Upon reading the comments on our overtures from the Advisory Committee on the Constitution (ACC), we overture advocates concluded in a series of meetings and conference calls that only one overture, 01-08 from New York City Presbytery, provided the GA with a way through the controversies around G-6.0106b.
The ACC wrote, “This overture correctly identifies the need to act on both G-6.0106b and the previous authoritative interpretations if the Assembly wishes to change the position of the denomination on these matters.” That advice convinced the advocates for 35 overtures seeking change to work together to make one, united presentation to the GA Committee on Ordination Standards.
Thus began a unique and complex undertaking: preparing and editing a 60-minute presentation, including Powerpoint slides, to make the case for middle ground at the 213th Assembly. All the overture advocates were consulted along the way. The presentation went through innumerable iterations, ably guided by Doug Nave, the advocate from New York City, and Tricia Dykers Koenig, the advocate from Western Reserve.
At the Assembly the presentation caused a minor sensation. Over the course of four days more than 1,500 people viewed it, including hundreds of commissioners. (We have asked the Covenant Network to distribute it to the church through their Web site at www.covenantnetwork.org.)
The overture advocates, and later the Committee on Ordination Standards in its report to the Assembly, did not try to convince anyone of one perspective or another on homosexuality. We acknowledged that Presbyterians hold different perspectives on this issue, in roughly equal numbers. Instead, we argued that interpretation of Scripture on this matter is not an essential of our faith and, therefore, is among those “truths and forms with respect to which men of good characters and principles may differ” (G-1.0305).
The committee agreed with us that it is the duty of Christians “to exercise mutual forbearance toward each other” on these non-essentials. Recognizing the prospect of unending judicial and legislative struggle over the ordination question, the committee and ultimately the GA proposed that Presbyterians agree to disagree, and stand down from the hard lines we have drawn.
The action taken by the 213th GA, if passed by the presbyteries, will neither require nor prohibit the ordination of homosexual Presbyterians who meet the standards for office. This middle ground proposal will allow the church to reassert the governing body discretion that has been a Presbyterian hallmark since the Adopting Act of 1729.
We overture advocates are weary of the back-and-forth, win-lose process in which Presbyterians find ourselves mired. The action taken by the Assembly puts these matters in the hands of the ordaining and installing governing bodies, where they properly belong.
Yes, that would mean that your presbytery or session could decide differently than mine when faced with a gay or lesbian candidate. That is precisely the point. We Overture Advocates might wish it could be otherwise, but we acknowledge that there is widespread disagreement in the church on this question. We want to protect the right of all sessions and presbyteries to do the work of determining the suitability of candidates for office. This includes not admitting to office a previously ordained candidate whom the governing body, in prayerful deliberation and good conscience, deems unsuitable. We are prepared to live with that outcome.
The middle ground proposed by the Assembly finally offers us a way through the turbulence of the last 25 years on this matter. Let us welcome it, approve it, and move on, together, to the renewal and revitalization of our beloved church.
posted Aug. 23, 2001
Timothy D. Hart-Andersen served as overture advocate from Twin Cities Area Presbytery at the 213th General Assembly. He is pastor, Westminster church, Minneapolis, and a member of the executive committee of the Covenant Network of Presbyerians.
