What Makes ECO Unique?

What Makes ECO Unique?

Learn more about ECO! Following is an outline of 11 major characteristics of the ECO vision and polity. A printable PDF of this information is available here. We pray this is helpful for you in your discerning and learning process.

1. Defined core theology and behavioral expectations
One of the main concerns for many individuals and congregations considering ECO is that the PC(USA) has not defined essential theology and behavior requirements and will not allow congregations and presbyteries to define these requirements either.  In the theology section of the ECO constitution the behavioral and theological core is established and all officers must “receive, adopt, and be bound by” these essentials.

2. ECO is concerned with ecclesiastical matters and therefore property is not held in trust.
There are a couple of reasons for this.  First, as we have seen, when property is held in trust it can be used as leverage against congregations wishing to maintain theological integrity.  Secondly, when presbyteries have interests in property an inordinate amount of time can be spent in property management.

3. Voting is done in parity at all levels and only when people are connected with a local congregation
ECO polity does not see mission and ministry happening primarily as a result of voting. When there is the need for voting at the presbytery and synod councils, within each council there is a requirement for a 1-1 parity between elders and pastors. Only pastors connected to a local congregation are eligible to vote. A pastor in validated service or honorably retired will only vote if they are an “assistant pastor” connected to an ECO congregation. In this instance the “assistant pastor” would be equivalent to what the PC(USA) calls a “parish associate.”

4. Church is redefined
ECO polity defines “church” wherever believers are gathered in the name of Jesus. Church can be lived out in small groups, accountability groups, ministry teams, house churches, and mission teams to name just a few.

5. Elders and deacons can be deployed for greater ministry
Because “church” is considered to be the gathering of believers in the name of Jesus in a variety of contexts it is appropriate for the sacraments to be administered in these contexts.  Elders and deacons who have been properly trained can be authorized to celebrate the sacraments in various settings.  Therefore, not only can communion be celebrated in these various expressions of church but, if someone comes to faith through these expressions of church, they can be baptized by the officers who are charged with shepherding these groups.  Elders and deacons can also be commissioned by the presbytery to serve as the pastors of congregations and new church developments for the mission and ministry of the presbytery.

6. Emphasis on the role of members as covenant partners
ECO polity now names members as “covenant partners.”  Congregations may choose to use different language if they wish, but this designation is designed to emphasize that individuals aren’t joining an organization.  When they say yes to membership in ECO, individuals are covenanting with one another in God’s redemptive mission as expressed in, through, and beyond the congregation.

7. Greater local flexibility
There is much within the PC(USA) Book of Order that congregations may wish to con-tinue to affirm, but there will be significant flexibility in these areas.  Here are a few examples:

  • Deacons – Deacons may serve as part of a board or be commissioned on an annual basis.  Since deacons do not have oversight within a congregation, a congregation may choose to continue to elect deacons in congregational meetings or can choose to have the session appoint deacons.
  • Elders – Elders in the PC(USA) serve three-year terms and can serve no more than two consecutive terms.  Many ECO congregations may wish to continue this practice.  But a congregation may choose to redesign their elder election and rotation.  For example, they may wish to have elders serve only one 4 year term.  In some cultures it is shameful for a person to be rotated off of the elders’ board. Congregations may wish to allow elders to serve an unlimited number of terms.  The local ECO congregation continues to be governed by elders and the congregation must elect them, but their terms of service can have flexibility.
  • Pastors – A few different categories of pastors are defined.  For example, ECO polity has reinstated the office of assistant pastor, hired by the session rather than called by the congregation.  This again allows for greater flexibility in pastoral leadership.

8. Presbyteries also have greater freedom
In ECO polity, the role of the presbytery is to support, encourage, and
resource local congregations.  ECO presbyteries are required to have three committees; the Committee on Ministry, which can include oversight of candidates, a Permanent Judicial Commission, and a governing council which has the same role and responsibilities of most PC(USA) presbytery councils.  Other committees and task forces may be formed as they are necessary for the mission of the presbytery.  Presbyteries also have flexibility as they guide congregations in the call process.  A typical PNC may be established or a congregation may allow the session to serve this function.  However they are called, the congregation must ultimately elect installed pastors.

9. Missional Affinity Networks
Missional Affinity Networks are networks of congregations in similar ministry settings and facing similar challenges and opportunities.  These networks are outside the presbyteries.  They could be comprised of congregations near universities or colleges, congregations in urban settings, multiethnic congregations, those who are actively planting worshiping communities, congregations of various sizes, etc.  These Missional Affinity Networks have no judicial authority but can be beneficial in a variety of important ways.

10. Accountability, support, and encouragement
ECO polity affirms that accountability between congregations is
vitally important.  Pastors should share with one another where they have seen God most visibly at work as well as what they are discerning as their part in God’s future mission.  ECO pastors are expected to covenant to be accountable to one another, ensuring they are living balanced lives and being good stewards of the multiple responsibilities God has given them.  Accountable relationships, called “peer reviews,” can take place within the presbytery or within the Missional Affinity Networks.

11. Flatter structure with an emphasis on God’s work within the local congregation
There are three layers to the ECO polity structure; session, presbytery, and synod.  Synod is the widest council in ECO.  Each council is designed to have a significantly smaller staff with significantly smaller numbers of congregations comprising a presbytery.  The primary role of staff will be mission and ministry in local congregations, facilitating the multiplication of worshiping communities and expansion of the gospel.

13 Responses

  1. Ben Sloan says:

    One unique thing about the ECO not mentioned, is that it does not alienate itself from the evangelicals who are staying in the PCUSA, but even seeks to work with them through the Fellowship of Presbyterians. In the past, when people have left, they have thrown rocks at those staying in, often calling anybody who stays “apostate.” ECO is more gracious in that regard. This allows more mission work together, the supporting of some institutions (colleges, children’s homes, retirement homes etc).

    • Matt Ferguson says:

      I think there has been as much, if not more, stone throwing at those leaving by those who remain in the PCUSA. This includes Ben’s comment above. Let’s try to state what we are doing, doing any contrast between ways forward, without negative comments toward brothers and sisters who are being led a different way forward.

      • David F Katt says:

        I agree that the blame game is not productive even within our own congregations. The insidious deceptions of the world have infiltrated our service to the Kingdom of God since Jesus ascended to His Father. In modern times the Shopping Mall has become more familiar to us than the church. Our success is measured by worldly values and self achievement. Being righteous servants of Jesus Christ and our brothers and sisters is socially graceful rather than Christian duty. We forget that Christ’s body was broken to atone for our sin and his blood proclaimed a new covenant with the Father that our faith in that atonement frees us to serve in His Kingdom righteously and eternally. The character of a righteous servant will not come to us by our own effort, for we are corrupt. We must rely on the Holy Spirit working through us to accomplish Christ’s mission in the world. A noble quest such as this leaves no time for blame.

  2. Allan H. says:

    Since nobody appears to be dealing with comments now on the old “New Reformed Body Unveiled” thread, I’ll rephrase here something I think is important.

    Unanswered questions about point #1 are currently the biggest thing keeping me from supporting a move to the ECO by my church.
    As #1 is stated here, the Essential Tenets is basically a “subscription” system, which is how the Polity document reads. Which is not necessarily bad if the Essential Tenets document was mere “essentials”. But the Essential Tenets goes on for 4 pages, covering a lot of territory, also expressing some nonessentials on the way. While I probably agree with 98% of that document, as the current polity reads it does not appear I could remain an Elder because I would not “receive, adopt, and be bound by” a few of its nonessential statements, such as its interpretation of how God created humans. [Crossing my mind is my friend who was put on trial in the OPC for teaching that God used evolution as a means of creation.]

    It seems like, as the Polity and Essential Tenets documents were rushed together before Orlando, the interaction between the two was not sufficiently considered. The Essential Tenets document seems to be intended as a base for theological discussion, not as the object of subscription that the Polity writers made it. I saw an article in the Outlook basically saying as much. This seems like a fundamental problem — and needs to be fixed either by making the Polity less subscription-like or by removing nonessentials from the Essential Tenets document. Is the ECO working to fix this?

    • fellowship-admin says:

      Thank you for raising this question. ECO is not designed to be a subscriptionist affiliation. We will keep this question in mind as we work with the documents.

      • Matt Ferguson says:

        I am disappointed to read the statement “ECO is not designed to be a subscriptionist affiliation”. Without a requirement to affirm some basic, foundational beliefs (subscription) the ECO is doomed to turn out like the PCUSA, just not at this moment.

        I believe the former New Wineskins Association of Churches white paper on subscription would be helpful to a discussion on the need for subscription on essentials.

        http://www.newwineskinsassociation.com/documents/White_Paper_on_Subscription.doc

        • Allan H. says:

          Thanks, Matt, for the link to the New Wineskins paper. From there I found their draft “essentials”, which has a brief set of mandatory essentials coupled with a more expansive list of implications from which candidates may take “scruples”. This might be a good approach if ECO does go the “subscription” route.

          Of course first ECO must decide what it wants to be when it grows up, subscriptionist or not.
          Two different replies on this site have said ECO is NOT subscriptionist. Yet the current draft of the polity, and point #1 on this very post, are clearly subscriptionist (even if they don’t use that word). Since some will have strong feelings on subscription, pro or con, it seems like sorting out that question should be a priority for ECO leadership as churches are considering whether to join them.
          And of course the current situation, where a subscriptionist polity document is combined with an Essential Tenets document that was not meant to be an object of subscription, is ultimately not viable.

          • Matt Ferguson says:

            Allan H.

            I also found that some of the polity of ECO has required parts—subscription. So it seems there is subscription to polity but not theology.

            Considering all the theological problems we now face, why it is so off putting to have some basic tenets that are held up as truly essential (not just in name only) whereby we mean they are required.

      • John W. says:

        Our church recently decided to seek to join ECO based on the understanding that the “Essential Tenets” really were essential tenets, not optional tenets. Please do not water down the requirement that church leaders accept and be bound by them. If there are non-essentials in the tenets, it would be far better to remove them than to make the “Essential Tenets” themselves not really binding.

  3. Rob says:

    So, are you separate from the PC(USA) or a sub-denomination within the PC(USA)?

    • fellowship-admin says:

      ECO is separate from the PC(USA).

      • Bonnie Boyce says:

        How is ECO different than PCUSA? The only difference I can determine is that “PCUSA has not defined essential theology and behavioral requirements.” Are there other differences? Our church is very missional, we have a very active food pantry, open our church to the Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts, we have a traditional worship service and find no problems with the PCUSA as it is currently structured. In fact our Presbytery has given us a grant that helps us sustain our food pantry.

  4. Brian says:

    I very much appreciate the fact that the polity documents aim for more freedom and less bureaucracy, but I do have a question about the language used about Deacons. The official polity document states that Deacons “may also be asked to preach and to teach”.

    If you were to be asked how you justify empowering Deacons to preach, when it seems that this role belongs instead to the office of Elder/Pastor, how would you respond?

Comments are closed.