Time will tell – and Valentine is certainly not alone in that hope. But the perennial issue of what the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) should do about ordaining gays and lesbians — a discussion with lots of history and baggage — will once again be before the church in San Jose in June.
The debate before this assembly could slide into acronym soup, with references to AIs (authoritative interpretations) and the GAPJC (General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission, the church’s highest court) and the PUP report (the recommendations of the Theological Task Force on the Peace, Unity, and Purity that the assembly adopted in Alabama in 2006).
To put it simply, there is a pile of overtures coming to this assembly regarding sexual behavior. But, in a year in which the denomination will also be dealing with some key leadership issues (the election of a new stated clerk) and other significant issues (whether and how to revise the denomination’s form of government and concerns ranging from abortion to interfaith relations to peace in the Middle East), that doesn’t necessarily make this the defining issue of the assembly.
The assembly will set its own priorities — and is being challenged to think creatively, not just to do things as they’ve habitually been done. But this is also the first assembly since the theological task force made the case for its recommendations in 2006, so it’s the first opportunity at the national level to consider again how well (or poorly) those recommendations are working.
Going in, think of most of the business related to the church and homosexuality this year as falling into one of several buckets.
In the first, some presbyteries want to do away with some of what the theological task force recommended — particularly the controversial Recommendation 5, which allows candidates for ordination to declare scruples based on conscience. Local governing bodies then have to decide if such a departure from the denomination’s ordination standards can be permitted, or if they are seen to violate an essential of Reformed faith and practice and cannot. The General Assembly in 2006 approved that as an “authoritative interpretation.”
Some Presbyterians are concerned that Recommendation 5 could open the door to candidates declaring scruples to the language in the PC(USA)’s ordination standards that require those being ordained to practice fidelity if they are married or chastity if they are single. In other words, they see it as a way for more non-celibate gays and lesbians to be ordained.
Central Washington presbytery, in Overture 28, is asking that all actions related to the Theological Task Force “be completely and fully rescinded.” Other overtures take different approaches, but share the common thread of trying to revisit and undo some of the task force’s recommendations. The assembly’s Church Orders and Ministry Committee will consider these overtures.
In the second, concerns about what has happened since the 2006 General Assembly in Birmingham are found in other overtures.
In February, the GAPJC issued a ruling that candidates for ordination must comply with the denomination’s sexual behavior standards even if they disagree in conscience with them. The GAPJC ruled that the authoritative interpretation the assembly approved in 2006 does not permit exceptions to the “fidelity and chastity” standard, which it described as “a mandatory standard that cannot be waived.” It recognized a distinction between allowing departures from the church’s standards related to belief — but not related to behavior.
But John Knox presbytery has submitted an overture asking for a new authoritative interpretation that would say that the procedure for declaring scruples would “apply equally to all ordination standards” of the PC(USA). If the assembly approved this, it would essentially undo the impact of the February PJC ruling and would allow the recommendations of the theological task force to stand.
In the third, some presbyteries want to remove the “fidelity and chastity” language from the Book of Order altogether, an issue that has been presented to the assembly time after time, but which, in the minds of some, carries increasing urgency now in light of the February GAPJC decision.
And some overtures also ask that “definitive guidance” statements the denomination adopted in the 1970s regarding homosexuality be set aside — to say in effect that they no longer have any force. Just days after the GAPJC issued its ruling, the national board of directors of More Light Presbyterians adopted a statement declaring “It’s About Time” for the “fidelity and chastity” clause to be deleted from the PC(USA) constitution.
“It’s about time to end the task forces, studies, judicial cases, interpretations, and other abuses that continue the unconscionable discriminatory policies of our church,” that statement reads in part. “It’s about time to lay aside our fears: fear of the unknown, fear of schism, fear of those who are different.”
Others, however, contend that the church has repeatedly considered the “fidelity and chastity” language and that the PC(USA) standards represent both what is biblically correct and the will of the denomination.
“We would like to see the good affirmation the GAPJC made of the constitutionality of the ordination standards upheld,” said Terry Schlossberg, executive director of the Presbyterian Coalition, an evangelical group.
And she questioned the wisdom of asking successive General Assemblies to issue “dueling authoritative interpretations,” in other words, for one assembly to reverse what a previous assembly or the GAPJC had done.
“It doesn’t help the church to do this yin and yang or whatever we’re doing — this seesaw — with authoritative interpretations,” Schlossberg said in an interview. By doing that, “there’s a potential of creating an adversarial relationship among the bodies.”
The Covenant Network of Presbyterians, which supports ordaining gays and lesbians, is asking the assembly both to support the task force’s recommendations and to remove the “fidelity and chastity” language from the denomination’s constitution.
There is no question that the debate over ordaining gays and lesbians will continue to haunt the PC(USA), as is true for all the mainline denominations, and as the debate over same-sex marriage and civil rights for gays and lesbians plays out in secular American society. As the Episcopal Church can attest, this issue is not going away soon.
But the extent to which it will be a spotlight issue at this assembly will depend in part on what most captures the hearts and minds of commissioners in San Jose, and it is likely they will pay close attention to other compelling topics too, such as changing alliances for world mission and proposals to change the form of government and a conversation about how the PC(USA) can better work with young adults in a multicultural world.
That’s not to say that the debate over homosexuality doesn’t matter in the PC(USA) — to many Presbyterians, it very much does.
But over the years, commissioners have become accustomed to homosexuality being perennially on the agenda, but not necessarily at the top of the marquee.
After the assembly in 2006, some predicted that the PC(USA) would see a flood of cases of gays and lesbians trying to be ordained. “I think that we were surprised too that there wasn’t more activity following that assembly,” Schlossberg said. “It’s taken a long time for a case to surface.”
Another set of overtures coming to the assembly is asking the stated clerk to develop models for effectively examining candidates. Heartland Presbytery, for example, says in an overture that the purpose of examinations is to discern whether God has called an individual for service, “recognizing that God’s spirit blows where it chooses.”
And an overture from Scioto Valley Presbytery states, “personal questions on all topics should be posed with discretion and sensitivity” and that specific inquiries about sexual orientation or practice should not be made when the candidate “has not taken the initiative of declaring his or her sexual orientation.”
The Heartland Presbytery overture also states, ”if such inquiries are not made into the sexual orientation or practice of all persons being examined, then such inquiries may not be made into only select persons’ orientation or practice.”
It’s unclear how much the task force recommendations have changed how presbyteries and sessions conduct their examinations of candidates, not only gay and lesbian candidates, but across the board. The San Jose assembly will face and discuss many such questions.
