General Assembly resisted efforts again this year to remove "fidelity and chastity" as a requirement for office in the PC(USA). Supporters of "progressive" theology and aberrant sexual practices have promised to continue to press for a change in the constitution that would require another round of votes in presbyteries. Recent attempts to make this change in the constitution have met with increasingly stronger support in presbyteries for fidelity and chastity.

This year’s attempt to remove the language—which reflects the biblical standard for sexual practice within the bonds of marriage, as well as the teaching of our confessions—came from the presbytery of Des Moines.

Once again, the committee on Church Orders and Ministry recommended approval of the overture. However, when it reached the plenary floor, the committee’s recommendation was defeated.

An attempt to keep the issue alive by referring it to the Theological Task Force that will report to the Assembly in 2006 also failed. Commissioners acknowledged that issues of sexuality, without any specific recommendations from G.A. are already before the task force. The G.A. called for prayer for the task force, allowing the effort to recommend deletion of fidelity and chastity to die at this assembly.

Defiance of the constitutional standard remains a problem that the Assembly did not resolve.

The Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) lost its bid to create a PC(USA) policy that would redefine family in a way contrary to Scripture.

The ACSWP policy asked the General Assembly to approve a variety of forms of family. Marriage between a man and a woman would be one option for forming families. The ACSWP proposal approached the Christian view of marriage in the same way as the overtures that seek to remove fidelity and chastity from the constitution: marriage between a man and a woman is regarded as not essential to sexual practice.

ACSWP released its policy proposal only shortly before the General Assembly. Renewal leader Alan Wisdom (Presbyterian Action for Faith and Freedom) alerted a number of commissioners on the National Issues committee prior to the G.A. of the problems with the paper. Commissioners then worked together to formulate a substitute document that was presented to the committee and adopted as a substitute for the ACSWP report.

Both versions of the Family policy went to the plenary floor. The larger body of commissioners was unfamiliar with the problems that had been discussed in the committee. They voted to refer the matter back to ACSWP for correction.

ACSWP will bring a revised version of the policy recommendation to the General Assembly in 2004. Commissioners from 2003, along with a number of renewal groups, continue to follow the progress of the changes.