Editor’s note: This article is one response to POL-01, the “Olympia overture.” To read more opinions, click here.
It is time. It is time for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to fully honor all of its people, celebrating their gifts and affirming their dignity to serve as members and ordained leaders. A candidate’s willingness to support the full participation and representation of people of every race, ethnicity, gender identity and sexual orientation should not only be a legitimate consideration – it should be an essential factor – in ordination decisions.
The Olympia Presbytery overture (POL-01) would offer needed assurance and clarity that LGBTQIA+ people are fully equal partners in the church and its ministry. A failure to pass the overture would send a very different and devastating message to all those in historically marginalized groups who still face discrimination, exclusion and extra burdens in our churches every single day.
It is time for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to fully honor all of its people, celebrating their gifts and affirming their dignity to serve as members and ordained leaders.
In its 27 years of faithful work, the Covenant Network of Presbyterians has always sought to hold unity and justice together. Sometimes, we even parted ways with progressive friends who wanted rapid change that might have caused division in the church. I have supported that approach, sharing in dialogue and education efforts with conservatives in the church during earlier controversies and seeking to keep divergent parts of our communion moving forward together, albeit slowly.
But it has been 14 years since the door was opened to the ordination of LGBTQIA+ people as deacons, elders and ministers. Many now serve openly, using their gifts to God’s glory and fulfilling their ordination promises with excellence and deep faith. Even to this day, they frequently do this against a backdrop of continuing discrimination, enduring exclusion and pushback in many presbyteries, and struggling to find equal opportunities.
For all our stated commitments to racial equity and LGBTQIA+ inclusion, the PC(USA) constitution still does not require that candidates for ordination articulate their commitment (or lack thereof) to representation, participation and non-discrimination. The Olympia overture calls on the church to state clearly its values of equity for all God’s people, and to put those values into action as it conducts examinations for ordination — nothing more, and nothing less. It is time.
What does the overture actually say?
Part one of the overture would add the words “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the foundational paragraph stating our commitment to unity in diversity (F-1.0403). It says we won’t discriminate against people because of who they are. This part of the overture is the very least we can do. The continued omission of those categories is permission to discriminate. The addition of these words is the most basic first step in aligning our constitutional documents with our stated commitment to celebrating the gifts and dignity of the LGBTQIA+ community.
Part two of the overture is about putting our values as a church into action. It clarifies that our commitment to representation isn’t just lofty language. It says those principles translate into expectations of our ministers and elders and deacons. It says a candidate’s support for the inclusion of people of all races and ethnicities, diverse marital statuses or sexual orientations and gender identities different from one’s own is a legitimate consideration when deciding to ordain or install them.
[Part two] does not kick conservatives out of the church. It does not require a presbytery to ordain anyone, or prevent it from doing so. It does not end “local option.”
Let’s pay attention to what Part two does not say. It does not kick conservatives out of the church. It does not require a presbytery to ordain anyone, or prevent it from doing so. It does not end “local option.” G-2.0104 establishes expectations for examinations; it does not control ordination decisions. The amendment simply clarifies that candidates must address their commitment to those principles of representation. Councils will still decide whether to ordain, just as they always have.
Why now?
Some straight, cisgender, White church leaders who are not engaged in the daily work of seeking equity for LGBTQIA+ people might suggest that this amendment should be delayed or set aside. I understand this inclination by those who have been on a long, tiring journey toward inclusion. But I’ve come to realize that in the church of today, delay or inaction would prioritize the comfort and job security of opponents of LGBTQIA+ inclusion and racial equity over the faith and well-being of those who have been historically wounded and excluded by the church. It would fail to recognize – and in fact, would reinforce – the inequity and deeply ingrained bias still present in our system. It would invert the call to serve the “least of these” embedded in our Matthew 25 emphasis and, indeed, all of Jesus’ ministry.
I’ve come to realize that … delay or inaction (of this overture) would prioritize the comfort and job security of opponents of LGBTQIA+ inclusion and racial equity over the faith and well-being of those who have been historically wounded and excluded by the church.
Some polity advisers (such as the Advisory Committee on the Constitution) suggest the amendment states ideas already contained in the Book of Order or that the clarity of the amendment is unnecessary or “redundant.” As the moderator of the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission and the stated clerk of a synod and (formerly) a presbytery, I am well versed in the PC(USA) constitution. I understand both the need for, and the implications of, the amendment. This amendment is more necessary than ever, clarifying that LGBTQIA+ and other historically marginalized communities deserve not to be overlooked or diminished as church leaders are examined and ordained. It would add something new, specific and important, and it would make a big difference.
As a gay man who served the church in the closet for more than a decade, I know the pain of the church pretending all is well, even when it is not. And as executive director of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians for the last 12 years, working every week with pastors and candidates, congregations and presbyteries, I see the damage that failure to pass this amendment would cause. The church has shown great forbearance over the past decade toward those who still oppose the inclusion of LGBTQIA+ people fully in the church’s life. Now, it is time to expect that none of God’s people called to ministry and membership will be treated as second-class by those who want to lead.
I see the damage that failure to pass this amendment would cause.
I urge the church to come together to support this measured, moderate step forward. I urge the church, in its values and actions, to live into its stated commitments to fully include and celebrate all of God’s people.
It is time.
The Presbyterian Outlook is committed to fostering faithful conversations by publishing a diversity of voices. The opinions expressed are the author’s and may or may not reflect the opinions and beliefs of the Outlook’s editorial staff or the Presbyterian Outlook Foundation. Want to join the conversation? You can write to us or submit your own article here.
