 Berated PCUSA family paper in search of 'theological' footings By John H. Adams The Layman Online Friday, September 26, 2003 The Presbyterian Church (USA)'s Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy has begun an attempt to include some theological footings in its "families" document that was blown away by a storm of protests and ridicule. But what kind of theology?
The first draft of the ACSWP report - titled "Living Faithfully: Families in Transition" - gave tacit endorsement to homosexual couples, unwed mothers and unmarried but cohabitating couples. It concluded that there is no "ideal" model for family life. Criticis said the paper was light on theology and heavy on sociology and economic "injustices" that the advisory committee blamed for the degradation of family life in America. In May, the 215th General Assembly rejected that report and ordered the committee to get some theological advice from the Office of Theology and Worship. That advice arrived via a 16-page review of some of the denomination's confessional and theological documents about marriage and family. Dr. Charles Wiley, an associate in the Office of Theology and Worship, introduced the review, noting that it was a rough draft and a work in progress. Committee members raised a number of questions. The Theology and Worship paper emphasized the traditional Presbyterian teaching that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. But Barbara Gaddis, a family therapist from Boone, Iowa, objected to including that material, saying that it would add to the dissension in the church over homosexual relationships. Despite overwhelming defeats in denominationwide referendums and a confessional history that supports traditional views about marriage, homosexual activists and their allies continue to seek PCUSA approval for ordaining practicing homosexuals as officers and allowing ministers to conduct "marriage" ceremonies for same-gender couples. Contrary to church law, several ministers in the denomination have publicly declared that they perform "marriage" ceremonies for homosexual couples. In one case, the Presbytery of Cincinnati declared that the Rev. A. Stephen Van Kuiken renounced the jurisdiction of the Presbyterian Church (USA) by officiating at such services in defiance of the PCUSA Constitution and a church court order. In the Presbytery of Hudson River, the presbytery refused to order church trials of a number of ministers who also stated publicly that they "marry" gay couples. Wiley's paper opens with a quotation from the Confession of 1967, which he said provided the most "thematized" understanding of confessional tradition on marriage and family: "The relationship between man and woman exemplifies in a basic way God's ordering of the interpersonal life for which God created humankind. Anarchy in sexual relationships is a symptom of alienation from God, neighbors, and self. The church, as the household of God, is called to lead people out of this alienation into the responsible freedom of the new life in Christ. Reconciled to God, people have joy in and respect for their own humanity and that of other persons; a man and woman are enabled to marry, to commit themselves to a mutually shared life, and to respond to each other in sensitive and lifelong concern; parents receive the grace to care for children in love and to nurture their individuality. …"No member of the committee targeted that section in particular – even with its strong language about "anarchy in sexual relations" as a "symptom of alienation from God, neighbors, and self." But, at one point, Wiley was pressed to say what he thought about homosexual couples. He paused at length before stating that he had viewed his assignment as presenting the tradition of the church. Alan Wisdom, director of the renewal effort known as Presbyterian Action and a key player in the debate about the paper at the 215th General Assembly, came from another perspective. An historian, Wisdom suggested that the theological review should emphasize one of the missing ingredients in the ACSWP document: that some relationships are sinful. "I'm going to throw in a tough point – the issue of whether we should say say that certain choices of family are wrong or sinful," Wisdom told Wiley. "I would use the example of cohabitation. You don't directly address that there. … You kind of dance around it. … Scripture does not lift up every single form of family life as a model." Wisdom added, "Our Reformed understanding of our Christian life is that sin affects everything. Some of us would argue that cohabitation would be a wrong choice for both Scriptural and practical reasons." Wiley responded, "Well, I sort of get to the precipice and look over." And Wisdom suggested where he might look again: at the Second Helvetic Confession, Chapter 29, which is titled "Of Celebacy, Marriage and the Management of Domestic Affairs." That section employs stern admonitions against co-habitation and holds up marriage as an institution ordained by God. While his section on marriage – taken directly from the Service of Christian Marriage in the Book of Order – drew some criticism because of the one-man, one-woman requirement, another segment of Wiley's paper was widely praised. That section dealt with baptism. "The baptismal rite in a sense is one that at one level disengages us from any kind of commitments, including family," he said. "Baptism is regardless – regardless of family commitments." "One of the changes in baptismal practices during the Reformation was the admission of parents," which many in Geneva had resisted, Wiley said. "This says, at least to me, that one of the Reforrmed teachings of the church includes family commitments. But families are not the center of baptism. God is the center of baptism." Wiley said the practice of the minister taking the baby from the parents and carrying it into the congregation "in some ways relativizes genetic and biological" family connections. They also serve as a response to Jesus' demands that his followers love God more than they did their own families. Thus, Wiley said, echoing some of the themes of "Living Faithfully," the Bible may include a number of configurations of families, but God has called individuals and families as groups to serve him faithfully. That point was a departure from the thrust of "Living Faithfully," which is essentially a social-political commentary that would have called on Presbyterians to take the side of liberals on such issues as workfare vs. welfare. "A family doesn't exist for its own purposes," Wiley said. "We serve families not just for the sake of family. I think government assistance programs have incredible power to assist and destroy. Presbyterians are more comfortable in suggesting to their representatives how to handle things than they are in getting their hands dirty." William "Beau" Weston, a professor of sociology at Centre College in Danville, Ky., asked Wiley to include "more talk about raising children" in his revision. And Marjorie Working, a pastor in Santa Barbara, Calif., called for the theological review to address transformation. Wiley took copious notes during the discussion and said he will make substantial changes. |
||
Respond to this article |
||
| Home
· Archives
· The
Layman ·
PLC
Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
||