Become our Friend on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Font Size: +A -A RESET
The Wheels of Justice ...
Written by Jack Haberer   
Monday, 03 April 2006 12:00

One need watch only a few episodes of "Law & Order" or "CSI" to know that the wheels of justice roll on bumpy roads. Many an omniscient viewer has shouted the right answers at celluloid investigators, detectives, and prosecutors while the actors have painstakingly dragged through the evidence to build a case that can hold up in court. In TV World, justice usually does get served--about three minutes before the end of the show.

In the real world, those wheels roll on even bumpier roads. Many a crime victim discovers that the local gendarmes don't have the time or the will to pursue the evidence. Or, if they do, the prosecutor responds with a shrug, "We have no case." Screaming at those officers of the law can be even more counter productive than shouting at a TV.  

Judging by this editor's e-mail inbox, many Presbyterians are shouting at their ecclesiastical TVs these days. Some are lifting up their voices in jubilation, others in anger. They all have been watching the same program, the recent ruling of the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Presbytery of Redwoods in response to the presbytery's case against the Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr. Charged with performing same-sex marriages in violation of the Constitution, she acknowledged before the court that she had indeed officiated such services. However, the PJC acquitted her, stating that the constitutional definition of marriage between a man and woman need not bind the conscience of a minister. Only constitutional prohibitions need be obeyed, they said. Definitions need not be.

One need watch only a few episodes of "Law & Order" or "CSI" to know that the wheels of justice roll on bumpy roads. Many an omniscient viewer has shouted the right answers at celluloid investigators, detectives, and prosecutors while the actors have painstakingly dragged through the evidence to build a case that can hold up in court. In TV World, justice usually does get served--about three minutes before the end of the show.

In the real world, those wheels roll on even bumpier roads. Many a crime victim discovers that the local gendarmes don't have the time or the will to pursue the evidence. Or, if they do, the prosecutor responds with a shrug, "We have no case." Screaming at those officers of the law can be even more counter productive than shouting at a TV.  

Judging by this editor's e-mail inbox, many Presbyterians are shouting at their ecclesiastical TVs these days. Some are lifting up their voices in jubilation, others in anger. They all have been watching the same program, the recent ruling of the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Presbytery of Redwoods in response to the presbytery's case against the Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr. Charged with performing same-sex marriages in violation of the Constitution, she acknowledged before the court that she had indeed officiated such services. However, the PJC acquitted her, stating that the constitutional definition of marriage between a man and woman need not bind the conscience of a minister. Only constitutional prohibitions need be obeyed, they said. Definitions need not be.

Those shocked by the ruling claim that the Redwoods PJC ignored both the Constitution and previous rulings of the church's highest court, the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission. Those who support the ruling wonder about its scope, and particularly whether the acquittal will lead other presbyteries' judicial commissions to render similar judgments in parallel cases.

The PJC ruling is very brief, leaving such questions scant little information and explanation.  

Even if the decision were more detailed, trying to review or dissect the decisions of church courts would be claiming to this editor a bird's eye view he does not have. However, he can see clearly enough to know that the welfare of the whole church needs to be kept in view. The whole church needs to know what this action means. The only way that can happen is for the ruling to be reviewed by a higher court. The Presbytery of Redwoods can file an appeal. Given the volume of questions being asked, it behooves them to do so. We recognize that the appeal will cost money. It may create conflict within the presbytery. The wheels of justice do roll on bumpy roads. But the good of the wider church will be served if these issues are addressed in a more extensive ruling being issued by a more comprehensive church court.  

Please Redwoods, file an appeal.* Please help turn down the volume.

 

*Redwoods Presbytery has announced that it will appeal the March 2 acquittal by its Permanent Judicial Commission (PJC) of the Rev. Jane Adams Spahr on charges that she violated the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)'s ban on performing same-sex marriage ceremonies.  Click here for the full news report.

Trackback(0)
Your Responses (8)Add Comment
Response from Steven Hammond, March 19, 2006
Pastor
A war rages, 200 billion spent; poverty abounds throughout the world and even in this country; 41 million without health insurance and millions more with only limited access to health care; a widening gap between the rich and the poor; and religious folks want to worry about two people who love each other? It is time for prejudice to end and for us to be the Gospel rather than preach it.
Response from Winfield Casey Jones, March 18, 2006
...
I am very appreciative of the editorial by Jack Haberer urging Presbytery of the Redwoods to appeal the decision of its PJC in presbytery's case against Dr. Jane Adams Spahr. Jack was right in pointing out that clarification is needed in a decision which in his words says, 'Only constitutional prohibitions need be obeyed....Definitions need not be."

I find it odd that the editor is excoriated by some, who, like me disagree with aspects of report of the Theological Task Force even though in the present case he is clearly calling for clarity in the interpretation and enforcement of our standards. I also see his writing style in this piece as being a wise attempt to persuade the presbytery to do the right thing by appealing the decision rather than as an attempt to make debate points or pre-judge the issue.
Response from Sherwood Anderson, March 17, 2006
...
Way to go, Jack.

Sherry
Response from elliott scott, March 17, 2006
...
Your editorial on the Redwoods PJC decision focuses on 'the volume' of the emotional response to the decision rather than on the decision itself. That makes me curious. To my mind, the underlying issue is not that people are angry. To say so is to imply that if people were not vocally upset there would be no problem with the decision handed down by the Redwoods PJC. This seems a superficial analysis and reflects an underlying weakness.

The Outlook has generally been the voice of the moderate middle of the denomination. In recent years it has seemed that the only agenda of the middle is to lower the volume on divisive issues so that all parts of the church stay together and we can get on with the 'real' mission of the church. What the moderate middle of the church seems to fail to realize is that the issues being debated will determine what the mission of the church is.

I understand the need for a certain degree of caution when discussing these issues. But there are also times for boldness and clarity. Ultimately it will not be caution that gets us through our denominational impasse. It will be faithfulness.

Response from Gary Miller, March 17, 2006
Pastor
Get use to it, Mr. editor. The Redwood PJC decision is the future of the Presbyterian Church (USA). It is a future in part made possible by your decision to recommend we leave the standards for ordination in the hands of presbyteries like Redwood. Was not the stated clerk of that presbytery one of your fellow commissioners on the PUP love-in?

Have you ever read the fable that ends with one dying animal asking another why he killed him. In the answer there is wisdom: 'You knew what was when you agreed to give me a ride. I was only acting in accord with my nature.' When Revisionists act like Revisionists the set out to revise. Do you really think they will set aside their agenda in order to achieve the peace or unity or purity? Amazing!

Editor's note: 'The Stated Clerk of Redwoods Presbytery is not a member of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church.'
Response from Dwight Johnson, March 16, 2006
clergy - retired
The ruling in the Redwoods Presbytery case demands review by a higher church court. The ruling is scandalous in its total disregard of the facts of our Presbyterian theology, confessions, and judicial history. It flies in the face of rulings by the Gen. Assembly Permanent Judicial Comission as if such higher rulings were meaningless. How can such rogue behavior by a supposedly competent judicial body be allowed to stand?
Response from malcolm king, March 16, 2006
...
Dear Editor,

Surely you jest! What this decision means is that the PJC of Redwoods Presbytery has already implemented the 'authoritative interpretation' that your PUP Team would have the PCUSA adopt. While there could be an appeal at this time, once the General Assembly 'buys into' your arguments such PJC decisions will become commonplace, but... there will be no appeal possible because the only question that a higher governing body will be able to ask is 'was this action reasonably, responsibly, prayerfully, and deliberately considered?' If you really think that the polity proposed by the PUP report will stop at the altar of ordination, you have been sitting too far from the 'reality bush' for far too long. Does the story of Essau selling his birthright for a mess of pottage ring any bells for you?

Hesed ve shalom,

Rev. Malcolm M. King III
Response from Steve Nesheim, March 16, 2006
...
The problem is money unfortunately. The Presbytery is broke and tired. If money were no object the volume would be screaming! Any backers out there?

Write a Response
smaller | bigger
NOTE: Your response to an article will be reviewed by staff before it is made available to the public for reading. The delay may be a few minutes or it may be as long as 24 hours.

busy
 
Banner
Join Our News Alerts Mailing List
Email:
Banner
Banner
Banner