the Outlook Blog

Photo by Joseph Williams

It's been a long week here at GA; the plenary finally ended last night around 11.45pm and I think commissioners and advisory delegates were very ready to head back to their rooms. Yesterday was the day when we hit all the hot-button issues: gay ordination, same-sex marriage, the Iraq war, Israel-Palestine issues and abortion. While the assembly voted to keep the definition of marriage as it currently stands in the Directory for Worship, the assembly did in fact vote to recommend the deletion of G-6.0106b (though it must be ratified by a majority of the 173 presbyteries) - which, along with the new authoritative interpretation, would allow LGBT folk to be ordained in the PC(USA). For more information on those decisions, check out articles here and here.

Many will leave this GA happy with these decisions; they will feel as though this is a justice issue, and that this vote reflects the church's call to be prophetic and move forward on this issue. On the More Light Presbyterians website, the headline states: "Good news from San Jose! 218th GA votes 54% to 46% to end LGBT discrimination!"

However, many others will leave this GA saddened and confused by these decisions; they will feel as though the church has made just one more step away from orthodox Christianity, what the church has taught for centuries and Jesus commands in the Gospels. Shortly after the vote to recommend deletion of G-6.0106b was passed yesterday, a press release was passed out from the Presbyterian Renewal Network stating that the PC(USA) lies "gravely wounded by the hand of its own General Assembly" and that these decisions place the PC(USA) in "spiritual jeopardy" and "threaten to cut us off from God's ancient law."

Regardless of how people feel about the issues - churches and presbyteries are now going to have to deal with these questions and issues. Some churches and presbyteries were still discussing the PUP report from GA two years ago, but there are now many more complexities added to the discussion. It will be interesting to see how this affects churches and presbyteries - especially those who are more split along the conservative/liberal polarities. There is going to be a lot of energy put into conversations about sexuality; energy that churches might have been spending in other ways. And it's not going to be easy work - this will be hard work. Potentially, hard work for the next two years. But - regardless of where you stand on these issues - it is important work. These are important conversations, whether you think it's because we need full inclusion of LGBT folk or you believe we need to remain faithful to the current standards we have.

Stated Clerk Gradye Parsons addressed the commissioners and advisory delegates this morning during the final business meeting and worship, and he said that it's important to remember that "We came in together - we leave together." As we leave this General Assembly, let us put our trust in God that God was at work this year at GA, and pray that God will continue to help us discern God's will for the Presbyterian Church (USA).

More related news articles:

• Presbyterian Leaders OK gay clergy (LA Times)
• Presbyterian assembly votes to drop gay clergy ban (Associated Press)
• More General Assembly News
• Presbyterian Outlook General Assembly News

The following message is from Jack Haberer, the Presbyterian Outlook's Editor:

"General Assembly is winding down to an end, and now the task of interpreting the actions of it falls upon the shoulders of folks like you.  Friends will be hearing about it from newspaper reports (your email inbox may already be filling up).  I have just put the finishing touches on a bulletin insert that will be made available for purchase on our Web site TODAY by 1PM Pacific time, 4PM eastern time today.  You can purchase a pdf master on the site for $40 and then make two-sided copies and hand out with tomorrow’s bulletins.  In keeping with the Outlook’s reputation, you will find the summary to be succinct, accurate, in context, and at least somewhat reassuring to the folks in your congregation and presbytery.
 
Whether you’re a pastor, an elder, or simply a church member wanting to help keep folks informed and assured of Christ’s leadership in the church, I commend this tool to you for your use.
 
If you can think of any friends and/or colleagues who may appreciate this, please forward this note on to them."

Follow the following link to make the purchase:  http://www.pres-outlook.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7465

Today is a big day. We'll be hearing a lot during the plenary business meetings today, and we'll be hearing from some of the most controversial committees - those that dealt with issues of ordination and Israel & Palestine. As I sat in these committees, and as I heard Overture Advocates, commissioners, advisory delegates and those in the open hearings all speak to these issues, I noticed one tactic being used that stood out over all others: a tactic of fear.

There is a general undercurrent of fear amidst some folks here at the assembly. This fear is often presented in the following way: "If we adopt _____, then people are going to leave the church." Or, you may have heard: "If I have to go back to my presbytery and tell them _____, I am positive that they will leave the denomination." This fear is a fear of dissent, of schism, of churches leaving the denomination over a decision that is made here in San Jose this week. I heard it from overture advocates, I heard it from YAADs, I heard it from TSADS and many others.

After hearing it so much, I can only guess that it is a tactic being used by folks from certain conservative affinity groups; by causing people to think that voting a certain way will cause the church to split, perhaps they can sway them in a different direction. After all, who wants to be the one to vote for the recommendation that will divide the church?

Over and over again, I heard it. During the Church Orders and Ministry Committee, one commissioner stated that "If this passes - we're going to bleed!" Later on, an Elder Commissioner from southern California said, "We're not going to bleed - we're going to divide. 22,000 in our presbytery will go to 4,000. San Diego will break off and make their own, Santa Barbara will make their own..."

This is a weak argument. According to numbers just recently released, the PC(USA) denomination lost 57,000 members this year - we're going to lose members regardless if we pass a recommendation to delete G-6.0106b or not. Furthermore, we're going to lose members if we DON'T pass a recommendation to delete G-6.0106b. It's not only those who are against the ordination of LGBT folk who may leave the church. There are those who are for it, those who are working for a just church, who may leave if they don't see the denomination change its ways.

When did the most important thing become the number of churches, or the number of congregants in each church? We're called to live in the way of Jesus, to seek to understand God's hopes and dreams for the world, and to live lives working for the kingdom of God. This "battle-cry" of fear, this attempt to make people think that a specific issue is going to be the one that will break apart the church, seems to be a tactic being used to create fear in the people here making decisions this week.

As we enter into this day, I'd encourage you to listen for this battle-cry. Listen to how many people try to tell us that if we recommend to remove G-6.0106b, if we take a critical stance against the State of Israel, if we do these things, our churches will be leaving in droves and they'll all want to take their property with them. As we approach these very important issues, I hope we'd listen to the wisdom of William Sloane Coffin. In his book "Letters to a Young Doubter," he has this great line that I want to share with you:

"It's always a good time to change your mind when to do so will widen your heart."

My prayer is that those in the Presbyterian Church (USA) would be known for having wide hearts.

Some folks have responded privately to me that I was misjudging folks with whom I disagree. A couple responses:

1. I'm not speaking for the Outlook on this matter; this is my own take on this issue.
2. A blog is an open forum - readers are invited to leave a comment. There is also some difference between straight news articles like you'll find in News and Analysis and blog posts.
3. I wasn't saying that everyone who is against the ordination of LGBT folk is motivated by fear. I was saying that there is a group of people here at GA, who I've observed, that I think are trying to use a tactic of fear in their arguments.

If anyone outside of the Presbyterian Church (USA) were to join us over the next couple days, they'd probably think we were a little bit obsessed with talking about sex. Certainly the "Fred Phelps"-type folks who were picketing outside the Convention Center last night think we are probably incredibly obsessed with and misguided about sexuality. Sexuality has been a part of many of the conversations over the past few days, and those conversations will probably be getting even more heated as we debate these issues on the floor of the Assembly today and tomorrow.

Much of the sexuality discussion is found in the questions concerning ordination of LGBT folk (the work of the Church Orders and Mission Committee), but there have been other places in which the discussion has surfaced, including a vote taken last night and one this morning. Last night there was a lot of debate concerning 12-08: On Directing the GAC to Produce Adolescent Human Development Resources. The recommendation was as follows:

"The Presbytery of Grace overtures the 218th General Assembly (2008) to direct the General Assembly Council to produce adolescent human development resources based upon Scripture and the Reformed theological tradition. These resources would explore all facets of adolescent development including human sexuality."

There were some that wanted more specific wording as to what issues related to sexuality would be covered, what position would be taken concerning homosexuality, and others wanted to specify that marriage was something that happened between a man and a woman. In the end, these and other amendments and proposals were rejected, and the original recommendation passed by a vote of 509 voting yes, 188 voting no and 5 abstaining. That means 73% voted in support of the recommendation.

This morning we had discussions concerning 13-06: On Correcting Translation Problems of the Heidelberg Catechism. The recommendation was to fix some translation errors and was sponsored by over 30 seminary professors from our Presbyterian theological seminarians. One of the reasons it was so controversial (it was the first recommendation to have produced a minority report) is that it asks that a reference to "homosexual perversion" be taken out, because it says that those people "will never come into the possession of the kingdom of God." The phrase, "homosexual perversion" was inserted into the catechism in the 1960s. Once again, after a lot of discussion about homosexuality and "backsliding progressives" and their agendas, the recommendation passed by a vote of 436 voting yes, 280 voting no and 11 abstaining. That means 60% voted in support of the recommendation (news article here).

What I, and others, are wondering is whether these two votes - which have dealt pretty explicitly with sexuality and homosexuality - be setting the tone for how the votes about the deletion of G-6.0106b will go tomorrow? On each of the previously mentioned recommendations, they've both been passed by a healthy majority. There are some who are guessing that we might actually vote yes for the recommendation to delete G-6.0106b, but that it will probably not pass when it goes to the presbyteries. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out tomorrow morning - but it does seem like the general feeling toward sexuality this year at General Assembly is one that might be leaning toward more inclusivity and openness.

I just got back from the Presbyterian Coalition Luncheon event - their guest speaker was Mark Labberton, who serves as the senior pastor at First Presbyterian Church of Berkeley, CA. For those of you who aren't familiar with the Presbyterian Coalition (and I really wasn't either, until going to the luncheon), according to their website, they are "A Movement of Christ's People Committed to Life and Transformation in the PC(USA): Exalting Christ, Energizing Congregations and Upholding Historic Biblical Leadership Standards." According to the two people I asked at my table, the Coalition is a group that works toward making sure liberal affinity groups don't get rid of G-6.0106b.

I asked some of the Commissioners at the table what they thought about the election of the Moderator last night. A few of them said they weren't too surprised about the outcome. They said Bruce Reyes-Chow handled himself very well on stage, had very honest answers, and clearly was young and charismatic. One Commissioner remarked that he was "a bit disappointed" because the candidate who was more centered theologically (Bill Teng, according to this Commissioner) didn't win. There was both an appreciation and wariness of how transparent and up-front Reyes-Chow was with his views on the homosexuality question that is at the heart of so many overtures and potentially divisive conversations this week.

Another Commissioner said, "The YAD who was sitting next to me pointed up at Bruce Reyes-Chow and said, 'This is the future of the church.' Well...maybe one part of the church - but hopefully not the whole church." He clearly had some apprehensions about Reyes-Chow's stance on the ordination issue.

Labberton spoke about the issue of "first-order things." He asked the question, "How do we keep first-order things first? And not let others get in the way." He encouraged folks to be continue to try and focus on first-order things, but to do so, realizing that it's very possible to lose that focus, even when you think you might be focusing on "first-order things." It seemed to me that he was saying that simply focusing on those first-order things wasn't enough - they needed to cause us to live out in the world and enact the kind of love and justice God desires. Labberton said we need to live "lives that bear the heart of God to the world."

For me, it was very interesting that Labberton gave this message to an affinity group in the denomination who believes they are focusing on "first-order things" by focusing on "upholding historic Biblical leadership standards." Labberton pointed out to them as well that it was going to be an intense week, as many different people believe that there are different "first-order things." For Labberton, Christ is the first-order "thing" that is the only hope for the PC(USA) - and Christ is also crucially important for those involved in the Presbyterian Coalition. However, I did find it interesting that when I asked some of those who were at my lunch table about the main purpose of the Coalition, according to them, it was not about unity or energizing congregations, but it was to make sure that G.60106b was upheld and the possibility of ordination was continued to be withheld from the LGBT community.

I'm sure if you ask anyone at GA, they will have their own version of what the really important "issues" at GA are going to be. And you'll probably find that what might be a really huge issue for some may not be that important to others. This is important to remember as we engage in debate and dialogue during this upcoming week. For myself, there are a few issues that I'll be following with some interest. I spent the summer of 2005 in the Middle East, primarily living just outside of Bethlehem, in the Occupied Territories. Because of my experiences there, I am very interested in the work of the Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee (MRTI), the overtures that discuss how the PC(USA) will work towards peace in the Middle East and the overtures that discuss the relationship between Christians and Muslims. This is actually one of the first years that we have invited interfaith representatives to be a part of the General Assembly, and I hope we will listen to their important voices. I will also be following the overtures and discussions about sexuality issues related to ordination, as they unfortunately seem to be at the root of a good portion of our denominational divisions.

On the GA website, the PC(USA) has posted their own version of the Top 10 Issues at GA this week. They have listed the following issues as the top ten:

1. A revised Form of Government

2. Partnership in World Mission

3. PC(USA) ecumenical stance and covenants

4. Peace, unity and purity of the PC(USA)

5. The Belhar Confession

6. Middle East concerns

7. Elections
8. 
Growing God’s Church Deep and Wide

9. Domestic social justice concerns

10. A church for future generations

As you read this post, and look at the issues listed by the PC(USA), what stands out to you as most important? What are your top issues for this week?