More About the PJC Decisions

Bob Davis of Presbyblog has summarized yesterday's decisions of the PC(USA) Permanent Judicial Commission and provided useful links to the relevant PJC decisions.

"The decisions have been issued:

Buescher, et al v. Olympia Presbytery (218-09)

Bush, et al v. Pittsburgh Presbytery (218-10)

1st Presbyterian Church, Washington, et al v. Washington Presbytery (218-15)

Also released and relevant is Advisory Opinion #21 from the Stated Clerk of the General Assembly. ..."

Personally, I wish they would write those decisions in plain English rather than lawyer-speak, but at least there is an advisory opinion that provides the official version of events.

Bob Davis points out that decisions of the PJC are authoritative interpretations themselves.

Probably the most significant outcome of these three decisions of the PJC is that Constitutional requirements for ordination cannot be changed by an "authoritative interpretation" of a particular General Assembly. In fact, the PJC seems to have upheld the AI arising from the Peace, Unity, and Purity report and makes it clear that it did not set aside any requirements for ordination, nor did it provide a loophole that would permit such requirements to be ignored.

Another related aspect of all this was the rejection of enumerated lists of essentials that many presbyteries had published following GA217. The PJC considered these and other restatements of what the Book of Order already says to be redundant, unnecessary, and unconstitutional. The presbyteries in question had a reasonable belief that the authoritative interpretation would be used to do an end run around the Book of Order. Subsequent events bore this out. By issuing the three rulings together, the PJC upheld the Book of Order, thus demonstrating to the presbyteries that the various restatements of ordination requirements were unnecessary.

I hope that some trust is being restored in our denomination. These decisions are a positive development.

Presbyterian Outlook: Top court prohibits scrupling on fidelity-chastity

Presbyterian Outlook: Top court prohibits scrupling on fidelity-chastity:

"LOUISVILLE – The General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission (GAPJC) has ruled that candidates for ordination must comply with the sexual behavior standards of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), even if they disagree in conscience with them.

The GAPJC, in a landmark ruling dated Feb. 11 on a case from Pittsburgh presbytery, declared that the authoritative interpretation that the General Assembly approved in 2006 does not permit exceptions to the requirement in the PC(USA)’s ordination standards, which say that candidates must practice fidelity if they are married or chastity if they are single.

It described the “fidelity and chastity” provision as “a mandatory standard that cannot be waived.” And it upheld language from a prior Synod of the Trinity PJC ruling that made a distinction between allowing departures from the church’s standards related to belief – but not departures related to behavior."

This ruling is a long-awaited clarification of just how the Peace, Unity, and Purity report would be applied in the inevitable attempts to probe the boundaries.

My quick take on this is that the plain sense of the English language is to apply to how the Book of Order is applied to polity decisions. "Shall", "Should", and "May" mean very different things, and the Book of Order uses those words purposefully.

In this particular ruling the PJC clearly states that to change such provisions of the Book of Order will require a constitutional amendment, and not the "scrupling" that has been the object of a number of recent actions in presbyteries around the nation.

Hopefully this will allay some of the fears that the PUP authoritative interpretation would be employed as an end run around the Presbyterian Constitution.

The PJC has made a sensible decision and I hope it can serve to cool things down among those who are trying to leave the denomination as well as those who are trying to parse authoritative interpretations in such a way as to change the Constitution with submitting amendments to the Presbyteries for up-or-down votes.

NOTE: I first saw this a couple hours ago on the Presbyweb site, but no details were given. It seems that Hans Cornelder is in the hospital. I sure he could use our prayers.

PC(USA) - Presbyterian News Service - One church has lessons on a house (of God) divided

PC(USA) - Presbyterian News Service - One church has lessons on a house (of God) divided:

"CLEVELAND HEIGHTS, OH — Two large evergreens stand on either side of the white columns leading into Forest Hill Church, Presbyterian.

A white bell tower and steeple sit atop the brick Georgian Colonial building across from a park. Inside, wooden pews with red seat covers face the Communion table, a large wooden cross suspended above the table.

Who could disturb such a peaceful spiritual setting? Try President Bush and Sen. Hillary Clinton, for starters.

As in many other congregations and denominations in America, the liberal-conservative divide on some of the most contested issues of our time — gay rights, abortion, Iraq — and the politicians each side loves to hate has challenged the unity of Forest Hill."

I can relate to this -- I am a member of a congregation that spans not only the political divide, but the theological divide as well. Over most of the past 18 years that I have been a member, peace was kept by the fact that neither side insisted on forcing their views to the front of the line. Lately, though, that peace has become a bit tenuous, and many of us are looking for ways to restore the peace.

The problems are great, but not insurmountable. What complicates this is the "winner take all" mentality that see only failure when one's opponents do not immediately see the plain good sense logic of one's arguments. Another complicating factor are profound differences in what sources of authority are employed, and how one uses such sources.

It's a tough job and one that we can only accomplish with God's help.

CRC lifts barrier to female ministers - mlive.com

CRC lifts barrier to female ministers - mlive.com:

"GRAND RAPIDS -- History came quietly to the Christian Reformed Church on Tuesday night, but progress remains to be made.

That was the feeling of longtime advocates of women's ordination who watched the CRC Synod remove the word 'male' from its requirements for church office.

After 37 years of back-and-forth struggle, delegates opened the way for women to become ministers in any of the CRC's 1,000-plus churches. If other proposed changes are approved as expected today, women also will be able to serve as delegates to the Synod for the first time. ..."

I saw this article linked yesterday in the Kruse Kronicle.

According to an article in today's Christian Post, women who are selected as delegates to Synod will be seated next year:

"... After debates broke out last year over the restriction of women from serving as synodical deputies (synod representatives) delegates at Synod 2007 – the eight-day meeting of the church's broadest assembly – decided to open for the first time the way for women to be delegates to next year's synod.

"Let’s take note, pause and reflect,” said Rev. Bruce Persenaire from Classis (regional assembly) Central California, according to CRC Communications. “We will now be seating women delegates."

The vote followed Tuesday's decision to remove the word "male" as a requirement for holding ecclesiastical office in the church and to allow women to be ordained as ministers, elders, deacons or ministry associates. In an effort to maintain unity in the church body by respecting the convictions of those who believe the Bible prohibits women serving as office bearers, synod representatives also decided to allow classes (regional assemblies) to set restrictions on women serving as delegates to classis meetings. ..."

One issue that this raises for the PC(USA) is that there have been few reformed denominations that recognize that both women and men are called to ministries in the Church. Many have therefore predicted that there would not be a mass exodus of Presbyterians as a result of real and imagined shortcomings of the PC(USA). This move by the Christian Reformed Church may have an effect on that dynamic.

The Evangelical Presbyterian Church has had "local option" for a few years now, but it is generally noted that few congregations have exercised that option. I suspect that the PC(USA) congregations that have already been dismissed to the EPC have more than doubled the number of ordained women in that denomination.

The Christian Reformed Church seems to have adopted "local option" as well, so its effect on any exodus from the PC(USA) may be minimal. In any case this is a positive move and I wish the CRC well as they embark on this path.

Anger gone nuclear -- Presbyterian Outlook

Anger gone nuclear -- Presbyterian Outlook:

"Anger is to humanity what nuclear energy is to electricity. Powerful and creative. Volatile and dangerous.

God created anger, and for good reason. Anger stirs social workers to rescue abused children from violent parents. Anger provokes prophets to expose exploiting power brokers. Anger compels the courageous to break chains of injustice. Anger confronts religious hypocrites and drives moneychangers out of temples.

Then again, evil hijacks anger for destructive pur­poses. It batters spouses and children. It unleashes the privileged against the powerless—and vice versa. It propagates hatred. It murders innocents. It morphs into resentment, escalates into bitterness, depresses into isolation, and explodes into carnage. ..."

Dr. Haberer goes on to remind the Presbyterian Church and its various factions that we as a denomination cannot "feign innocence" -- the easiest way to work a crowd is to go on the attack, using pejoratives. Haberer highlights "Those liberals" or "those fundamentalists," "those gays" or "those homophobes". (I would add the characterizations "anti-choice" and "baby killers" to this mix.)

Haberer calls this "potshot preaching" and expresses great concern over the effect it is having on the overall climate of our denomination. He reads the letters to the editor, and while most are posted online and some find their way into print, there are some "so violate basic decency, that we are compelled to hit the delete key."

The Outlook is beginning a collaborative effort with Tom Ehrlich called "The Church Wellness Project". It is the hope of The Outlook that "... in publishing these columns is that Tom will help us all become the health­filled, transparent, humble, thoughtful, compassionate, prophetic, coura­geous and, ultimately, Christlike community of faith that knows how to turn even anger, like harnessed nu­clear energy, into a creative motivation—just as God intended."

The Outlook requires registration to read the articles online, but it is free, and I recommend it highly. It is one of the best sources for truly balanced and independent reporting of the life of the PC(USA)

Presbyterian Outlook: Ecclesiastical divorce

Ecclesiastical divorce:

"... You know how divorce happens. The aggrieved party looks back over recent history, shudders over the hurtful things the spouse has done, and remembers all the unrequited steps he or she took to try to bring reconciliation. The aggrieved party transitions from trying to save the marriage to building a compelling case to justify ending it.

In the process, the accused party reacts and does things that are really, really stupid, reinforcing the anger of the aggrieved. Soon each party can’t stand the sight of the other.

I’ve been participant in or immediate observer of a dozen congregational splits and denominational separations. Every one of them has followed that divorcing pattern.

We can do better.

Given the desire of some congregations to separate from the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) these days, let us consider a few possible modi operandi.

The most critical thing we can do is to believe in one another’s intentions. ..."

Good point here. A lot more can be accomplished if people assume that their fellow Christians love the Church as much as they do.

It seems that the debate has been framed by both sides as an Armageddon-like conflict with good arrayed against evil -- if not in those words, it is implied by the respective sides' rhetoric and actions. Jack Haberer points out that it doesn't have to be that way. I hope that we all can take some time to handle these disputes -- and they are not trivial -- with more of a Christian outlook and mutual forbearance.

Who knows? If we begin the process in a pastoral way, instead of going immediately to adversarial actions, we might achieve some form of reconciliation. And if it is not possible, then we can at least part with each side asking God's blessing for their counterparts on the other side.

Presbyterian Outlook: Living in Hope

Presbyterian Outlook: Living in Hope
[free registration required to read the full article]

"Whether it be spouted by the Jesus Seminar scholars, the Da Vinci Code author or The Lost Tomb of Jesus producer, this is the season when magazines give undeserved attention to Jesus’ detractors. In spite of their allegedly formidable arguments, confident Christians worldwide will gather in huge numbers on Easter morning chanting, “He is risen. He is risen. He is risen indeed.”

Presbyterian Outlook: Living in Hope Such affirmations continue undeterred, because the arguments supporting the resurrection and the legacy of Christ-changed lives far overwhelm lame claims about some Passover Plot.

Then again, resurrection faith does have other detractors, or distracters. We who declare the confident hope of resurrection often exhibit attitudes that scream out hopelessness, despair, and defeat.

These voices of despair have saddened me more than once since I accepted the call to serve as your editor here at the Outlook. They broadcast their hopelessness by sending in letters to the editor. Many letters challenge the viewpoints of this editor and our writers, and that’s totally okay. But what breaks my heart is reading letters that sing, “Hi, ho, the church is dead, the wicked church, the church is dead.”

Such voices don’t say that the Church-with-a-capital-C, the universal Church of Jesus Christ, is dead. They have claimed that the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is dead, that it is irretrievably lost and hopelessly undone. They blame bureaucracy and ideology, traditionalism and liberalism, compromises and conspiracies, plus a host of other enmeshed causes. At the end, they render their final diagnosis: dead, never to be revived.

In the process, they hurl scorn and mockery at anybody who speaks a word of hope for the denomination—their hopelessness is irrefutable. ..."

Self-fulfilling prophesies are all too easy to make...

Dr. Haberer, in yesterday's editorial from the Presbyterian Outlook makes it quite clear that our hope comes not from humans but from the Resurrection of Christ, and the victory over death and freedom to live free of the bondage of sin that it provides us.

There are attacks from all directions on the Church but the ones that are most frustrating are those that occur from within.

Jack Haberer closes with a verse of The Church's One Foundation which may not be familiar to all:

Though with a scornful wonder This world sees her oppressed,
By schisms rent asunder, By heresies distressed,
Yet saints their watch are keeping; Their cry goes up; “How long?”
And soon the night of weeping Shall be the morn of song.

I would add to that the final two verses of I Heard The Bells On Christmas Day:

And in despair I bowed my head
“There is no peace on earth,” I said,
“For hate is strong and mocks the song
Of peace on earth, good will to men.”

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:
“God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail
With peace on earth, good will to men.”

We live with the hope of the Resurrection; let's keep on reminding ourselves and each other of that inescapable fact.

Outlook -- Living the Hosea life: An open letter to my Presbyterian friends

Outlook -- Living the Hosea life: An open letter to my Presbyterian friends
by Faith Jongewaard

"All his friends would have understood if he had left her. She was unfaithful, wandering, adulterous--plain and simple, she was a whore. The children, who all bore his name, didn’t all look very much like him. He was always having to go after her, always having to hunt her down in bars and strip joints and other men’s houses. He was always having to bail her out of some mess or another—and, that wasn’t cheap or easy. So, everyone would have understood if he had left her. Some would have even applauded. Some would have said, “Well, it’s about time! She’s been playing him for a fool for way too long!”

But, he didn’t leave her. He couldn’t leave her. It wasn’t that he didn’t get frustrated with her—angry, furious, raging mad. But, he couldn’t leave her. He had made a promise—not just to her, but also to God. And, truth be told, it was often only the promise to God that kept him going. He was, he said, being faithful to God, not to her. And that mattered to him more than anything—more than her unfaithfulness, more than the shame he felt about her lifestyle, more than the fantasies (and the advice of well-meaning friends) that he might really have a much better life without her or with another. ..."

I saw this linked today in Presbyweb, and I was impressed with its strong advocacy for remaining together as as denomination. I can understand the frustration many feel with the apparent disconnect between the powers in Louisville and the people in the pews, but my heart is with this denomination, as imperfect as it is. And I am very thankful for those who choose to stay and provide a faithful witness as spiritual leaders.

laughing pastor: From the Top Down

laughing pastor: From the Top Down:

"... The room I sat in is typical of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).....old. Her words were not the typical words we hear from the top down. She challenged us to do the following in the midst of a denomination that is not functioning:

1. We've tried to fix the church ourselves. Presbyterians are smart people. It is time for smart people to realize we can't fix this church on our own. If we could we would have already done it. We must turn to God who is sovereign. Turn to God with hope and trust that God will mold us into the church we will become.

2. We do not spend enough time in prayer. We say we pray daily....but a very small percentage of our people say they pray one hour or more a week. We need to spend time in prayer. It is time for us to listen to God's words rather than our own! ..."

Presbyweb linked to this posting by a Texas pastor and I found it to be a breath of fresh air. Too often we hear things from the top that suggest that the only thing standing in the way of Peace, Unity, and Purity is our lack of respect for connectionalism.

Joan Gray, the moderator of the 217th General Assembly was in Texas recently and had something different to say, and I find this to be a refreshing change from the rhetoric that has characterized the debates following the last General Assembly.

Instead of the knee-jerk reactions -- from BOTH sides -- threatening legal action and bringing actual lawsuits, Joan Gray suggests that there is a way we should have been employing all along.

This is the Lord's Church, not ours, yet we are unwilling to surrender our wills. We need to serve the Lord in more than just an advisory capacity. As Joan Gray has said in the past, we need to lead from our knees.

Whatever else the 217th General Assembly may have done or failed to do, their choice of moderator for the next two years is one for which I am thankful.

Technorati tags: PCUSA

Presbyterian Panel Survey Results Released

The Presbyterian Panel results that were originally to be released in late Spring, 2006 -- prior to the 217th General Assembly -- have now been released. Jack Marcum, of the Presbyterian Panel, wrote a memo on May 30, 2006 outlining the reasons for the failure to meet the original release date.

Two things seem particularly interesting to me:

1. More respondents in each of the 4 groups -- members (52%), elders (50%), clergy (49%), specialized clergy (46%) believe that Peace, Unity, and Purity differ in importance than feel they are the same in importance (30%, 32%, 42%, 38%). Of those who saw differences in importance, the elders ranked them with purity as the most important, followed by peace and unity. Specialized clergy had unity first, followed by peace and purity. In addition, majorities of members, elders, and clergy disagreed with the statement that it is worth giving up purity to get peace in the church.

2. On the statement "A Church that is not clear about what it believes is not worth belonging to", members (67%), elders (65%), and pastors (62%) agreed or strongly agreed -- sizable majorities. A plurality of specialized clergy (47%) were in agreement with that statement.

All in all, it seems that regardless of what particular stance is taken, a significant majority of all respondents agree that the PC(USA) needs to be clear about what it believes, and it appears that purity is not to be sacrificed even to bring about peace. The deep divisions on many of the questions indicate that unity is not a possibility at present.

My question is can we find ways to work together peaceably on the things that unite us, while holding the denomination together? Or will we hold our Mission hostage to our need to have our own way?

San Diego Presbytery: Task Force on the Way Forward

San Diego Presbytery: Task Force on the Way Forward

"It is the conclusion of the Task Force on the Way Forward that the Presbytery of San Diego is divided and therefore polarized over some key theological issues. As a result we are unable to experience ecclesiastical unity. The advisory survey taken by commissioners at the Special Meeting of Presbytery on October 24, 2006 and the complexion of our recent presbytery meetings confirms our conclusion. As a result of this polarization, our ability to do mission and ministry together is greatly hampered. Often we spend more time arguing our respective positions than proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ. Much like Paul and Barnabas in Acts 15:36-41, we seem to have reached an insurmountable impasse.

It is time to tell ourselves the truth and bring an end to this entrenched dispute. In our opinion, it is futile to keep arguing our respective cases, hoping to persuade our brothers and sisters in Christ to change their deeply held beliefs and values, while vehemently defending our own. We simply cannot continue in this state of sharp disagreement. We will either continue to fight among ourselves or we will move forward, but we cannot do both. We must find a way to break this destructive cycle and come to a place where mission and ministry take precedence over unproductive debate. We may need to find a way to commend one another to the grace of God so that we can pursue faithful and fruitful ministry options. We must find a common ground where we can work together to further God’s kingdom here on earth, or we must part company. Anything less will not bring glory to God or increase His kingdom here on earth.

Therefore, the Task Force on the Way Forward presents the following recommendations to the Presbytery of San Diego for immediate adoption and implementation. ..."

I have to say that when I first read this I had a deep feeling of disappointment -- but then I started to think about it. San Diego is one of the more conservative presbyteries, and, if memory serves, one of the first to clearly outline what it thought were the Essential Tenets and Reformed Distinctives of our our faith. Even though I am in accord with the general goals and many of the specific stands taken, I recognize that this presbytery (as well as nearly every other in the PC(USA)) is deeply divided on many issues. In far too many of these cases, denomination-wide, the majority prevails and fails to recognize the minority's deep feelings.

San Diego seems to be taking a path that few have chosen and that is to recognize the divisions and a way forward that allows all sides to function more as a church and less as bickering children. This report makes specific recommendation as to how to accomplish this, and it may be difficult to implement, but at least they are trying to avoid the trap of fighting to win every argument by majority vote, but doing nothing to heal the divisions.

Included in this report is the questionaire that was answered by 70 respondents. The answers show clearly the depth of division.

The Paul and Barnabas analogy is one that resonates with me. By finding a way to move forward separately, the work God calls us to perform can be done more effectively. The alternative is to remain paralyzed by our inability to agree. Our disputes seem petty compared with the needs around us, and as much as I abhor the idea of separation, it may lead to greater things for the Presbyterian Church. We need to all remember that the subject of Paul's and Barnabas' disagreement was Timothy. Paul was wrong to dismiss Timothy on the basis of a single failing, but see how the early Church was strengthened -- and see how Paul's and Timothy's relationship developed several years later to the point where they were mutually supportive colleagues in ministry. If our denomination is truly presented with a "Paul and Barnabas" moment, let's not be too stubborn to recognize it.

Presbyterian Outlook: From confusion to clarity

Presbyterian Outlook: From confusion to clarity:
Presbyterian Outlook requires registration to read the full articles, but it is free.

by Jack Haberer

"...As a former member of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church (TTF), I have been distressed to see so many Presbyterian friends troubled, perplexed, and even angered by the actions taken by the 217th Birmingham General Assembly in response to the Task Force’s recommendations. ..."

Not much has truly changed with the passing of the PUP recommendations. Judicatories that previously chose to ignore constitutional provisions in making ordination decisions will continue to ignore the Book of Order when it finds its provisions inconvenient. Judicatories that carried out their responsibilities with integrity are free to continue to do so, and many have made it crystal clear that they intend to do so.

What has changed is that a practice has been brought back of permitting "scruples" to be declared and allowing the judicatory to determine whether such scruples place the candidate outside the "essential tenets" of the reformed faith. The Task Force failed to clarify what the essentials are, and we go on as before without any clear understanding of what they are, and without such clarification the job of promoting Peace, Purity, and Unity is going to be very difficult.

I am still willing to give it a fair chance, since the recommendations appeared to strengthen the judicial review of such decisions -- but not enough time has elapsed to see the effect of such reviews.

People seem to be divided in four groups when it comes to the Task Force on Peace, Purity, and Unity recommendations:

• Those who are in accord with the PUP recommendations.
• Those who are willing to give them a chance, but have some reservations.
• Those who are opposed to the recommendations based on a study of the issues.
• Those who never really intended to consider fairly the recommendations and are using it as a wedge issue to further their own agendas.

The preceding four categories do not account for all Presbyterians, and my gut feeling is that they do not even comprise a majority. We need to recognize that there are those who simply do not understand what is going on because it never really has been clearly or honestly explained by either the supporters or the detractors of the PUP report.

Jack Haberer has much personally invested in the PUP report and recommendations, and I respect his opinions, but the fact that there are so many people out there who are confused suggests very strongly that the Task Force needed to do a much better job of interpretation of their report to the membership.

"...Then again, we Presbyterians are pretty insistent that the sovereign God reigns. And given that God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33), the people of God listening for the voice of God ought to be able to find their way through a season of confusion into greater clarity. This edition of The Presbyterian Outlook is dedicated to helping us all to listen better, to discern more clearly, and to follow our Lord more faithfully."

This injunction should be heeded by all sides, not only in this dispute, but in all disputes that prevent us from heeding our individual and corporate calling to follow Jesus Christ.

God is not the author of confusion; we are.

Should I stay or should I go?

Should I stay or should I go?:
Presbyterian Outlook (free registration required)

by Fairlight Collins-Jones
07/24/06

"It had been one week since the gavel was laid down at the General Assembly in Birmingham, Ala. My energy level had rebounded—it can be tough work as an “observer.” But, I was finding it more difficult to bounce back emotionally and vocationally from GA. After hours of debates in committee, debates on the floor, asking whether or not the minority should become the majority report, trying to figure out LES (the electronic report system) and hearing countless people refer to the decline of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and threats of leaving, I was left wondering isn’t there more to life than this? Is there a place to start over fresh? Is staying in this denomination worth it? ..."

Collins-Jones has written a thoughful piece on why she is planning to stay with the PC(USA). As a self-identified "catholic, evangelical, Reformed, feminist, missional, genX, liturgical, charismatic, female person", she often feels out of place, but she is willing and eager to be a part of a church that has its problems, but also has a clear mission in the world.

There has much talk of schism, with the attendant finger-pointing. Frankly, I do not understand why so many people who identifiy themselves with renewal are so ready to act in a way that is counter to renewal.

Beau Weston feels that the movement will fizzle out, based on history. I sincerely hope he is correct.

From my perspective, I see a debate going on, egged on by people within and without the PC(USA), that potentally has the same damaging effects as the perennial debates on sexuality. There is so much more that unites us than divides us, and our failure to work with our inherent unity is a blight on not only the PC(USA), but the Church as a whole. Surely we can do better.

The Reverend Collins-Jones closes with this:

"...I am staying because the Spirit of the Lord still rests on the PC(USA). I am not taking my ball and going to another game. Frankly, I am not leaving until I get kicked out! Perhaps there will come a day when I will have to refuse to bow down to any idol that the PC(USA) has begun to worship and in turn, I get the boot. But I have hope that the church will create a new presence in the world, that a revival and renewal is headed our way. Lord, don’t let us miss it! But, thanks be to God that ultimately our hope is not in a denomination, but in the Head of the Church, Jesus Christ."

Amen!

Technorati tags: religion, presbyterian

On the day after adjournment

On the day after adjournment:
Presbyterian Outlook (free registration required)

"...Calvin goes on to argue that the quality of life of one’s fellow church members should not be the basis on which one decides whether to stay or leave the church. Speaking of those who would leave the church in offense over the behavior of others, he points to the Apostle Paul’s remarks in I Corinthians 5 and 11. He comments that “in thinking it a sacrilege to partake of the Lord’s bread with the wicked, they are much more rigid than Paul. For when Paul urges us to a holy and pure partaking of it, he does not require that one examine another, or everyone in the whole church, but that each individual examine himself.” (IV, I, 15). The theme of sections 17-22 of this chapter of Book IV is summarized as “The imperfect holiness of the church does not justify schism, but affords the occasion for the exercise within it of forgiveness of sins.” (Book IV, Section I). ..."

Joan Gray, moderator of the 217th General Assembly has posted a reflection on the aftermath of this year's meeting in Birmingham. In this short excerpt from the middle of her article, she calls on John Calvin to offer a suggestion on how to approach al this talk of apostasy and schism.

Reading this triggered some memories of my reading the Book of Confessions several years ago, and I went back to the Second Helvetic Confession, Chapter XVII, and located this:

WE MUST NOT JUDGE RASHLY OR PREMATURELY. Hence we must be very careful not to judge before the time, nor undertake to exclude, reject or cut off those whom the Lord does not want to have excluded or rejected, and those whom we cannot eliminate without loss to the Church. On the other hand, we must be vigilant lest while the pious snore the wicked gain ground and do harm to the Church. -- Book of Confessions 5.140

The section preceding the above quote likens the Church to a net that catches all kinds of fish (Matthew 13:47) or a field in which both wheat and tares are found (Matthew 13:24).

I sincerely hope and pray that the PC(USA) will not split over the PUP report, especially since so much that was good came out of GA 217.

We are not called to ignore problems in the name of "unity", but neither are we called to go through the field uprooting the weeds we see. We are to be vigilant and, as Calvin suggests, examine ourselves first, realizing that imperfection in the Church is not neccesarily grounds for schism.

Nearly 450 years ago there was near schism in the newly reformed Church, and the Second Helvetic Confession was a response to the charges and countercharges of heresy being hurled back and forth in the mid-1500s. The Church survived then, and the Church can survive today.

Technorati tags: religion, presbyterian, schism, calvin

Advisory Opinion on PUP released

Quotidian Grace has a posting concerning the release Saturday of an advisory opinion from the State Clerk of our denomination

The opinion confirms that the outcome is subject to review, but goes on to ask that we give deference to the deliberations of ordaining bodies. What it ultimately boils down to is whether PJCs have the moral courage to do their jobs.

Does it clarify things? No. It leaves things pretty much where they have been. We have a long history of paying lip service to connectionalism, but only when we get our way.

Can we live with it? Why not? We have been living with it for many years. Sessions and presbyteries that have found connectionalism inconvenient will continue to ignore the constitution, regardless of the outcome of the PUP report. Permanent Judicial Commissions that have been disinclined to uphold the Book of Order will continue to be so. But the Church goes on -- and there are many PC(USA) congregations and presbyteries that provide a welcome for those with orthodox beliefs.

On a personal note, I have already made it clear that my threshhold for "peaceably withdrawing" is nowhere near being reached, and if that even became an issue for me there is one thing that would make it very difficult -- I cannot be a part of a denomination that tells women that their gifts for teaching, preaching, and leadership are not wanted. And, sad to say, in the Presbyterian tradition outside the PC(USA), women's gifts are denied with few exceptions. The Evangelical Presbyterian Church has local option, but the one in my community chooses not to excercise the option. We have no Cumberland Presbyterian Church where I live. So my choice is to stay.

Technorati tags: presbyterian, ga217

Stunning unity … ambivalence

Stunning unity … ambivalence:

The Presbyterian Outlook (free registration required)

Three votes. Three stunning votes. A fourth stunning vote, too.

After months of relentlessly intensifying drumbeats pounding the threat of an impending split about to befall the PC(USA), 91% of this GA’s commissioners voted to stay together.

After two years of pitched conflict over the Presbyterian Church’s relationship with and advocacy toward Israel and Palestine, this GA proposed a new approach, and 94% of the commissioners voted their support.

After 30 years of wresting over ordination standards, after vote upon vote being adopted by narrow, sometimes paper-thin margins, the 217th General Assembly rejected an attempt to eliminate the fidelity-chastity ordination requirement with 81% support.

Those nearly unanimous vote counts were stunning.

One other vote, the most anticipated vote of the Assembly, stunned the Assembly by its close margin.

Jack Haberer, editor of The Presbyterian Outlook, has weighed in with some comments regarding the Peace, Unity and Purity Task Force report. As a member of the Task Force, he felt it necessary to avoid commenting in it in the Outlook while it was before the General Assembly, but such constraints are no longer in force.

His comments today are, as usual, worth reading.

Technorati tags: religion, presbyterian, ga217

Where was the Holy Spirit?

The three men I admire most;
The Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost;
They took the last train for the coast;
The day the music died.

-- Don MacLean, American Pie (1971)

In the 1990s there was a particular General Assembly where things seemed to go pretty much the way the one faction wanted, and one of the leaders was quoted as saying that the Holy Spirit had moved through this assembly.

I remember how appalled I was to hear that. Is the Holy Spirit to be found on the prevailing side?

A year or so later another faction narrowly won a key vote, and an opposing voice was quoted as saying that the Holy Spirit had not spoken clearly. Is the Holy Spirit found in the vote tallies?

In this year of so many people (and I see it on all sides) claiming prophetic voice, I am as disturbed as I was ten or more years ago. Prophetic voices are not self-identified, nor are they identified by their partisans. An implied "Thus saith the Lord" doesn't necessarily make it so.

You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name. -- Exodus 20:7

Where was the Holy Spirit? Right there in the midst of it all, speaking in a still, small voice. And the Holy Spirit is with all Christians in every time and place.

The question is not whether the Holy Spirit speaks clearly, but whether people listen. A still, small voice may be hard to hear during the earthquake, wind, and fire of General Assembly. (I have already expressed the opinion that the PC(USA) is not undergoing a tectonic shift, but there certainly was a lot of wind and fire). But I have faith and hope that some listened.

"Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right." -- Abraham Lincoln

Technorati tags: religion, presbyterian, ga217