Let’s not lend a hand to litigiousness and simply keep the BCO as it is on these uniform filing deadlines. The present 30 days allows plenty of time for reasonable filings of Complaints and Appeals. A vote AGAINST these 3 proposals is a vote FOR closure and for reasonable support for Sessions to do the work of being shepherds to their flock.

At present, there are three proposed amendments to the PCA Book of Church Order (BCO) to change the filing times for Complaints and Appeals that could seriously hurt the church and multiply confusion. For the reasons below and others, Northwest Georgia Presbytery voted not to approve these amendments at its September meeting.

Since I’ve not seen much discussion on these amendments, I wanted to provide our rationale, along with a plea to other Presbyteries not to approve these three proposed BCO amendments. Surrounded by a far more publicized overture on Intinction (Item #6 in the proposals), there is a tendency for these three filing-process proposals to get lost in the shuffle and just be waived on by with little attention to the consequences. That, however, would be a significant mistake that many Sessions could regret for years to come.

I believe that these proposals were waived through by the 2012 General Assembly thinking that Complainants or Appellants might not have adequate time to object and file their documents within the 30 day period presently in BCO 42 and 43. For legitimate dissent, the present 30 days is plenty of time, and, of course, we’re all for due process for all. However, many hard-working Sessions may have unnecessary burdens added to their shoulders should these proposals pass. Proposed items #3 and #5 seek to change the statute of limitations for Complaints and Appeals to a relative 30 days from receipt of notification, instead of from the proven standard of 30 days from the date of the court’s action (and adds a needlessly cumbersome procedure to the Session).

Notwithstanding, the glaring proposed change (Item #4 to amend BCO 43-2) is to create a different time period by doubling the time for Complaints to 60 days. Absent proven massive, intentional obstruction by many Sessions, it is simply speculation that our time-standard employed for 40 years has not worked and that a new one would be an actual improvement. To the contrary, at present the BCO has a clear and uniform time statute that can and should be known to all parties. Rather than creating (a) more work for Sessions, (b) inconsistent time periods, and (c) a patchwork set of filing procedures for members (and Sessions!) to navigate, it seems wiser to leave the BCO as it is. IT IS NOT THAT BROKEN, if at all. And there is already an adequate method of Complaint (BCO 43-3, sentence 2) if a Session is non-responsive.

Moreover, 40 years ago, there were no faxes, no emails, no social media—communication has certainly sped up. Today’s 30-day period is probably comparable to 60-90 days in 1973-years of communication. Rather than lengthening the period for Complaints, one could probably muster a better argument to shorten the filing statutes in view of the increased rapidity of electronic communications.

In an age that is prone to litigiousness, there are good reasons why the 30-day closure period is abundantly ample.

Furthermore, it is not helpful to those who are dissatisfied to stew in discontent longer, to focus more on disagreement with their elders, to consult others on how to draft Complaints with even enhanced litigiousness, or how to—if given more time—find other loopholes rather than to, alas, submit to the decisions of their elders and courts (Heb. 13:17).

Neither the Old Testament (interestingly, Dt. 17:8-13 classifies the failure to abide by the deliberated decisions of a court of priests as “contempt” and puts an end to appeals in an emphatic fashion) nor the New Testament (Mt. 5:25; 1 Cor. 6:4) call for the art of Complaining or Appealing to be more expertly litigious.

Instead, an orderly “no thank you” to these BCO proposals might not only spare Sessions much more tedium than needed, but it assures that the dissatisfied will deal with their concerns sooner rather than later (Eph. 4:26). Extending the filing statutes, especially to 60 days, will help neither the sheep nor the shepherds find the closure they need; it will only induce enhanced litigiousness (1 Cor. 6:7).

Just as a coach has to take his team and move on, even if the call or score doesn’t go its way, so Sessions and pastors need all the support possible in this age to move people to accept governance and away from Complaining-it is, even while there are numerous methods to express dissent properly (See also BCO 45).

Perhaps we should also be honest: most of the Complaints our courts receive are not over some matter of doctrine or high principle; no, it’s more often that one didn’t get his way. Seriously, every conceivable filing does not rise to the importance of the 1935 case between J. Gresham Machen and the Presbytery of New Brunswick.

Let’s not lend a hand to litigiousness and simply keep the BCO as it is on these uniform filing deadlines. The present 30 days allows plenty of time for reasonable filings of Complaints and Appeals. A vote AGAINST these 3 proposals is a vote FOR closure and for reasonable support for Sessions to do the work of being shepherds to their flock.

David W. Hall, a Teaching Elder in the Presbyterian Church in America, is Senior Pastor of Midway Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Powder Springs, Ga.