palestine, as well as the conditions that led up to this point.
4. Concluding statement of our responsibility as a Church that proclaims the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
I. Activity of the 2012 (220th) General Assembly
The 220th General Assembly (GA) was the first time the Mission Responsibility Through
Investment Committee (MRTI) had brought a recommendation to disinvest from companies - Caterpillar,
Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions - engaged in Israel’s occupation of Palestine and non-peaceful pursuits
in Palestine, and the first time a GA Standing Committee ever recommended such action to the plenary. The
recommendation to disinvest, approved by the Committee on Middle East and Peacemaking Issues (#15), was
sent to the plenary floor by a 36-11-1 margin. Committee 15 had listened to hours of hearings and debate, and
had at its disposal maps, resources and experts to sufficiently discuss Israel’s occupation of Palestine, as well as
our investment history in the three companies engaged in non-peaceful pursuits in the Holy Land. The morning
of plenary debate, the Rabbi bringing interfaith greetings after being asked not to do so, said disinvestment may
irreparably fracture relations with the Jewish community and implored voting against Committee 15’s
recommendation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZpRQBHqO8g. Commissioners lodged complaints with
the denominational leadership. The 220th GA vote for disinvestment failed by a 2 vote margin (333-331) in
favor of a minority report (369-290-8), which instead called for positive investment.
21
Later the 220th GA voted overwhelmingly (457-180-3), calling for a boycott of all products coming from
illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The arguments in support of this action in both Committee 15 and
on the plenary floor, were in essence, the same arguments in support of disinvestment delineating - how
occupation and the nonstop expansion of settlements were destroying Palestinian life and culture. In both cases,
the Committee 15 understood the logic and consistency of those arguments, voting for both disinvestment and
boycott. Though that same dynamic occurred on the plenary floor, the General Assembly chose to support
boycott and vote against disinvestment.
Further confusing the issue, the plenary later voted to provide Teaching Elders and Church Workers
participating in the programs of the Board of Pensions a “relief of conscience” clause so that at their request their
pension funds would not be invested in these companies. The plenary voted to do this even after an official from
the Board of Pensions said it could not be done, and the Moderator of the General Assembly responded by
saying that with God all things are possible. Following a break the Moderator returned to the podium to
announce that he was ruling the action out of order. This further indicates that the plenary, after hearing of the
truth of illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine, did everything short of disinvestment to send a clear signal that
non-peaceful activities by companies supporting occupation cannot be tolerated.
Since the 220th General Assembly, nothing constructive regarding corporate practices in Palestine has
occurred on the part of Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard or Motorola Solutions. Also, there has been no sign that
Presbyterians employed by them have sought to bring change from within so that the business practices of their
employers are consistent with the clear moral investment strategies of their church.
To review the entire Mission Responsibility Through Investment record of corporate engagement
with these companies, commissioners are strongly urged to read its report to the 220th General Assembly
which can be located at http://www.pc-biz.org/IOBView.aspx?m=ro&id=4021.
Here are highlights of that report:
Caterpillar
An article in Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper, dated March 11, 2009, reported on the close relationship between
Caterpillar’s Israeli dealership and the Israeli military. This includes selling the Caterpillar D-9 bulldozers to the
Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) who has them weaponized by an Israeli company. The article notes that the IDF has
used these bulldozers from the mid 1980s, and has hundreds of them in its arsenal. After that, the Caterpillar
dealer provides maintenance work. The dealership’s mechanics provided maintenance in the recent Gaza war
(these dealership employees maintained and serviced Caterpillar equipment near the battlefield during the Gaza
War of January 2009, when more than 1,300 civilians were killed and the entire civilian infrastructure of the
territory was destroyed) and the Second Lebanon
War. The dealership noted publicly its close working relationship with the IDF, according to Haaretz in an
article dated March 17, 2009, the IDF also “is planning to draft civilian bulldozer-maintenance personnel for
reserve duty, marking the first time the army will be conscripting the staff of a private firm in wartime.” This
would permit the IDF to use Caterpillar dealership employees on the battlefield in future operations.
The dialogue clarified several issues, but did not produce any progress. Company officials made it clear that the
company took no responsibility for the use of its products even by its dealers (the only party considered to be a
customer), had no procedure in place for monitoring or ensuring compliance with Caterpillar’s stated
expectations even in a situation with a documented historic pattern of the equipment being used in human rights
violations, and no desire to develop such a procedure. Further, they indicated that Caterpillar, although a global
company doing business in virtually every country except where prohibited by U.S. law, had no capacity to
evaluate whether particular actions are in accord with human rights conventions or international humanitarian
law. Finally, Caterpillar did not provide information on whether its dealership was selling equipment to major
construction companies building the illegal settlements, the separation barrier, or the Jewish Israeli-only roads in
the occupied territories as requested
The 219th General Assembly (2010) action called for continued engagement within the context of the following
clear and public policy denouncing the company from profiting from involvement in serious human rights
violations and obstacles to a just peace in Israel and Palestine: “… the [General Assembly] strongly denounces
22
Caterpillar’s continued profit-making from non-peaceful uses of a number of its products. We call upon
Caterpillar to carefully review its involvement in obstacles to a just and lasting peace in Israel-Palestine, and to
take affirmative steps to end its complicity in the violation of human rights. We hope that, by God’s grace,
Caterpillar will come to exercise its considerable power and influence in the service of a just and lasting peace in
Israel-Palestine” (Minutes, 2010, Part I, p. 363 of the printed version, p. 986 of the electronic version).
While the action of the 219th General Assembly (2010) denouncing the company’s continued profiting from its
involvement in human rights violations was designed in large measure to convince Caterpillar that the church
was serious about the gravity of this complicity, the company remained unresponsive. On April 19, 2011, MRTI
sent its own letter to new CEO Douglas Oberhelmer, expressing hope for a new spirit of conversation around
these issues and requesting dialogue (see Appendix 1 in gamc-mrti-recommendations-appendix1.pdf under
"Additional Resources"). There was no response. On July 26, 2011, the United Methodist Board of Church and
Society retransmitted the 2010 letter (see above) from eight religious shareholders to the new CEO requesting a
meeting to discuss the issues described in the correspondence. Again, there was no response.
Motorola Solutions
The dialogue on June 18, 2007, focused on human rights standards and conventions, and explored the company’s
involvement in the occupation through sales of military communications products, fuses for bombs, security
technology for Jewish Israeli settlements on the West Bank, and operating a cell phone business in the West
Bank. Motorola denied that any of its activities implicate it in the Israeli occupation, or raise human rights
concerns. A shareholder resolution addressing broader human rights issues was filed by several religious
shareholders in the fall of 2007. In response, Motorola requested a follow-up meeting, which occurred on
January 7, 2008. The company indicated its intent to review and amend its policies but would not specify the
particular changes under consideration and made clear that its human rights policies would not be applied to their
business relationships with foreign governments. This lack of clarity and limited scope led the religious
investors, including MRTI representatives, to decline to withdraw their resolution, which went to a vote at the
annual shareholders meeting on May 5, 2008. It received more than 12 percent of the shareholder vote, enough to
be resubmitted in 2009. Although the conversation with Motorola has been less productive than hoped, religious
shareholders agree that more in-depth dialogue on corporate social responsibility and human rights might
potentially create a more productive arena for analyzing the Israel-Palestine conflict and other world situations
and ought to be continued.
A shareholder resolution similar to the one from 2008 was filed with Motorola requesting that the company
amend its human rights policies “to conform more fully with international human rights and humanitarian
standards. …” The resolution was co-filed by the General Board of Pensions and Health Benefits of the United
Methodist Church, Mercy Investment Program, and the Episcopal Church. The company did not respond to a
request in the filing letter for a meeting to discuss the resolution. When the filers tried to set one up following the
annual meeting, the company declined, but offered to answer written questions. The stockholder meeting was
held on May 4, 2009. Speaking in support of the resolution, which received 9.7 percent of the vote, were
representatives of the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Following the 2009
annual meeting, religious shareholders requested another dialogue, but on June 12, an e-mail from Motorola’s
legal department refused to meet in person saying the company would only answer questions in writing.
Questions were submitted, but answers did not adequately respond to the concerns expressed. In an email of
January 13, 2010, the company also declined to facilitate a meeting with Motorola Israel during the February
2010 visit of religious shareholders to Israel and Palestine. The 2010 shareholders meeting was held on May 3
where the human rights resolution was voted on again. It received a vote of 11.8 percent. Motorola also
announced that it would be splitting into two new companies by the end of 2010: Motorola Solutions and
Motorola Mobility.
Meanwhile, the involvement of Motorola in the Occupation lessened in some important ways. The sale of
armaments work by Motorola Israel meant that it no longer made bomb fuses for the Israeli military. Motorola
also announced its intention to sell its Israeli cell phone company, and has sought bids from potential buyers. The
company supplied cell phones to the Israeli soldiers operating in the Occupied Territories, and built cell towers
in the illegal settlements. However, the company maintained its stance of no face-to-face dialogues, but would
answer some written questions.
23
On November 4, 2010, in the filing of the shareholder resolution on human rights for the 2011 annual meeting,
MRTI expressed its hope that the company would respond positively through constructive dialogue. The
company did not respond. The corporate restructure was completed on schedule. The shareholder resolution was
voted on at the annual meeting of Motorola Solutions on May 2, 2011. However, this time it received a lower
vote total (5.4 percent), and could not be resubmitted for 2012. At the meeting, the CEO of Motorola Solutions
announced that the company would be concentrating on the Middle East for its integrated communications
products. Following the meeting, MRTI sought to determine how the restructure had affected the company’s
business in Israel-Palestine. Motorola Mobility confirmed that the Israeli cell phone company had been sold to a
French company, and that its business was now limited to marketing cell phones in civilian markets. It also
confirmed that the business lines with the Israeli government remained with Motorola Solutions. Motorola
Solutions did not respond to MRTI’s information request of July 11, 2011.
Hewlett-Packard
The company sells hardware to the Israeli Navy, and as a contractor manages all Information Technology (IT)
including its operational communications, logistics, and planning including the ongoing naval blockade of the
Gaza Strip. This blockade has included interdicting humanitarian supplies by attacking or turning back
international vessels carrying the supplies, and attacks on Palestinian fishermen.
The company also is involved through its ownership of Electronic Data Systems in providing electronic
biometric identification scanning equipment to monitor only Palestinians at several checkpoints inside the West
Bank, including as part of the separate road system, restricting Palestinian movement. At these checkpoints, the
2.4 million West Bank Palestinians are required to submit to lengthy waits as well as the mandatory biometric
scanning, while Israelis and other passport holders transit without scanning or comparable delays.
Hewlett-Packard also has extensive involvement with the Israeli Army. Soldiers in the IDF are issued a Tadiran
Communications ruggedized personal digital assistant (RPDA) based on the Hewlett Packard IPAQ (handhelds
and smart phones) as part of Israel’s Anog soldier modernization program. This equipment is used to enforce the
Occupation. In July 2009, Hewlett-Packard won a contract for the installation of software products in a threeyear IDF virtualization tender worth an estimated $15 million, with a two-year option to extend.
Hewlett-Packard also has business relationships with the illegal settlements in the West Bank. A subsidiary, HP
Invent, outsources information technology services to Matrix and to its subsidiary Talpiot, which has its main
outsourcing center in the illegal West Bank settlement of Modi’in Illit. By using Talpiot’s services, clients of the
company are profiting from the company’s relationship with an illegal settlement and are helping solidify the
Occupation.
In addition, Hewlett-Packard worked with the government of the illegal settlement of Ariel in the occupied West
Bank to develop specialized solutions for government data storage, and used this project in marketing publicity.
Despite the fact that Ariel is deep in the Occupied West Bank, the company’s published description of this work
claims that Ariel is within Israel, including the use of a map making no reference to the West Bank as a separate
occupied territory.
In addition, as with Motorola Israel, its Israeli subsidiary does not disclose its equal employment opportunity
record of its hiring practices.
A shareholder resolution was developed requesting a review of Hewlett-Packard’s human rights policies, and a
report on their implementation. It was filed by the PC(USA), United Methodist General Board of Pensions and
Benefits, and four Roman Catholic religious orders. The filing letters requested an opportunity for dialogue, and
prompted a positive response by the company. On October 28, 2009, several religious participants met with
company officials by conference call. The discussion reviewed Hewlett-Packard’s policies and procedures, and
identified issues of concern for further discussion. Participants were grateful for the positive atmosphere, and
willingness to cooperate. As the company agreed to initiate a board of directors level review of its human rights
policy, and committed to positive follow-up to the issues identified in the dialogue, the shareholders decided to
withdraw the resolution.
However, the follow-up was spotty in some areas, and nonexistent in others. One positive aspect of the
engagement though was meeting with a representative of HP Israel in Jerusalem in February 2010. The
24
discussion was informative about the extent and variety of Hewlett-Packard’s businesses. Requested information
on the company’s employment practices and how the human rights policy influences the company’s business
with governments was not provided.
The 219th General Assembly (2010) directed MRTI to continue its efforts to engage Hewlett-Packard on these
issues. Although efforts began to schedule dialogue with company management in November 2010, the company
repeatedly deferred and postponed this meeting. Attempts to schedule conference calls met with delays, but one
was finally held on April 19, 2011. Unfortunately, it was not a productive dialogue. While the religious
shareholders had communicated clearly their desire for an in-depth discussion of the biometric scanners at the
checkpoints, Hewlett-Packard’s representatives, including its person in charge of implementing its human rights
policy, said that they were not knowledgeable on the issue and could not discuss it. They also did not offer to set
up a subsequent call with Hewlett-Packard representatives who could. In addition, they announced that the
human rights assessment they were conducting (which would include IsraelPalestine) would concentrate on
systems evaluation, and any specifics would not be included in Hewlett-Packard’s public reporting. Indeed,
Hewlett-Packard’s public report contained no reference to its business operations in Israel and the Occupied
Palestinian Territories.
Hewlett-Packard produced a Global Citizenship Report for 2010, its most recent one. It states in its Global Issues
section: “At HP, we believe technology is a driver of social progress, environmental sustainability and economic
opportunity. We’re committed to helping individuals everywhere use technology to connect and create a better
world.” The company reviews its involvement in the United Nations Global Compact, and its support for the
Universal Declaration on Human Rights. It notes that it is one of eight founding members of the Global Business
Initiative on Human Rights (GBI). However, nowhere does Hewlett-Packard discuss the relationship of its policy
commitments to its involvements in nonpeaceful pursuits in Israel-Palestine.
Recent United Nations Findings
Since the adjournment of the 220th General Assembly the Twenty-second session of the United Nations General
Assembly Human Rights Council issued its report regarding the “Human rights situation in Palestine and other
occupied Arab territories” (February 2013) and brought these conclusions:
Conclusions
The facts brought to the attention of the mission indicate that the State of Israel has had full control of the
settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory since 1967 and continues to promote and sustain them through
infrastructure and security measures. The mission notes that, despite all pertinent United Nations resolutions
declaring that the existence of the settlements is illegal and calling for their cessation, the planning and growth of
the settlements continues of existing as well as of new structures.
1.
The establishment of the settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem (see annex II), is a
mesh of construction and infrastructure leading to a creeping annexation that prevents the establishment of a
contiguous and viable Palestinian State and undermines the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.
2.
The settlements have been established and developed at the expense of violating international human
rights laws and international humanitarian law as applicable in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as recognized
notably by the International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion of 9 July 2004.
3.
The settlements are established for the exclusive benefit of Israeli Jews, and are being maintained and
developed through a system of total segregation between the settlers and the rest of the population living in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory. This system of segregation is supported and facilitated by a strict military and
law enforcement control to the detriment of the rights of the Palestinian population.
4.
The mission considers that, with regard to the settlements, Israel is committing serious breaches of its
obligations under the right to self-determination and certain obligations under international humanitarian law,
including the obligation not to transfer its population into the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The Rome Statute
establishes the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the deportation or transfer, directly or
indirectly, by the occupying Power of parts of its own population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation
or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside that territory. Ratification
25
of the Statute by Palestine may lead to accountability for gross violations of human rights law and serious
violations of international humanitarian law and justice for victims.
5.
The existence of the settlements has had a heavy toll on the rights of the Palestinians. Their rights to
freedom of self-determination, non-discrimination, freedom of movement, equality, due process, fair trial, not to
be arbitrarily detained, liberty and security of person, freedom of expression, freedom of access to places of
worship, education, water, housing, adequate standard of living, property, access to natural resources and
effective remedy are being violated consistently and on a daily basis.
6.
The volume of information received on dispossession, evictions, demolitions and displacement points to
the magnitude of these practices. These are particularly widespread in certain areas and acute in East Jerusalem.
7.
The mission noted that the identities of settlers who are responsible for violence and intimidation are
known to the Israeli authorities, yet these acts continue with impunity. It is led to the clear conclusion that
institutionalized discrimination is practiced against the Palestinian people when the issue of violence is
addressed. The mission believes that the motivation behind this violence and the intimidation against the
Palestinians and their properties is to drive the local populations away from their lands and allow the settlements
to expand.
8.
The mission is gravely concerned at the large number of children who are apprehended or detained,
including for minor offences. They are invariably mistreated, denied due process and a fair trial. In violation of
international law, they are transferred to detention centres in Israel.
9.
Children endure harassment and violence, and encounter significant obstacles in attending educational
institutions, which limits their right to have access to education. The occupying Power, Israel, is failing in its
duty to protect the right of access to education of the Palestinian children and failing to facilitate the proper
working of educational institutions. 110. Information gathered by the mission showed that some private entities
have enabled, facilitated and profited from the construction and growth of the settlements, either directly or
indirectly.
10.
Women alone in their homes, the Bedouins and other vulnerable groups are easy targets for settler
violence, creating a sense of insecurity in Palestinian society in general.
The above information may be located in the following report:
Human Rights Council
22ND session - Agenda item 7
Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories
Report of the independent international fact-finding mission to investigate the implications of the Israeli
settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people throughout
the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem*
This report in pdf format can be accessed by inputting this information in the appropriate Internet search engine:
G.E. 13-10742 Human Rights Council, Twenty-second Session Agenda, Item 7, Human Rights Situation in
Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories.
Maps
Map 1 is part of the (above) report of the United Nations General Assembly Human Rights Council.
Map 2 shows the disintegration of Palestinian land on the West Bank preventing the creation of a viable
Palestinian State.
Map 3 shows the historical progression of the Palestinian loss of land from 1946 to 2005.
26
27
28
Conclusion
The writers and endorsers of this overture are convinced that as circumstances presently stand, we can do no less
than become part of a global human rights movement (ecumenical, interfaith and secular) to disinvest from
corporations whose business practices violate the human rights of the Palestinian people through occupation by
the Israeli government. It is unconscionable that the PC(USA), which has already called upon Presbyterians to
boycott products made in the illegal settlements, continues to invest in and profit from corporations engaged in
activities that are not peaceful and labeled illegal by the United Nations Human Rights Council. If the actions of
Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions in regard to their business practices with the Israeli
government do not violate PC(USA) policy regarding its prohibition on investments that benefit from nonpeaceful pursuits, what actions ever would? It is our plea that through faithfulness towards the justice taught by
our Lord Jesus Christ, the investment policies and decisions of our denomination will be consistent with the
following statement: We are the Church of Jesus Christ. When the powers of the world decide that they will
conduct business as usual, and that business is contrary to the teachings of Christ and the will of God for
humanity, then it is time for the church to end its complicity in this sinful behavior.
The above overture was defeated in a ballot vote of 104 in favor, 105 opposed with 3 abstentions.
2. The Overture listed below comes from the session of Oakhurst Church. This overture is presented as a
concurrence to the same overture approved by the Presbytery of New Brunswick. Again, as stated
above, a concurrence is to approve as is.
The Bills and Overtures Committee recognizes that this overture deals with the same issues raised in the
previous overture yet calls for a different response on the part of the church. Historically, there have been three
ways of the powerless in attempting to affect change: divestment, boycotting and calling for sanctions. This
overture presents another complicated issue for the Church. The Bills and Overtures Committee makes no
recommendation.
29
The Overture is as follows:
On Boycott of All Hewlett-Packard Products
The Presbytery of Greater Atlanta overtures the 221st General Assembly (2014) of the Presbyterian Church
(U.S.A.) to:
1. Call for the boycott of all products manufactured and sold by Hewlett-Packard until the company ceases
to profit from all non-peaceful pursuits in Palestine and the violation of Palestinian human rights.
2. Direct the Stated Clerk to:
a. Communicate this action to all other PC(USA) councils and entities and strongly encourage
these groups and organizations to endorse this boycott, calling upon all Presbyterians to be led
by their conscience in the face of human rights violations, ongoing oppression and injustice.
b. Inform our ecumenical partners of this action, both nationally and globally, encouraging them to
do the same.
Rationale:
The History of Hewlett-Packard (HP)
HP began in 1938 as the creation of good friends, Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. In that year they invented
their first product: Oscillators for Walt Disney. By 1942 the company became a health insurance pioneer.
After entering the microwave field in 1943, HP incorporated in 1947, went public in 1957 and global in 1959.
During this time the company developed Fast Frequency Counters and the first Oscilloscopes. In 1962 it made
the Fortune 500 list and would reach the top of that list in 1984. In the 1970’s HP took the lead in laser
technology and became a leader in business computing. In the 1980’s the company introduced the Touchscreen
Personal Computer, the LaserJet printer, and the DeskJet printer. By 1993 ten million LaserJets had been sold
throughout the world and the company introduced the Omnibook 300 laptop computer. The very first
commercial all-in-one device went to market in 1994. By 2005 HP was called “the most trusted” industry
leader. From 2005-2011, Hewlett Packard acquired these companies: Mercury Interactive Corporation, EDS,
Palm Inc. and ArcSight. ( http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hphttp://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-information/abouthp/history/history.htmlinformation/about-hp/history/history.html)
HP Global Citizenship Statement
“At HP, we embrace our role as a global citizen. As one of the world’s largest information technologies
companies, what we do and how we do it matters. That’s why we use global citizenship to help shape and
advance our business strategy… We promote responsible practices in our supply chain, respect human rights,
foster ethical behavior, and strive for a workplace where all of our employees can flourish…”
(http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-information/globalhttp://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-information/globalcitizenship/index.htmlcitizenship/index.html)
HP Statement on Corporate Ethics
“We use our size and influence to promote respect for human rights in all our business dealings.
We do this by working with organizations such as the Global Business Initiative on Human Rights
(GBI) and BSR, which promote awareness of the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human
Rights. (http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-information/global-citizenship/governance/ethics.html)
30
HP Business Practices in Regard to Palestine
“The company sells hardware to the Israeli Navy, and as a contractor manages all Information Technology (IT)
including its operational communications, logistics, and planning including the ongoing naval blockade of the
Gaza Strip. This blockade has included interdicting humanitarian supplies by attacking or turning back
international vessels carrying the supplies, and attacks on Palestinian fisherman.
“The company also is involved through its ownership of Electronic Data Systems (EDS) in providing electronic
biometric identification scanning equipment to monitor only Palestinians at several checkpoints inside the West
Bank, including as part of the separate road system, restricting Palestinian movement. At these checkpoints, the
2.4 million West Bank Palestinians are required to submit to lengthy waits as well as the mandatory biometric
scanning, while Israelis and other passport holders transit without scanning or comparable delays.
“Hewlett-Packard also has extensive involvement with the Israeli army. Soldiers in the IDF are issued a Tadiran
Communications ruggedized personal digital assistant (RPDA) based on the Hewlett-Packard IPAQ (handhelds
and smart phones) as part of the Israel’s Anog soldier modernization program. This equipment is used to enforce
the Occupation. In July 2009, Hewlett-Packard won a contract for the installation of software products in a
three-year IDF virtualization tender worth an estimated $15 million, with a two-year option to extend.
“Hewlett-Packard also has business relationships with the illegal settlements in the West Bank. A subsidiary, HP
Invent, outsources Information Technology services to Matrix and to its subsidiary Talpiot, which has its main
outsourcing center in the illegal West Bank settlement of Modi’in Illit. By using Talpiot’s services, clients of the
company are profiting from the company’s relationship with an illegal settlement and are helping solidify the
Occupation.
“In addition, Hewlett-Packard worked with the government of the illegal settlement of Ariel in the occupied
West Bank to develop specialized solutions for government data storage, and used this project in marketing
publicity. Despite the fact that Ariel is deep in the Occupied West Bank, the company’s published description of
this work claims that Ariel is within Israel, including the use of a map making no reference to the West Bank as a
separate occupied territory.”
This information comes from the report of the PC(USA) Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee
(MRTI) to the 220th General Assembly (Pittsburgh, 2012) and can be found at:
http://www.pcbiz.org/IOBView.aspx?m=ro&id=4021.
Present General Assembly Policy on Boycott regarding Palestine
The 220th General Assembly (2012) approved the following action by a 457-180-3 vote:
1. Call upon all nations to prohibit the import of products made by enterprises in Israeli settlements on
Palestinian land.
2. Call for the boycott of all Israeli products coming from the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including
AHAVA Dead Sea Laboratories Beauty Products and all date products of Hadiklaim, the Israel Date
Growers Co-operative Ltd., often marked by the brand names: King Solomon Dates and Jordan River.
3. Direct the Stated Clerk to communicate this action to all other PC(USA) councils and entities and
strongly encourage these groups and organizations to endorse the boycott until significant progress
toward Palestinian rights and independence can be reported to the General Assembly or General
Assembly Mission Council.
4. Direct the Stated Clerk to inform our ecumenical partners of this action, both nationally and globally,
and call upon them to join the boycott of these companies. http://www.pcbiz.org/IOBView.aspx?m=ro&id=3775
31
In approving this boycott of all Israeli settlement goods, it was the intent of the 220th General Assembly to send a
clear message that it will not tolerate the profiting of companies through military occupation, ethnic cleansing,
the illegal appropriation of land and natural resources, and policies promoting displacement and
disenfranchisement in Palestine. Along with the United Methodist Church, which took the same action in 2012,
Presbyterians have become leaders in what has become an international interfaith boycott movement. Through
its Israel Palestine Mission Network, for instance, the PC(USA) has been a significant player in the U.S.
Campaign to End the Occupation Interfaith Coalition’s boycott of Sodastream, which is a product manufactured
by an Israeli company in the illegal settlement of Ma’ale Adumim outside of Bethlehem. This boycott effort is
in full accordance with the actions of the 220th General Assembly.
This is only part of the equation, however. At the same time that we are telling Israeli companies that they must
not profit from the occupation of Palestine, we are still supporting American corporations that are doing the same
through the sale and service of products in support of the occupation of Palestine by the Israeli government and
military. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has longstanding policy and practice in which it does not invest in
corporations that profit from non-peaceful pursuits, but also has a strong history of calling upon the consciences
of individual Presbyterians to not purchase products from companies that through their business practices
actively engage in the violation of human rights in our nation and the world. Through boycott Presbyterians
have been an important part of the successful fight against apartheid in South Africa, ending the sales of Nestles
infant formula to impoverished mothers in developing nations that caused infant affliction and death, and
insuring the human rights of exploited farm workers in Immokalee, Florida through the Taco Bell boycott, to
name only a few.
The time for Presbyterians to stand up against a U.S. company that is seriously violating the rights of all
Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is now upon us. As seen on its own website, HP takes pride
in making statements about its global citizenry and corporate ethics in our nation and in the world. As a Church
of Jesus Christ, seeking to be a moral agent in, and prophetic voice to a fallen creation, it is our great
responsibility to call upon HP to make good on its own moral and ethical claims. HP has been a great American
company since 1938 and we can be proud of its innovation throughout the decades. Hardly any of us are able to
do business, personal or otherwise, without exposure to and usage of HP products, which makes this particular
boycott so challenging. We acknowledge that this is a hard decision to make because large numbers of us like
their products and even have them in our homes, including the author of this overture. In that way, HP has been
like a corporate friend to American businesses and households for a long time. It is now time, however, to tell
our corporate friend that it is violating human rights in terrible ways and that we can no longer purchase its
products until such time that it ceases to profit from this violation through an occupation that is causing and
continuing the hardship, suffering and pain, and even death of innocent Palestinians.
The above overture was approved by ballot vote with 81 in favor, 75 opposed and 2 abstentions.
REPORT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION
FOR THE CHURCH OF ST. ANDREW
Summary
Following many years of conflict within the congregation and leadership at the Church of St. Andrew (COSA),
in August 2013 the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta (PGA) appointed an Administrative Commission (AC) to
inquire into and settle these differences. The Administrative Commission, consisting of three teaching elders and
two ruling elders, reviewed the findings of other investigations, reviewed church records, interviewed current
and former members, and interviewed the pastor and lay leadership.
The disagreements within COSA are many and some are of long duration. The range of conflict includes most
characteristics of church governance including: worship styles, pastor selection, terms of call of the pastor,
32
eligibility of members to serve as Elders, styles of music used in worship, management of the church property,
and allocation of church funds.
Although the root causes of conflict vary, the impact of these ongoing disagreements is clear. Membership of the
church has decreased to a level where the church cannot be sustained. Church leadership has become ineffective,
and recent financial decisions demonstrate a lack of responsibility and sustainability. After reviewing the history
of the problems and listening to the members’ stories, the Administrative Commission reluctantly concluded that
the only reasonable course was for the church to dissolve.
At a Congregational Meeting on December 8, 2013, the Church of St. Andrew voted to dissolve. The church
held a worship service of remembrance and celebration on January 12, 2014. An estimated 200 members, former
members, and friends attended this Kirkin’ of the Tartans service of celebration and remembrance.
The Administrative Commission for the Church of St. Andrew recommends to the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta,
that the commission be dissolved and a that a new commission be formed to oversee the disposition of church
property, preservation of records, and other matters related to the closure of the church.
Introduction
The establishment of an Administrative Commission for the Church of St. Andrew (COSA) was recommended
by the Committee on Ministry at the August 17, 2013 meeting of the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta. This
recommendation was approved and the following persons were elected to serve as Commissioners:





Rev. Joe B. Martin, Mount Vernon Presbyterian Church
Rev. Ceceyla Taylor, Trinity Presbyterian Church (Decatur)
Rev. Jay Thomas, Minister at large
Elder Ginger Jeffries, First Presbyterian Church of Atlanta
Elder Ralph Clements, Roswell Presbyterian Church
The Administration Commission was formed with the following instructions from the Presbytery:
1. Inquire into and settle the difficulties within Church of St. Andrew (G-3.0109b(5)), including:
2.
a. Explore and clarify the arrangement between the school and the church regarding governance,
separation, and finances.
b. Obtain an accurate membership list with contact information.
c. Communicate with members of the congregation in whatever fashion that the commission
deems appropriate. Examples are: hearings, focus groups, subcommittee meetings.
d. Call and conduct town hall meetings to receive comments and feedback from current members,
and former members.
e. Review the recent audit and all financial information.
f.
3. Assume original jurisdiction of the Session only if the Administrative commission concludes that the
session of Church of St. Andrew is unable or unwilling to manage wisely its affairs per G-3.0303e after
a thorough investigation and full opportunity to be heard has been accorded to the Session. Original
Jurisdiction will include but not be limited to the powers:
a. To call for congregational meetings and Session meetings
b. To assume responsibility and control of all financial matters
c. To assume the duties of the trustees in all items related to the corporate entity
d. To arrange for the pastoral care of all members
e. All other duties of the Session under G-3.02
33
Actions
The Administrative Commission conducted the following actions:











Orientation and training from the PGA Stated Clerk
Review of the work of the Administrative Review Team
Review of church records including:
o Membership rolls and directories
o Session membership
o Minutes of session and congregational meetings for the prior 10 years
o Financial records for the prior 10 years
o Report from the external auditor
o List of current Session members including contact information and terms of service
o The relationship and records of the Tabula Rasa school (tenant)
o The lease arrangements for the cell phone tower
o Pastor terms of call
Meetings with the pastor
Meetings with the session
Town Hall meetings (listening session) with members, former members, and friends
Meetings with the owners of the Tabula Rasa school
Hired a professional inspector to report on the condition of the building
Arranged for a final worship service and celebration
Arranged for separation of personnel
Arranged for handover of property and assets to the Presbytery
Findings and Discussion
The Church of St. Andrew is overwhelmed with conflict over multiple issues, some going back many years.
These include disagreements over the style and format of the worship service and music used during worship
going back at least ten years. Other disagreements include who is eligible to serve as a member of the Session
and the terms of call of the pastor. There is also disagreement on the leasing of the church property for the
Tabula Rasa school and other matters related to property management. Other conflicts relate to financial
decisions around the allocation of funds.
This culture of conflict has led to a decline in membership for many years, as members became disenfranchised
by the many disagreements within the body. Congregation membership in 2013 was approximately 35 with the
typical worship attendance (as observed by the commissioners) being about 16.
The conduct of a formal audit was not within the scope of this commission; however this commission did
examine the financial records of the church for the past ten years as part of the process of learning and listening.
Although some of the financial records should have been better maintained, overall there is no apparent evidence
of deceit in the management of the church’s finances. As the membership levels declined, the church became
more reliant on non-giving income sources, particularly the cell phone tower lease and the Tabula Rasa school
lease.
Disagreements within the church leadership resulted in the pastor and lay leaders being unable to work together
to move the congregation to resolution of their conflicts. The last Session of COSA was comprised of four
people: the pastor, the pastor’s husband, the head of the school which leases space from COSA, and another
member. The commissioners agreed that the pastor’s husband and the owner of the tenant school were
inappropriate members of the Session due to their inherent conflicts of interest. The pastor said that she saw no
conflict of interest in having her husband as a member of the Session. Either way, there were no other members
willing and eligible to serve.
34
During the September 24, 2013 meeting with the Session, the Administrative Commission was told that the
Session could not conduct business and the Session invited the Administrative Commission to assume original
jurisdiction of the Session. The commissioners voted to assume original jurisdiction and remained in that role
until the dissolution of the church.
The commissioners’ work was compromised by mistrust and suspicion from COSA members and leaders who
did not trust the Presbytery. They had been told from outsiders that the Presbytery’s objective was to take control
of the COSA property so that it could be sold in order to provide money for the Presbytery. During the summer
of 2013, the Session hired an attorney to help them fight against what they believed was an attempt to steal their
property. As a result of these attitudes and actions, the commissioners found it difficult to get clear information
from mistrusting members. The commissioners made a significant effort to gain the trust of the members and to
restore their faith in the church universal.
Due to declining membership and ineffective leadership in the culture of conflict and mistrust, it became
apparent that the church was no longer a viable congregation. The Administrative Commission recommended to
the congregation that they vote to dissolve the church.
Recommendations
The Administrative Commission for the Church of St. Andrew makes the following recommendations.
1. That the Administrative Commission for the Church of St. Andrew be dissolved.
We will be requesting the Committee on Ministry to appoint a new administrative commission for the purpose of
managing the remaining actions related to the closure of the Church of St. Andrew.
Please see the addendum to these minutes for the Litany of Celebration for the life and ministry of the Church
of St. Andrew.
NOMINATING COMMITTEE
For Recommendation: (part of the omnibus motion)
Committee on Preparation for Ministry has one vacancy:
Class of 2015:
(2014) (TE) Roosevelt Winfrey, Honorably Retired
Council has one vacancy:
Class of 2016:
(2014) (RE) Delores Bryant-Booker, Hillside
Committee on Ministry has one vacancy:
Class of 2016:
(2014) (TE) Richard Short, Honorably Retired
OPERATIONS
Admit to Record:
35
See the following quarterly financial reports.
Presbytery of Greater Atlanta, Inc.
Preliminary Statement of Financial Position
Operations Fund
As of November 30, 2013
Assets
Cash
Investments
Accounts Receivable
A/R--Operations
A/R-Due from Clifton Sancturary Min.
A/R-Hanbit PC
A/R-Midway PC
A/R-Georgia Avenue Building/Site
A/R-Riverdale PC
A/R-Peachtree City
A/R -East Point
Pledges Receivable (Ground Lease)
Discount on Pledges Receivable (Ground Lease)
Total Accounts Receivable
Prepaid Expenses
Property & Equipment
Land, Buildings and Property (Net)
Total Assets
($364,431.61)
$731,233.88
$1,863.59
($28.08)
$34,994.87
$45,515.86
$28,199.35
$65,615.74
$1,352.75
$35,201.64
$975,000.00
($706,652.00)
$481,063.72
$2,023.17
$28,455.35
$4,238,558.53
$5,116,903.04
Liabilities, Fund Principal, & Restricted Funds
Liabilities
Benevolences/Accounts Payable
Due to (from) Other Funds
A/P Operations
HFSA
Long-term Debt
N/P -Riverdale
Due to Wells Fargo Equip Express (Car)
Due to Wachovia (CSM)
Total Long-term Debt
Total Liabilities
$0.00
($1,443.73)
$2,104.06
$28,980.23
$8,059.06
$107,391.19
$144,430.48
$219,158.05
Total Restricted Funds
Fund Principal
Fund Balance-Operations
Net Income Year-to-Date
Total Fund Principal and Net Income Year-to-Date
Total Liabilities, Fund Principal, & Restricted Funds
36
$259,841.61
$4,670,437.90
($32,534.52)
$4,637,903.38
$5,116,903.04
Presbytery of Greater Atlanta
Operations Fund Revenues and Disbursements-Preliminary
Period Ending November 30, 2013
Actual
Period Ending
11/30/13
$
585,997.47
$
541,120.88
Unified
Per Capita
Budgeted Designated
Budgeted General Assembly
$
Budgeted Presbytery
$
Total Designated $
Interest Income
Designated for Presbytery Only
Other Income
Total Revenues before Transfers
$
$
$
$
$
$
Actual
Period Ending
11/30/12
674,399.18
525,436.01
$
$
Annual Budget
FYE 01/31/14
825,000.00
587,000.00
91,658.65
29,876.40
121,535.05
$
$
$
136,716.32
37,822.52
174,538.84
$
$
$
213,000.00
55,500.00
268,500.00
9,745.16
61,772.07
6,658.49
1,326,829.12
$
$
$
$
11,548.92
144,796.22
3,977.54
1,534,696.71
$
$
$
$
15,000.00
80,600.00
19,500.00
1,795,600.00
Transfers
Calvin Center
New Church Development
Peacemaking
Transfer to Pilgrimage
From Restricted Funds
Total Transfers
$
$
$
$
$
$
117,120.65
89,299.51
117.24
(97.42)
206,439.98
$
$
$
$
$
$
120,000.00
78,595.07
174.50
(213.15)
198,556.42
$
$
$
$
$
$
140,000.00
100,000.00
(300.00)
239,700.00
Benevolent Disbursements
$
387,049.08
$
440,717.59
$
561,270.00
Program Expenses
Committees & Partnerships
Salary and Benefits
Administrative Costs
Total Program Expenses
$
$
$
$
24,380.35
598,781.38
147,696.30
770,858.03
$
$
$
$
28,926.31
622,668.33
180,831.61
832,426.25
$
$
$
$
45,641.00
739,607.10
193,300.00
978,548.10
Total Transfers and Disbursements $
1,364,347.09
$
1,471,700.26
$
1,779,518.10
16,081.90
Change in Net Assets
$
(37,517.97)
$
62,996.45
$
Other Revenues
$
4,983.45
$
4,485.11
$
-
Other Expenses
$
$
-
Net Operating Total
$
-
$
(32,534.52)
37
$
67,481.56
$
16,081.90
THE PRESBYTERY OF GREATER ATLANTA
2013 BENEVOLENCE GIVING RECORDS
11/30/13
*See explanation on final report page regarding each column.
COLUMN 1
CHURCH
COLUMN 2
BENEVOLENCE BENEVOLENCE
PLEDGE
RECEIVED
COLUMN 3
COLUMN 4
COLUMN 5
COLUMN 6
COLUMN 7
COLUMN 8
PER CAPITA
PER CAPITA
TOTAL RECEIPTS
SPECIAL
NON-BUDGETED
TOTAL OF ALL
ASSESSMENT
RECEIVED
TO PRESBYTERY
DESIGNATIONS
DESIGNATIONS
RECEIPTS
$21.68
BUDGET
(Column 2 + Colunm 4)
ALPHARETTA
ATLANTA KOREAN
ATLANTA TAIWANESE
AUSTELL
BARNESVILLE
BETHANY
BUFORD
CANAAN KOREAN
CARROLLTON
CENTRAL
CHURCH OF ST. ANDREW
CHURCH OF THE MASTER
CHURCH OF THE NEW COVENANT
CLAIRMONT
COLLEGE PARK
COLUMBIA
CONYERS
COVENANT
CRISTO PARA TODAS LAS NACIONES
CROSSROADS
DALLAS-DODD
DECATUR
DRUID HILLS
EAST POINT
EASTMINSTER
EBENEZER
EMORY
FAIRVIEW
FAYETTE
FELLOWSHIP
First AFRICAN
First MONROE
First PRES-ATLANTA
First PRES-BREMAN
First PRES-COVINGTON
First PRES-DOUGLASVILLE
First PRES-GRIFFIN
First PRES-JOSNESBORO
FirstPRES-LAGRANGE
First PRES-MANCHESTER WM SPRGS.
First PRES-PEACHTREE CITY
FRIENDSHIP
GOOD NEWS GARDEN
GOOD SHEPHERD
GRACE COVENANT
GREENVILLE
GUM CREEK
HAMILTON MILL
HANBIT
HEMPHILL MEMORIAL
HILLSIDE
JACKSON
JOHNS CREEK
KELLEY
KOREAN CENTRAL
KOREAN COMMUNITY
LAWRENCEVILLE
LOYD
LUTHER HAYS
MCDONOUGH
MEMORIAL DRIVE
MORNINGSIDE
MORROW
MOUNT VERNON
NEW LIFE
NEWNAN
NORCROSS
NORTH AVENUE
NORTH DECATUR
NORTHMINSTER
NORTHWEST
$19,000.00
$17,416.63
$0.00
$2,774.57
$0.00
$0.00
$4,700.00
$46,000.00
$3,525.00
$38,333.30
$3,000.00
$2,333.36
$0.00
$9,240.00
$2,500.00
$1,000.00
$2,200.00
$7,700.00
$750.00
$2,500.00
$8,767.00
$6,750.00
$1,000.00
$2,700.00
$0.00
$30,000.00
$10,000.00
$19,750.00
$10,000.00
$9,166.57
$13,000.00
$8,800.00
$4,583.37
$3,500.00
$4,125.00
$3,500.00
$28,000.00
$23,060.89
$1,900.00
$1,900.00
$4,000.00
$3,500.00
$12,500.00
$5,000.00
$4,583.37
$14,000.00
$1,600.00
$10,500.00
$1,466.63
$3,500.00
$30,000.00
$24,000.00
$19,000.00
$17,416.63
$2,120.08
$16,676.70
$36,000.00
$20,000.00
$35,000.00
$15,000.00
$19,121.76
$715.44
$1,864.48
$2,384.80
$628.72
$2,883.44
$12,856.24
$303.52
$6,438.96
$13,983.60
$867.20
$2,384.80
$2,471.52
$7,656.77
$1,430.88
$3,143.60
$6,785.84
$5,029.76
$888.88
$3,056.88
$1,105.68
$16,433.44
$4,444.40
$823.84
$8,563.60
$563.68
$2,623.28
$2,926.80
$7,934.88
$737.12
$15,132.64
$56,346.32
$260.16
$6,395.60
$12,840.27
$5,657.42
$3,924.08
$13,766.80
$715.44
$9,996.75
$520.32
$997.28
$5,331.60
$1,105.68
$693.76
$2,406.48
$3,685.60
$2,254.72
$1,040.64
$3,360.40
$1,886.16
$15,869.76
$2,558.24
$2,818.40
$41,972.48
$6,699.12
$4,596.16
$845.52
$13,810.16
$2,926.80
$10,644.88
$6,699.12
$11,685.52
$11,707.20
$10,211.28
$3,425.44
$13,388.24
$6,308.88
$11,338.64
$7,306.16
38
$19,121.76
$715.44
$1,864.48
$43.00
$628.72
$7,983.70
$298.34
$5,896.00
$13,983.60
$867.20
$2,384.80
$2,471.52
$8,248.77
$1,430.88
$2,096.00
$2,399.44
$888.88
$3,048.00
$1,105.68
$16,433.44
$2,280.50
$7,707.24
$563.68
$2,623.28
$5,951.16
$10,090.50
$840.28
$56,346.00
$260.16
$5,862.67
$2,550.00
$12,619.99
$715.44
$520.32
$7,000.00
$672.08
$4,085.60
$2,254.72
$1,040.64
$3,324.36
$1,886.18
$11,901.88
$2,000.00
$12,500.00
$6,699.12
$4,596.16
$13,810.00
$2,682.90
$10,645.00
$6,400.00
$11,000.00
$9,400.38
$1,712.72
$13,388.24
$11,338.64
$7,306.16
$36,538.39
$715.44
$1,864.48
$2,817.57
$628.72
$0.00
$7,983.70
$298.34
$9,421.00
$52,316.90
$867.20
$2,384.80
$2,471.52
$10,582.13
$1,430.88
$2,096.00
$2,399.44
$7,700.00
$888.88
$3,798.00
$3,605.68
$25,200.44
$9,030.50
$0.00
$7,707.24
$1,563.68
$5,323.28
$0.00
$5,951.16
$0.00
$20,090.50
$840.28
$76,096.00
$260.16
$15,029.24
$0.00
$0.00
$11,350.00
$17,203.36
$715.44
$4,125.00
$4,020.32
$0.00
$7,000.00
$672.08
$0.00
$0.00
$27,146.49
$2,254.72
$2,940.64
$3,324.36
$5,386.18
$11,901.88
$2,000.00
$0.00
$25,000.00
$6,699.12
$9,179.53
$0.00
$24,310.00
$4,149.53
$14,145.00
$6,400.00
$24,000.00
$11,000.00
$26,817.01
$3,832.80
$30,064.94
$0.00
$46,338.64
$22,306.16
(Column 5+Columns 6 &7)
$2,428.04
$6,684.00
$2,572.66
$1,072.40
$620.00
$330.00
$2,055.77
$2,389.00
$6,003.15
$4,111.00
$850.00
$1,179.99
$1,371.02
$405.00
$2,717.15
$1,281.00
$902.00
$1,068.75
$245.00
$187.50
$1,550.00
$13,032.77
$3,546.80
$176.30
$895.97
$187.50
$1,515.00
$10,000.00
$260.20
$1,110.00
$2,682.78
$1,776.00
$889.15
$31.00
$1,668.00
$369.00
$7,480.25
$316.21
$1,644.25
$1,433.45
$4,583.37
$155.00
$10,875.00
$2,203.00
$6,198.70
$1,500.00
$341.00
$1,000.00
$103.00
$1,773.75
$116.70
$2,554.50
$1,621.51
$150.00
$5,714.75
$1,018.00
$2,973.00
$1,607.00
$3,975.96
$916.63
$527.00
$1,433.30
$558.44
$2,543.26
$75.00
$2,787.50
$128.00
$1,041.00
$11,000.00
$595.00
$1,040.00
$9,060.00
$201.12
$45,650.43
$715.44
$1,864.48
$6,462.63
$628.72
$950.00
$10,039.47
$298.34
$15,921.00
$59,170.05
$867.20
$2,384.80
$4,056.51
$14,670.30
$1,430.88
$3,377.00
$3,546.44
$8,768.75
$888.88
$4,173.00
$6,670.68
$48,233.21
$12,837.50
$1,286.30
$8,603.21
$1,563.68
$8,037.06
$1,776.00
$6,840.31
$0.00
$21,758.50
$1,209.28
$85,779.25
$576.37
$22,872.19
$0.00
$0.00
$12,783.45
$21,786.73
$870.44
$16,500.00
$4,020.32
$0.00
$7,000.00
$1,013.08
$0.00
$0.00
$28,146.49
$2,254.72
$3,043.64
$5,214.81
$5,386.18
$14,456.38
$2,000.00
$0.00
$25,000.00
$8,320.63
$9,404.53
$0.00
$32,812.25
$5,167.53
$17,246.00
$9,048.00
$38,975.96
$11,000.00
$27,733.64
$4,954.80
$32,538.24
$558.44
$55,398.64
$25,050.54
39
MISSIONAL ANNOUNCMENTS
1. George Tatro shared with the Presbytery information about the Atlanta Hunger Walk
encouraging all congregations to sign up with representatives to march together. A special
appeal was made to involve and invite youth groups to participate.
2. Ernie Hess shared with the Presbytery the work of the Haiti Partnership. He shared how the
partnership has been involved with helping folks in Haiti learn how to read…a specific request
from Haiti.
3. Lisa Majoros shared with the Presbytery her expressions of thanks and about the continued
ministry of AMIS (Atlanta Ministry with International Students) as one of hospitality and
friendship
CLOSING
The Presbytery was closed with prayer offered by Moderator Rob Sparks at 1:17 PM.
Respectfully Submitted:
Donna E. Wells
Stated Clerk
40
ADDENDUMS
Table of Contents
1. First Read: Gracious Separation Policy
2. Council Task Force re. Jeff Peterson-Davis update report on recommendations
3. Litany of Thanksgiving for the Life and Witness of the Church of St. Andrew
41
Addendum #1
Gracious Separation Policy
This is a first read of the re-write of the Gracious Separation Policy. The original policy was adopted by the
Presbytery at its Stated Meeting on December 1, 2011. Since the adoption of this policy, we have engaged 4
churches and have come out of those engagements with many learnings. In an attempt to make this policy
clearer and more accurate to real life situations, a task force of former PET team members, and SCC members
from two of the churches where we had engagement worked on this re-write. Council has approved its
submission to the Presbytery for a first read.
If you have suggestions, questions before this is brought back to the May 1, 2014 meeting, please direct those to
Donna Wells (dwells@atlpcusa.org) and they will be forwarded to the task force for reflection and consideration.
POLICY OF RESPECTFUL DISCERNMENT AND POSSIBLE
MUTUAL SEPARATION
As the Church, we begin with a statement of our values:
Statement of Values of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
The 218th General Assembly (2008) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) approved Commissioners’ Resolution
Item 04-28 which urged (quoting the then-current Book of Order):
.”..that presbyteries and synods 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’ (Book of Order, G-11.0103i) with consistency, pastoral responsibility,
accountability, gracious witness, openness, and transparency. Believing that trying to exercise this
responsibility and power through litigation is deadly to the cause of Christ, impacting the local church, other
parts of the Body of Christ and ecumenical relationships, and our witness to Christ in the world around us,
the General Assembly urges congregations considering leaving the denomination, presbyteries and synods to
implement a process using the following principles:





Consistency: The local authority delegated to presbyteries is guided and shaped by our shared faith,
service, and witness to Jesus Christ.
Pastoral Responsibility: The requirement in G-11.0103i to consult with the members of a church seeking
dismissal highlights the Presbytery’s pastoral responsibility, which must not be submerged beneath other
responsibilities.
Accountability: For a governing body, accountability rightly dictates fiduciary and connectional
concerns, raising general issues of property (G-8.0000) and specific issues of schism within a
congregation (G-8.0600). But, full accountability also requires preeminent concern with ‘caring for the
flock.’
Gracious Witness: … Scripture and the Holy Spirit require a gracious witness from us rather than a harsh
legalism.
Openness and Transparency: Early, open communication and transparency about principles and process
of dismissal necessarily serve truth, order, and goodness, and work against seeking civil litigation as a
solution.”
The rationale supporting this resolution stated that it is easy to “emphasize the property trust responsibilities of
Presbytery/synod oversight to the exclusion of the pastoral responsibility of caring for the congregations
(members staying and leaving) and the responsibility of public witness to Christ with the larger body of Christ
and the community and world.” Secondly, it was suggested that presbyteries should be consistent in
communicating how they will respond to congregations seeking dismissal and that all parties should engage in a
more grace-filled exchange.
42
Statement of Values of the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta
The Presbytery’s overarching value is the mission of Jesus Christ. This mission leads us to several values in
cases of discord within the Body of Christ:
a. Unity
The congregations and members of the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta seek to uphold one another and to respect
each other’s integrity, even as we acknowledge significant differences in our views of what the Bible teaches
about a number of issues. We affirm the freedom of conscience of each member of the body of Christ. We desire
to encourage peace and unity, while minimizing confrontation between our congregations and members, as we
seek together to find and represent the will of Christ. In all that we do, it is our prayer to strive to be a church
modeled on the body of Christ, a church made up of many different parts, all of which are necessary for its
mission to the world (F-1.0301). Our spiritual unity is derived from the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love
of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. (2 Corinthians 13:14)
b. Freedom of Conscience and Mutual Forbearance
Presbyterians have always celebrated and recognized significant differences of opinion on issues that matter.
This ethos is currently noted in the historic language found at F-3.0105: “[W]e also believe that there are truths
and forms with respect to which men of good characters and principles may differ. And in all these we think it
the duty both of private Christians and societies to exercise mutual forbearance toward each other.” Our
covenant demands that we strive to work together in peace and unity, even in the midst of our diversity. The duty
is always to attempt to bring the estranged member back into the covenant community, and we promise to carry
out that duty in our ordination vows.
Through our theology we understand that “Presbyters are not simply to reflect the will of the people, but rather
to seek together to find and represent the will of Christ. Decisions shall be reached in governing bodies by vote,
following opportunity for discussion, and a majority shall govern” (F-3.0204 and 3.0205). At the same time, the
church is committed to being open to voices sharing minority opinions. At some points in our history, minority
views eventually became those of the majority. Thus, the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
recognizes “’The church reformed, always to be reformed according to the Word of God’ in the power of the
Spirit” (F-2.0200).
There are also times when members find it impossible to go along with the majority. The Presbytery encourages
all presbyters and congregations to “concur with or passively submit to” the vote and wisdom of the majority
(footnote to G-2.0105). If their consciences will permit neither, the Presbytery will be generous in allowing
congregations and presbyters with strong issues of conscience to pursue peaceable withdrawal through dismissal
to another Reformed body in accordance with our interpretation of the Trust Clause as found in Sections 3 and 6
below.
c. Dialogue and Reconciliation
The goal of this Presbytery will always be reconciliation and continued engagement in relationship for all
congregations within the Presbytery, without the threat of isolation, estrangement or blame. The Presbytery is to
be a servant to the congregations God has entrusted to us, encouraging and supporting them toward becoming
healthy, growing congregations. This is especially true for those congregations for whom the bonds of unity are
stretched and ecclesiastical connections are frayed over issues of conscience to the point of considering
disaffiliation.
1 John 4:18 states: “There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear. For fear has to do with punishment,
and he who fears is not perfected in love.”
43
The Presbytery’s commitment to this passage in how we dialogue with each other means that we are committed
to engage the leaders of a congregation or the congregation as a whole without threat of punishment. It is
likewise incumbent upon the leaders of congregations wrestling with issues of conscience to share their concerns
with Presbytery leadership in a timely manner, being assured that the response will not be hostile, but instead
one of prayerful dialogue and a commitment to act in love and in the best interests of the congregation as well as
the Presbytery’s mission.
Dialogue recognizes that our Reformed tradition includes broad historical differences between the great
doctrines and themes of the church, and the specific theories and models which different communities have
found useful in seeking to understand those doctrines in the practice of their faith. A Reformed stance allows
room for a variety of legitimate perspectives and valid models of “essentials” that allow an understanding of
underlying mysteries. Graciousness on both sides acknowledges this validity and seeks to honor rather than to
demonize one another.
The policy itself:
POLICY OF RESPECTFUL DISCERNMENT AND POSSIBLE
MUTUAL SEPARATION
The Book of Order, the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) (“PC(USA)”).
2011/2013 provides in part at G-3.0301 as follows:
Part II,
The Presbytery is responsible for the government of the church throughout its district,
and for assisting and supporting the witness of congregations to the sovereign activity of God in
the world, so that all congregations become communities of faith, hope, love and witness. As it
leads and guides the witness of its congregations, the Presbytery shall keep before it the marks
of the Church (F-1.0302), the notes by which Presbyterian and reformed communities have
identified themselves through history (F-1.0303) and the six Great Ends of the Church (F1.0304).
In light of this charge, the Presbytery has responsibility and power to:
(a) provide that the word of God may be truly preached and heard. This responsibility shall
include organizing, receiving, merging, dismissing, and dissolving congregations in consultation
with their members; overseeing congregations without pastors; establishing pastoral
relationships and dissolving them;…providing encouragement, guidance, and resources to
congregations in the areas of mission, prophetic witness, leadership development, worship,
evangelism, and responsible administration to the end of the church’s witness through the love
and grace of God may be heard in the world.
As part of the responsibility of the Presbytery set forth above, G-4.0203 Church
Property Held in Trust, (the “Trust Clause”) provides:
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.).
The Presbytery, on occasion, will become aware that a congregation or some part of a congregation may
desire to separate from the denomination. In that event Presbytery is obligated to oversee that separation to
ensure that the best interest of the Presbytery and those in that congregation who do not wish to separate are
honored. In carrying out its responsibility, the Presbytery has identified several guiding principles:
44
(1) Presbytery must determine, by whatever methods it deems appropriate, what part of the congregation
desires to remain in the PC(USA) and what part of the congregation desires to leave;
(2) Presbytery, under the Trust Clause, is obligated to use the Church property held in trust first for the
benefit of the PC(USA) and therefore those members of the congregation who wish to remain in the PC(USA).
The Trust Clause covers all assets of the congregation and not solely real estate.
(3) If any of the property will be released with those in the congregation who are departing, it may be
released only to another Reformed body recognized by the PC(USA). It cannot be released to “independency.”
(4) Nothing in this policy is intended to prevent any member of any congregation from deciding that he
or she desires to move to a different church or denomination by requesting a letter of transfer. It is not the
Presbytery’s mission or purpose to prevent any member of any congregation from separating from the PC(USA).
(5) The Presbytery believes that exercising its responsibility and power through litigation is deadly to
the cause and the witness of Christ. Therefore, Presbytery will not preemptively initiate civil litigation based on
the Trust Clause, but if some, or all of the congregation, initiates civil action, the Presbytery may take legal
action to defend its mission strategy for the Presbytery. It is the Presbytery’s goal to encourage peace and unity
as we seek together to find and represent the will of Christ for the members of the congregation through the
exercise of the provisions of this policy with particular care for those members who wish to remain part of the
PC(USA).
I. Period of Discernment
When Presbytery becomes aware that some or all of a congregation are considering separation from the
PC(USA), the Committee on Ministry (COM) will appoint two or more skilled and experienced persons
(Representatives) to contact the pastoral staff of the congregation to determine the nature, extent and seriousness
of dissent. The congregation will give the Representatives an accurate active membership roll of the
congregation in order to aid in the discernment process. The Representatives will seek a time of prayer and
conversation focused upon understanding the issues and identifying potential steps toward reconciliation. The
Representatives may hold discussions with congregation leaders, the session individuals and/or small member
groups, as deemed appropriate, and may require several months or longer as the Representatives attempt to
ascertain the extent of dissatisfaction within the congregation and potential for reconciliation. During this period
of discernment, Representatives may use whatever methods seem appropriate to discern the extent of
dissatisfaction within the congregation, including town hall meetings, surveys, speaking at church services to
explain this policy and the separation process to the congregation as a whole. It is important during this period
of discernment that each member of the congregation understands the theology of the PC(USA), this policy and
the implications of the Trust Clause. It is also imperative that the Presbytery determine what part of the
congregation, if any, desires to remain in the PC(USA) in order for the Presbytery to meet its obligation to care
for those members and discern its obligations pursuant to the Trust Clause. If during this period of discernment
the representatives of Presbytery determine that a significant part of the congregation desires to separate from the
Presbytery and the denomination, the process in Section II will proceed.
45
II. Process for Separation
If during this period of discernment the representatives of Presbytery determine that a significant part of
the congregation desires to separate from the Presbytery and the denomination and that reconciliation does not
appear possible, COM will then appoint the Representatives to serve as a Presbytery Engagement Team (PET) to
undertake further discussions with the staff, session and wider congregation and will provide information if
requested to assist the congregation to discern God’s will for denominational affiliation for some or all of the
congregation. PET will be comprised of a balanced number of ministers and elders who are representatives of
Presbytery as a whole and, if possible, will include persons who have special skills, training and experience in
mediation and negotiation. Thereafter, the chairperson of PET will remain in regular communication with the
Presbytery through COM and the stated clerk’s office, and will provide Presbytery with periodic updates on the
status of discussions with the congregation.
The congregation’s session will appoint a Special Committee of the Congregation (SCC) to begin
negotiating with PET the terms of separation and formal validation of the congregation’s desire to separate.
SCC should comprise a mix of pastors and elders, including members of the congregation’s finance, property
and personnel committees and should be representative of the broader congregation, including those who wish to
remain in the PC(USA). It is expected that the congregation’s leadership will ensure that PET is involved in all
communications including mailings, newsletter, website, social media, email, etc. with the congregation so that
both sides of every issue are addressed fairly and accurately. During this time of negotiation and exploration,
PET’s dialogue with the congregation and SCC will be guided by the following:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Prayerful and respectful conversations to achieve clear understanding of the issues and positions
of all participants, including those congregation members that do not wish to withdraw from the
denomination;
Clarification of the services and benefits provided to or on behalf of the congregation and its
leadership by its Presbytery and the PC(USA);
Explanation of the process of separation from the PC(USA) and its likely consequences,
including financial, property and other matters;
An initial discussion of whether separation shall occur by dismissal, dissolution, transfer of
letters or by some other means (See G-3.0301, above); and
Continuation of the exploration of whether reconciliation is feasible.
If SCC and PET discern that some type of separation must take place, Presbytery recognizes that, in the
context of the Trust Clause, some division or sale of church property may be appropriate. Regardless of the form
of separation, no property may be released to the individual member(s) of the congregation. Dismissal may
occur only to another Reformed Body recognized by the PC(USA). It cannot be dismissed to “independency,”
independent persons, or an independent church body.
SCC will provide to PET copies of all executed documents concerning the congregation’s incorporation
and by-laws, real property and all other assets including, current bank and investment accounts, deeds of trust,
loan agreements, deeds to secure debt, liens, property and casualty insurance, and statements of tangible and
intangible assets. In order for the separation process to proceed, steps must be taken to repay in full any
indebtedness owed to or guaranteed by Presbytery, the Synod, or PC(USA), or to refinance such indebtedness
through an independent creditor without support from the Presbytery, the Synod, or PC(USA). Appropriate
action must also be taken to amend any organizational documents, as necessary, and to ensure that adequate
insurance coverage of all property is maintained until separation is completed.
Similarly, if the congregation has established a foundation or received any grant or endowment, related
documentation must be examined to identify any terms or restrictions affected by the proposed separation or
involving Presbytery, Synod or the PC(USA) to ensure the terms of the documentation are honored.
46
SCC will provide to PET two current market appraisals of all of the land, buildings, fixtures, and
personal property contents held by the congregation. The cost of these appraisals, prepared by independent
appraisers satisfactory to both SCC and PET, will be borne by the congregation. Fair market value will ordinarily
be obtained by averaging the two appraisal amounts.
To allow the Presbytery and that part of a congregation seeking to separate to act graciously towards one
another, SCC and PET will negotiate clear and specific written terms by which the Presbytery will resolve the
division, if any, of all property. This division, if any, will tangibly recognize the congregation’s and
Presbytery’s history of ministry together, and will bless one another for their future ministries but with a primary
consideration of the intent and purpose of the Property Trust Clause.
Prior to finalization of the separation process, legal counsel will be retained to review the terms of the
proposed written Settlement Agreement (the “Agreement”), prepare any quit claim deed by Presbytery to the
congregation for any real property being released, and prepare an indemnification by the separating congregation
to Presbytery against any and all future claims that may arise related to the property. All legal costs associated
with this and any other corrective action noted above shall be borne by the separating congregation.
These terms will take into account the following considerations:


The congregation’s size.
The extent of dissatisfaction with the PC(USA) - particularly, whether a minority/majority may wish to
remain within the PC(USA) either by joining other congregations or by seeding a new church
development or continuing as the existing PC(USA) congregation.
 The congregation’s comprehensive financial situation.
 The appraised value of the property, any loans and liens against it, and the circumstances of those
loans.
 Any grants made to the congregation, either to establish the congregation or to further its mission
and ministry.
 The congregation’s history and longevity within the PC(USA) and predecessor denominations.
 The tangible and intangible value the Presbytery and PC(USA) offered by the congregation through
its history and, for example:
o The education and training of pastors, Christian educators, and candidates for ministry;
o Support for pastors and Christian educators during times of transition and throughout their
ministry;
o Camp and conference centers;
o Educational resources; and
o Shared mission and witness both locally and globally.
 Website, social media and IT infrastructure.
 A reasonable timeframe and means of distributing any property to be divided.
When presenting the final written Agreement to the congregation and Presbytery, SCC and PET will
also present their discernment process, so it is clear to the congregation and Presbytery that the financial terms
represent a mutually accepted separation agreement. (See Section IV).
III. Church Personnel
Each minister shall declare his/her intention to remain in or to leave the PC(USA) as soon as PET and
SCC teams are formed. Each minister serving the congregation may choose to continue serving the separating
congregation or to seek another call within the PC(USA) which may include remaining a minister with the
congregation that remains within the PC(USA). For any minister who seeks a call within the PC(USA), but
outside the present congregation, if the congregation separates, the negotiations of the congregation must include
a severance package equal to not less than six (6) month’s salary. The severance period begins as negotiated
between the SCC and PET. If a minister requests a transfer to a Reformed body to which the separating
47
congregation members intend to join, normally this transfer will be approved unless the minister is the subject of
a pending judicial or investigative action (per D-10.0105).
Special attention shall be given to the members of the congregation who are preparing for ministry and
are under the care of Presbytery. Each member under care, together with his/her liaison from the Committee on
Preparation for Ministry (CPM), shall be advised immediately that some or all of the congregation’s members
desire to separate. A member under care, in consultation with PET, SCC and the CPM liaison, will be given the
opportunity and assistance to decide under which congregation that person wishes to remain, whether it is with
the separating congregation, the remaining congregation or a new membership elsewhere.
It is important that throughout this process both SCC and PET communicate carefully so that
divisiveness is minimized between those within the congregation who wish to separate and those members who
intend to remain in the PC(USA). After a formal vote by the congregation, members will be contacted regarding
their membership status. (See Section VI). Members who serve on Presbytery committees who wish to
withdraw will have their terms end officially on the date the Presbytery votes to approve the terms of the
separation.
IV. Congregational Approval of Terms and Type of Separation.
After PET and SCC have negotiated the terms of the separation and the type of separation, Presbytery
will formally call a meeting of the congregation to validate the proposed written terms of separation, the type of
separation sought as set forth in the Agreement and to validate which members are separating and which
members are remaining members. Because of the importance of this decision in the life of the church, at least
fifty (50%) percent of the active members of the congregation shall be in attendance for this vote to take place.
Notice of the called meeting of the congregation must be given at least thirty (30) days in advance (and, if
provided by the U.S. Postal Service at least thirty-three (33) days) and every effort must be taken to maximize
participation of members in this meeting. It is expected that representatives of PET and SCC will address the
congregation and discuss any specific issues that will enable the congregation to make an informed decision
based on the facts and prayerful discernment. Steps will be taken to ensure that only active members of a
congregation are permitted to vote and voting will occur by secret written ballot. Proxies will not be accepted.
If two-third (2/3) of those voting approve the request for separation and accept the terms of the
Agreement, the separation request will be deemed as validated by the congregation. The congregational vote,
however, is advisory only; the final decision to separate rests with the Presbytery.
If the vote for separation does not receive a two-thirds majority, then real potential for congregational
conflict must be recognized and addressed. To allow the congregational leadership to caringly address the
situation, an interval of no less than twelve months must pass before another congregational vote for separation
can be taken.
If there is a separation, and not a dismissal, and if PET and SCC and the Session agree in writing, and no
real property is to be released by Presbytery, this vote may be waived and the final Agreement shall be reported
to Presbytery.
V. Process for Presbytery to Approve Separation
Once the congregation has formally voted (or the vote has been waived) to request separation from
Presbytery and PC(USA) and has accepted the terms of the Agreement, Presbytery will vote on accepting the
terms of the Agreement. Representatives of PET will report on the discernment process, financial terms, and the
congregational vote tally at a regular stated meeting of Presbytery, and will strongly encourage Presbytery to
approve the Agreement.
It should be noted and carefully considered by attendees that renegotiation of the terms for separation
48
through use of amendments from the floor of Presbytery would invalidate months of work between PET, SCC,
and the congregation. Therefore, the proposal should be presented as a whole, with the understanding that the
final Agreement has been reached in good faith negotiations among PET, SCC, and the congregation.
Approval by Presbytery requires a simple majority. In the unlikely event that the Presbytery does not
approve the separation, PET will inform COM who will inform the Presbytery at the next stated meeting of
Presbytery for a reconsideration of issues raised by Presbytery. If approved, the transfer of property (if
applicable), will take place no less than thirty (30) days after approval when the way is clear.
It is our prayer that, by all parties’ commitment to follow the above process in good faith, we can resolve
differences reasonably and with grace.
VI. Determination of Members’ Desire for Transfer
Within 30 days of the Presbytery’s vote approving the Agreement of the separating congregation,
Presbytery will prepare a letter to members of the church informing them of their option to be separated with the
congregation or to remain in the PC(USA). The Church will send, by U.S. Postal Service or email, the letter to
active members of the congregation promptly and will bear all costs associated with this mailing. The letter will
direct that responses should be returned to Presbytery. The Presbytery, through PET, will then ensure that
contact is made with those members wishing to remain in the PC(USA).
VII. Completing the Separation
Recognizing that the departure of valued colleagues in ministry will be a matter of pain for all parties, it
is appropriate for Presbytery to hold a time of prayer, giving thanks for prior shared ministry and prayers for the
ongoing witness of the departing congregation and the remaining congregation, of all other congregations in the
Presbytery, and the PC(USA).
49
Addendum #2
Council Task Force re. Jeff Peterson-Davis update report on recommendations
Interim Report of the Committee on Recommendations of the
Jeff Peterson-Davis (JPD) Administrative Commission
Presbytery of Greater Atlanta
January 15, 2014
A. Recommendations Concerning Distribution
1. Recommendations on Report One distribution to governing bodies…Done by the Stated clerk
following our August 2012 Presbytery Meeting
2. Recommendations on Report Two distribution to sessions…Done by the Stated Clerk following our
August 2012 Presbytery Meeting
3. Recommendations on Report Two distribution to Montreat…Done by the Stated clerk following our
August 2012 Presbytery Meeting. We received a thank you acknowledgement from the President of
Montreat
4. Recommendation on Need-to-Know Form to request Report One…We have received 5 requests for
the complete report and have responded according to protocol.
B. Recommendations Concerning Care for Victims
1. Apology - At the August meeting of Greater Atlanta Presbytery, as recorded in the minutes,
Executive Presbyter Penny Hill offered a public apology for the ways in which the church and the
presbytery had failed in the Jeff Peterson-Davis situation. Ed Albright, the former executive
presbyter, offered a personal apology as well.
2. Service of healing to be planned by the Presbytery’s Worship Committee – The committee on follow
up activities is actively working to identify a date and a central location for the Service of Healing.
The announcement of the service will be handled through the Presbytery Office using all of its
communication networks to maximize publicity throughout the Presbytery. The committee will also
contact churches in the outlying areas to arrange transportation to the host church in order to
increase participation and availability to all survivors of sexual abuse and their families and
supporters. Every effort will be made to provide access to the 5 survivors of the JPD sexual abuse
who wish to attend.
3. Resources for counseling – An offer to assist the survivors of the JPD sexual abuse was extended in
October 2013. Counseling/therapy would be provided (payable to a therapy) for sessions not to
exceed a total of $3000 per survivor. Presently, one survivor has expressed a definite interest in the
offer, and the others are still weighing the offer. The committee has established a deadline of
December 31, 2014 to commence therapy that is payable by the Greater Atlanta Presbytery.
4. Retreat opportunity for victims – The Presbytery of Greater Atlanta extended an opportunity to the 5
survivors to attend LEAPING UPON THE MOUNTAINS: A MEN'S RECOVERY WEEKEND led
by Mike Lew & Thom Harrigan. One of the survivors served as the point of contact with the others.
The offer was initiated on October 17, 2013 with follow on October 31, 2013 and January 9, 2014.
The response in the January 2014 email is that “There was little response...they did not seem
interested in the retreat offered.” Therefore this committee will notify the chair of the JPD
Commission of the responses and recommend that letters are sent to each survivor closing out the
offer of a retreat, extending the offer for counseling through December 31, 2014, and offering
assistance to attend the Service of Healing.
50
C. Recommendation to Church Councils
1. Administrative leave for co-pastors – The recommendation of the Committee On Ministry of the
Greater Atlanta Presbytery will present its recommendation to the Presbytery at the February 8, 2014
meeting.
2. Legal settlements concerning abuse…not acted upon to date
3. Sexual Misconduct Self-Certification – Changes to the Personnel Information Form are handled by
the legal department of the General Assembly. The PGA is awaiting a response from the department
for guidance and steps to petition for a change to the PIF.
4. Reference checks by nominating and personnel committees…We have designed a new Executive
Reference check form that is used in this Presbytery. We have shared that with our the presbyteries
of our Synod.
5. Notation of renunciation after abuse charges – The response from the Office of the General
Assembly indicates this notation is the current practice and is being done.
6. Executive reference-checking training…Penny contacted the Association for Executive Presbyters
and was told that this training is offered during the Executive training for new EP’s.
7. Mandatory reporting extended to church volunteers and employees…not acted upon to date
8. Mandatory background checks…an overture is in the hands of this General Assembly
9. Children’s training on self-advocacy – The committee is continuing to gather information for use in
training children to recognize sexual abuse and to take appropriate action.
10. Training presbyteries in disclosure of sexual boundary violations
11. Annual review and acknowledgement of the policy on Preventing and Responding to Sexual
Misconduct…COM is currently working on this
12. Consequences of renunciation pending charges – The Presbytery of Greater Atlanta approved
concurrence of the overture from the Presbytery of Western Reserve to amend G-2.0509
Renunciation of Jurisdiction of the Form of Government to add a new paragraph that prohibits
former teaching elders who have renounced jurisdiction in the midst of a judicial proceeding from
performing any work, paid or volunteer, in any congregation or entity of the Presbyterian Church
(U.S.A).
51
Addendum #3
Litany of Celebration for the Life and Ministry of the Church of St. Andrew
Let us join our hearts together as we give thanks to the Lord for the life and witness of the Church of St. Andrew.
Let us pray:
Almighty God, throughout the centuries you have gathered daughters and sons to bear witness to the
Light of your Son, Jesus Christ. Through the prayers of their hearts and the work of their hands you have
made known your faithfulness, justice, and compassion to many generations.
We give you thanks, O Lord, for such signs of your Presence among us.
For those 60 charter members gathered by the Holy Spirit in what has become Sandy Springs, Georgia,
back in 1964, and for the hundreds who would follow after them, praying, singing, giving, forgiving and
being forgiven, teaching, healing, and reaching out to the world in acts of mercy and reconciliation,
We give you thanks, O Lord, for such signs of your Presence among us.
For the children of the Church of St. Andrew who were welcomed into your Way at the Baptismal Font
and sealed forever as your own, and for those little ones who were welcomed with open arms in Church
School classes, the day care, and Vacation Bible School.
We give you thanks, O Lord, for such signs of your Presence among us.
For the pastors who preached powerfully, walked humbly, and lived purposefully among the people of
the Church of St. Andrew, pointing them always to the Word made flesh, and encouraging them to
follow boldly in the Way, as together they sought to do your will on earth as it is in heaven.
We give you thanks, O Lord, for such signs of your Presence among us.
For the Table at the Church of St. Andrew, where all were invited to taste and see the goodness, and to
realize the gift of their Oneness in a fellowship built on forgiveness, acceptance and love; and for each
person whose life and work were transformed by such a foretaste of glory divine.
We give you thanks, O Lord, for such signs of your Presence among us.
For the members of the Church of St. Andrew who sustained their ministry in times of change and
challenge, and for the imagination and love that broadened their sense of community and strengthened
their outreach to the poor and needy, their ministry at home with the Community Assistance Center and
abroad in Burkina Faso, even as they wrestled with hard decisions.
We give you thanks, O Lord, for such signs of your Presence among us.
For all these things, we give you praise, O Lord, and especially for the saints whose identity as the
Church of St. Andrew breathed Life into their community and their world for these fifty years. We thank
you for your grace that blessed them on their way and empowered them to lift up the hope of the Gospel
in a world riddled with hurt and despair. As their memory now becomes our inheritance, give us the will
to build on their legacy of faith and courage, justice and generosity, kindness and peace.
Rekindle our Flame! Inspire our Love! Restore our Vision! Give us new resolve to lift high your
cross and make your Joy known! For we pray in the Name of the One whom we worship and
adore this day and forever, Jesus Christ the Lord. Amen.
52