Google+
PC(USA) opens door to ordination of sexually active gays and lesbians. Vote may be prelude to ‘seismic’ change
Written by Leslie Scanlon, Outlook national reporter   

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has dropped its prohibition on ordaining sexually active gays and lesbians – prompting some to rejoice in a move towards equality and others to lament what they see as the denomination’s spiritual decline.


The historic move will end a 14-year-old requirement that those being ordained as ministers, elders or deacons practice fidelity if they are married or chastity if they are single. That rule had survived three previous challenges, most recently in 2009, although the vote that year was closer than ever.

On May 10, Twin Cities Presbytery became the 87th presbytery to vote in favor of Amendment 10-A, by a vote of 205-56.


That means a majority of the denomination’s 173 presbyteries have now voted “yes” on a proposed constitutional change that the General Assembly endorsed in 2010 by a vote of 373-323. The change will take effect after the remaining presbyteries finish voting this summer.

The outcome came as no surprise either to supporters or opponents of 10-A. The trend toward approval became clear weeks ago.

So far, 19 presbyteries have switched from voting against the proposed change in ordination standards in 2009 to voting in favor this year. Only three presbyteries switched from a “yes” vote two years ago to a “no” vote this time.

That shift adds the PC(USA) to the list of mainline Protestant denominations willing to consider allowing gays and lesbians in committed partnerships to serve in pastoral leadership. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America made that move in 2009, causing some congregations to depart to join more conservative Lutheran bodies.

The United Church of Christ also permits the ordination of sexually active gays and lesbians, and the Episcopal Church has been rocked by dissent over its decision to allow the election of openly gay bishops.

A search for the ‘sweet spot’

Many evangelicals consider such a policy contrary to Christian teaching and tradition. It is expected the Presbyterian change in ordination standards – which one group recently described as “seismic” – will anger some of the PC(USA)’s international partners and cause some congregations and individuals to leave the denomination.

Gradye Parsons, the PC(USA)’s stated clerk, said he knows some congregations are considering pulling out of the PC(USA). But he stresses that ordination decisions will remain the responsibility of local governing bodies – and that some will choose not to ordain sexually active gays and lesbians.

“The ultimate hope is that nobody leaves, that everybody stays and we find a way to live together in this,” Parsons said. “I think certainly the way the legislation is written, nobody has to be forced to do anything they think is contrary to their conscience.

“What I hope for, my quest, is to find the ecclesiastical and polity sweet spot, for lack of a better term, where everybody’s gifts can be respected and everybody’s integrity can be respected. So that people don’t feel they have to compromise their core beliefs, and at the same time we can receive the gifts of people who want to give them to the ministry of the church.”

PC(USA) leaders are hoping to prepare Presbyterians at the grass roots by releasing interpretive materials, including a pastoral letter – recognizing, as Parsons said, that “people read about it in their local newspapers before they read about it in the Sunday bulletin” at their church.

Good interpretive materials should help Presbyterians talk to people in other denominations about what the change means, he said.

Outpourings of joy – and dismay

Now, Presbyterians are bracing for the reaction – both from those who exult that gays and lesbians can be honest about their sexual orientation and still have a chance to serve in church leadership, and those who think the denomination has chosen a sinful path.

Both the Covenant Network of Presbyterians and More Light Presbyterians have worked for years to remove the “fidelity and chastity” restriction from the PC(USA) constitution. Their supporters are thrilled at what they see as a matter of justice in the church and a recognition of the gifts for ministry that many gays and lesbians now will be able to exercise in church leadership.

They also point out that the vote is just one step – and that hard work remains to be done to help sessions and presbyteries understand the implications of the changes.

The PC(USA) also is likely to continue to debate what its policy should be regarding same-gender marriages. That issue came up before the 2010 General Assembly, which left intact language in the PC(USA) Book of Order that defines Christian marriage as being between one man and one woman. It’s expected that presbyteries will present more overtures proposing changing that definition to the General Assembly in 2012.

Within the church, “the cultural change is equally if not more important as the polity change,” said Michael Adee, executive director of More Light Presbyterians. “People are having to think again, or maybe for the first time, about these real possibilities. What would it mean to have a gay minister? Is homosexuality sinful or not? Can gay people be moral people too?”

Some evangelical Presbyterians, on the other hand, are questioning whether there is still room for them in the PC(USA).

“Even for those who have been following the voting, the reality of this change is a source of unspeakably deep grief,” the Issues Ministry Team of Presbyterians for Renewal wrote recently, in a document intended to help church leaders prepare their congregations for the change.

“While in some ways this vote is just another step in the ongoing disintegration of a denomination we have known and loved, this particular vote verifies the deep and unquestionable divisions among us—and consummates a significant institutional departure from the Christian faith we have been called to proclaim.  For those who love the Presbyterian Church, this is a form of death.”

Talk of ‘new connections’

Already, evangelical Presbyterians are deep into conversation about what to do next – a discussion jump-started in part by a white paper that 45 pastors released in February declaring the PC(USA) to be “deathly ill.” That group has announced plans for a gathering in Minneapolis Aug. 25-26, and it has called for an exploration of ways that Presbyterians who share theological convictions can form “new connections.”

What that will mean in concrete terms remains unclear.

In a recent letter sent by e-mail, the group behind the white paper wrote that “we are committed to starting a new Reformed body without leaving the PC(USA).” The authors spoke of forming “theological subsets” within several current presbyteries, and of petitioning for 10 to 15 new presbyteries to be recognized soon.

As a result of that discussion, some congregations that might consider leaving the PC(USA) may wait – at least for a while – to see what other options emerge.

It is expected that some congregations consisting principally of racial or ethnic minorities or immigrants, including many Korean Presbyterian churches, will be distressed by the change in ordination standards.

“For some of them, this is a very challenging issue,” Parsons said. “But there’s certainly not a uniform opinion about all that. Historically, they’ve stuck with us through other changes that culturally they had struggles with, so I hope they stick with us through this one.”

What tipped the scales?

Parsons cited several reasons why he thinks Amendment 10-A passed this year.

Some conservative congregations that are unhappy with the PC(USA) already have left to join the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, and that has changed the balance in some presbyteries. Some moderate conservatives, weary of the decades-long controversy and sensing that change was inevitable, wanted to get the vote over with and move on.

“And I think more and more people, as the world turns, have members of their families or their circle of friends who are gay or lesbian, and that changes their perspective also,” Parsons said. “I think the way this particular legislation is written is a fourth reason – people seem to be more accepting of this particular wording” than of previous proposals.

Amendment 10-A removes the “fidelity and chastity” language from the PC(USA) constitution. Presbyteries and sessions still would examine candidates for ordination or installation, with the standard being that a candidate’s “manner of life should be a demonstration of the Christian gospel in the church and in the world.”

The amendment also instructs governing bodies to “be guided by Scripture and the confessions in applying standards to individual candidates.”

That likely would mean that some congregations and presbyteries would ordain gay and lesbians who are involved in relationships – and some more conservative governing bodies would not. Also, a particular governing body might decide to ordain some gays and lesbians but not others, based on individual assessments of the strengths and weaknesses of particular candidates.

“No one will be forced to receive any officer they don’t think is fit in their congregation or in their presbytery,” Parsons said.

“. . . So if a church doesn’t want to have a gay minister, no one is going to force that on them, or a gay elder . . . It really is up to the discretion of the local examining body.”

 

Comments  

 
#22 Robert Drake 2011-08-16 20:31
This is simply absurd, anybody tyat thinks this fracture will not split the church in half, are deaf and blind. One writer pointed out that our Korean and ethnic bothers and sisters will have a great problem with this vote, should also count the moderate conservatives like my family and I.
Gays and Lesbians are all in deed loved by our Lord, and I beleive they may serve as deacons, elders, and ministers, however, chastity outside of marriage must be the standard as it is what our Lord commands. Therefore, it is also rediculas to beleive that this vote will not lead to our denomination recognising gay marriage.
We have destroyed ourselves, we have deluted the truth, I hope the champions of 10-A are happy.
Goodbye all, we will be seeking a new church home.
Quote
 
 
#21 p.w. gregory 2011-05-19 05:34
Well, this past Sunday something amazing happened. We openned the doors, as we have done every Sunday in this town since 1816, and we had church, songs were sung, prayers made, a a sermon preached. As I am sure all active PCUSA congregations that existed 6 May, were there open for business 7 May as well. Regadless of how one feel on the issue of 10-A.

But make no mistake, the social compact of the PCUSA (1983-2011) is over. The implied trust and is null and void. The egg cannot be glued back together. Post 10-A passage there was no earthquake or otherwise weather related event (that's 21 May for those who believe such nonsense). Evolutionary changes in religious organizations are not revolutionary, there will be no villagers with pitch-forks at the castle walls demanding the heads of the bishops. But change, even revolutionary change is very subtle, gradual, sometimes happens is such a way the ground does change and we do not even notice it.

There will be mile-posts and signs along the way as the PCUSA winds down or morphs into something else all together. First sign post is the gathering of the dissaffected congregations this summer. What will come of that, a new church within a church?

Another sign post will be the first time someone is denied membership in a presbytery or ordination on both sides of the isle, because of 10-A. The third sign post will be of course the court cases in response to that action and the fall-out from as more churches seek to take their property else where.

And even if 10-A never existed, and all were at peace, the church still faces a very painful and protracted restructure in the next 5-7 years as 1 in 3, 1 in 4 churches close. merge, union or simply vanish as the denomination ages, people walk, and otherwise drop out. Many fine young men and women in Seminary now will never be employed in the church, find a paying job, or support a family. And that is fact, regardless of 10-A or not.

The theological Holy Grail of progressives for over 30 years has been achieved. I wonder how that victory tastes about now.
Quote
 
 
#20 Matt Jensen 2011-05-17 09:54
What a joke this church is. Like all the other mainline protestant churches, it stands for nothing but its own unity, and even then only unity between liberals. It's past time we stopped mourning this meaningless church's self-inflicted demise.
Quote
 
 
#19 G. Ram 2011-05-15 12:24
Mr. Berkley: Thank you for your comments as you speak directly to my feelings on this subject. We are new to the Presbyterian family, having grown up in the Methodist church. I learned of the decision today in our church. I was so distracted with seeking bible verses on the subject that I lost tract of the sermon. I do not know what this will mean for our own congregation and we will be patient and await that decision. Should the decision be in favor of adopting these amendments, we will not in good faith be able to remain with this facet of the Presbyterian church.
Quote
 
 
#18 CHARLES SANDEFUR 2011-05-13 10:51
TO James D. Berkley,
YOU TOOK THE WORDS RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH....ONLY BETTER.
Quote
 
 
#17 Trish Rogers 2011-05-12 09:44
We always ask where is the Spirit leading us today. It's wonderful to see the church following a path of inclusion rather than exclusion. I don't think that Jesus ever asked us to decide who God love's most.Moreover, it's not smart. Jack Welch, former CEO of GE, said, "I am convinced that if the rate of change inside an organization is less than the rate of change outside, the end is in sight." The world has been leading on this path. IF we want to stay vital, we need to catch up, to stand with the just.
Quote
 
 
#16 Marcia Lewis 2011-05-12 06:24
For those of us who choose to stay in our hometown churches worshiping as we have for years with our friends and families despite our strong opposition to this ruling based on our understanding of the Word of God which shall never change - where is our financial "relief of conscious?"
Quote
 
 
#15 Dan Wolpert 2011-05-12 05:20
I've always felt that making ordination standards about one issue is an enormous error and distracts the majority from confession, repentance, and accountability in their spiritual life. We ordain people who: don't tithe, are mean, are divorced, don't come to church much, never participate in mission, abuse their kids, love war and violence, just to mention a few things. All of these are behaviors that go against Biblical teachings and what God wants, yet we turn a blind eye because they are the sins of the majority and not a specific minority. If we only ordained those who actually practiced Christianity as Jesus preached, we wouldn't have enough folks to fill our Sessions. I would suggest we quite worrying about this one issue and start trying to practice our faith.
Peace,
Dan
Quote
 
 
#14 Penn Hackney 2011-05-11 17:28
Thank you, Carl Wilton, for your thoughtful response. It inspired me to make just two additional comments.

In addition to wondering why remarriage after divorce and interracial marriage were not "enduring standards" of "Biblical morality", I would add the ordination of women. Those were surely “seismic changes” that, in my view, theologically *require* the amendment that has apparently passed. Where have those "anchors" gone?" Second, the language of the present section that excludes anyone from office who is honest enough to acknowledge "any ... practice which the confessions call sin" exposes the factual and theological impossibility (if not hypocrisy) of an “anchor” for ordination standards based on sexual orientation or activity. In my view the new language gets the focus right, and is based on truly Reformed principles of human depravity and God's grace.

On issues of this caliber, the desideratum of following “centuries of tradition” is no more persuasive than were the counter-Reformation insistence on that standard in the 16th Century.
Quote
 
 
#13 Patricia Slomanski 2011-05-11 15:11
Dr. Berkley,
Thank you so much for your tireless prophetic efforts in espousing the truth of God's Word in regards to human sexuality. You and several others have pounded and pounded the truth into the hearts and minds of Presbyterians for years. Sadly, it seems that the majority of the denominational leaders and laity have closed their ears to your faithful message. Instead of accepting and following what God's Word clearly says to us about human sexuality, they have decided to be the "deciders" who will determine what is moral or not moral. They, in fact, have thumbed their noses at God's Word, and, as the Book of Judges tells us over and over: "...the people did what was right in their own eyes." Like you and thousands of other Presbyterians, I grieve on this day. Surely God must grieve, also, as His children have turned their backs on the Bible, which is not a witness among many, but THE witness without parallel(Confes sion of 1967). For your tireless efforts I give thanks to God. For the church of my childhood which I have dearly loved, I pray for God's mercies as it, as you say, wanders off after Baal. Tears are being shed, and hearts are broken on this day as our beloved denomination's witness to the world has been compromised and diminished. It is my prayer that the Holy Spirit will convict it of its erring path and bring it back unto God's Holy Self. May it be so in the coming days.
Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh