| GAMC: Marriage and civil unions task force: Consensus …so far |
| Written by Leslie Scanlon, Outlook national reporter |
| Tuesday, 15 September 2009 02:25 |
|
LOUISVILLE – A "Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage" has begun approving sections of its draft report – including a section stating that “civil unions cannot adequately substitute for marriage,” either for those who support same-gender marriage or for those who oppose it. Those who would permit same-gender marriages don’t just want additional federal or state benefits, the draft report concludes. “The struggle is not just to be able to visit in hospitals, share health care or custody of children. Same-gender couples desire to belong – to be accepted in the larger society.” But those who say marriage should only be between a man and a woman “see the compromise of civil unions as a dangerous and myopic redefinition of marriage” that loses important dimensions of marriage, the draft report states. The committee is meeting in Louisville Sept. 14-17, and will be approving, section by section, a preliminary version of its work. The full draft report will be posted later this week on the website of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Jim Szeyller, a pastor from Charlotte and the committee’s chair, stressed that this version of the report is preliminary – that the committee will hear feedback from the church regarding its ideas and then will have time to make revisions before approving a final version at its meeting next January. The report is limited to 10,000 words. And there’s no way it will be the final word in the long, excruciating debate in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) over all things related to homosexuality. The study also is being conducted at a time of fast-moving change in the secular world – when Presbyterian ministers in a half-dozen states, for example, now must consider whether to perform same-gender marriages that are legal in those states, while serving in a church that defines Christian marriage as being solely between a man and a woman. The 2008 General Assembly, which created the task force, has instructed it to study: · the history of the laws governing marriage and civil union, · the theology and practice of marriage in the Reformed tradition, and more broadly in Christianity, · the relationship between civil unions and Christian marriage, · the effects of current laws on same-gender partners and their children, · and the place of covenanted, same-gender partnerships in the Christian community. So far, the committee has approved two draft sections – so far, with consensus, even though it’s clear the members don’t all agree on some key issues involving gay marriage. The draft report refers to the conflict over marriage in the church as “a crisis of conscience – on all sides.” It states that “some say marriage is a gift of God that can only be defined within the context of a relationship between a man and a woman. For many, blessing a relationship they believe to be forbidden by scripture is not acceptable, and an unloving gesture. For them, this is fundamentally an issue of conscience and faithful scriptural interpretation.” And others say “marriage is a gift of God that need not only be defined within the context of a relationship between a man and a woman. For many, not blessing a relationship they believe to be allowed by scripture and given by God is not acceptable and an unloving gesture. For them, this is fundamentally an issue of conscience and faithful scriptural interpretation.” The draft report also describes “grey areas” in the ongoing discussion. “I would anticipate that we would get significant push-back in several areas that will give us places for extended conversation in January,” Szeyller said before the first vote. “I am pleased and thankful for all the hard work you have done.” Clay Allard, a pastor from Dallas, said he felt he could vote “with integrity” for what’s been presented so far. “I’m a pretty hard-core Calvinist,” said Tracie Mayes Stewart, a pastor from Statesville, N.C. “The providence of God is such a big part of what’s going on here. We are in God’s grip.” And Margaret Aymer Oget, an assistant professor of New Testament at the Interdenominational Theological Center in Atlanta, said of the committee, “I feel like miraculously we’re still communicating, which if nothing else is a model to the church.” The committee has not yet voted on its recommendations – so it’s not completely clear yet what it will propose saying or if the consensus seen so far will hold. On Sept. 15, it did approve a 10-page section including a biblical and historical summary of how Christianity over the centuries, and the PC(USA) in more recent years, have considered civil unions and Christian marriage. It also approved another section describing the relationship between civil union and Christian marriage. Among the points in those sections: · The committee is using the phrase “expanded civil marriage” to describe what’s happened in states where same-gender marriages are legal. That language keeps the committee away from “the red flags that (the terms) `traditional marriage’ or `non-traditional marriage’ brings,” Allard said. But Emily Miller, a 2009 graduate of Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, warned that the “expanded civil marriage” terminology might be unfamiliar and confusing. “I just worry about the readers of this, and how quick they’re going to understand,” Miller said. · The committee is discussing “same-gender” rather than “same-sex” relationships – trying to use that language consistently through its report. · The report describes civil marriage as “a state-licensed contract entered into between two consenting adults,” and Christian marriage, as defined in the PC(USA)’s Book of Order, as a covenant through which “a man and a woman are called to live out together before God their lives of discipleship.” · A section on historical views concludes by acknowledging that Christian bodies around the world would have diverse views on marriage, divorce and same-gender relationships. “The challenge facing the PC(USA) in light of these discussions will be complicated by our desire to maintain communion with our brothers and sisters in the global church,” the draft report states. The committee expects to vote on the remaining sections of its draft report and its recommendations when the meeting continues on Sept. 16.
Bookmark
Email This
Trackback(0)
Your Responses (13)
Response from Jayne Devlin,
September 24, 2009
Eagar, AZ
God made Adam and Eve NOT Adam and Steve. I am against allowing practicing homosexuals in any position. We are telling our kids that's it's ok to sin. Sorry I don't think so. I am sick of the issue, read the Word of God about how God feels about the issue. We keep getting away from scripture then why even have it? I don't flaunt my sins around and I don't want their sins flaunted in my face thank you! We can not say sin is right, sin is wrong and we will not be different from the world if we allow this into our churches. We must be different from the world or we have nothing to offer the world. Jesus loves the sinner, but we can't allow the sin to take over.
Response from Cheryl Stanford,
September 22, 2009
Ripley, MS
Well so much for the other books to read, what does the Bible, and I might add GOD'S HOLY WORD, say? Please look at 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. Now we can all take Scripture and make it say what we want it to, to make it sound good for what "I" want. It is all about "me" and what I want... On judgement day are we going to say, well I did not UNDERSTAND it to mean what was SAID in Your Word!!! DUH!!!
God made all creatures. Have you ever seen cattle in a pasture? Have you ever seen a "bull and bull" parterning? Would they bring forth a baby calf as God Almight intended? What about roosters, deer, skunks, fish ect.??? I believe the animals, birds & fish have more morals & sense than some humans which were created in God's own image. So if the Presbyterian Church USA votes for our Ministers to bless same sex marriages, I am beginning to doubt if they need me anymore. I am not casting stones at the homosexuals, because we have ALL sinned and come short of the glory of God, but we need to stand up for what is right and what God's word tells us! Are we headed on the road as Revelation speaks of??? NOT JUST ONE SIN, BUT ALL SINS... The man who said this will all come to pass is probably correct, because it is going in that direction all the time, but it goes back to what the Bible says is coming: evil and more evil... Cheryl Stanford-a SINNER saved by God's Grace, His Son, Jesus Christ!
Response from Ann Gray,
September 21, 2009
San Antonio, TX
What all this noise is doing is driving people away from the Presbyterian church! I am one of them: 74, heterosexual, married to the same man for 53 years, adult life-long contributing Presbyterian. I know it doesn't matter to the haters out there or the people who think they are so right they can inflict their beliefs on others. I have straight married friends; I have gay married friends.....hard to tell the difference until one thinks of civil rights. I am not one to decide who sins and who does not.
Response from Rev. Ray Bagnuolo, Jan Hus Presbyterian Church, NYC,
September 20, 2009
New York, NY
The report is out (link at the end of these comments). It is worthwhile reading and study. The committee clearly worked carefully and well in the short period of time that it had to do this work. Thank you to them all.
Like Scripture and many other considerations related to the church's behavior, the report will read differently depending on who it is doing the reading. I am unsure of the wisdom in making no recommendation by the committee. It may have been that that was their charge. I need to think and pray about this a bit more and hear from others. The following excerpt is an example of the division in interpretation, even of the report. "Those who defend marriage" could be thought of as those who defend marriage between a man and a woman. "Those who defend marriage" could also be viewed as those of us who see "civil union" for LGBT as a "second-class" option and unacceptable, defending it for all. Here is the excerpt: "Those who defend marriage as it has been understood see the compromise of civil unions as a dangerous and myopic redefinition of marriage that loses its social dimensions and encourages the impermanence of these arrangements. They would argue that marriage is the only significant institution supported by civil authority that protects children as they grow; the impermanence of the parental relationships is one of the major causes of a host of ills that beset the most vulnerable and weakest among us. European experience has demonstrated that diluting marriage into a private contract for the sake of one population can dilute it for the whole population. While there may be significant small populations for whom a civil union is a useful contract, civil unions cannot serve to make peace between those who view homosexual practice differently." -p. 22 of the report http://www.pcusa.org/oga/newsstories/final-prelim-report-civil-union-marriage-spec-cmte-091809.pdf
Response from Jean Throckmorton,
September 19, 2009
Ridgecrest, CA
I am personally moving toward the idea that civil marriage and church marriuage should be completely disconnected. The State, and legally binding 'ties', should do whatever the people want. The population as a whole is allowed to have differing religious views and non-religious views about marriage. The church should be allowed to have marriage as a covenant relationship within the body of Christ. Within the church, the covenant, in my mind, must be between a man and a woman, as that is what God decreed from the beginning, and Jesus affirmed on earth. And people should be allowed to have a covenant marriage within the church without the legal protections if they so desire. When looking for leaders in the church they should be living under the covenant marriage.
Should gay and lesbian people be 'allowed' in the church - of course. The church should be open to attendance by all and membership by those who proclaim their faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior to the glory of God. Where we then run afoul of Presbyterian polity is in the ordination of people to offices in the church. The Bible gives the qualifications for leadership in the church. We do not adhere to that very well. We allow adultery, fornication (to use an old word for sleeping around), domestic abuse of spouses and children. We should not do so. This is also a part of the fidelity and chastity section of the BoO. Instead we select people by age, race or ethnicity, etc. I believe in full integration of the church and leadership and do not want these bypassed. But I believe we could do a much better job in most churches if we looked beyond who has the business skills for Session, or a good cook for deacons (who prepare meals for those in need). or 'we have to have an (fill in your favority ethnic/racial term) in this slot'. We are too often filling seats with warm bodies so we have a 'full board.' We have, in many churches,and I believe often as a denomination, failed to seek those gifted by God for service. I go beyond the traditional arguments because I believe we have so fixated on Sex/gender that we have lost track of the importance of some of these other elements.
Response from Walter Poe,
September 19, 2009
North Canton, Ohio
I like this discussion. But we must realize that being gay is ok. We are hung up on the Sexual act of it not the LOVE of it. THe PCUSA should drop this all together. Gay people should be allowed to be married, be ordained Ministers and have rights as we do. I am married, I have three children, I have been married for 15 years. Gay Marrige does not affect me. It is Equal Rights for all. Being gay does not determines a person faith in Christ nor in the church. I highly recommend a book, Jesus was a Liberal. very good insight into our social issues that the church is facing.
You cant beat this! This will happen. 30 years ago they said a black man wont be president. Guess What. Thank GOD for Barak Obama......
Response from Clarence Oakley, Jr,
September 19, 2009
Boiling Springs, South Caroline 29316
Second Corinthians Chapter 3, States that we should not depend on the Old Testament. Other Scriptures in the New Testament states the same. The Sodom and Gomorrah myth has caused all the hate against homosexuals. Beginning with the second chapter of Genesis women were made second class through all history. Why don't Christians wise up and read the Bible they say is infallible. God gave us a mind to use and the Churches have failed miserably by teaching a polluted message about women and homosexuals. People are human and so was Jesus who states that loving God and People is most important.
The Old Testamen is a book of the Law and about all ministers are preaching the Law as if it is the will of God. People that live with the indwelling Spirit of God do not have to worry about the Law just as is taught by Jesus and Paul of Tarsus. Maybe all the smart scholars can come down to earth and realize the truth that is taught in the New Testament. Jesus was killed by followers of the Old Testament that pollutes the Christian messages of today.
Response from Charles Hale,
September 19, 2009
Plainfield, New Jersey
I think we overlook the Old Testament, where PROPERTY inheritance and family RESPONSIBILITY were the foundation of marriage - and still are critical in the marriage debate. Because sex is such a fascinating subject (in the USA) we get all hot and bothered (puns intended) about who has sex with whom. Marriage is about legal issues of inheritance ... Read Moreand responsibility and privileges such as insurance coverage.And the thousands of ways marriage is written into laws aren't covered by "civil unions" or other alternatives. Persons marrying aren't doing it for sex! They can have sex anytime. They are making a legal commitment to care for one another, in sickness and in health, and this is what the church should be blessing. Back in the days when "miscegenation" was the hot topic I recall a Black preacher saying, "We say marriages are made in heaven.Then who are we to judge whom God has chosen for marriage?" We also say "Whom therefore God has joined together, let no one put asunder."
In our sex-soaked society we've allowed ourselves to lose sight of the extreme commitment of two people to care for one another till death takes one away. That commitment may or may not include sexual activity!! It usually includes love and common interests such that they are compatible. The church is being asked to bless a commitment of responsibility which is awesome. ochoa
Response from Rev. Ray Bagnuolo, Pastor Jan Hus Presbyterian Church,
September 19, 2009
New York, NY
Blog Response to: Outlook Article: "Marriage and Civil Unions Task Force...so far"
As a minister, ordained as an openly gay man, serving the needs of God's whole family, I welcome the input of the committee. I wonder at what stage the committee will be? Will it be at the women should not be in church stage of the Bible? Will it be at the 'slaves should learn from their master' quotes attributed to Jesus stage? Or will they be beyond the the stages that try to keep the status quo based on fear of those who are different, yet sisters and brothers. Will they be beyond the stage of using Scripture to exclude people, once again, until the Christian heart expands in love and wisdom, finally turning away from Scripture passages that that kept women quiet, slaves in their place, and same-gender relationships the target of fear? Finally, after directly or indirectly being implicit in the violence of such restrictions and fear. The only path is forward, with full and comprehensive benefits in the church that our heterosexual sisters and brothers are afforded. To draw the line on the "behavior argument" is to draw a line in the sand of creation and God's love. That line will be washed away, for it is a human-made line. A "fear line," an argument, not an act of God's love toward one another. I am not who I am based on behavior, but I am who I am based on how God has created me, which includes being a man and being gay. I pray that how I behave reflects God's love in all the fullness of my being and that must include the intimacy of marriage for same-gender loving couples. The healing we are called to bring into this broken world is beyond us still, because some still cower in fear of who we are as the full Body of Christ. Simply, we have not been able yet to fully accept one another in our diversity. Simply, then, we still have not learned to fully accept God in the lives of our sisters and brothers, without playing God. God is beyond slaves, the muting of women, and the full work, worship, and benefits for our LGBT folk in the Church of Jesus Christ. What is it we are waiting for? Better, what is it we are afraid of? Ray Bagnuolo
Response from Guy Hummel,
September 18, 2009
Derby, NY
Wow, respondents on both sides of the question bring up outstanding points. Bottom line however, what we Presbyterians are discussing (as Mr. Haberer points out) is behavior issues. Mr. Poe brings up the point that there are baptized gay Presbyterians. What he fails to continue to state is that there are confirmed members and officers who are gay. The church does not exclude gay members or gay clergy. What the church has struggled with is behavior, and specifically behavior standards for ordination. Mr. Wollerman applauds the use of same GENDER rather than same SEX because of the volatility of SEX. But this is an accomodation that misses the point of all this fuss. This debate is all about SEXUAL behavior, not gender. Love is not in question, but sexual conduct is! Love is the essence of Christianity. What sexual behavior has God prescribed for humankind? What sexual behavior is temptation to break our covenant with God? For our ordained leaders the Book of Order sets the standard of fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman. God has never spoken to us that same sex intercourse is acceptable...never, not ever, in no way, not at all, not under any condition, nadda. Throughout the entire discussion, no one has ever been able to produce any iota of comment in the old or new covenants that infers, much less states, that sodomy is pleasing to God. PLEASE, someone come up with the verse showing that sodomy is pleasing to God, so that this discussion can be resolved.
Response from Geoffrey Haberer,
September 18, 2009
Franklin Lakes, NJ
With all due respect I must say that Mr. Poe's arguments completely ignore scripture. Upon what authority does he base his opinion and beliefs (legal, sentimental, societal, existential)? And what does infant Baptism have to do with acceptable adult behavior? Having an opinion is fine, but try to build your case on some form of logic and the Word Of God or just admit that you are a cultural relativist. Start from a place of honesty and then let the discussion run its course. Womens' rights and racial minority rights have a very narrow connection with behavioral rights. Jesus made that very clear. Love the sinner and hate the sin. No offense intended, it's just my opinion based on my understanding of scripture.
Response from Fred Wollerman,
September 18, 2009
Wheat Ridge, CO
I am not ready to express an opinion about the theological and practical "correctness" of the concept. It does seem to me that there is a place for civil unions, whether for man and woman or two people of the same gender...for a variety of reasons. I do commend the committee for using the term GENDER. I have urged this for some time and I am gratified that somebody finally got it right. SEX is such a big, red, flashing neon sign that causes hackles to rise and tempers flare (for many) as soon as sex is mentioned. Gender seems more rational and invites rational discussion.
Response from Walter Poe,
September 18, 2009 north canton, ohio
You are not going to defeat this. One day, gay Marriage is going to be excepted.
PCUSA is going to have to realize that there is more to this then sex. It is called love. Two people who love each other, that is the key. The catholic church (universal church) has no right to tell people who they can love and who they cant love. Also, What about Baptism? If a small baby is babtised in a church (PCUSA). That baby grows up in the church with all the rights he/she deserves. What happens when that baby is older and is Gay, are you going to take it's baptism away, fine the church that baptised him becuase they failed as a church in bringing him up? How many babies have been baptised and are now Gay? In the PCUSA? It is hard to believe that the PCUSA is trying to fight this when your own modirater has written a book and declares that being Gay is not a sin. I think you guys need to re-read, "Jesus, the bible and Homasexuality" by Jack Rodgers over again. I think he has some really good points. Finialy, If Universal Health care passes, Your argument will fall, everyone will have Healthcare and you can't use it as a crutch anymore against gay marriage. The PCUSA is on the wrong side. You stood up for womans right to vote, what is the differance. Write a Response
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
