One session responds to another's
condemnation of Amendment A
[10-6-01]
Susan Andrews from National Capital Presbytery
reports that another Session sent out a 7 page letter condemning
Amendment A and asking every Session in the Presbytery to respond to
them. The Session of Bradley Hills Presbyterian Church unanimously
approved the attached letter as a response, and sent copies to every
other Session in the Presbytery.
Ms. Andrews, pastor of the Bradley Hills church, has
given permission for us to share the letter here.
October 2, 2001
Dear Friends in Christ,
The Session of the Centreville Presbyterian Church has
requested Sessions in National Capital Presbytery to respond to its
position paper arguing against the General Assembly's actions on
ordination standards. Having prayerfully considered the arguments set
forth in your letter, the Session of Bradley Hills Presbyterian Church
respectfully disagrees with our brothers and sisters at Centreville
Presbyterian.
The General Assembly's proposed action returns us to
an ordination standard that emphasizes the essentials for ordination of
ministers of word and sacrament and church officers: that they be
"persons of strong faith, dedicated discipleship, and love of Jesus
Christ...", whose lives "should be a demonstration of the
Christian gospel in the church and in the world." (G-6.0106a)
Within the boundaries of these criteria and the Book of Order, local
governing bodies have always had the freedom and the responsibility to
assess the qualifications of persons who are considered for such
offices, and then to decide whether or not to ordain and install them.
We have been debating for 25 years, within the PCUSA,
whether or not gay and lesbian Presbyterians should be allowed to render
ordained service. Rather than leading us to a consensus, the
"authoritative interpretations" of the General Assemblies have
been deeply divisive; Amendment B (G-6.0106b) was adopted with only 51%
of presbyters voting in favor and 49% opposed.
Recognizing that consensus is unlikely, the proposal
seeks a middle ground that neither requires nor prohibits the ordination
of openly gay and lesbian Presbyterians. Rather, it permits Presbyteries
and sessions to exercise freedom of conscience, recognizing in
accordance with the historic principles of church order (G-1.0305) that
"[t]here are truths and forms with respect to which [persons] of
good characters and principles may differ." In such matters we are
to "exercise mutual forbearance toward each other." (G-1.0305)
Trusting local governing bodies to discern candidates'
fitness for office is consistent with our denomination's historic view
that the church is both "catholic and particular." (G-7.0100)
We think this course is better than the disingenuous legalism of
amendment B, which despite its supposed facial neutrality, has been
unevenly and intentionally directed at gays and lesbians.
In your letter you suggest that this is matter on
which we cannot "agree to disagree," because ordination of
practicing gays and lesbians is a "universal moral issue of the
first order" based on your view that Scripture is unequivocal in
its condemnation of homosexuality. We believe, to the contrary, that the
scriptural record is at best ambiguous.
Moreover, to say that scriptural understanding of
homosexuality is immutable disregards the reality that our tradition has
reformed over the centuries its view of human relationships, as
illustrated by our stance on divorce (to which Jesus did speak), the
status of women, and slavery.
References to what might be broadly characterized as
homosexual relations appear in a sparse set of texts. None of these
texts appear in the Gospels, and none are attributed to Jesus.
Our temptation to paint any and all homosexual
relations with the broad brush of condemnation should be tempered by
care in our understanding of language, the cultural context in which the
scriptural texts were written and the theological point being made. We
should recall that homosexuality as a term in our own language is of
relatively recent - 19th century - origin, and is not a term easily
substituted in translation for the words of the original texts.
In looking at Scripture itself, we find that the texts
are focused on actions best characterized as lacking mutuality and honor
in relationships, whether heterosexual or homosexual.
For example, in the story of Sodom in Genesis 19, we
should recall that the city is already doomed for its wickedness - its
service of alien gods - before the angels arrive to meet Lot. The crowd
outside Lot's house demands to "know" the alien visitors - a
desire for rape, unacceptable whether considered heterosexual or
homosexual, and a grotesque violation of the principle of hospitality
that infuses Scripture. Sodom's arrogance, pride and its inhospitality
were the cause of its destruction. See Ezekiel 16: 48-50; Matthew
10:14-15; Luke 10:10-12.
In First Corinthians, Paul uses words to describe
specific offensive practices like male prostitution and pederasty -
exploitative relationships, which like adultery, are to be condemned. In
Romans Paul's point is that we are all fallen, and in giving into pure
unbridled passion acting against our natural orientation -- whether
heterosexual or homosexual - we turn from God.
More importantly, in the debate over the meaning of
these passages, we should not lose sight of what is unambiguous in
Scripture - that we are all in need of God's grace and that the promise
and hope of the Gospel embodied in Jesus Christ is that God's grace is
available to all. Nowhere is this idea clearer than in Jesus' fellowship
with outcasts and sinners throughout the Gospels. Indeed, as in the
story of the sinful woman who anoints Jesus' feet in the house of the
Pharisee (Luke 7:36-50) we often find that those who are considered
outcast have a better understanding of God's grace than the
self-righteous and socially important.
The message of the Gospels, embodied in the image of
the messianic banquet, is one of inclusiveness that shatters the
boundaries of narrow legalism. In Paul's words (Galatians 3:28),
"In Christ there is no longer Jew nor Gentile, there is no longer
slave nor free, there is no longer male or female, for all of you are
one in Christ Jesus." Thus, we are charged to "[w]elcome one
another, therefore, just as Christ has welcomed [us], for the glory of
God." Romans 15:7.
Based on our understanding of the gracious promises of
scripture, and on our commitment to embody the hospitality of Jesus
Christ, we strongly support the passage of Amendment A. We believe that
such an action is the best way for our beloved denomination to stay
together - by agreeing to disagree on a matter that is not essential to
the basic tenets of our reformed faith.
Yours in Christ,
The Session of Bradley Hills Presbyterian Church
cc: All the Sessions of National Capital Presbytery
