Ordination and exclusion

Ordination and Exclusion

For items on "Living with the Authoritative Interpretation" >>

Cases and actions working through the 2006 GA action allowing respect for conscience

For a variety of items relating to issues of gender and justice >>

Wisdom from the Scots Confession
in considering the need for change of G-6.0106b
[3-21-08]

This note came to us through an e-list of More Light Presbyterians. The author, Witherspoon member Charles Forbes, has kindly given us permission to post it here.

Greetings,

Those who know me would know that perusing the Book of Confessions is not a likely pastime for me, but that is what I found myself doing the other day, for very arcane reasons. I happened upon a Chapter of the Scots Confession that speaks, I think, rather boldly to G-6.0106b. I don't pass this reference along because I believe that it will change the polity climate of the PCUSA in the near term. But it does give comfort to those whose consciences are torn between justice and their ordination vows, which call not only for conformity to church polity, but to be instructed by its Confessions.

Chapter XVIII of the Scots Confession is entitled "The Notes by Which the True Kirk Shall Be Determined From the False, and Who Shall Be Judge of Doctrine."

The chapter concludes:

When controversy arises about the right understanding of any passage or sentence of Scripture, or for the reformation of any abuse within the Kirk of God, we ought not so much to ask what men have said or done before us, as what the Holy Ghost uniformly speaks within the body of the Scriptures and what Christ Jesus himself did and commanded. For it is agreed by all that the Spirit of God, who is the Spirit of unity, cannot contradict himself. So if the interpretation or opinion of any theologian, Kirk, or council, is contrary to the plain Word of God written in any other passage of the Scripture, it is most certain that this is not the true understanding and meaning of the Holy Ghost, although councils, realms, and nations have approved and received it. We dare not receive or admit any interpretation which is contrary to any principal point of our faith, or to any other plain text of Scripture, or to the rule of love.

Fairly paraphrased, no interpretation or opinion of any council (read, GA) even though councils, realms, and nations have approved and received it (e.g. G-6.0106b) it is not the true understanding of the Holy Ghost if it is contrary to ... the rule of love.

I love the elevation of "the rule of love" to the same status as "any plain text of Scripture"!

Going straight to the point, surely G-6.0106b is an "abuse within the Kirk of God" is it not?

"It's in the Book!"

Charles Forbes
Baltimore

The Rev. Hal Porter, of Cincinnati, then sent this comment:

It is always good to receive Charles Forbes “musings.” His comments should remind us of the last major statement of our church in the early 1980’s regarding “Presbyterian Understanding and Use of Holy Scripture.” The document is still available on line or in pamphlet form from OGA. The relevant passage is as follows:

5. The Rule of Love: The fundamental expression of God’s will is the two-fold commandment to love God and neighbor, and all interpretations are to be judged by the question whether they offer and support the love given and commanded by God. When interpretations do no meet this criterion, it must be asked whether the text has been used correctly in the light of the whole Scripture and its subject.

Any interpretation of Scripture is wrong which separates or sets in opposition love for God and love for fellow human being, including both love expressed in individual relations and in human community (social action). No interpretation of Scripture is correct which leads to or supports contempt for any individual or group of persons either within or outside of the church. Such results from the interpretation of Scripture plainly indicate that the rule of love has not been honored. This rule reminds us forcefully that as the rule of faith and life, Scripture is to be interpreted not just to discover what we are to think or what benefits we receive from God in Christ, but to discover how we are to live.

The passage from the Scots Confession Charles muses on is used to underline the above passage in “Presbyterian Understanding and Use of Holy Scripture.” Certainly we have failed this Rule of Love as we interpreted the scriptures and Charles is right to apply it to the contemptible G-6.0106b. Thanks, Charles.

Hal Porter

GA Permanent Judicial Commission rules out conscientious objection to “fidelity and chastity” requirement

PJC says only a constitutional amendment will change things [2-16-08]

The General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission (GAPJC) has overthrown the authoritative interpretation that the General Assembly approved in 2006, which would have allowed candidates for ordination to declare a “scruple” against a particular requirement for ordination, on the grounds that they could not in conscience adhere to it.

Specifically this means that any candidate for ordination as a minister or elder must obey the requirement of “fidelity in marriage or chastity in singleness,” which was added to the Book of Order as provision G-6.0106b.

The ruling of the GA PJC, issued on February 11, 2008, actually deals with three cases, all of which touch on the issue of sexuality and ordination.

The action of the 2006 General Assembly left it up to the discernment of the ordaining body (the session for elders, the presbytery for ministers) as to whether the ordination requirement must be regarded as “essential,” and therefore an absolute requirement, or might be seen as not essential, and therefore might be set aside in the case of a particular individual.

This PJC ruling describes the “fidelity and chastity” provision as “a mandatory standard that cannot be waived.” Further, it makes clear that while candidates may be permitted to “depart” from ordination standards related to belief, they cannot be allowed the same freedom of conscience with regard to behavior.

And it upheld language from a prior Synod of the Trinity PJC ruling which made a distinction between allowing departures from the church’s standards related to belief – but not departures related to behavior.

Presbyterians committed to a fully open and inclusive church, including its practices of ordination, have differed over the past few years in their strategies for dealing with the essentially exclusionary demands for “fidelity and chastity.” Some have sought a gradual approach to changing practice and the application of ordination standards through action in presbyteries, which others have believes that no real change would happen until the “fidelity and chastity” requirement in G-6.0106b of the Book of Order is totally removed.

The PJC seems to side with the latter approach, especially when it declares: “the fidelity and chastity standard may only be changed by a constitutional amendment. Until that occurs, individual candidates, officers, examining and governing bodies must adhere to it.”

It seems likely that this action will reverse the moves toward a more inclusive church recently taken by two presbyteries: On January 15, San Francisco presbytery voted 167 to 151 to approve as “ready for examination” Lisa Larges, a lesbian who works for the advocacy group, That All May Freely Serve. And on January 26, the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area voted 196 to 79 to restore the ordination of Paul Capetz, a gay seminary professor who voluntarily set aside his ordination in 2000 in protest over the PC(USA)’s ordination standards.

More reports and comments >>

	from Presbyterian Outlook and the Louisville Courier-Journal
	from the Office of the General Assembly -- an Advisory Opinion
	from More Light Presbyterians
	from Ray Bagnuolo, “openly gay Presbyterian minister”
	from That All May Freely Serve
	from Presbyterians for Renewal
	An open letter to the PC(USA) from "Your Candidates and Inquirers for the Ministry of Word and Sacrament who are Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer"

We welcome your comments and additions!
Just send a note.

The Soul-Sucking, Imagination-Challenged, Trust-Bereft Thing We Call The Examination of Candidates for Ordination

by Jan Edmiston [10-6-07]

So . . . is this how it’s going to be?

A presumably pre-assigned elder or clergy member of the Presbytery will stand up, identify himself or herself, and then ask a candidate for ordination, "Since we as a Presbytery haven’t heard your answer, can you tell us if you are now and do you plan in the future to be in compliance with the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness?"

Even after the chairperson of the Committee on Ministry has already declared before God and the Presbytery that candidates are asked a rigorous litany of questions – including that one – this question continues to be asked, making what is supposed to be an engaging and helpful examination into an eye-rolling, humiliating, yes – soul sucking – exercise in power and self-righteousness.

Was this the intention of the Report on Peace, Unity, and Purity?

Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary Professor Cynthia Rigby (who reminded us that "Presbyterian" is still part of the name of that institution) asked us at the September Presbytery meeting to consider whether we care more about being imaginative or being right. Is it worse to be boring or to be wrong? Clearly, the votes have been cast.

Will it be like this forever? Could we, in solidarity with the Peace, Unity, and Purity Committee, break bread together, perhaps, and talk like sisters and brothers in Christ? Or is this simply real live verification that we can further the peace or the unity or the purity of the church – but we can’t further all three?

These episodes are demeaning and beneath us as disciples of Jesus Christ. I am, frankly, without the right words to express my dismay.

But I’d like to offer a challenge:

- If you feel moved to defend standards of ordination by asking this question, please also agree to meet with someone with whom you disagree about this issue prior to the examination for prayer and conversation.

- Meet with the candidate prior to the examination for prayer and conversation.

- Meet with someone from the Committee on Ministry and/or Committee on Preparation for Ministry for prayer and conversation.

And as we listen to each other, we need to remember that listening is not simply waiting for our turn to talk. At the risk of sounding self-righteous myself, I humbly request that we stop lifting up "sexual standards" as the primary standard for ordination. It only serves to further divide the Body of Christ, and I tremble at the thought of how Jesus would respond to this.

Ordination is not about any one issue. It’s about the full package of God’s calling, serious preparation, and community confirmation. And the more that people insist on harping on a single matter, the less seriously they will be taken. In the spirit of peace, unity, and purity I want to take all my colleagues in ministry seriously.

The author: Jan Edmiston is the pastor of Fairlington Presbyterian Church in Alexandria, Virginia and a blogger at A Church for Starving Artists .

First published in the National Capital Monthly, the newsletter of the National Capital Presbytery, Washington, DC.

Finding a new place to answer call

Gay graduate of Austin Seminary leaves denomination to pursue ministry.
[3-13-07]

A message from Michael Adee, National Field Organizer of More Light Presbyterians

Karen Thompson said she is sad, but not bitter that the Presbyterian Church is still struggling with sexuality issues in ordaining ministers. God led her to the seminary, she says, though now she'll be answering his call to serve elsewhere

Please join us in prayers of blessing for Karen Thompson, Austin Theological Seminary graduate, who is leaving the Presbyterian Church (USA) to follow God's call to serve as a pastor in another denomination, the Metropolitan Community Church.

Central Presbyterian Church, Austin, Texas held a special service of Hope and Reconciliation yesterday as they said farewell to Karen Thompson who had been under their care throughout her theological studies at Austin Theological Seminary.

Faith Presbyterian Church, Austin, a More Light Church where Karen served as a seminary intern honored her with a stole to be shared with The Shower of Stoles Project.

In writing about Karen Thompson's following her call from God to serve in ministry, Flynn describes this decision as: "Finding a new place to answer call," with the second statement - "Gay graduate of seminary leaves denomination to pursue ministry." This is, of course, an indictment of our Church and denomination --- that a seminary graduate must leave our denomination to pursue ministry.

The title and subtitle of Eileen Flynn's article should indeed be a "wake up" call to the Presbyterian Church (USA) and other denominations who fail to recognize that God creates all of God's own children in the image of God including God's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender children -- and that God does not just call heterosexuals into ministry any more God just calls men or white people to serve.

How many more of our own daughters and sons, and their calls to ministry, are we willing to sacrifice by allowing prejudice and discrimination against LGBT persons to continue in our Church?

Please join us in prayers for wisdom and courage for the Presbyterian Church (USA) to stop the prejudice and end its discrimination against its own LGBT daughters and sons now.

The Session of your Church can be part of ending this prejudice and discrimination by prayerfully considering an Ordination Overture to "delete-B" for the next General Assembly in San Jose 2008. Mike Smith and Madeline Jervis, National MLP Board, are ready to provide resources and assistance to you. www.mlp.org

May God's Spirit continue to bless Karen and her family as they begin a new journey and a new ministry.

with hope and grace,

Michael

Michael J. Adee, M.Div., Ph.D., National Field Organizer

More Light Presbyterians, 369 Montezuma Avenue # 447, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 USA
(505) 820-7082
michaeladee@aol.com
www.mlp.org