All the hot-button issues were managed without any large measure of dissension that would radiate out into the church. On the issue of what some are calling “constitutional defiance,” the Assembly chose to send a pastoral letter to presbyteries and synods encouraging administrative review of lower governing bodies with pastoral sensitivity. It also voted to ask for clarification from the Office of the General Assembly of the administrative review process of lower governing body decisions. The Assembly declined to call for another vote on ordination standards by the presbyteries, instead calling upon the church to pray for the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity. A request for further clarification of Book of Order language in the section on ordination standards was turned down.
Also, the Assembly voted to carry through the process of biennial Assemblies, beginning in the year 2006, on an experimental basis, rather than returning to the annual meeting. It had been approved by last year’s Assembly. It also agreed to toughen the requirements for calling an Assembly back into session, a response to the controversial attempt to recall the 214th Assembly last year. Denominational abortion policy remained essentially unchanged. A controversial report on changing family structures was referred back to the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy, with its theological sections going to the Office of Theology and Worship.
Continued support for the World Council of Churches was approved. Major papers on Africa and the Arab-Israeli situation were also approved. One change in course approved by the Assembly was that of exempting the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity from the open meetings rule in certain specified cases involving discussion of “sensitive theological issues.”
Discussion for the most part was conducted in a civil fashion and it reflected a general desire among commissioners not to stir the boiling pot further. A major reason that this GA was less contentious was the appointment of the theological task force two years ago, and we are waiting for it’s work to be concluded.
Perhaps the church can use this time to search for some healing and to advance the discussion to a new level. There is much hope for a breakthrough by the theological task force, but whatever its findings and recommendations, the struggle will undoubtedly continue for many years to come.
Send your comment on this editorial to The Outlook. Please give your hometown.
