Officer nomination by session (PCA)

[Justaguy]

Scenario:

A call is put out to the congregation for officer nominations during the month of September. After the close of nominations, the session invites a man who did not receive a nomination to attend officer training along with the other officer nominees that were called by congregation. If the man who did not receive a nomination thinks the office is a fit during the training, along with the Session, the session will nominate him for office. Is this appropriate according to the PCA BCO in your opinion?

 

[Jack K]

The BCO does not specify a period of time for the nomination process or even that there has to be an announced cutoff date. This allows the Session a lot of flexibility.

When I was in a PCA church and involved in this process, we typically asked for nominations by a certain date—but this was more a matter of letting the congregation be aware of our timeline than it was a firm cutoff. The Session would meet after that date to discuss the nominees, and frequently one of the Session members would nominate someone additional at that time. If a congregation member had shown up at the Session meeting to say, "I know I'm late, but I'd like to nominate someone if there's still time," I'm sure the Session would have accepted that nomination too. The point was not that nominations had to be in by an announced cutoff, but that they had to be in before the process moved too far along. That's why you announce a date.

It's very common for officer nominations to come from members of the Session, who tend to have their eye out for good candidates. Unless there's something else going on that would make this nomination unfair, I don't see a problem with what you described. The ordination process is not a competition. As long as the whole process can still be completed successfully, a "late" nomination should not be a concern if the Session wants to accept it.

 

[Justaguy]

The BCO does not specify a period of time for the nomination process or even that there has to be an announced cutoff date. This allows the Session a lot of flexibility.

When I was in a PCA church and involved in this process, we typically asked for nominations by a certain date—but this was more a matter of letting the congregation be aware of our timeline than it was a firm cutoff. The Session would meet after that date to discuss the nominees, and frequently one of the Session members would nominate someone additional at that time. If a congregation member had shown up at the Session meeting to say, "I know I'm late, but I'd like to nominate someone if there's still time," I'm sure the Session would have accepted that nomination too. The point was not that nominations had to be in by an announced cutoff, but that they had to be in before the process moved too far along. That's why you announce a date.

It's very common for officer nominations to come from members of the Session, who tend to have their eye out for good candidates. Unless there's something else going on that would make this nomination unfair, I don't see a problem with what you described. The ordination process is not a competition. As long as the whole process can still be completed successfully, a "late" nomination should not be a concern if the Session wants to accept it.

This is very helpful, thank you!

 

[Clark-Tillian]

Scenario:

A call is put out to the congregation for officer nominations during the month of September. After the close of nominations, the session invites a man who did not receive a nomination to attend officer training along with the other officer nominees that were called by congregation. If the man who did not receive a nomination thinks the office is a fit during the training, along with the Session, the session will nominate him for office. Is this appropriate according to the PCA BCO in your opinion?

The direct answer to your query is "no". Your post presents us with a situation that is confusing, at best.
Our BCO is deliciously oblique at times; thankfully, 24.1 possesses a decent amount of clarity.

24-1. Every church shall elect persons to the offices of ruling elder and deacon in the following manner: At such times as determined by the Session, communicant members of the congregation may submit names to the Session…

—The term “shall" indicates that a Session must adhere to the outlined procedures. The BCO draws a line of demarcation between the usage of the terms “may” and “shall”. The terms are not co-referential.

— The clauses “At such times as determined by the Session”, and "After the close of the nomination period", indicate that the nominating period has a terminal date. Common sense dictates this, as well.

— The clause reading “members of the congregation may submit names to the Session”, indicates that individual congregants--not the Session as a group-- possess the right of nominating officers. This clause rules out the idea of a Session making a nomination.

The Session, as a group, is not allowed to proffer nominations.; the Session receives nominations, and determines the fitness of the man for office; it then presents the nominees who passed examination as candidates for election. Individual members of Session may proffer nominations as individual congregants. Your query states that the nominating period ended on September 30. It seems that the Session in question was out of accord with its previous action to determine the nomination period. Inviting the non-nominee to training might not be our of order, but it is unwise; the nominee's names should be held in confidence until after the examination process is closed so as to avoid embarrassment in the event a man doesn't pass the exams.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Beside the answers supplied to the Q in the opening post, it may be useful to observe that in the present scenario (focused on nomination) nothing in the process has come to a vote of the congregation for the election of a deacon. A man who undergoes training prior to such a vote, must still according to the Presbyterian system be approved to stand for election to the office. The nomination has not made a deacon or elder of one put forward. "Joke" nominations, or vetting that reveals disqualification of a nominee, either one should result in dismissing the party from consideration.

Some men are nominated before they are fit to serve. Perhaps such a man could take training along with others more fit in the present, but perhaps it would be better to wait on the investment. Some who are nominated withdraw themselves at some point before election and ordination/installation. The point of nomination is to identify potential officers. Realizing that potential is downstream a ways.