I have been asked by Session to help inform the congregation of the upcoming General Assembly meeting of our denomination in June and the potential impact/fallout from it. Last month, I tried to give a general overview of some of what it means to be Presbyterian in the PCUSA (Presbyterian Church, USA), especially in terms of our being a connectional church (article can be viewed at https://cotc.org/plumb-line-archive/being-presbyterian-at-cotc-part-i/). I indicated that sometimes decisions are made and stands are taken by the larger church that local congregations may not agree with. These can include things like stands on abortion, Middle East issues, same sex relationships, and many others. While these kinds of stands are not binding on local congregations, congregations are certainly impacted by them and often considered “guilty by association.”
In particular, issues revolving around same sex relationships have been ones that we, as a denomination, have been talking and debating about for over thirty years now and still don’t seem to be any closer to a consensus. Most of the discussion/debate/votes over the years have revolved around the question of ordaining (either as pastors or elders) those who are self-avowed, practicing homosexuals or lesbians. Repeatedly this allowance was not granted on Scriptural and historical grounds, as was stated in our Book of Order (former G-6.0106b):
Those who are called to office in the church are to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church. Among these standards is the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness. Persons refusing to repent of any self-acknowledged practice which the confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and Sacrament. (emphasis mine)
However, in 2011, a significant change was passed whereby the suitability for the ordination of any particular candidate now rests with the ordaining body (Session for elders, Presbytery for pastors), without any specific behavioral requirements being enforced across the board. The above section of the Book of Order was replaced with this one:
Standards for ordained service reflect the church’s desire to submit joyfully to the Lordship of Jesus Christ in all aspects of life. The governing body responsible for ordination and/or installation shall examine each candidate’s calling, gifts, preparation, and suitability for the responsibilities of office. The examination shall include, but not be limited to, a determination of the candidate’s ability and commitment to fulfill all requirements as expressed in the constitutional questions for ordination and installation. Governing bodies shall be guided by Scripture and the confessions in applying standards to individual candidates. (emphasis mine)
Personally, my biggest (but not only) concern with this new section is the very clear and intentional change in language from leading a life “in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church” (emphasis mine) to being “guided by Scripture and the confessions” (emphasis mine). There is, in my opinion, a big difference between living “in obedience to Scripture” versus being “guided by” it. In one sense, I understand this change in wording. No one is suggesting that every law and directive in the Old Testament is still intended to be obeyed today by followers of Christ. Anyone sacrificed a bull or dove recently? As a result, some are more comfortable using “guided by” language rather than “in obedience to” in order to avoid a black and white, legalistic kind of interpretation and application of Scripture, and I suspect, especially because a number of Old Testament passages unequivocably speak against same sex relations. But to relegate God’s Word to something to “be guided by” rather than “lived in obedience to” is a very dangerous change to make. For one, it delegates to Scripture the same guiding authority as that given to “the confessions” which the church, especially from the time of Martin Luther and the Reformation, has staunchly and rightly opposed. And for me it raises some serious red flags as to the direction/s that at least some in our denomination are moving.
While this change potentially opens the door for the ordination of those in same sex relationships it in no way obligates any Session or Presbytery to ordain or not ordain such folks.
Next month, I will speak to a few of the issues coming up for discussion and vote at our PCUSA General Assembly meeting in June, most notably an effort by some to change the definition of marriage in our Book of Order from “a man and a woman” to “two people.” Regardless of how the discussion and voting goes on this issue, it will undoubtedly be front page news for a time.
I am very much aware that not everyone at COTC feels the same about this issue and that the feelings on both sides run very deep and are often very personal. There is no doubt that the culture around us is changing very quickly in regards to this which is certainly then forcing churches to take a stand in one form or another. Some see this as a very good thing and others as not so good. It is certainly not a simple issue! May God grant us discernment, love and grace for these days.