An
Open Letter to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
An Open Letter to the Presbyterian
Church (U.S.A.)
October 2001
You can read this letter also on
the site of the Presbyterian
Coalition.
Dear Friends in Christ,
Once again our denomination is embroiled in a debate
regarding ordination standards. Over the course of the next several
months our presbyteries will be voting on the proposed Amendment A. How
our presbyteries vote on this amendment will profoundly affect the
denominational landscape of our church for years to come.
We believe that Amendment A threatens the peace,
unity, and purity of our church, and we strongly urge presbyteries to
vote against it so that it does not become part of our Book of Order.
The biblical and confessional standards of fidelity in marriage and
chastity in singleness have been the standards of the Church of Jesus
Christ for two millennia, and it is unwise for the PC (USA) to alter
those standards now.
Some people say, Amendment A grants freedom of
conscience. However, they overlook the fact that officers of the church
are free to move only within the parameters of the standards of the
church, and that the conscience must be held captive to the Word of God.
Some people say, The sexual practices of officers are
among the non-essential matters of the faith. We would suggest that the
Bible takes seriously the matter of ethics, including sexual ethics for
leader of the church. A person''s sexual lifestyle is hardly a matter of
indifference, especially for leaders of the church.
Some people say, ''Amendment A will enhance the unity
of the church. Not only does Amendment A threaten schism to the PC
(USA), but also ecumenical mission partners around the world have
indicated that if this amendment is approved, they will reconsider their
association with the PC (USA) and perhaps sever ties with our
denomination. Amendment A would be disastrous for the unity of the
church.
Some people say, Local option will bring an end to
these divine debates. In actuality, the debates will simply be delegated
to local governing bodies. Each and every presbytery and session will be
forced to develop its own standards for ordination, and debates and
legal challenges will only proliferate. In addition, since advocates for
Amendment A believe the ordination of homosexuals is a matter of
justice, they cannot in good conscience rest with local option. For
conscience''s sake, they must seek to make the ordination of homosexuals
mandatory.
Some people say, Jesus never addressed the matter of
homosexuality, so it must not have mattered to him. Jesus also never
directly mentioned rape, pedophilia, bestiality incest or polygamy. Are
we, therefore, to conclude that these sexual practices were acceptable
with him as well? In addition, Jesus publicly broke with convention on
important matters and spoke out against them, yet apparently he agreed
with the strict Jewish law that prohibited homosexual practice in his
time. Would not his silence more logically point to his concurrence with
the Jews in this matter?
Some people say, The vote on G-6.0106b was close.
However, these advocates ignore the larger voting record of the church.
In dozen of votes over 25 years, General Assemblies and presbyteries
alike have repeatedly upheld the traditional Christian sexual ethic.
Amendment A is an aberration, not just of a generation of votes by
faithful Presbyterians, but of two millennia of the Christian
understanding of things.
Some people say, The denomination is evenly divided on
this matter. On the contrary, the Presbyterian Panel continues to show
that 75% of Presbyterians favor traditional sexual ethic.
Some people say, Amendment A is the third way for
which many have hoped in finding a compromise to these divisive matters.
In fact, Amendment A is precisely a winner-take-all legislative answer
radicals have sought for a generation. Amendment A is, as one noted
lesbian activist in the church has said, The whole enchilada! It is not
a compromise that addresses the concerns of Presbyterians committed to
our historical understanding of biblical ethics.
Some people say, The church has changed its views on
women, slavery and divorce. Homosexuality is simply the next in a long
line of enlightenments. However, they ignore the many proposed revisions
that the church has rejected across the centuries, precisely because the
revision lacked any scriptural foundation. Amendment A is just such an
example. It has no biblical foundation and must be rejected.
We urge elder and minister commissioners to our
presbyteries this year to vote against Amendment A, and we call upon our
denomination to uphold the biblical standards for human sexuality that
are taught throughout the Scriptures and our Confessions. Our very
future as a denomination is at stake. God help us.
In the service of Christ, and this church.
