The trip began in 1998
Remember the long, long road to Tipperary? We seem to be on it with Christ Church in Burlington, Vermont. The 1996 General Assembly proposed the "fidelity and chastity" amendment to the constitution. It was a proposal to add explicitly to the Book of Order what was already implicit in Scripture and the Book of Confessions (that is, to apply Christian faith’s sexual standard to standards of ordination for our leaders). The proposed amendment was approved by a majority of our presbyteries and formally enacted by the G.A. in 1997 as G-6.0106b. In June of 1998, the session of Christ Church declared publicly that it could not comply with the constitution.

Next stop: church courts
Another church in the presbytery brought remedial charges when the presbytery itself refused to act on its obligation to ensure that ministers and elders honor the vows they have taken to uphold the constitution.

The road then led from church to presbytery to synod to General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission (GAPJC), our highest church court. In the year 2000 the GAPJC handed down a decision (Londonderry), which distinguished between dissent from and defiance of the constitution and instructed the presbytery to work with the church pastorally and administratively to bring it toward compliance.

G.A. of 2001 saw movement toward compliance
The General Assembly’s Stated Clerk reported to the General Assembly of 2002 that a pastoral committee was established and working, although no change had occurred. Just prior to the G.A., Christ Church removed its specific statement of non-compliance. Consequently, the G.A. took no action on an overture asking it to intervene to aid the progress toward compliance. Some thought that Tipperary might be close at that point.

But Christ Church bounced back more defiant than ever
However, in November of 2002 Christ Church posted a statement in which it said it had studied and interpreted G-6.0106b for itself and, given its new understanding of the terms used in this paragraph of the constitution, found itself in compliance. The session’s interpretation of the paragraph and of Scripture on the subject of homosexual practice stands in utter contrast to the understanding expressed uniformly by General Assemblies and our church courts since the issue was first raised. For example, their newest statement says, "Therefore, we believe that ‘living chastely in singleness’ [as G-6.0106b requires] does not constitute a ban on committed homosexual relationships."

Presbytery capitulates; Synod silent
The presbytery's Pastoral Committee assigned to help the church move toward compliance issued a report accepted by the presbytery in March of 2003. In it the committee expresses its opinion that "the statement [of Christ Church] does not defy or violate the Constitution." They ask that this, their final report, be forwarded to the G.A. Stated Clerk and that their committee be dismissed. The report goes to the G.A. committee on Polity.

Where the road ends
Of all the situations of defiance before the church, this is the most serious. If the judgment of the pastoral committee and the Presbytery of Northern New England is allowed to stand, the church’s constitution is thereby subject to interpretation by each session and has no effect whatever.

The courts have already spoken in this case. The General Assembly’s response to this report is of great consequence to the Presbyterian Church. Ultimately, the road ends with the G.A.