Some
of the other overtures
Some overtures move
beyond the sexuality issue
An overview by Chris Iosso, Witherspoon Issues Analyst
[5-12-01]
In a clear sign of where the Church’s
attention has been, 26 of the 46 overtures received by May 5 focused on
changes in the Assembly’s position on "Amendment B," which
has been interpreted to bar homosexual ordination. We
comment on those separately.
In addition to the usual overtures
which would weaken the church’s justice work and bind members’
consciences, there are two overtures which speak to the payment of per
capita and mission monies, a worthy request for equitable
mental health coverage in the medical plan and for other health
insurance providers (#16), an overture calling for stronger
environmental measures to prevent the
extinction of species (including our own!), and one which calls for
an evaluation of the charitable choice proposals in light of traditional
Presbyterian concerns for separation of church and state and "free
exercise" of religion. We comment here primarily on those overtures
with clear justice or ministry implications, apologizing to those space
prompts us to leave undiscussed.
The Per Capita overtures from
Scioto Valley (Ovt.
01) and Philadelphia (Ovt.
11) both seek to deal with the fact that congregations in our system
are not obligated, except morally, to pay their per capita, or mission
monies for that matter. The withholding of per-capita has been a major
conservative weapon over the past decade in the church, most notably in
the year when Amendment B was passed. Conservative churches withheld
more than $1 million dollars in an apparent effort to weaken the
national church and to coerce moderate and liberal congregations. The
Witherspoon Society takes few specific stands but sees a very clear
principle of mutual respect for the ministries of others at stake here,
along with the connectional nature of our church.
We have similar concerns of principle
in relation to Overture 5, which
seeks to regain for commissioners and observers the right of free
speech and assembly within the Assembly hall. To prohibit
expressions of collective concerns and emotions is more worthy of an
authoritarian church and not of Presbyterians, however uncomfortable
demonstrations may make us feel. Certainly there are reasonable ways for
the Stated Clerk to handle demonstrations "decently and in
order" without the current demeaning rule.
Theology by power play?
The Presbytery of San Joaquin echoes
the Presbyterian Layman’s Confessing Church movement by calling
in Overture
43 for ministers to subscribe to a pair of selective proof texts
that seem to view as inadequate our present vows of ordination,
membership and baptism. This is partly an effort to control and exclude
people who would lift up different parts of the Bible’s witness to
Jesus Christ, or who simply oppose over-simplifying our faith into a few
slogans.
San Joaquin’s solution to the
complicated issue of homosexuality is a set of equally simple assertions
about getting the National Ministries Division to fund change
ministries (Ovt.
41), as if thousands of gay people hadn’t already been driven to
suicide after trying to become heterosexual. It is because of insurance
liability and the very frequent "backsliding" by ex-gay
ministry leaders that previous General Assemblies have avoided backing
programs like "One by One." This year we would note the
statement by over 900 members of the American Association of Pastoral
Counselors drawing attention to the pastoral damage caused by Amendment
B and the churches’ general anti-gay stances. "Purity" is
also a very non-Reformed, shame-related concept to stick onto human
sexuality; it is much more common in traditional Roman Catholic
teaching.
This year, as usual, there are
overtures—four in all—calling for various actions to limit women’s
choice in the matter of abortion. Overture
26 is an attempt to prohibit all third trimester abortions by
focusing on the tiny number of "partial birth" abortions. It
is important to remember than strong majorities of Presbyterians (about
80%) all over the country still favor respect for a woman’s individual
Christian conscience. This year the overture claims to
"resolve" a discrepancy between two statements of previous
General Assemblies which are not in fact contradictory, but the effect
is to narrow the range of choice for responsible women and their
families. In its own words, this overture would "eliminate the
application for such medical coverage based on the good moral choices by
beneficiaries." In other words, this overture would dictate a
choice for women in advance. We too would like to see abortions
decrease, but we believe European-style birth control education and
contraception would help a lot more than the pro-life groups, which are
actually in close cooperation with the Roman Catholic Church in what
they recommend.
Overture
40 would shackle our support of the National Council of Churches
by linking it to the dues and other payment policies of other
denominations. Last year, the effort was to get us out of the NCC
entirely, using the stick of financial shortfalls (which no one is
ignoring!). This approach is very much like the efforts to
"fix" the United Nations by cutting their funding. Previous
General Assemblies have resisted this simple-minded approach, while
noting that the NCC management performance needs to improve.
Commissioners will need to decide whether one year is enough for a
turn-around, and whether a punitive set of conditions are all of equal
weight. The whole overture seeks to create distrust of the National
Council, and reflects many years of similar attacks by well-funded right
wing foundations which want the churches never to look at Christian
values in business or politics. The tone of unilateral threat in this
overture seems unworthy of our Presbyterian Church.
