Most engaged Presbyterians know that our
denomination recently held its national meeting called the General Assembly. It
seems axiomatic that every General Assembly meeting produces some good news and
some bad news. The proportion of each changes depending upon the year. For 20
years, I have had to respond to the General Assembly’s most negative actions in
order to keep the local church engaged in the denomination. As we near the end
of the process of leaving the PC(USA) and joining the ECO, that’s no longer the
case. However, I offer this somewhat lengthy analysis because I continue to be
asked my opinion on this year’s actions.
There were some good results. Perhaps the
most celebrated good news came out of the Congregational Vitality Committee.
They received the report of the 1001 New Worshipping Communities initiative of
the Evangelism and Church Growth office. At the time of the Assembly, 248
groups had registered as new worshipping communities. Also, the World Mission
office began a campaign on missional living and it joined with other offices to
focus efforts on child education globally.
On the other hand, the actions guaranteed to
cause division were in large supply. For example, an Authoritative Interpretation
(AI) was passed to allow pastors the right to conduct gay marriages in states
where gay marriage is legal. They also passed a change in our Book of Order that
redefines marriage as a covenant between two people. The former decision is effective
immediately; the latter must be approved by a majority of our 171 presbyteries.
The Assembly voted to divest from three U.S. companies in Israel and they began
the process to consider divesting from fossil fuel companies. They rejected any
effort to amend, or even to review, our position on abortion, which essentially
supports any form of abortion at any time in a pregnancy. And, as is common,
they expressed liberal opinions on all types of political issues such as gun
control, immigration, and tax reform. The last one advocated eliminating the tax
deduction pastors receive for housing. Happily for us pastors, long ago
Congress gave up caring about the opinions of the PC(USA) on any issue.
Obviously, I am disappointed with many of this
Assembly’s decisions, but I am particularly saddened by how one piece of business
was conducted, specifically, the AI on gay marriage. It was not only a
theological and biblical error, but was also a gross violation of the
constitutional framework of the denomination. We are historically a
denomination with a strong constitutional foundation. The first half of our
constitution is the Book of Confessions (theology) and the second is the Book
of Order (governance). Adherence to both halves has been essential for the historic
health of the denomination. Sadly, this last assembly severed any substantive
connection between the two, and undermined the authority of the Book of Order. That’s
a constitutional crisis.
When a passage in the Book of Order is
unclear about a particular statement and how it pertains to a contemporary
issue, the General Assembly can issue an AI that becomes law of the land as
soon as the Assembly is over. It is a necessary way to keep our constitution
pliable enough to address changing cultures. It requires that an Assembly have
enough honesty and humility to recognize when there is a clear ambiguity in the
book. That was not the case this year.
The Book of Order states in section W-4.9000 that
marriage is a covenant between a man and woman. The Book of Confession also
defines marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman. Is any of this
ambiguous in your mind? Nonetheless, the Assembly used its power to pass an AI on
W-4.9000 that allows ministers to perform weddings of any two people. Such an
action is a gross abuse of the power of issuing AI’s. If mandates of the Book
of Order can be so easily neglected, then it is no longer a reliable guide for
the governance of the church. If the clear statements of the Book of
Confessions are so easily tossed aside, then it no longer functions as a
constitutional document.
In the past, we could trust that while we
intensely debated difficult decisions, at least we were a people of the “book”
that is, the Constitution, who followed good process. I’ve lost many votes, but
for the most part good process was followed, which made it easier to accept the
loss. You win some, you lose some, and you move on. In this case, the Assembly
clearly wanted to advance the rights of the LGBTQ community, but they should
have taken the advice of the Advisory Committee on the Constitution and
rejected the AI strategy. The decision to use an AI to achieve an immediate
victory for gay marriage eroded our Constitution and set a deadly trajectory for
the future of the PC(USA). There will be aspects of PC(USA) that I will miss
when we move to ECO, but I will definitely not miss the upheaval caused in many
local churches every time the General Assembly of the PC(USA) meets.
No comments:
Post a Comment