The committee concludes:
That Stroud was neither ordained nor installed by Baltimore Presbytery. (He was ordained in 1975 by Mecklenburg Presbytery, which is now Charlotte Presbytery.)
That Stroud “did not, within the bounds of the presbytery, ordain or install any person in violation of the Constitution” (G-6.0106b). However, Stroud “made certain statements which some persons construed to be in violation of the Constitution and in violation of his ordination vows, for which a statement of alleged offense was presented to the presbytery.”
That the handling of the disciplinary case that resulted, “did not involve any irregularities or delinquencies, in that the members of the investigating committee were properly appointed and approved by the presbytery; the number of members of the investigating committee met the requirements of the Book of Order, the committee’s proceedings were regular and conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Book of Order, and its proceedings were properly recorded and reported to the presbytery in a timely manner; the designated members of the presbytery’s permanent judicial commission properly reviewed the decision of the investigating committee and reported their findings to the presbytery in a timely manner; and the proceedings of both the investigating committee and the permanent judicial commission were prudent, equitable and in accordance with the Book of Order.”
While the synod committee found nothing “of a sufficient magnitude to constitute an irregularity or delinquency that alters” its conclusions above, it did make six observations “for consideration by the presbytery.” These primarily concern procedure.
The synod administrative review committee was not charged with the task of reviewing judicial aspects of the case. The report notes that requests were made to the committee to expand the scope of its inquiry, but that was “determined to be outside its authority and hence not a matter” the committee could act upon.
The synod council received the report with one member voting “no.” C. Powell Sykes, a minister from Burlington, N.C., voted against the motion.
The synod created the administrative review committee last November to review the actions of Baltimore Presbytery regarding Stroud, a minister who has publicly said that he cannot comply with the section of the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) that does not permit the ordination of those who are single and sexually active.
Stroud, a gay man and a commissioner to the 213th General Assembly (2001), works for That All May Freely Serve, an organization trying to push open the doors of ordination to gays and lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered persons. Stroud was the subject of a disciplinary case in Baltimore Presbytery, brought by Paul Rolf Jensen, a lawyer who has aggressively initiated cases against individuals he contends are defying the part of the ordination standards requiring fidelity for those who are married or chastity for those who are single.
In response to Jensen’s complaint, an investigating committee appointed in Baltimore Presbytery declined to bring charges against Stroud. After that decision, Stroud continued to say publicly that he cannot in conscience comply with the “fidelity and chastity” standard.
During discussion of the report, Sykes brought up the question of possible conflict of interest by members of the presbytery investigative committee.
The report notes that That All May Freely Serve (TAMFS) has its Baltimore offices in a part of Faith church, which also houses (on another floor and “not in close proximity to each other”) the presbytery. The presbytery’s stated clerk, Charles Forbes, is TAMFS board member, treasurer and contributor. The moderator of the investigating committee, John Kazanjian, once made a “modest” contribution to TAMFS, as did another member of the investigating committee, Florence Henderson. Sam Jett, the other person who actually served on the presbytery investigating committee, “is not believed to have had any connection with TAMFS.”
Review committee member Don Bickhard, who presented the report, said those connections were noted, and did not change the committee’s finding.
Sykes also attempted to have the synod council address Stroud’s “statements which some persons construed to be in violation of the Constitution and in violation of his ordination vows.”
Synod council member Linda Morris, who also served on the review committee (and abstained on the vote to receive), said Stroud’s statements were not a part of what the review committee was told to investigate. “If you want to do that, you need another committee,” she said.
Sykes then said it appears that the accuser (Jensen) has no way to appeal the presbytery’s lack of action against Stroud. Council member Robert Angus, a member of the National Capital Presbytery PJC, noted that Baltimore Presbytery had sent a letter to Jensen asking for a response, but he had not responded. (Jensen said he never received the letter, but the presbytery says it has a signed receipt from him.) “If he had responded, the presbytery’s investigative committee might have looked into it further.”
After the council received the administrative review committee report, Sykes tried to get the council to approve a “comment” that Baltimore Presbytery should rule that any ordained member of the presbytery who refuses to repent of a statement that they will not abide by the Constitution has renounced the jurisdiction of the church.
“This is an issue of justice to the entire denomination,” said Sykes. “One presbytery cannot rule part of the Constitution ineffective within its bounds. … That’s the comment that needs to go on here. Does the majority rule in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) or not?”
Yeuell ruled that this was a directive, not a comment. He added, however, that Sykes, as a minister of the Word and Sacrament, can file a complaint with Baltimore Presbytery.
Finally, Sykes moved that the synod moderator, June Bucy, call a full meeting of the synod in the first quarter of 2004 “to deal with Baltimore Presbytery’s continued defiance of the Constitution.” The motion died for lack of a second.
The members of the synod’s administrative review committee were John Goodman of Coastal Carolina Presbytery, Kurtis Hess of James Presbytery, Bob Stroud (no relation to Donald Stroud) of James Presbytery, Bickhard of Eastern Virginia Presbytery, Ann Massie of Shenandoah Presbytery, Morris of Abingdon Presbytery and C. W. Hargrave of National Capital Presbytery.
