G.A. decisions have been numerous and church courts have affirmed those decisions
Until the ordination requirement for fidelity in marriage and chastity in singleness was placed in the church constitu-tion's Book of Order (1997), church court decisions relied on guidance--based on Scripture and our Book of Confessions--from actions of the General Assembly that explicitly interpreted the constitution. In 1978 the General Assembly issued a "definitive guidance" that said that homosexual practice is not compatible with ordination to church office. In 1993 the G. A. issued an "authoritative interpretation" of the constitution that reflected the same understanding as the "guidance." In those years, attempts to ordain or install ministers of the Word and Sacrament, elders, and deacons who were openly engaged in homosexual practice were blocked by decisions of the General Assembly's court: the Permanent Judicial Commission (GA-PJC).

Court announcement makes Book of Order addition necessary
In 1996, membership of the court had changed and the court served notice that future decisions would allow the ordination of those in unrepentant homosexual practice unless explicit wording in the Book of Order prohibited such ordinations. Sessions and presbyteries responded with overtures to accomplish that, and the 1996 General Assembly adopted Amendment B, which was approved by a majority of presbyteries and became paragraph G-6.0106b in the Book of Order in 1997.

The GA-PJC received a case in the year 2000 regarding a public statement by the session of a Presbyterian Church in Northern New England Presbytery (The Londonderry case). Christ Church had announced in writing to its presbytery that it could not obey the constitution. Their letter is posted on the worldwide web. The GA-PJC decision said that a church has a right to dissent from the constitution and to work for change in the constitution, but does not have the right to disobey or disregard the constitution.

The GA-PJC ordered the presbytery to work with the church pastorally and administratively to bring the church into compliance with the constitution. That was in 2000. Today Christ Church continues its public declaration of non-compliance. The presbytery has not taken sufficient steps to bring the church into compliance as it is required to do.

The church has decided
General Assemblies and presbyteries set the standards for ordination. They have voted repeatedly on constitutional wording for sexual standards for church officers, three times in the past five years. The will of Presbyterians is clear and indisputable. The constitutional ordination requirements related to sexual practice apply to all sexual behavior, as they ought to: adultery, sexual relationships outside the bonds of marriage, and homosexuality.

The decisions about the constitutional wording were not a struggle between conservatives and liberals or between extremes of special interest groups in the church. Those groups had a lot to say in the public debate, but those groups did not vote. It was duly elected and commissioned ministers and elders in every presbytery of our denomination who cast their votes on this matter. They have voted for fidelity and chastity with increasingly larger margins each time the vote has been put to the church. The church has decided and repeatedly reaffirmed its decision. And now individual sessions and presbyteries need to obey for the sake of the unity of the body.

How many acts of disobedience are needed to create a constitutional crisis?
If one church defies the constitution with impunity, will the constitution and our form of government be rendered of no effect? Perhaps not. Nevertheless, the public example of even a single church standing in open defiance, uncorrected, certainly creates a tension that leaves Presbyterians wondering whether the constitution will hold.

Today, we are not in a situation that involves one church. Dozens of churches have publicly declared their inability, or unwillingness, or refusal to obey the church's constitution. Mount Auburn Church in Cincinnati is a demonstration that actions follow words. That church is both ordaining elders openly involved in homosexual relationships and performing what they call homosexual marriages. First Presbyterian Church in Yellowstone Presbytery recently announced its unwillingness to abide by the constitution. So, how many churches does it take to present us with a constitutional crisis? We know that whatever the number is, we have enough to threaten our life together as a body that is bound by its constitution and unified by officers who have taken vows. Governing bodies that are allowed to defy our constitution without correction and officers who are allowed to break their ordination vows with impunity threaten the well being of the whole body.

How is continuing defiance to be resolved?
If a presbytery fails administratively to bring a church into even passive compliance with the constitution and the order of the GA-PJC, there is recourse to the General Assembly.

The Standing Rules of the General Assembly provide that if the body finds the Stated Clerks report of compliance to a GA-PJC ruling by a governing body is "inadequate, the assembly may make such further order or orders as it deems necessary to ensure compliance...."

Following the Stated Clerk's report to the Assembly of the outcome in the Christ Church case, this General Assembly will have the opportunity to make further order or orders to ensure compliance. If this General Assembly takes action in the Christ Church case, we have hope that other churches and presbyteries will comprehend that being an officer in the Presbyterian Church requires honoring the vows we have taken and obeying the constitution, even if we dissent from it. That compliance is necessary to the preservation and peace of the body.

Isn't this just a way to get rid of dissenters?
Some in the church are playing the role of victims and portraying the requirement to comply with the constitution as an effort to expel them from the Presbyterian Church (USA). The exercise of our constitutional Rules of Discipline is by no means a weapon of the many against the few. It is a means of loving those who find living in common agreement with the church difficult. The goal is not expulsion; the goal is that dissenters live faithfully as true brothers and sisters in Christ, honoring their vows to be governed by our church's polity and abide by its discipline. Opportunities to work for change are plentiful. But the church court has rightly said that the constitution must be obeyed until and unless it is changed. When governing bodies carry their dissent beyond the bounds of dissent and into defiance, higher governing bodies are required to recognize that has happened and take the action necessary to bring lower governing bodies into compliance.

In the end, failure to achieve compliance puts the matter squarely with the General Assembly who then must act to preserve the integrity of the constitution and our life together as Presbyterians.

Top / Back to Spring/Summer 2002 Index / Previous article / Next article
To begin receiving Presbyterians Pro-Life NEWS by mail, click here. Then click "Newsletter."

Home / About PPL / Contact PPL / Topical Index / PPL Publications / Pregnant? We’ll Help
Adoption Resources / Post Abortion Resources / PPL NEWS Articles / Order Resources / Prayer Calendar