Herb Schlossberg

Presbyterians Pro-Life
Posted July 26, 2002

"The Amendment is only the beginning, not the end"

In the Spring of 1997 it was clear that the presbyteries had ratified the "fidelity and chastity" amendment--Amendment B. It would become paragraph G-6.0106b of Part II of our constitution (The Book of Order) following the 1997 General Assembly.

The action of the General Assembly, ratified by the presbyteries, simply planted in our church law what was implicit in the theology of the Christian Church historically and expressed in the Confessions of Presbyterians. Neither the broad Christian Church nor the Reformed Tradition had ever professed any other sexual ethic.

However, even before the voting of 1996-97 was complete Presbyterians heard murmurings of defiance against the amendment. Presbyterian elder Herbert Schlossberg wrote an article published in the PPL News that Spring, advising Presbyterians that the passage of the amendment was "only the beginning, not the end," of learning to live under the standards of the Christian Church and the vows we take. John Buchanan was Moderator of the General Assembly that year.

Schlossberg's article is interesting and useful as a slice of the history reminding us of how things were in the wake of that vote. It is also prophetic in helping us see what is necessary now that the signs of disregard for the constitution on this point have become a reality for us.

We in PPL encourage your reading or rereading of this article, and refer you to a piece on the Coalition's website for a very current assessment of our situation. That article is titled, "Why the Shenango Overture Was Defeated: The General Assembly ducked its responsibility to affirm mutual accountability in the PC(USA)," by Rev. Jim Tony.

The Amendment is only the beginning, not the end
by Herbert Schlossberg

In June 1997, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) will certify the constitutional amendment that was approved by the 1996 General Assembly and ratified by a majority of the denomination's presbyteries. Here is the wording of the amendment:

Those who are called to office in the church are to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church. Among these standards is the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage of a man and a woman (W-4.9001), or chastity in singleness. Persons refusing to repent of any self-acknowledged practice which the Confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and Sacrament.

The voting in the presbyteries was closer than any Christian denomination in a state of health and vitality would have experienced. People who were not aware of the state of the PC(USA) would be amazed that a denomination which includes in its constitution the statement that "the Holy Scriptures are the only rule of faith and manners [morals]" (G-1.0307) would find such an amendment controversial or, indeed, necessary. Something of the exasperation felt by many members of the church was reflected in the January 27 editorial by Robert Bullock, editor of the Presbyterian Outlook:

Friends: Let's get serious. The issue here is whether the same church that expends enormous amounts of energy calling secular corporations to task for their misbehavior can maintain any standards of personal morality for its ordained leadership at a time when sexual anarchy reigns in our culture. To say that we cannot is to admit that we have reached the point of moral bankruptcy as a church.

Even before the outcome of the Presbytery voting was assured, high-level foot-shuffling could be heard, and it appeared as though the opponents of the amendment would try to find a way to nullify it in every practical sense. The Moderator of the General Assembly, John Buchanan, called for "Common Ground" meetings of a small number of persons from liberal and conservative wings of the denomination to see if something could be worked out. One of the participants said that the point "is to try to set the amendment aside in order that we might start at the real basic level of our faith vision."

Set aside an amendment that the constitutionally-prescribed process of the church has passed? Perhaps the moderator should have corrected her, but when he himself was asked in a later interview what he would say to a pastor who declares, "My session and I will not obey this ordination standard," Buchanan responded, "I really don't know what I would say to that person. I'm going to think long and hard about that." Similarly reluctant to carry out their responsibilities is a group of elders and pastors in my presbytery, and perhaps others as well, who are circulating what they call a "Covenant of Dissent," which, behind the theological language, is a call for defying and undermining the constitutional order of the church.

Officers have taken vows to abide by the church's discipline
The officers of our church need to be reminded of their ordination vows. Elders, deacons, and ministers all agree as a condition of ordination to "be governed by our church's polity" and "abide by its discipline." A refusal to do so invites judicial action, and when the moderator himself expresses such defiance the gravity of the offense is multiplied. If these officers refuse to obey their ordination vows, they should be encouraged to resign their posts. If the constitutional order cannot be maintained, we must fear that the denomination itself cannot continue.

Anyone familiar with the way these things work in the PC(USA) knows that scriptural and constitutional issues are not the only ones operating. There are also the usual political initiatives that operate whenever people govern themselves through organizational processes. Moderator Buchanan now says it was a mistake in 1979 to force people to ordain women when they did not believe it was right. He applies his new insight to the issue of sexual fidelity and says that people who do not agree with it should not be forced to follow it.

It is inescapable that a broad cross section of the church will read Mr. Buchanan's change of heart in this way: "When we get our way we force it on everyone; when we don't we exempt ourselves from the constitutional or legislative act with which we disagree." It is hard to think of a better formula for destroying the denomination whose integrity we are determined to preserve.

The amendment's effect ought to be to end the rationalizations
There does not seem to be any organized move to legitimate adultery in our denomination. The crisis in which we find ourselves has been engineered by the homosexual lobby, which has consistently been rebuffed through the years in its desire to fend acceptance of their rationalizations of clear scriptural teaching denying the legitimacy of their practices.

The practical meaning of the constitutional amendment ought to be that the rationalizations will have to stop, and the church get on with its responsibilities to proclaim the gospel, build up believers in the faith, and offer a prophetic word to a society that is running aground in its perversions.

Those who do not agree with the amendment are responsible to comply with it. The Book of Order requires of those who seek or hold office that the exercise of freedom of conscience is within the bounds of "the Word of God as interpreted by the standards of the Church," and that it must not obstruct "the constitutional governance of the church" (G-6.0108). The footnote to this section of the Book of Order provides,

that when any matter is determined by a major vote, every member shall either actively concur with or passively submit to such determination; or if his conscience permit him to do neither, he shall, after sufficient liberty modestly to reason and remonstrate, peaceably withdraw from our communion without attempting to make any schism.

There is no doubt that a substantial minority will not be happy with the decision our denomination has made. But this has often been the case, and is not in itself a cause for alarm. Firm and compassionate leadership is usually required for these situations to be resolved well. We can hope that Mr. Buchanan sees his responsibilities more clearly in the future than he has so far shown. But even if he does not, there will be a new moderator elected at the General Assembly this June.

We are fortunate that Clifton Kirkpatrick, the Stated Clerk, has announced that he will enforce the new provision of the constitution: no "witch hunts," as opponents of the amendment like to put it, but no defiance either. Judging from their record in the past year the two main officials of the General Assembly Council, moderator Youngil Cho, and the interim executive director Frank Diaz, also can be expected to give firm support to the constitutional order. We should support these officers with our prayers and our encouragement and, if we are pastors, elders or deacons, with our own renewed commitment to our vows.

Herbert Schlossberg is a Presbyterian elder who resides in Burke, VA. He is the author of Idols for Destruction: Christian Faith and Its Confrontation with American Society.

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