Excerpts from
Sebastian brief
Monday, September
2, 2002
- The resolution is "an act of confessing, not a new
confession." Quoting from The Book of Order, the brief
says, "'A distinction must be made between confession as an act
of Christian faith – and a confession as a document of
Christian faith.'"
- "The Resolution is the Sebastian Session's effort to call
the Sebastian church to be faithful to the historic confessions and,
by example, to encourage other Presbyterian churches to reaffirm
their commitment to be faithful to the historic confessions. Hebrews
10:24 calls us to 'spur one another toward love and good deeds. That
is all the Sebastian Session intended to do."
- "The relief granted by the [presbytery court] prohibits the
Sebastian session from carrying out activities required by the
constitution and must be vacated … The order of the CFPPJC is
an unconstitutional intrusion into how an individual session can
exercise its rights and privileges within the bounds of our
Constitution."
- The presbytery court's order that the Sebastian session limit its
inquiry of current or prospective officers to the nine ordination
questions in G-14.0207 of the Book of Order "is
improper, contrary to the Book of Order, and must be
vacated."
- "In fact, G-14.0205 places an affirmative obligation on a
church's Session to examine candidates for the office of elder or
deacon that reaches beyond the nine questions set forth in
G-14.0207. Specifically, a Session is responsible to examine an
individual who has been elected to the office of elder or deacon
concerning that person's "personal faith; knowledge of the
doctrine, government, and discipline contained in the Constitution
of the church; and the duties of the office. Further, the Session's
responsibility includes ensuring that those who seek to be ordained
or installed as officers are qualified consistent with other
constitutional standards …"
- "The Sebastian Session has broad authority to examine
candidates for the office of elder and deacon. It is within the
Session's purview to ask candidates whether they affirm the historic
confessions contained in the Resolution, especially since the
questions are within the spirit and scope of the Book of
Confessions and call of Scripture. It is not the province of the
[presbytery court] to unconstitutionally limit the power of any
individual session acting within the confines and strictures of our
Constitution."
- The presbytery court's "decision is improper because it
rests on a flawed premise, namely that Scripture is fallible."
- "Section 6.052 of Part I of our Constitution provides in
relevant part: "By Him the prophets were moved to speak the
Word of God and all the writers of the Holy Scriptures inspired to
record infallibly the mind and will of God."
- "Further, Section 6.184 of Part I of our Constitution
provides in part: 'He is the Lord and Giver of life, everywhere
present and is the source of all good thoughts, pure desires, and
holy counsels in men. By Him the prophets were moved to speak the
Word of God, and all the writers of the Holy Scriptures inspired to
record infallibly the mind and will of God.'"
- The presbytery court "is not free to pick and choose which
portions of our Constitution they will uphold and which they will
set aside."
- The presbytery court "committed procedural errors that
require reversal."
- The presbytery court's moderator, the Rev. Dale Heaton, should
have "excused from presiding over or taking any part in the
trial because of extrajudicial statements made that evinced a clear
bias towards Appellant's case. Rev. Heaton's bias, calling the
confessing church movement 'illegal' and also advocating, during the
pendency of this case, the passage of Amendment 01-A (subsequently
rejected by the General Assembly), which is repugnant to the
statements of the Sebastian Session's Resolution, make it clear that
Rev. Heaton should not have taken any part in the trial. Allowing a
biased member to preside over the trial is unfairly prejudicial to
the Appellant's rights under our Constitution."
- The presbytery court permitted Blessing to file an amended
complaint – highly irregular and in violation of D-7.0401d"
– less than three weeks before the trial but would not grant
Sebastian's counsel adequate time to respond. "This was
unfairly prejudicial to Appellant and evidences the [the presbytery
court's] single-minded interest in considering only Appellee's side
of the case."
- "At trial, the members of the [presbytery court] had not
even reviewed Appellant's response to the new allegations and issues
in the Amended Complaint. The trial concluded at 2:45 p.m. on
February 20, 2002. The [presbytery court's] decision was issued by
close of business the same day. The [presbytery court's] hastening
to its decision is so fundamentally and unfairly prejudicial to
Appellant that, at a minimum, a retrial is required."
- "During the trial before the [presbytery court], none of the
witnesses were sworn, as required by the Book of Order. This
error alone was unfairly prejudicial to the appellant, militating a
retrial. Also, it is further evidence that the CFPPJC acted in haste
and did not observe the proper procedures to insure a full and fair
hearing of the case on its merits, reinforcing that a decision had
already been reached."
- "The moderator did not require the witnesses to be sworn at
the trial. The moderator allowed Appellee to file an Amended
Complaint, adding new substance to his original Complaint, just 3
weeks before the trial. The moderator did not allow Appellant time
to respond to Appellee's Amended Complaint. In short, the moderator
evinced a clear determination to decide the case before ever hearing
it. The result is that the actions, both individually and
cumulatively, unfairly prejudiced Appellant and kept Appellant from
receiving a fair hearing of the issues on the merits."
- The [presbytery court's] decision seeks to elevate form over
substance, and in the end, form without real substance creates a
vacuum in which expression of personal liberty trumps corporate
responsibility to be faithful to Scriptures and the historic
confessions of our Church. By affirming the Resolution, the
Sebastian Session seeks to add substance to this vacuum, and issue a
call to sister churches and the General Assembly to take a look at
and remember our historic roots: that we are a people of God, saved
by Christ, guided in our lives by certainty that Scripture is
infallible, seeking to live our lives as God commands us through His
revealed Holy Word."
|