At its stated meeting on September 10, 2013, Grace Presbytery (South Mississippi) approved an overture on changing some of the judicial processes in the Presbyterian Church in America. The overture recommends that the PCA General Assembly amend its Book of Church Order 15-5 which deals with the decisions of the Standing Judicial Commission (SJC).

The overture arose from dissatisfaction with some of the judicial decisions made last year by the Standing Judicial Commission in a number of cases. A number of Presbyteries expressed their concerns about these decisions and sent overtures to the 41^st General Assembly seeking to have the cases reviewed (See here, here, and here). The GA did not approve these overtures and the decisions were not reviewed.

The Grace overtures makes a number of assertions:

Whereas, the Standing Judicial Commission of the General Assembly (SJC) has been established (BCO 15-4 and Rules of Assembly Operations (RAO 17) in a way that isolates its decisions from review of the General Assembly, making its judgments final, without approval of the General Assembly as a whole (BCO 15-5a and b): and

Whereas this represents a contradiction in the way the various courts of the church operate—with the judicial commissions of presbyteries operating in one fashion and the General Assembly/SJC operating in another….and

Whereas, insulation of SJC Decisions from the oversight of the entire General Assembly may violate the principle of the General Assembly having the power to “bear testimony against error in doctrine” (BCO 14-6a)….

One part of the amendment suggests adding the following, “The General Assembly without debate shall approve or disapprove of the judgment, or may refer, (a debatable motion), any strictly constitutional issue(s) to the Committee on Constitutional Business.” Right now, the decisions of the SJC are final without having to be voted on by the General Assembly.

The Overture as adopted by Grace Presbytery:

Overture to the General Assembly

Change BCO 15-5(a) and (b) in order

to regularize the approval of judicial commission decisions

Whereas, the Book of Church Order (BCO) recognizes a distinction between commissions (BCO 15-1), which “conclude the business assigned to it” and judicial commissions (BCO 15-3), which must submit its decision, without debate, for approval or disapproval of presbytery; and

Whereas, the BCO establishes the principle that judicial commissions act on behalf of a presbytery, but do not have their decisions finalized until the entire court hears and approves the judgment rendered (BCO 15-3); and

Whereas, the Standing Judicial Commission of the General Assembly (SJC) has been established (BCO 15-4 and Rules of Assembly Operations (RAO 17) in a way that isolates its decisions from review of the General Assembly, making its judgments final, without approval of the General Assembly as a whole (BCO 15-5a and b); and

Whereas this represents a contradiction in the way the various courts of the church operate—with the judicial commissions of presbyteries operating in one fashion and the General Assembly/SJC operating in another; and

Whereas, this contradiction may violate the essential principle of BCO 11-3 that “all Church courts are one in nature;” and

Whereas, insulation of SJC Decisions from the oversight of the entire General Assembly may violate the principle of the General Assembly having the power to “bear testimony against error in doctrine” (BCO 14-6a); and

Whereas, the means for ensuring that the SJC remain the General Assembly’s judicial commission is already present in the model found in presbytery judicial commissions in BCO 15-3; and

Whereas, the General Assembly may wish to decide a judicial case, notwithstanding the limiting Vows taken by SJC members (RAO 17-1), just as a presbytery does; and

Whereas, the General Assembly may wish to decide a judicial case by not ordinarily deferring to the factual findings of the presbytery or its discretion and judgment (BCO 39-3.2).

Therefore, be it resolved, that BCO 15-5(a) and (b) be amended as follows (additions in underline):

15-5. a. In the cases committed to it, the Standing Judicial Commission shall have the judicial powers and be governed by the judicial procedures of the General Assembly. The decision of the Standing Judicial Commission shall be the final decision of the General Assembly except as set forth below, to which there may be no complaint or appeal. Members of the Standing Judicial Commission may file concurring or dissenting opinions, or a minority report as set forth in (c) below. The General Assembly may direct the Standing Judicial Commission to retry a case if upon the review of its minutes exceptions are taken with respect to that case.

b. In each case the Standing Judicial Commission shall issue a summary of the facts, a statement of the issues, its judgment and its reasoning, together with any concurring or dissenting opinions. all of which shall be entered on the minutes of the General Assembly and shall be reported by the Stated Clerk to the next General Assembly. The judgment shall be effective from the time of its announcement to the parties. The General Assembly without debate shall approve or disapprove of the judgment, or may refer, (a debatable motion), any strictly constitutional issue(s) to the Committee on Constitutional Business. In the case of referral, the Standing Judicial Commission shall either dismiss some or all of the specific charges raised in the case or decide the case only after the report of the Committee on Constitutional Business has been heard and discussed. If the General Assembly approves, the judgment of the Standing Judicial Commission shall be final and shall be entered on the minutes of the General Assembly as the action. If the General Assembly disapproves, it may assume original jurisdiction at the point of the original complaint or indictment, and/or assign the case back to the Standing Judicial Commission, with or without the assumption of original jurisdiction, and/or appoint, through the moderator, a special commission to hear the case again, with or without the assumption of original jurisdiction.

If approved, these two sections would read as follows:

15-5. a. In the cases committed to it, the Standing Judicial Commission shall have the judicial powers and be governed by the judicial procedures of the General Assembly. Members of the Standing Judicial Commission may file concurring or dissenting opinions, or a minority report as set forth in (c) below. The General Assembly may direct the Standing Judicial Commission to retry a case if upon the review of its minutes exceptions are taken with respect to that case.

b. In each case the Standing Judicial Commission shall issue a summary of the facts, a statement of the issues, its judgment and its reasoning, together with any concurring or dissenting opinions. The General Assembly without debate shall approve or disapprove of the judgment, or may refer, (a debatable motion), any strictly constitutional issue(s) to the Committee on Constitutional Business. In the case of referral, the Standing Judicial Commission shall either dismiss some or all of the specific charges raised in the case or decide the case only after the report of the Committee on Constitutional Business has been heard and discussed. If the Assembly approves, the judgment of the Commission shall be final and shall be entered on the minutes of the Assembly as the action. If the General Assembly disapproves, it may assume original jurisdiction at the point of the original complaint or indictment, and/or assign the case back to the Standing Judicial Commission, with or without the assumption of original jurisdiction, and/or appoint, through the moderator, a special commission to hear the case again, with or without the assumption of original jurisdiction.