From the very beginning of our national government two philosophies
have been in conflict. One the one side is federalism. Federalism advocates a
strong central government for the whole Nation. Anti-federalism advocates a
weak central government in favor of “states’ rights.” Are there certain issues
which demand a single standard across all states, or is each state free to
establish their own standards?
Imagine a situation where each of the fifty states
establishes its own standards for automobile safety? An automobile purchased in
Pennsylvania may be illegal to drive in Ohio or New Jersey. We live in a highly
mobile society having different standards in each state would be unacceptable. Therefore,
we have national standards for automobile safety.
Historically, there were “free states” and “slave states.”
Some states prohibited individuals from owning slaves and some permitted the
owning of slaves. Part, and only part, of what led to the Civil War/the War of
Northern Aggression/the War Between the States was the issue of federalism
versus anti-federalism. Shall slavery be prohibited nationally, or shall it be
up to each state to make the decision?
Today we see this conflict between federalism and
anti-federalism being played out on several fronts. Shall transgender people be
required to use the restroom according to the gender on their birth
certificate, or may a transgender people use the restroom of sexual identity? What
happens when a transgender person lives in a state which permits the individual
to make the choice of which restroom to use then is traveling across country
into a state which does permit restroom choice? Shall each state set its own standards for accommodating
students with special needs, or should there be a basic national standard? What
happens when a student moves from New York to Texas where the two states have
widely divergent standards?
We have seen the conflict between federalism and
anti-federalism play out in many church structures. The Presbyterian Church
(U.S.A.) is a case in point. In 1983 the United Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
and the Presbyterian Church in the United States merged to form the PC (U.S.A.)
The UPCUSA tended toward a more federalist church government. One could move
from one presbytery (regional governing body) to another and be confident that
the rules and procedures were basically the same. The Book of Order (the operational portion of the church constitution) detailed
common nomenclature in the structure and procedures. In the PCUS, which tended
more toward an anti-federalist church government concerning the relationship of
the presbyteries and the more inclusive governing bodies of the synods and the
General Assembly. The Book of Church Order provided for more latitude from
presbytery to presbytery in procedures and processes.
With the 1983 merger two styles were not fully integrated. The
Book of Order, following the merger, more closely followed the federalist
model. The across the Nation the federalist and anti-federalist divide in society
was becoming wider and wider. This divide was evidenced in the rewrite of the
Book of Order, which took effect in 2011. Many of the “regulative” portions of
the Book of Order were eliminated, giving more freedom to the presbyteries to
design their own structures. No longer could one depend on presbyteries being
similar in nomenclature and procedures. Anti-federalism was winning over
federalism.
As the General Assembly (the national governing body) made
controversial decisions allowing ordination and marriage of gay and lesbian
people, the resistance to the federalist model grew. Additionally, the property
trust clause in the Book of Order, which maintains that if a congregations
disaffiliates from the PC (USA) the property reverts to the presbytery as a
trustee for the denomination. Congregations insist the property is theirs. The
property issue usually ends up in the civil courts. Some courts rule in favor
of the denomination and some in favor of the congregation. It all depends on
whether the philosophy of the court tends toward federalism or anti-federalism.
