Semper Reformanda offers four
perspectives on Assembly issues
Louisville, June 8, 2001
Again this year Semper Reformanda (Always Being
Reformed) provided an opportunity for progressive Presbyterians to spend
time before the Assembly reflecting on some of the weighty theological
issues confronting the church today.
Meeting at Central Presbyterian Church, a sold-out gathering of some 100
people heard S.R. Moderator Barbara Kellam Scott reflect on her own
faith journey as one of learning that "theology really does
matter," and that it cannot not be reduced to a mere three simple
affirmations, as is being proposed now by the Confessing Church
movement.
"Each of their three statements has something
that I recognize and affirm," she said, "but each of the
statements also has a word or two that changes it all. And more
important is what the three statements leave out -- including our whole
understanding of Presbyterian polity and our way of forming and
re-forming our faith in community."
David Bos on Affirmation 2001
David Bos, whose sermon last year at Downtown United
Presbyterian
Church in Rochester, NY, was the stimulus for what has now
been put forward as Affirmation 2001, spoke about the background of that
statement in the Auburn Affirmation of 1925. He asserted that we now
face another moment in the life of the Church when "the Church has
to be reclaimed for the gospel of Jesus Christ and the purposes for
which it was intended." There is always a temptation to use the
church "for reactionary political agendas," and people who do
this are not willing to "exposing their agenda to the liberating,
spacious light of the Gospel."
Bos labels such efforts as forms of fundamentalism,
adding that fundamentalism is not so much a matter of specific beliefs
as it is "an insistence on purification and exclusion." In
contrast to such close-mindedness, he said, Affirmation 2001 asserts
that baptism alone, and not personal purity or particular beliefs, is
what qualifies one for ordination.
Aurelia Fule on interfaith dialogue
The next presenter, Dr. Aurelia Fule, for many years
on the staff of the Office for Theology and Worship in Louisville, spoke
on the question of "why interfaith dialogue?" [See her
paper on the same topic here.]
She began by explaining that Voices of Orthodox Women
has been insisting lately that we are saved "in no other name"
than Christ's. If that's the case, of course, there is no need -- and
indeed no room -- for dialogue with people of other faiths. But
she noted that in the Book of Acts, the name of Christ is invoked not as
a test of faith, but as a means of healing. It is an affirmation of
God's power in and through Christ, and not a formula for salvation.
"The question is not whether we evangelize or
dialogue," she continued, "but how we evangelize or
dialogue. And it's not a choice between one and the other, but a
question of how we do both."
So why should we engage in interfaith dialogue?
"It is based on the simple assertion that God alone is God, and
that you and I don't know all there is about God." We as Christians
are bound to God's revelation in Scripture, she added, but God is free
to move everywhere the divine love and grace may extend.
As Christians we trust in the promise that we are
saved through Christ, she concluded, but there is no Biblical promised
that no one else can be saved. So "we must leave to God alone the
secret of God's love and grace and saving work."
Joe Small on developing doctrine
The Rev. Joe Small, the coordinator of the Office of
Theology and Worship,
presented the third perspective, describing how
the Presbyterian Church develops its theological and doctrinal
statements. In brief, such statements are developed (wouldn't ya know!)
by committees which are appointed for specific tasks. The committees'
work is then submitted to a General Assembly, which may respond by
either (1) receiving the report, which is a minimal acknowledgment of
its existence, (2) approving it and commending it for study in the
church, or (3) adopting it as "our words" as a church.
Small highlighted some recent doctrinal publications
of the church, including "The Crucified One is Lord," recent
theological statement by the Reformed Church in America which he said is
"far better than anything you've heard in our debate" about
Christology.
As an example of the power of some of these
statements, Small read from the recently published teaching catechism,
which provides answers to questions about the Ninth Commandment (against
giving false witness) that condemn racism and any other speech or
attitudes than deny the value of persons or groups because of their race
or gender or sexual orientation or other such characteristics.
Hal Porter on a More Light perspective
The final presentation was from the Rev. Hal Porter,
who had been asked to set forth current perspectives from the More Light
groups. He began by naming what he sees as "three idolatries in our
church" -- heterosexual idolatry, which asserts that
heterosexuality is the only form of sexuality that is acceptable, and
the heterosexuals are the only kind of people God can love; Biblical
idolatry, which replaces the living Word of God with the written words
of the Bible; and institutional idolatry, in which the survival of the
church is valued more highly that faithfulness to its mission.
Porter went on comment on current proposals for
"a third way," saying that those who have issued this called
have a legitimate concern, but "they offer no solutions." For
23 years, he said, "our greatest effort has been to stall" --
most recently with three years of study (but with slim results), and
then another two years of moratorium. "And now," he asked,
"another four years?" That might be acceptable, he said,
"but only if it will help us set aside the exclusionary
Authoritative Interpretations" and the other strictures on
ordination.
Porter concluded by touching on possible responses if
"the homophobic culture" continues to dominate our church's
life. One response would be to continue to work for change, but another
might be "honorable disobedience" by congregations and others
who feel called to "be faithful to their homosexual neighbors"
in spite of all the bans.
Following the presentations, the group broke into four
lunch-time sessions around each of the speakers. The day ended as all
the participants came together again to share the results of their
conversations.
