This morning I sat through the open hearing of the Church Orders and Ministry Committee - basically, the committee dealing with the "sex stuff" (as I've heard it referred to around GA the past day or so). The open hearing was a time for people who have come to speak for or against a specific overture that the committee is dealing with, to do so in 90 seconds. People who spoke were commissioners, YADs, members or supporters of affinity groups (OneByOne, Covenant Network, More Light Presbyterians and others) and other observers who came to GA. They went through all of the overtures under consideration, and when they were able to, tried to provide a balance by alternating the speakers who were for approving the overture and those who were for disapproving it. Over 60 people participated in the open hearing, and they ranged from personal testimonies, to biblical exegesis, to passionate pleas for the church to remain "biblical" and other desperate calls for the church to become more prophetic and inclusive. Most referred to either the PUP report or G-6.0106b and its "fidelity and chastity" requirement. If you're not familiar with G-6.0106b, here is the full text:
"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 between a man and a woman (W-4.9001), or chastity in singleness. Persons refusing to repent of any self-acknowledge practice which the confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and Sacrament." (G-6.0106b, The Book of Order)Personal stories were shared from people who used to identify as LGBT and who "experienced transformation and liberation" out of that lifestyle, as well as from LGBT folk who desire to be in full-time ministry and feel passionate about their call by God to ministry. Many were supportive of the Peace, Unity and Purity report that came about at the 2006 GA, one speaker saying that "it gave our church a new way to live in community and a fresh hope for the denomination." Others said that it has caused mistrust, divisions and constant fighting over church property. Some shared how they believed that homosexuality was a sin and that we shouldn't get rid of the standards "set by the word of God" for leadership in the church. While others believed that the church needs the LGBT community to be involved in ministry; one person said "the church that doesn't welcome the fullness of all its members is not the church - it's not the body of Christ."
It was hard to keep all the overtures straight (especially since PC-Biz was down for awhile), primarily because there are so many that are so similar, but have slight variants. I'm having a hard time imagining how the Moderator of the committee will guide the discussion through all of the complex issues associated with each overture. And I also am having a hard time understanding how they will be able to go through all of the overtures without having the same conversation over and over again about homosexuality and whether it's a sin or not. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
To read a news story on the open hearings, click here.
Set as favorite
Email This
Hits: 903
Trackback(0)
TrackBack URI for this entry
Comments (2)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Tom Eggebeen, June 26, 2008
At the PCUSA GA site, comments about "leaving the church" come to the fore again. Why do we do this to one another? Is "our" Christ such that we can't have fellowship with those on the other side of an issue? Is our take on things soooo Biblical, so right, so true, that we, and we alone, have the inside truth-track? Who hasn't wanted to bale on their spouse, or as a pastor, leave a congregation and flip burgers somewhere, anywhere. Taking leave is always the easy way out, and those who now threaten once again to take their papers and walk is simply erroneous. Sadly, we Presbyterians have been a contentious lot, often priding ourselves on our well-honed hair-splitting knives. But such chickens always come home to roost - there is no good way out; there is only the larger question of our love for one another. Love, not simply an emotion, rarely, in fact, an emotion, but rather a commitment, a decision, to be faithful to one another, to work it out, to put up with each other, because Christ is greater, larger, better, than any of our theological constructs or ethical positions. After all, what will do in eternity? Would those so willing to bolt from the church then claim that we won't be there with them in heaven? And if not, where? Okay, that's one answer. But if they can allow for even the slightest change of all of us being together in the glory of God, then how shall we relate? And if we can be one in Christ then, what about now? Is future glory not some rationale, some measure, for behavior now? But let's not take this "Christ" stuff and this "love one another" stuff too far ... let's pick up our marbles and run. Ah well ... to the glory of God!
written by Mark Smith, June 24, 2008
What they did last [s]year[/s] time was to have the PUP report answer all of the overtures. The vote on the PUP report also handled the response to the overtures.
I suspect they'll do the same this year - come up with one resolution and have it answer all of the G-6.0106b overtures.
I suspect they'll do the same this year - come up with one resolution and have it answer all of the G-6.0106b overtures.
Write comment
