With thanks to the Anarchic Comedians in general and the Marx Brothers in particular.
THIS IS NOT A BLOG ABOUT AMENDMENT 10-A. And while it relates to the nFOG that is not the true intent. It is about accretions.
I am a presbytery curmudgeon. That is if I am not convinced that it is worth voting for the motion before the house I vote against it. Usually my negative vote is singular. I am the only no vote. I have voted against many amendments to the constitution in my time. If it doesn't add to the meaning of the constitution or to the need to further define particular sections of the constitution or necessary additions I vote no. I've done so for the past 20 years, give or take.
I am not sure why the house generally votes yes. I wonder sometimes if people simply haven't read the amendments. I've read them. Have others? So if it isn't necessary I vote no.
There is a great irony this year. The nFOG is intended to remove the various accretions to the Form of Government. The argument is that back in 1983 the Book of Order was about 1/3 of its present size. Over the past 27 years the Form of Government grew like a weed. Problem is presbyteries just kept voting for amendments.
The great irony is that while the nFOG is on the ballot this year to remove all the accretions like scraping the bottom of a wooden ship we have before us 10 more amendments. The nFOG removes the accretions. The amendments add accretions. Go figure.
Aside from amendment 10-A there are nine amendments to the Form of Government, three to the Directory for Worship and nine to the Rules of Discipline. Putting aside the amendments to the Directory of Worship and the Rules of Discipline the nine amendments to the Form of Government have started the accretions all over again. No sooner have we an nFOG (if it passes) than we have people proposing accretions. Why?
I wasn't at the May presbytery to vote against the new accretions. I don't see much point in an nFOG if we are just going to start the whole process over again.
