Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in byFaith’s Fall 2019 issue.
In 2015 the pastors of Pacific Northwest Presbytery (PNWP) had a moment of soul-searching. The presbytery had come through a season of dealing with pastoral catastrophes at several churches.
PNWP Teaching Elder Matthew Bohling served on the Ministers and Churches Committee, which was in charge of shepherding pastors and churches through the wreckage. He and PNWP Moderator John Haralson felt that their committee was “like a fire department being called to a four-alarm fire,” Bohling said. “We just did cleanup.” The presbytery did nothing proactive to prevent these crash-and-burn situations.
At the core, Bohling believed, was a fundamental misconception about the purpose of presbytery. Because pastors weren’t looking to the presbytery for support, sin secretly gained a foothold in men’s lives and grew unchecked. By the time fellow elders realized there was a problem, it was too late.
Bohling, Haralson, and others proposed some changes to PNWP’s presbytery format to allot more time for relationship building without sacrificing essential presbytery business. If pastors could get to know each other in informal settings, they reasoned, they could be honest with each other and receive loving accountability from fellow elders.
Chesapeake Running Aground
Anonymity has no place among God’s servants.
Chesapeake Presbytery formed about 16 years ago when the Baltimore-Annapolis churches broke off from Potomac Presbytery. Five years into its existence, Chesapeake Presbytery was running aground.
Meetings were long, unproductive, and bogged down in judicial cases, recalls Bruce O’Neil, senior pastor of Evangelical Presbyterian Church of Annapolis. The Credentials Committee acted as a gatekeeping body intent on keeping candidates out rather than shepherding candidates through the ordination process. Worse, the committees struggled to have a quorum, and the presbytery was not planting new churches.
“Our culture was not healthy. We dealt with our differences through floor examinations, judicial cases, and protests,” O’Neil said. “We really didn’t know each other.”
There had to be a better way.
Rethinking the Purpose of Presbytery
Chesapeake and PNWP took different approaches to resolving their dysfunctions. For PNWP, the committee chairmen, stated clerk, and moderator came together to determine how to have meetings that accomplished everything the Book of Church Order required, while working as efficiently as possible.
A handful of presbytery leaders drafted a paper asking presbyters to reconsider the purpose and format of the quarterly meetings.
PNWP utilized two-day meetings from 5 p.m. on Thursday to 4:30 p.m. Friday. Under the old format, committees met Thursday evening after worship and dinner, and most of Friday’s business dealt with candidate examinations and out-of-bounds presbyter reports.
“We looked very hard at the schedule and asked, ‘What is absolutely, positively necessary that we do together, and what is not?’ And we trimmed down to what absolutely must be done verbally on the floor of presbytery,” Bohling said.
Now PNWP committees meet before presbytery either via video conference or elders meeting in person earlier Thursday afternoon. Candidates and out-of-bounds presbyters submit their reports before presbytery, and the clerk distributes the reports electronically.
PNWP also modified its credentials process to make the written exam the most important exam in the ordination process. The exam with the PNWP Credentials Committee became the second-most important exam, and the presbytery floor exam became the shortest exam.
By making the floor exam the shortest, PNWP freed up time during presbytery meetings, and elders learned to trust each other more. Elders learned to rely on the fact that the committee had done its work and did not spend time on the floor of presbytery rehashing issues that the committee had already covered in its exams.
“The gospel induces a dynamic of give-and-take where I am as willing to receive as I am to give.” – Matt Bohling
These leaner meetings leave more time for elders to spend time together informally on Thursday evening after dinner. PNWP also added a “Moderator’s Program” on Friday, a lecture or seminar that serves as continuing education for the elders, adding another element to presbytery that will strengthen the body.
Shepherding Pastors and Multiplying Churches
In Chesapeake, a study committee helped the presbytery examine its vision and values and think about how to restructure meetings to focus on developing future leaders, planting new churches, and revitalizing established churches.
The presbytery appointed an executive committee to plan each presbytery meeting. The goal: accomplish worship and business in less than four-and-a-half hours, five times each year.
The executive committee also nominates members for the presbytery’s five committees and the presbytery judicial commission.
Chesapeake Presbytery changed its gatekeeping Credentials Committee to the “Leadership Development Committee,” which seeks to guide men through the licensure and ordination process. “We are developing our leaders rather than merely giving credentials if they meet our standards,” O’Neil says.
Developing Trust, Improving Health
Though PNWP and Chesapeake perceived different problems leading to presbytery dysfunction, O’Neil believes the underlying issue is a lack of trust.
When pastors and elders fail to trust each other, presbytery becomes a battleground for warring factions. And since a battleground is no place for the wounded, pastors struggling with discouragement or secret sins fight their own wars alone.
Bohling can understand why some pastors want to stay anonymous at presbytery. Flying under the radar and not getting to know fellow pastors feels more comfortable than being honest about difficult things. But anonymity has no place among God’s servants.
“One of the things that the gospel does for a presbytery is that it induces a dynamic of give-and-take where I am as willing to receive as I am to give,” Bohling said. “I make space for my brothers because I think they are valuable.”
Since its reorganization, Chesapeake has planted three churches and set up a commission to handle judicial cases. The presbytery votes commission decisions up or down with little debate.
Around the U.S., other presbyteries have revamped vision statements and overhauled meetings to create healthier cultures. Central Florida, Central Indiana, Ohio Valley, and Arizona presbyteries have changed toxic cultures. New presbyteries have created systems for trust and relationship building from the beginning.
Bohling has helped other presbyteries develop a culture of relationship building and trust. Change is always hard, he noted, but when men realize that the damage the status quo will induce outweighs the pain of changing, they will put in the work to create something better.
We like to hear what you think about this. Please submit a letter to the editor, or write to letters@byfaithonline.wpengine.com.