Don’t be surprised if David Hall shreds the Book of Church Order yet again.
David Hall may, in print, portray himself as a constitutional scholar, but in practice, he twists and turns the constitution to meet his agenda every chance he gets.
In the infamous congregational meeting of July 2020 where David Hall packed the session with his assistants, Hall engineered for no ballots to be used, the three assistants to be voted on as a slate, and had two deacons attempting to count the entire vote from the front of a 1000-seat sanctuary with voters even in the balcony. Despite all that, he still managed to prevail only 57%-43%. He then tried to persuade the minority to go along with the majority, exactly opposite of the charge given him in BCO 20-5.
If that wasn’t enough, David Hall didn’t stop there. He went on to attest three times in writing to the presbytery that the congregation elected men to carry the call to presbytery. But that election never took place.
Since then, two of the three assistant pastors that became associates have resigned. The remaining “associate” has been instrumental in the suspension of four sitting ruling elders for pointing out Hall’s disregard of the Book of Church Order.
So don’t be surprised if Mr. Polity himself shreds the BCO again. BCO 25-2 says a congregational meeting must be called within 30 days after the Session receives a petition from the congregation; if the BCO does not mean to call the meeting to order within 30 days, then any other interpretation would invite chaos. That petition was delivered to the Session on June 27, 2022. That means the last Sunday that meeting could be held would be July 24th. Since the BCO also requires seven days notice before a meeting, July 17th is no longer a possibility, leaving the 24th as the only Sunday remaining. What trick does David Hall, parliamentarian of the presbytery, have up his sleeve this time?
We would remind our readers and the remaining Session members that every ordained officer, including Mr. Hall, got on their knees and agreed to abide by the constitution of our church (officer vows 2 & 3). That is a sacred covenant with the Lord. Those officers also, at minimum, have a fiduciary duty to the congregation. If David Hall is willing to twist and turn the constitution to say what it was never intended to say, is he willing to do the same with doctrine? Can such a man be trusted?