BIRMINGHAM — Now that the General Assembly has blown through town, what does the map of the Presbyterian world look like?
First, for a lot of Presbyterians, things look exactly the same. The world did not end because a General Assembly met for a week in Alabama. Presbyterians still bow their heads to ask God’s blessing and work to make the world a better place, as they have done for generations. And perhaps those faithful Presbyterians carrying on without pause may help to balance out those who can’t sleep for thinking about what the assembly just did.
For the insomniacs, the reality is settling in something like this.
It will take time — months, maybe longer — for the repercussions of the assembly’s decisions to echo through the church.
Some say the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has handed presbyteries and sessions a loophole for ordaining sexually-active gays and lesbians, others aren’t so sure. It’s likely the Presbyterian church courts will play a role in sorting it out.
And in the meantime, Presbyterians will have to figure out what being faithful means for them. Some pastors and congregations are scouring their consciences about whether to leave the PC(USA), although many conservatives are counseling people not to run for the exits.
Some liberals are struggling too — they want to be part of a denomination that welcomes gays and lesbians into leadership unequivocally, and that’s not something the PC(USA) has been willing to do.
“The only certain result of the Episcopal and Presbyterian church conventions that ended this week is that the participants will return to fight another day — and at future church conventions — over homosexuality,” reported The New York Times.
In the meantime, there is talk of a “new way of being church.”
And exactly what that “new way” means could (at least for the insomniacs) be a most interesting conversation.
Staying put doesn’t mean staying still
Staying in the PC(USA), for some evangelical Presbyterians, will not mean staying in place. If they don’t leave altogether, they will be searching for ways to make sure they don’t participate in doing something they consider absolutely unacceptable, such as ordaining people who are sexually active outside of marriage.
So evangelicals are considering new configurations, new ways of involvement with international mission work, new ways of connecting with like-minded folk.
Vic Pentz, senior pastor of Peachtree Church, a megachurch in Atlanta, wrote a letter to his congregation following the assembly, in which he said: “Peachtree and other evangelical congregations plan to remain in the PC(USA), but must now explore our own new ways of being the church.”
Among the possibilities, Pentz wrote, is that the session of Peachtree may consider “a policy of total designation of all of its benevolent contributions. We believe it is important to be accountable for every penny contributed by our members, directing all towards ministries that are consistent with Biblical standards and orthodox Reformed theology.”
Throughout the summer, evangelicals will be gathering to talk strategy — in July at the New Wineskins meeting (www.newwineconvo.com/ ) in Tulsa; in August with the Presbyterian Coalition (www.presbycoalition.org/postga.htm ) and the Presbyterian Global Fellowship (https://www.presbyterianglobalfellowship.org/Atlanta/), both meeting in Atlanta; and in late September with the Constitutional Presbyterians (www.constitutionalpresbyterians .org/call.htm) in Pittsburgh.
Likely to be on the agenda at all these meetings: Stay in the PC(USA) or go? And how to stay in what some evangelicals contend is a misguided denomination without eroding their core convictions?
Among the options being considered: withholding of funds from the PC(USA); earmarking contributions only for specific uses, and raising and spending money outside the denominational structure for global mission.
Some evangelicals seem to be looking for a clarified sense of identity — perhaps positioning themselves as a distinct fellowship within a denomination with which they are somewhat reluctant to be associated.
“There will be a lot of people who don’t leave, but who need a place to identify, ‘This is the kind of Presbyterians we are,'” Bill Young, executive director of Presbyterian Frontier Fellowship, said in an interview.
For example, the founding statement of the new Presbyterian Global Fellowship, created in May, speaks of its focus on international mission and evangelism in the U.S., but also includes a statement opposing the ordination of gays and lesbians.
Michael Carey, the pastor of Trinity Church in Satellite Beach, Fla., and a General Assembly commissioner, wrote to his congregation after the assembly that “some seem to want the church to mirror the culture.” But Carey asked people from his church to stick it out, writing: “Trust us as we explore ways to be biblically-based and Presbyterian.”
Dave Moore, a new church development pastor from Kansas City and also a General Assembly commissioner, contended that Presbyterians need to clearly identify the boundaries of what’s acceptable and what’s not in the PC(USA). Appealing to Presbyterian tradition “doesn’t cut it with the unchurched of Kansas City,” Moore told the assembly. “They want to know where we stand.”
What did the Assembly really do?
The evangelical reaction to this assembly was swift and furious. New Wineskins said the assembly has “abandoned its Presbyterian heritage and opened the door to blatant disregard of biblical standards.”
A coalition of renewal groups said “the consequences of the decision of this General Assembly throw our denomination into crisis.”
And a new group called Constitutional Presbyterians says its members feel like “strangers in our own denomination.”
Much of the furor has to do with the assembly’s decision to approve, by a margin of 57 percent to 43 percent, an authoritative interpretation of the denomination’s constitution proposed by the Theological Task Force on the Peace, Unity and Purity of the PC(USA).
That interpretation permits a candidate for ordination who disagrees with part of the church’s national standards to declare an objection or a “scruple.” The session or presbytery would then decide whether that departure from the denomination’s constitutional standards “constitutes a failure to adhere to the essentials of Reformed faith and polity,” or can be tolerated.
Those national standards require ordained church leaders to practice fidelity if they’re married or chastity if they’re single.
But following the assembly, there’s been a blast of debate about the actual wording of the assembly’s action — and about whether some amendments the assembly approved change the impact of the task force recommendations. That amended language has to do with the possibility of higher governing bodies reviewing the actions of sessions and presbyteries.
The right to review has always existed, but now there’s debate over how extensive it can actually be. Does it involve just reviewing the process the governing body followed, or also the substance of the decision it made?
Prior church court decisions allow a review of content for “extraordinary reasons.” This assembly added language to say that the review could consider “whether the examination and ordination and installation decision comply with the constitution of the PC(USA).”
The Advisory Committee on the Constitution contends the new language does not change the review process.
The task force report is just “restating the existing law of the church,” Jim Wilson of the ACC said in an interview. The amendment “doesn’t change the effect of the case law,” Wilson said, but “it may add clarity and comfort to some folks.”
Others, however, read it differently — and the polity wonks have been parsing up a storm on the web.
“There’s a lot of confusion about that, and ultimately that will be determined by the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission,” said Michael Walker, executive director of Presbyterians for Renewal. “Until that time, we don’t know for certain what the assembly’s actions mean.”
Presbyteries, start your engines
In the interim, presbyteries and sessions will be the Petri dishes where the task force recommendations come to life. It will be there that candidates for ordination or installation will be examined and, if they chose, declare their scruples.
The task force has asked presbyteries to set up theologically diverse discussion groups, in the hope that Presbyterians who get to know one another through Bible study, worship and ongoing conversation will have a better experience of hacking through the weeds of controversy together.
It has recommended more rigorous examinations of candidates for ordination or installation.
And it is expected that test cases will be brought in the coming months to see if sessions or presbyteries are willing to ordain candidates who declare scruples — over gay ordination, the ordination of women, paying per capita or something else.
A group called Presbyterian Welcome, a coalition of groups supporting the ordination of qualified gays and lesbians, has announced a retreat in late July (www.covenantnetwork.org/images/retreatflyer-final.pdf ) for gays and lesbians who are inquirers or candidates to become ministers of Word and Sacrament.
It’s likely they will discuss — as will others in the PC(USA) — what a more “rigorous examination” could be like.
Jon Walton and Kimberly Richter are co-moderators of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians, which favors the ordination of qualified gays and lesbians. Walton, pastor of First Church in New York City, says the authoritative interpretation both allows candidates to follow their consciences and allows governing bodies to consider someone’s “whole being, their whole person,” in deciding whether to ordain — meaning “their faith, their beliefs, their character, their behavior, who they are as a person.”
Bob Dooling, an evangelical who is pastor of Mountain View Church in Loveland, Colo., said a more rigorous examination “can only help. I think we have been far too lax across the board in examining candidates and examining people coming into our presbyteries. We don’t know enough about them.”
But the tone of those examinations — whether cordial or mean-spirited — will depend on the presbytery and the people involved, Dooling said.
His own examination for ordination, years ago, “was lengthy and rigorous,” Dooling said. “It was not nasty. The presbytery wanted to know who the heck I was, (asking) detailed, thoughtful questions. They expected detailed, honest answers … I am not for witch hunts. I am for honest, open, candid conversation with integrity.”
There are still questions about what exactly a presbytery or session could ask about sexual behavior, if the candidate doesn’t volunteer information.
It’s anticipated that some gay and lesbian candidates living in committed partnerships will declare scruples and ask to be ordained. But not discussed so openly is the whole sticky issue of what kinds of questions are appropriate for other situations — for the single, heterosexual candidate, for example, who dates but doesn’t have a “lifelong partner.”
Very few sessions would want to say to an elder, “Now you’re 30 years old and you’ve never been married. Have you ever slept with someone else, have you repented of that?” Walton predicted. “We just don’t inquire into those things.”
Some sessions and presbyteries may choose to ask all candidates if they know of any reason why they couldn’t comply with the “fidelity and chastity” standards — and to expect honesty in the answers. But how intensely to probe — on matters of sex, other behavior or theology — is something presbyteries and sessions will have to work out.
Some who support ordaining gays and lesbians also acknowledge their hope that, through the new authoritative interpretation, more gays and lesbians will be ordained, and hearts and minds will change in the church as a result of that experience.
Richter said when she was first ordained, “there would be people who would stand up and walk out whenever I started to lead worship and preach … There were some people who were never going to change their minds” about the ordination of women.
But the others, as they got to know her, found “it was not all that bad,” and became reluctant to say, “Kim shouldn’t be a pastor.”
As gays and lesbians are ordained, Presbyterians “will see the incredible gifts for ministry, the incredible faithfulness and generosity of these people,” Richter said.
And Walton said the questioning won’t be limited to sexual matters.
If a candidate said, “I believe the story of Jonah is mythological,” a faith story, “but I don’t literally believe the whale swallowed the man,” people could ask about theology and biblical interpretation.
“The whole issue will be proven in the crucible of conscience,” Walton said.
And Richter — who’s a director of the Center for Lifelong Learning at Columbia Theological Seminary — said the PC(USA) “will discover together what is going to be acceptable and faithful, and what is not.”
