The Permanent Judicial Commission (GA-PJC) of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), has handed down a landmark ruling in the process of determining a case to be moot. In George R. Stewart vs. Mission Presbytery, the GA-PJC ruled in favor of the presbytery in its request to drop the case since the substance of the complaint was no longer an issue. Nevertheless, Stewart’s essential complaint was upheld by the GA-PJC.
In dispute was the action of the Mission Presbytery in south central Texas, on October 10-12, 2005, which met to approve for candidacy an inquirer who stated–according to the call to the meeting–that “she is a lesbian and lives in a committed relationship.” The call to that meeting also stated, “Although our Book of Order (G-14.0305a-i) requires those coming to be ordained to observe fidelity in marriage and chasteness in singleness, the Book of Order does not place this standard on those in the candidacy process.” The presbytery voted by 169-111 to approve that action on the part of the inquirer. Stewart, an honorably retired minister, challenged that assessment.
The Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Sun heard his appeal but by tie vote did not sustain it. He appealed the case to the GA-PJC.
On November 17, 2006, the candidate withdrew from the process and the presbytery voted on March 3, 2007, to remove her from the roll of candidates. The presbytery then filed a motion, requesting the PJC to drop the case on the grounds that the candidate’s withdrawal rendered it moot.
Stewart contended that the action is not moot, since it is the presbytery’s action that he was challenging, and that it deserves the full consideration of review and remediation.
The PJC has now ruled that it is moot, but it also stated that the substance of Stewart’s argument was accurate.
The PJC ruling challenges the annotated edition of the Book of Order (G-14.0305d), where it cites Sheldon, et al. v. Presbytery of West Jersey (Minutes, 2000, p. 589) and asserts, “An inquirer may be received as a candidate even if not currently eligible for ordination because of G-6.0106b, but could not be ordained if found at the time for certification of readiness for ordination not to be in compliance.”
The PJC responds: “The annotation is a misstatement of the cited case.” Sheldon, it says, allowed a celibate gay man to proceed as a candidate. “However,” it states, “if the [Presbytery] should determine the Candidate to be ineligible for candidacy at some point in the future, the [Presbytery] should remove the Candidate’s name from the roll of candidates, as provided by G-14.0312.”
This ruling of the GA-PJC reflects the language of G-6.0108a also, which states, “It is to be recognized, however, that in becoming a candidate or officer of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) one chooses to exercise freedom of conscience within certain bounds. His or her conscience is captive to the Word of God as interpreted in the standards of the church so long as he or she continues to seek or hold office in that body. The decision as to whether a person has departed from essentials of Reformed faith and polity is made initially by the individual concerned but ultimately becomes the responsibility of the governing body in which he or she serves (G-1.0301; G-1.0302)” (emphasis added).
The actual ruling can be found on the PC(USA) Web site: https://www.pcusa.org/gapjc/decisions/pjc21804.pdf.
