CALLED MEETING

November 30, 2006

The Presbytery of Mississippi held a called meeting at Westminster Presbyterian Church, Hattiesburg, Mississippi on Thursday, November 30, 2006 at 2:00 p.m. with the Vice Moderator, Ms. Peggie Herrington, presiding. The meeting was opened with prayer by Dr. Bubba Martin.

ROLL

A quorum was present with the following twenty-five ministers and thirty elders enrolled for the meeting.

Ministers: Emett Barfield, Martha Blount, Charles Bowdler, Tim Brown, Steve Bryant, Scott Castleman, William dePrater, John Dudley, Russell Hays, Michael Herrin, Andrew Hoffecker, Chas Jones, William Jones, John Larson, Su McLain, Lynn Miller, Steve Ramp, Clint Regen, Clarence Roberts, Cory Stott, Morris Taylor, Sally-Lodge Teel, Jim Truesdell, Andrew Wells, Jim White

Elders: Tip Hailey, First Canton; Frank Cuervo, Diamondhead; Norma Loposser, Handsboro; Robert Bruce, Westminster Gulfport; Carolyn McLarnan, Westminster Hattiesburg; Janice Nixon, Fairview; Suza Dorsey, Briarwood; Larry Favreau and Auburn Lambeth, Covenant; Shirley Middleton, Faith; Betty Gentry, Fondren; Sallie Wren, St. Luke’s; Henry Davis, First-Trinity; Richard Stratton, Liberty; Annie Ruth Thigpen, First Lucedale; Norma Bassett, Vernal; Trey Hess, Grace Chapel; Benton Gibson, J.J. White Memorial; A.M. “Bubba” Martin, Trinity; Joan Gandy, First Natchez; Peggie Herrington, Westminster Natchez; William Gryder, First Ocean Springs; Vance Sprague, Pineville; Al Hollingsworth, First Port Gibson; Bobby Robinson and Ed Thompson, First Vicksburg; Bob Friley, Yokena; Bill Pettey, C.L.P. Wiggins; Jim Rabey, Wiggins; George Bates, moderator of Christian Nurture Committee

Corresponding Members: Margaret dePrater (Presbytery of New Hope)

Visitors: Dick Blount, Helen Boone, Jim Brown, Sara Brown, Jim Cassell, Ann Catron, John Catron, Glenn Gentry, Bill Hays, Violet Jones, Ralph Loposser, Chuck McKinley, Loreice Nackley, Stuart Robinson, Robert St. John, Gerry Wilson

An excused absence was granted to all active minister members not present and to all sessions not represented. An excused absence was also granted to Morris “Skip” Ehrlich. The following ministers were absent without excuse: Barron Banks, Ned Beckes, Theophilus King, and David Ray.

The purpose of the meeting was twofold:

to consider a proposed policy statement on property developed by the Task Force on Denominational Matters

to dissolve the pastoral relationship between Rev. Jim White and Fondren Presbyterian Church and to grant him the status of honorably retired, both effective February 28, 2007

The meeting was called at the request of the members of the Task Force on Denominational Matters and also at the request of Rev. Jim White and the session of Fondren Presbyterian Church.

I. Dr. Emett Barfield, moderator of the Task Force on Denominational Matters, presented the following proposed statement on property for the consideration of the presbytery:

Statement of Policy on Property of the Presbytery of Mississippi

I. Purpose of this Statement of Policy

The Presbytery of Mississippi desires to retain all of its congregations as sister churches based on our organic spiritual unity found in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. Our unity rests in Christ, not in real estate. Quoting Isaiah 66:1-2, Stephen admonished his critics, “Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made with hands” (Acts 7:48). It has ever been thus in Israel and in this Presbytery. Property should neither hold us together nor pull us apart.

Matters concerning property within the bounds of the Presbytery of Mississippi would be largely academic, were it not for current events in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). In April of 2006, the Trustees of Eastern Oklahoma Presbytery filed an affidavit placing a claim on all the real property belonging to congregations within the bounds of that presbytery. This was a strategy recommended in a paper entitled “Church Property Disputes” which was produced for the Stated Clerk of the General Assembly. Many congregations throughout the Presbyterian Church thus believe they have reason to fear coercive action by their presbyteries. The First Presbyterian Church of Baton Rouge, for example, has asked the courts of Louisiana to issue a declaratory judgment that the congregation alone owns its property, and the Presbytery of South Louisiana has concurred with that request.

It is solely to allay such fears that the Presbytery reiterates and reaffirms its historic stand with respect to property issues. The Presbytery offers this Statement of Policy to its particular churches as the definitive statement on how this Presbytery interprets and intends to enforce the Book of Order with respect to real property.

II. Policy Statement

The Presbytery of Mississippi hereby:

1. Desires all its particular churches to remain in fellowship with each other under the jurisdiction of the Presbytery;

2. Resolves that pure preaching of the gospel and right administration of the sacraments are constitutive of the church, that our unity, purpose, and mission are found in Jesus Christ and nowhere else, and that decisions affecting ownership of property are subordinate to, and should support, our spiritual unity in Christ;

3. Resolves that the Great Ends of the Church found in G-1.0200 summarize the mission of this Presbytery and explain the purpose for the existence of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.);

4. Resolves that whenever particular churches of this Presbytery pursue the Great Ends of the Church they are in fact using their property for the benefit of this Presbytery and of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.);

5. Trusts its particular churches to make their own decisions concerning how best to use their property to accomplish the Great Ends of the Church;

6. Resolves that property has not been, is not, and shall not be a basis for our unity or an opportunity for division among us;

7. Recognizes that many of its particular churches believe they hold clear title to their own property;

8. Recognizes all its particular churches as having the ability to sell, lease, mortgage, or otherwise encumber any of their real property without further written permission of the Presbytery;

9. Recognizes all its particular churches as having the ability to acquire real property subject to an encumbrance or condition without further written permission of the Presbytery;

10. Resolves that it shall take no action to enforce any general trust interest claimed by any higher governing body against any property, real or personal, held by any of its particular churches while they remain under its jurisdiction;

11. Resolves that it will not resist any particular church of the Presbytery of Mississippi which would ask the courts of the State of Mississippi to clear its property of any claims made by higher governing bodies against that property; and

12. Orders that these statements be transmitted through the sessions of all the particular churches of the Presbytery.

III. Theological Reflection and Rationale

1. The Church is founded by Jesus Christ and should embrace his methods and his values. The Holy Spirit is building the church “upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20). Jesus established the church by calling and gathering the apostles to himself. He trained, taught, and commissioned them to preach, teach, make disciples, baptize, and celebrate the Lord’s Supper with the risen Lord. Our Book of Order recognizes that it is Christ who calls the Church into being, giving it all that is necessary for its mission, edification, and service.

2. Jesus did not call or train the church to deal with real property. When we turn to what Jesus had to say, this is what we find:

When a man asked Jesus to settle an estate with his brother, Jesus replied: “Man, who has made me a judge or divider over you” (Luke 12:14)? Jesus refused to get involved with the property issue. Instead, Jesus used this occasion to warn people not to covet and place one’s trust in larger barns.

When the sons of Zebedee were vying for power, Jesus said, “You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you” (Mark 10:42-44).

“Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man has nowhere to lay his head” (Matthew 8:20).

3. The Goal of the Church is not ownership but discipleship. “It belongs to Christ alone to rule, to teach, to call, and to use the Church as he wills, exercising his authority by the ministry of women and men for the establishment and extension of his kingdom” (G-1.0100(b)). Thus, the goal of the church is not to acquire, own, manage, buy, or sell real property. The goal of the church is to extend Christ’s reign on earth.

4. According to John Calvin, the marks of the church are the preaching of the gospel and the right administration of the Sacraments. Real estate is not and never has been one of the marks of the church. In the early church, congregations did not own real estate. People met in houses, often in secret. Our Book of Order and its historic principles of Church Government are derived from the example of the apostles and the practice of the primitive Church. This includes their attitude towards property.

5. The church is called to exercise spiritual discipline, not worldly power. St. Paul cautions the church at Corinth: The weapons of our warfare are not worldly [physical] but spiritual (II Corinthians 10:4). In the Institutes of the Christian Religion John Calvin carefully describes the spiritual character of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The spiritual power of the church—to resist offenses and eliminate scandal—should be “completely separated from the right of the sword” (Institutes IV.xi.5). The church does not exercise “power through fines or prisons or other civil penalties,” but through the power of the Word. This power is exercised by preaching, admonishing and use of “the final thunderbolt:” excommunication (Institutes IV.xi.5).

Calvin thundered against the church’s attempt to usurp and wield civil power. He cites with approval Ambrose’s statement: “To the emperor belong the palaces; to the priest the churches” (Institutes IV.xi.8). He also cites Bernard, who admonished Pope Eugenius to refrain from making decisions regarding property: “What seems the greater honor to you: to forgive sins or to divide estates? There is no comparison. These base and earthly things have their own judges, the kings, and princes of the earth. Why do you invade another’s border?” He again cites Bernard: “This is the form of apostleship: lordship is forbidden; ministry is bidden” (Institutes IV.xi.11).

Calvin also recalls a time, under Pope Gregory, when priests and bishops confiscated land. “Gregory then called a council of bishops together, inveighed stoutly against that profane custom, and asked whether they would anathematize the cleric who tried to occupy some possession by inscribing a title on his own initiative; similarly, a bishop who either ordered it done or let it go unpunished. All declared, ‘Anathema’” (Institutes IV.xi.14).

6. The Church should always operate out of love and fairness, so as to build up and not injure the faith of its members. Calvin discusses the fact that the church’s rule-making authority is subject always to the requirement that it not violate love. The church in Jerusalem decreed that the Gentile Christians should observe certain dietary laws, etc., (Acts 15:20). Calvin comments: “This is no new law laid down by the apostles, but the divine and eternal command of God not to violate love” (Institutes IV.x.21). Calvin concedes that constitutions are necessary to keep peace and order, but they must be “founded upon God’s authority, drawn from Scripture, and, therefore, wholly divine” (Institutes IV.x.30). When Jesus is silent on a point, the church may impose rules for order and decorum, but they should be tested by the law of love. “But love will best judge what may hurt or edify; and if we let love be our guide, all will be safe” (Institutes IV.x.30). “[W]e are mutually bound, one to another, to nourish mutual love” (Institutes IV.x.31).

7. In applying the law of love, the Presbytery should honor local custom. “Nevertheless, the established custom of the region, or humanity itself and the rule of modesty, dictate what is to be done or avoided in these matters” (Institutes IV.x.31).

8. In accordance with the mission of the church – to extend the reign of Christ in the world by pursuing the Great Ends of the Church – decisions by the church should be made with a view to the up-building of the witness of the local congregation. Fighting over title to real property damages faith and destroys the witness of the church.

9. In Mississippi, land and identity are deeply intertwined. This Presbytery has always regarded real property as part of the local congregation’s core identity. During the 1970s, a number of congregations in Mississippi elected to withdraw and join other Reformed denominations. These were difficult and heartbreaking decisions. Some of the decisions to leave were fueled by anxiety over what would become of the church property if they remained with the denomination. Many of the congregations who chose to remain in the PCUS believe that, when they exercised the exemption clause provided in G-8.0701, they retained their property free of any denominational claims. Feelings about ownership of real property run very deep in this Presbytery and we have learned, by hard experience, to err on the side of grace in dealing with such matters.

10. For the past twenty years, it has been the policy of this Presbytery not to use real property as a weapon or bargaining chip. Although the Presbytery has an encouraging role to play, especially in the formation of new congregations, it continues to be the responsibility of the congregations themselves to pay for their buildings and to maintain them, in order that the mission of the Church might be carried out in particular places.

11. This statement is in no way intended to abrogate the Presbytery’s role in determining what happens to the property of a congregation which is dissolved or in schism or which seeks to be dismissed from the Presbyterian Church, (U.S.A.). Instead, this statement seeks to reassure all the particular congregations of the Presbytery of Mississippi that, while they remain in fellowship with us, their property is safe for them to use and develop as they see fit.

12. This statement is an attempt to be faithful to the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Because of incomplete records, the Presbytery has long assumed that all its congregations that were formerly members of the PCUS did exercise the clause in G-8.0701 that allowed them to be exempt from needing the permission required in G-8.0501 and 0502. G-8.0501 does not stipulate that the permission given to particular churches to sell, mortgage, or encumber real property, or to buy property subject to encumbrances or conditions, must be done on a case-by-case basis. Likewise, there is no stipulation in G-8.0502 that permission to lease property must be given on a case-by-case basis. By granting the permission required in G-8.0501 and 0502 to all its particular churches, the Presbytery thus seeks to treat all of them equally and fairly.

13. Although this Presbytery can build a culture of trust within its bounds, it cannot act on behalf of higher governing bodies. It is possible that, while the Presbytery calls for love and justice to be demonstrated where it comes to congregational property, higher governing bodies may continue to claim ownership of the property belonging to the congregations of the Presbytery. Only the courts of the state of Mississippi can make final determinations concerning the validity of such claims. As a matter of pursuing the love and justice of Jesus Christ, the Presbytery of Mississippi will not interfere with any of its particular churches which desire to act to clear their titles of any claims made on them by the higher governing bodies of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

IV. Conclusion

In making this statement, the Presbytery expresses its trust in its congregations, and earnestly desires that its congregations would trust that this Presbytery will do nothing detrimental to the health or strength of any of its particular churches. We take this position in compliance with the Book of Order, and solely for the furtherance of the great ends of the church. It is our belief that, in this place and at this time, the mercy and grace of Jesus Christ is best demonstrated by avoiding conflict over property issues. This is not a new position for our Presbytery. It is how we have handled such matters in the past, and how we intend to continue to deal with them as we move forward.

The first part of the policy statement, I. Purpose of this Statement of Policy, was received as information.

The presbytery next considered each of the twelve subsections of II. Policy Statement. Subsections 1 through 6 were approved.

An amendment was offered to add at the end of subsection 7 the following words -- “despite the provisions of G-8.0000 in the Book of Order.” This amendment was defeated. Subsection 7 was then approved.

Subsections 8 through 11 were approved.

An amendment was offered to renumber subsection 12 as subsection 13 and to insert as a new subsection 12 the following – “Resolves that nothing contained within this Statement of Policy shall abrogate the authority and responsibility of Presbytery under G-8.0401 and G-8.0601 of the Book of Order.

This amendment was approved. The new subsection 12 was then approved, and the new subsection 13 was also approved.

The presbytery received the third and fourth parts of the proposed policy statement as information and then dismissed with thanks the Task Force on Denominational Matters.

Communications had previously been received from the sessions of First Presbyterian of Vicksburg, Grace Chapel, and J.J. White Memorial Presbyterian Church concurring with the proposed policy statement on property. A communication from the session of Fondren Presbyterian Church in opposition to the proposed policy statement had also been received.

The following requested that their negative votes on subsections 8, 9, 10, and 11 of II. Policy Statement be entered into the minutes of this meeting: Ms. Joan Gandy, Ms. Betty Gentry, Rev. John Larson, Rev. Su McLain, Rev. Lynn Miller, Rev. Cory Stott, Rev. Sally-Lodge Teel, Rev. Jim Truesdell, and Rev. Jim White.

Nota bene: The Statement of Policy on Property of the Presbytery of Mississippi as amended and adopted appears as an Appendix to these minutes.

II. Dr. Steve Ramp presented the following recommendation of the Committee on Ministry:

That presbytery concur with the request of Fondren Presbyterian Church and Rev. Jim White that the pastoral relation be dissolved and that Rev. Jim White be granted the status of honorably retired, both effective February 28, 2006.

This recommendation was approved.

The presbytery expressed its appreciation to the congregation and pastor of Westminster Presbyterian Church for hosting this meeting and to the Vice Moderator, Ms. Peggie Herrington, for the excellent job she did in moderating the meeting.

There being no further business, the presbytery adjourned with prayer offered by Rev. Jim White at 3:15 p.m.

Ms. Peggie Herrington, Vice Moderator

Dr. John C. Dudley, Stated Clerk Attest: _______________________

John C. Dudley

APPENDIX