Assistant Pastors as Church Planters

[Homebound]

Can an assistant pastor be called to the position of organizing pastor for a mission church (specifically called by the session for this role)? I understand the role of assistant pastor and that they are called by the session, but if the session calls an assistant pastor to plant a mission church, and that pastor receives members into the mission church, is his relationship able to be dissolved by the session without the consent of the mission church members who have been received?

My understanding of BCO 5-5 is that an assistant pastor is not a recognized provision of pastoral ministry. I also understand BCO 5-5a to say that members received assent to the call of the pastor, thus establishing a pastoral relationship until the time of particularization. When the time comes for particularization, the members may choose to continue that pastoral relationship.

Knowing that the session can dissolve an assistant pastor's relationship without the consent of the congregation, does this still apply to a mission church? Thank you for any insight and amendments to my understanding. To clarify - this question is in context of PCA BCO.

 

[ZackF]

Can an assistant pastor be called to the position of organizing pastor for a mission church (specifically called by the session for this role)? I understand the role of assistant pastor and that they are called by the session, but if the session calls an assistant pastor to plant a mission church, and that pastor receives members into the mission church, is his relationship able to be dissolved by the session without the consent of the mission church members who have been received?

My understanding of BCO 5-5 is that an assistant pastor is not a recognized provision of pastoral ministry. I also understand BCO 5-5a to say that members received assent to the call of the pastor, thus establishing a pastoral relationship until the time of particularization. When the time comes for particularization, the members may choose to continue that pastoral relationship.

Knowing that the session can dissolve an assistant pastor's relationship without the consent of the congregation, does this still apply to a mission church? Thank you for any insight and amendments to my understanding. To clarify - this question is in context of PCA BCO.

You are distinguishing an assistant pastor from an associate pastor correct?

 

[Homebound]

You are distinguishing an assistant pastor from an associate pastor correct?

Correct - I am speaking specifically about an assistant pastor.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Can an assistant pastor be called to the position of organizing pastor for a mission church (specifically called by the session for this role)? I understand the role of assistant pastor and that they are called by the session, but if the session calls an assistant pastor to plant a mission church, and that pastor receives members into the mission church, is his relationship able to be dissolved by the session without the consent of the mission church members who have been received?

My understanding of BCO 5-5 is that an assistant pastor is not a recognized provision of pastoral ministry. I also understand BCO 5-5a to say that members received assent to the call of the pastor, thus establishing a pastoral relationship until the time of particularization. When the time comes for particularization, the members may choose to continue that pastoral relationship.

Knowing that the session can dissolve an assistant pastor's relationship without the consent of the congregation, does this still apply to a mission church? Thank you for any insight and amendments to my understanding. To clarify - this question is in context of PCA BCO.

This seems like an awkward arrangement, and I wonder if the interested Presbytery has any say in how such a scene might unfold.

If a church has a mother-daughter relationship with a mission work, and the Presbytery is not fully called in for oversight, then the manner in which the overseeing Session (of both mother and daughter congregations) conducts its oversight will not fall wholly within the Presbytery's direct review. Not until that daughter church has particularized, separated and become a congregation in its own right and answerable to the Presbytery.

So, my sense (at a great distance) of the situation is that the mother church exercises (or attempts, intentionally or otherwise) an extra measure of control over the daughter congregation, by removing the erstwhile pastor of the gathering from their direct power (since even as members of the mother church, they did not exercise any power to call the assistant pastor).

The members (such as they are) of a mission church--here I beg pardon because it has been more than 15yrs since I dealt with the PCA BCO--if it is like the OPC's approach, they are made members of the mother church since they are not members "on the roll of Presbytery" if that body was directly overseeing the work. They are provisionally "members" of the mission work, but that is provisional, and not formal.

Perhaps these thoughts are helpful? I would think it less awkward if a church-planter was an associate pastor of a mother-church, if he was not called directly by the Presbytery as planter.

 

[iainduguid]

This seems to be a complex case with two parts, if I understand you correctly:
1) Can a Session call a man specifically as a church planter as an assistant pastor?
2) Given 1), is his relationship with the mission church then dissolvable without a vote of the mission church?

I don't think the BCO directly addresses 1), but I think it addresses it indirectly in 5-3 c. Mission churches can either be governed by a mother church session or by a commission on behalf of presbytery. Your situation is the former, but in the latter case, the church planter is explicitly required to be appointed as a member of the overseeing Session. By analogy, I would argue that in the former case, he ought to be an associate pastor and therefore a member of the mother church session, which he would not be as an assistant pastor. Otherwise, the mission church has no representation on the mother church session, which seems unwise.

As for 2), if the church planter is an assistant pastor of the mother church, there is nothing to stop them firing him without recourse to congregational or presbytery discussion. If they fail to explain to the church plant why they think this course of action necessary, that seems to me very unwise. It's likely to cause the church plant either to close or to break away and join another denomination. The church plant could and should appeal to Presbytery for help, which will force the parent church to explain its actions. It may not be easy to change their minds if the mother church has been providing most of the finances, but the church plant certainly has a right to be heard.

 

[Homebound]

This seems like an awkward arrangement, and I wonder if the interested Presbytery has any say in how such a scene might unfold.

If a church has a mother-daughter relationship with a mission work, and the Presbytery is not fully called in for oversight, then the manner in which the overseeing Session (of both mother and daughter congregations) conducts its oversight will not fall wholly within the Presbytery's direct review. Not until that daughter church has particularized, separated and become a congregation in its own right and answerable to the Presbytery.

So, my sense (at a great distance) of the situation is that the mother church exercises (or attempts, intentionally or otherwise) an extra measure of control over the daughter congregation, by removing the erstwhile pastor of the gathering from their direct power (since even as members of the mother church, they did not exercise any power to call the assistant pastor).

The members (such as they are) of a mission church--here I beg pardon because it has been more than 15yrs since I dealt with the PCA BCO--if it is like the OPC's approach, they are made members of the mother church since they are not members "on the roll of Presbytery" if that body was directly overseeing the work. They are provisionally "members" of the mission work, but that is provisional, and not formal.

Perhaps these thoughts are helpful? I would think it less awkward if a church-planter was an associate pastor of a mother-church, if he was not called directly by the Presbytery as planter.

So if the presbytery does get involved, dissolves the relationship with the mother church, and the presbytery commissions a new group to be the temporary oversight, (5-1c commission) can the original sending church dissolve the pastoral relationship? A few things to keep in mind, this assistant pastor has voted on both sessions, been offered moderator on the second session...

 

[Edward]

I haven't researched it, but it would seem to me that if the mission church hasn't particularized, it can't have called a pastor, or be in a position to request that a call be dissolved. Ordinarily the mission church is under the Presbytery (BCO 5.2) but it may act at the initiative of an existing church (BCO 5.2 a.ii). The presbytery is responsible for the approval of the pastor, not a mother church. ( So the situation described in the original post sounds a bit irregular. (note also that a gathering of folks can also ask the presbytery to establish a mission church 5.2.a.iii.) 5.3 and 5.4 appear to govern, not 5.5.

there is nothing to stop them firing him without recourse to congregational or presbytery discussion.

While I agree that the mother church can fire him as an assistant pastor, I would argue that the presbytery, and not the mother church, would govern his relationship with the mission church. So you could have an awkward situation where the mother church fires him as an assistant, and pulls funding they have been providing, but he would continue as the pastor of the mission church. This would create a mess, and the Presbytery should step in and deal with the situation, and perhaps the mother church as well. Because frankly, a church that would take such action without involving Presbytery probably needs a very hard look from the Presbytery.

A few things to keep in mind, this assistant pastor has voted on both sessions, been offered moderator on the second session...

Well, this isn't right. An assistant doesn't get a vote on the session. Associates do. BCO 12.1 If this has happened, Presbytery should certainly be involved. He may have been moderator of the commission of the mission church, but as a mission church, it wouldn't have a session. Either you are confused about what is actually going on, or the Presbytery needs to step in and clean up a mess.

 

[Homebound]

This seems to be a complex case with two parts, if I understand you correctly:
1) Can a Session call a man specifically as a church planter as an assistant pastor?
2) Given 1), is his relationship with the mission church then dissolvable without a vote of the mission church?

I don't think the BCO directly addresses 1), but I think it addresses it indirectly in 5-3 c. Mission churches can either be governed by a mother church session or by a commission on behalf of presbytery. Your situation is the former, but in the latter case, the church planter is explicitly required to be appointed as a member of the overseeing Session. By analogy, I would argue that in the former case, he ought to be an associate pastor and therefore a member of the mother church session, which he would not be as an assistant pastor. Otherwise, the mission church has no representation on the mother church session, which seems unwise.

As for 2), if the church planter is an assistant pastor of the mother church, there is nothing to stop them firing him without recourse to congregational or presbytery discussion. If they fail to explain to the church plant why they think this course of action necessary, that seems to me very unwise. It's likely to cause the church plant either to close or to break away and join another denomination. The church plant could and should appeal to Presbytery for help, which will force the parent church to explain its actions. It may not be easy to change their minds if the mother church has been providing most of the finances, but the church plant certainly has a right to be heard.

Thank you for your insight. My question is specifically regarding pastoral relationship. 5-3c refers to the form of temporary government rather than pastoral supply. This mission church started as a 5-3B and transitioned to a 5-3C, and then the 5-3B session dissolved the relationship.

 

[Homebound]

I haven't researched it, but it would seem to me that if the mission church hasn't particularized, it can't have called a pastor, or be in a position to request that a call be dissolved. Ordinarily the mission church is under the Presbytery (BCO 5.2) but it may act at the initiative of an existing church (BCO 5.2 a.ii). The presbytery is responsible for the approval of the pastor, not a mother church. ( So the situation described in the original post sounds a bit irregular. (note also that a gathering of folks can also ask the presbytery to establish a mission church 5.2.a.iii.) 5.3 and 5.4 appear to govern, not 5.5.

While I agree that the mother church can fire him as an assistant pastor, I would argue that the presbytery, and not the mother church, would govern his relationship with the mission church. So you could have an awkward situation where the mother church fires him as an assistant, and pulls funding they have been providing, but he would continue as the pastor of the mission church. This would create a mess, and the Presbytery should step in and deal with the situation, and perhaps the mother church as well. Because frankly, a church that would take such action without involving Presbytery probably needs a very hard look from the Presbytery.


Well, this isn't right. An assistant doesn't get a vote on the session. Associates do. BCO 12.1 If this has happened, Presbytery should certainly be involved. He may have been moderator of the commission of the mission church, but as a mission church, it wouldn't have a session. Either you are confused about what is actually going on, or the Presbytery needs to step in and clean up a mess.

A few points - funding was in a reserve in the mother church but the salary/all funding for the mission church came from members or external sources, not the mother church.

Concur wholeheartedly that an assistant does not get a vote on the session. So this "assistant pastor" votes for four years while on the provisional session of the mission church, and then when he turns down the position of moderator on the second provisional session he is also allowed to continue to vote on the session. This is my question - an assistant pastor cannot be forced on a congregation with ecclesiastical jurisdiction. In the same way, if that "assistant pastor" accepts new members to a mission church, doesn't a pastoral relationship exist that cannot be dissolved without congregational input?

 

[iainduguid]

If the mission church is now under the oversight of a presbytery commission, then the session of the mother church has no jurisdiction. They can dissolve their own relationship with the assistant pastor, but that doesn't affect his relationship with the mission church. The Presbytery urgently needs to get involved. (As an aside, this is another reason why the whole "Assistant pastor" thing in the PCA doesn't exist in other conservative Reformed denominations; it's too open to abuse, even while occasionally useful).

 

[Homebound]

If the mission church is now under the oversight of a presbytery commission, then the session of the mother church has no jurisdiction. They can dissolve their own relationship with the assistant pastor, but that doesn't affect his relationship with the mission church. The Presbytery urgently needs to get involved. (As an aside, this is another reason why the whole "Assistant pastor" thing in the PCA doesn't exist in other conservative Reformed denominations; it's too open to abuse, even while occasionally useful).

I am so sorry to keep diving in further, but I thank you brothers for indulging and enlightening me.

Fast forward. The presbytery is involved. They receive the motion that the mother church is dissolving their relationship with their assistant pastor and dissolving his call. The presbytery votes to accept this dissolution and the MNA committee motions that they will not pick up his call. Keep in mind that the 5-3B relationship is dissolved already. And members have been accepted/assented to the call. It reminds me of the harrel et al ruling concerning mission churches: “When members of mission churches take the vows of membership and are received on the rolls of the mission work, they are understood to assent to the call of the organizing minister assigned to that work and to have affirmed to the organizing minister the congregational promises made to a pastor, just as established churches do…In other words, while the mission congregation has not elected the organizing minister, the minister is deemed to have ‘at least the consent’ of the mission congregation to his government at the time of their addition to the rolls and during the continuance of the provisional government of the mission.”

 

[iainduguid]

Are they working to find another church planter? Have they explained to you their rationale? I suspect that they are technically within their rights, and it's doubtful you can access the money in the mother church, unless it was legally designated in some way (caveat: I'm not a lawyer). It seems to me your options are to try to work with the presbytery/mother church to find another church planter that's acceptable to both sides, or to go your own way and restart the plant as part of a different denomination, if there are reasons why that makes sense (e.g. the church planter is out of step with the PCA presbytery).

 

[Homebound]

Are they working to find another church planter? Have they explained to you their rationale? I suspect that they are technically within their rights, and it's doubtful you can access the money in the mother church, unless it was legally designated in some way (caveat: I'm not a lawyer). It seems to me your options are to try to work with the presbytery/mother church to find another church planter that's acceptable to both sides, or to go your own way and restart the plant as part of a different denomination, if there are reasons why that makes sense (e.g. the church planter is out of step with the PCA presbytery).

Regarding this - specifically I am questioning members rights to dissolve that relationship. If a member is received, and pastoral vows are taken, can members not have a say in dissolution?

The MNA committee has not shared new info with the church plant since the relationship was dissolved in February, including church planter or dissolving of the church plant. I can share more on their rationale for removing our organizing pastor via DM, simply to not be unprofitable for the larger audience. There was no disciplinary action taken against the organizing pastor. The mother church session attempted to bring charges against the organizing pastor and the IC found no strong presumption of guilt. The mother church then moved to dissolve the call.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Regarding this - specifically I am questioning members rights to dissolve that relationship. If a member is received, and pastoral vows are taken, can members not have a say in dissolution?

The MNA committee has not shared new info with the church plant since the relationship was dissolved in February, including church planter or dissolving of the church plant. I can share more on their rationale for removing our organizing pastor via DM, simply to not be unprofitable for the larger audience. There was no disciplinary action taken against the organizing pastor. The mother church session attempted to bring charges against the organizing pastor and the IC found no strong presumption of guilt. The mother church then moved to dissolve the call.

How large is the group; do you need the mother church's funds to survive?

 

[Edward]

They receive the motion that the mother church is dissolving their relationship with their assistant pastor and dissolving his call.

This makes some sense in that control has passed from the session of the mother church to a commission erected by the Presbytery. The church planter is no longer under their control, and they are acting on that. And there is not session for the church plant - at this point there is a Commission set up by Presbytery functioning as a session, with the church planter as moderator. There are still missing pieces to the puzzle as to the timeline and details.

The presbytery votes to accept this dissolution and the MNA committee motions that they will not pick up his call.

This is where it gets messy. And without knowing whether it was theological, financial or personal, I'm not going to comment further at this point.

The Presbytery does owe communication to the worshipers as to whether they are going to pull the plug on the church plant, supply a new leader, or do something else. If the church planter was popular, it's not something that many folks would be willing to take on.

 

[Homebound]

How large is the group; do you need the mother church's funds to survive?

At its height before the mother church stepped in and made moves to remove the pastor, the group was around 100. (After they initially moved to remove the pastor (and presbytery stepped in and set up a commission we were about 60.. When they removed our pastor finally the church is not about 20) he mother church has given zero dollars to the church plant since its inception. The salary of the pastor and all operating funds came from the members and church planting organizations. So no, the mother church was never needed monetarily.

Another curve ball, when the mother church fired the organizing "assistant pastor" they told the presbytery, their congregation, and the second provisional session said that 6 months severance was going to be given. We later learned that this was contingent on an NDA/non disparagement agreement.

 

[Edward]

Regarding this - specifically I am questioning members rights to dissolve that relationship. If a member is received, and pastoral vows are taken, can members not have a say in dissolution?

Probably not.

If the effort has been abandoned by Presbytery, and if they haven't done anything to communicate in 3 months, that appears to be the case; the worshipers might decide to continue on their own, organize themselves into an independent church, and then seek affiliation with a like minded body. Conversations should be opened with the former mother church and with the presbytery as to what assets each might be claiming, and new contributions placed in a separate account in the name of the new independent body.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

At its height before the mother church stepped in and made moves to remove the pastor, the group was around 100. (After they initially moved to remove the pastor (and presbytery stepped in and set up a commission we were about 60.. When they removed our pastor finally the church is not about 20) he mother church has given zero dollars to the church plant since its inception. The salary of the pastor and all operating funds came from the members and church planting organizations. So no, the mother church was never needed monetarily.

Another curve ball, when the mother church fired the organizing "assistant pastor" they told the presbytery, their congregation, and the second provisional session said that 6 months severance was going to be given. We later learned that this was contingent on an NDA/non disparagement agreement.

It sounds like everyone was working hard to kill the plant whether intended or not. I think isn't there some move against NDAs this year? Or maybe I simply saw articles against. Were there doctrinal issues with the plant minister?

 

[Homebound]

It sounds like everyone was working hard to kill the plant whether intended or not. I think isn't there some move against NDAs this year? Or maybe I simply saw articles against. Were there doctrinal issues with the plant minister?

Zero doctrinal issues. I hope there is something regarding NDAs this year, but I don't recall it being on the docket. I still cannot find a solid answer on whether or not an assistant pastor can be an organizing pastor. There is no clear answer in the BCO, and it does not make sense with our form of polity to have an assistant pastor as the pastor of a church plant.

 

[Edward]

We've planted at least two churches out of our facility, maybe 3. I don't think the planters were carried on our books as assistants.