The Christian faith -- certainly as we know it in the Reformed tradition -- is a faith of the community. While we make our individual professions of faith, we do so as we join the company of the faithful, the church of Jesus Christ. Parents may be the primary faith educators of their children, but it is the congregation that promises to guide and nurture the child by "word and deed, with love and prayer, encouraging the child to know and follow Christ and to be a faithful member of Christ's church."
Serious Christian education requires that we not simply teach the Bible, but that our understanding of the text always be open to refinement. For 40 years I taught my Middle Eastern students, "Keep your exegetical conclusions tentatively final." They have to be final in the sense that, as a disciple of Jesus Christ, I must live out my discipleship today. Obedience to my Lord cannot wait for me to read one more technical article in New Testament studies.
That's the text.
The occasion? Last week I was kicked out of Valley Hospice. It wasn't for moral turpitude or anything like that. I doubt if I will be brought before any presbytery committee or take up the PJC's precious time. It simply was the halfway point in their six-month program and I was too healthy. I don't really need the kind of crisis care in which they specialize. So why not save the last three months for the days I need them.
Before retiring I had the privilege of being the minister of Dornoch Cathedral in the far north of Scotland. Within a few miles of Dornoch and its magnificent mediaeval cathedral is Skibo Castle, which Andrew Carnegie not only built, but in which he spent the happiest years of his life. He called Skibo his "Heaven on Earth."
After only one month of preaching, my senior elder took me aside and said, "Charles, we think we are going to like you a lot, but your sermons are going right over our heads. You should remember that the Lord said, 'Feed my sheep' not my giraffe." I almost responded that I knew about sheep, but I had received no instructions about grubs.
We Presbyterians are searching frantically to preserve the unity of our denomination, anything to keep the church from splitting. Let's try this way, that way, a third way. There must be some way we can find! But maybe what we need is to give up our ways and concentrate on what God in Christ has done.
Several strains of thought have converged recently for me and shaped these paragraphs. The Outlook editorial of Jan. 15 by Robert Bullock and William Stacy Johnson brought thoughtful assessment of Amendment O as well as a challenging reminder of work to be done by all the church in the days after the presbyteries have voted.
Living for 15 months in Egypt introduced us to a different world -- Arabic and Islamic; ancient yet modern; a third world, and an industrial nation unable to give up its old ways; a gracious hospitable people who want you to like their country.
The theology, constitution and policy of our church, in concert with the church universal and ecumenical, teaches that sexual expression belongs only within the covenant of marriage. The polity of the church is to conform to the profession of the church, as our Preliminary Principles say: "We are persuaded that there is an inseparable connection between faith and practice, truth and duty."
I have experienced an epiphany, or at least a reawakening of personal hope for our Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). In a day when it seems that our beloved church is being torn asunder by irreconcilable issues, such as the Amendment O debate, little did I realize that a request from my session would lead me to a rediscovery of hope for the church.
It is too bad that with so many challenges facing the church today we have to be conducting a dispute with our good friend Jerry Andrews over Amendment O. This diversion of valuable energy is just one more reason we are against the amendment.
As presbyteries consider Amendment Q, some important questions are being raised. As co-authors of the original overture from Genesee Valley Presbytery, we offer the benefit of our thoughts.
1. It sounds like this amendment is just trying to punish the offender.
Last Saturday evening I spent about an hour and a half sitting crossed-legged on the bed in the basement room of one of my 13-year-old parishioners while she and her two friends fired questions at me non-stop. As soon as I took a breath in an answer, mostly to check my own brain to be sure that I was on track, the next question shot out, hung in the air in a pleading way and fell into my lap.
What will the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) be like in the next 10 or 20 years? Only God knows with certainty. But if young pastors, those age 40 or younger, are any indication, the denomination may very well continue to retreat from causes associated with the Great Society and its heirs, while returning to its theological roots.
The Guest Viewpoint by Jerry Andrews and reply by Robert Bullock and me offers a poignant example of Christian friends engaging each other -- reluctantly -- in disagreement. What are we to make theologically of this fact: that disagreement seems to be a permanent mode of the church's existence?
I would like to make three comments on Robert Bullock's important editorial, "A Sacred Trust." Before I do that, let me say that even though I differ with him on a number of issues, not the least of which is Amendment O, I know that Robert is a dedicated servant of Jesus Christ and of the PC(USA).
Cleanliness may be next to godliness, but part of the problem with Presbyterians today is they do not often enough smell to high heaven. That is, Presbyterians look down their noses more regularly at bad order than at bad odor. Obviously God made human beings with five senses. Puzzling over how they worked together caused Aristotle to posit a "common sense" (De Anima, III).
Birds are among God's most beautiful creatures and bird watching in the world around us is a pure delight. People of the Middle Ages were also fascinated by birds and filled the borders of their manuscripts with obsessively accurate drawings of birds. Birds were regarded as cheerful, hopeful, impudent and above all free. They enrich our lives and some of them enrich our tables.
The range of responses to Alexander McKelway's reflections on the theology of homosexuality illustrates the diversity of perspectives in the Presbyterian Church today. Without commenting on the merits of what is said, I wish merely to note that each position is offered in good faith, and that each has a certain Christian plausibility to it.
By ceaseless and careless repetition, our society teaches us many things. Few Presbyterians under 40 years of age, I suspect, can distinguish between Rosinante and Dulcinea. However, everyone knows, and has been influenced by, Don Quixote's conviction, "When in Rome do as the Romans do" (Part II, Chapter 54).
All good teaching elders have bad consciences and genuine humility because first-class seminaries instruct them in how much there is to know about divine science (including human and natural science) and how little they ever will. In addition, Presbyterian seminaries do not encourage the notion that any amount of pious zeal can make up for abysmal ignorance.
Laird Stuart, whose efforts at reconciliation are well known, has reported significant points of my previous article, which I hope interested persons will consult.
As one involved in writing what came to be known as the "Thompson Overture" a number of years ago, I was taken by Professor McKelway's intent in "Reconsidering 'Definitive Guidance.'" Through an overture which was sent -- with many others like it -- to the 1992 General Assembly, the session of Nassau church, Princeton, N.J., was seeking "a way through" the difficulty.
In his well-intended article, "Reconsidering 'Definitive Guidance,'" A. J. McKelway essentially argues for the ordination of homosexual persons because they are really the victims of an "involuntary condition." But, he adds, as long as they do not impose their "life style publicly" on the church. That is, if they don't flaunt it, ask for the church's approval or cause injury or public scandal.
A. J. McKelway's article offers to make distinctions that, it is agreed, are often so helpful when considering issues before the church, but one distinction, essential to the conversation, remained unspoken -- a distinction the church has rightly made.
© Copyright 2026 The Presbyterian Outlook. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Statement. Website by Web Publisher PRO
