Covenant Network
leader
mounts new legal attack
on 'Authoritative Interpretation'
By John H.
Adams
The Layman Online
Tuesday, August 17,
2004
The hue and cry at the
216th General Assembly from many of the advocates for ordaining
practicing homosexuals was that the denomination's Authoritative
Interpretation – the theological anchor for the constitutional "fidelity/chastity"
ordination clause – needed to be pulled up.
The Covenant Network of Presbyterians, the largest of several
like-minded special-interest groups, targeted the Authoritative
Interpretation but did not openly join the attack on the "fidelity/chastity"
clause. Apparently, its strategy was to dispense first the authority for
G-6.0106b in the Book of Order.
The Authoritative Interpretation concluded that "unrepentant
homosexual practice does not accord with the requirements for
ordination." On the other hand, G-6.0106b doesn't even mention
homosexuality. It simply states:
- "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-acknowledged
practice which the confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or
installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and
Sacrament."
But now one of the Covenant Network's legal activists is telling
pro-gay ordination groups that the Authoritative Interpretation isn't
legal anyway.
In a column on page
6 of the recent edition of More Light Update, Peter
Oddliefson, declared the Authoritative
Interpretation "constitutionally defective." In what
appears to be an attempt to invite gay Presbyterians to ignore the
Authoritative Interpretation, More Light Update titled
Oddliefson's column, "Despite G.A., the A.I. is Moot."
Similar arguments were made without success at the 216th General
Assembly. Even Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick didn't suggest that the
Authoritative Interpretation was moot. Appearing before the committee
that considered the Authoritative Interpretation, as well as proposals
to repeal the constitutional fidelity/chastity clause, Kirkpatrick gave
no indication that the statement lacked legal – and constitutional –
status.
Furthermore, the highest court in the Presbyterian Church (USA) –
the Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly – has
cited it as authoritative (and legal) in a number of cases. And in 2001,
the presbyteries of the PCUSA voted nearly 75 percent against a proposal
that would have repealed the Authoritative Interpretation as well "fidelity/chastity"
clause.
Oddliefson is an elder at Downtown Presbyterian Church in Rochester,
N.Y., a More Light congregation that has been at the center of the storm
over the ordination standard. Under the rubric of the Authoritative
Interpretation, the General Assembly's Permanent Judicial Commission
ruled in 1993 that Downtown Presbyterian Church could not install Janie
Spahr, a lesbian activist, as an associate minister.
More recently, however, Downtown Presbyterian called Pat Youngdahl, a
lesbian activist, as co-pastor in spite of church law. Youngdahl, a
divorcee who was ordained in 1981 but kept her homosexual behavior
secret until years later, says her long-term lesbian partner is Michal
McKenzie, who served as vice moderator of the General Assembly in 1986.
In the meantime, Oddliefson has written extensively for the Covenant
Network and More Light churches about what he calls the legal
shortcomings of the Authoritative Interpretation and the constitutional
"fidelity/chastity" standard.
In his column for More Light Presbyterians, Oddliefson employs a number
of attempts to delegitimize the Authoritative Interpretation, including:
- 1. He said it was merely "construed" to be
authoritative when it was termed "definitive guidance." At
the General Assembly, former Princeton Theological Seminary
President Tom Gillespie, one of the members of the task force that
wrote the 1978 definitive guidance, expressed his disagreement with
that view. "Anything that is 'definitive' I would take as
authoritative," Gillespie said.
- 2. Oddliefson called the Authoritative Interpretation "an
attempt to amend the Book of Order without obtaining the
required ratification of the presbyteries because it excluded from
ordination an entire class of persons in violation" of other
Book of Order requirements for inclusivity.
- But the requirements he cites (G-3.0401, G-4.0403, G-5.0103 and
G-5.0202) have nothing to do with qualifications for church office.
- G-3.0401 is part of a section about the church's mission, calling
for openness and diversity (specifically men and women) and makes no
reference to homosexual behavior.
- G-4.0403 is about unity within the PCUSA and ecumenical unity.
It doesn't mention homosexuality.
- G-5.0103 addresses inclusiveness and calls on congregations to
welcome all people upon a profession of faith in Jesus Christ as
Lord and Savior. Again, there is no reference to homosexual
behavior.
- G-5.0202 refers to the rights of membership – including the
right to become elected as church officers – ministers by
presbyteries and elders and deacons by congregations. But G-5.0202
also calls on members to submit to the government of the church –
which Oddliefson encourages them not to do.
- 3. Oddliefson argues that the Authoritative Interpretation
shouldn't be church law – which it remains unless a future
General Assembly nullifies it or adopts a new Authoritative
Interpretation – because a majority of the Bible professors in
Presbyterian seminaries says it wrongly interprets Scripture that
condemns homosexual behavior. But the opinions of the professors
have nothing to do with church law. Church law has to be established
by the General Assembly through an Authoritative Interpretation or
by a majority vote of the presbyteries.
- 4. He declares that the Authoritative Interpretation is "now
obsolete and irrelevant" because it was superseded by
G-6.0106b. But the Presbyterian courts have not regarded it as "obsolete
and irrelevant;" to the contrary, they have continued, since
G-6.0l06b was added to the constitution in 1997, to cite it as
authoritative.
- Oddliefson was the attorney for the Presbytery of Northern New
England when it refused to take action against Christ Church in
Burlington, Vt., which had elected a self-acknowledged, practicing
homosexual to its session. The General Assembly Permanent Judicial
Commission said the presbytery should have intervened. In that
decision,
the court said, "This Commission finds that there are no
constitutional grounds for a governing body to fail to comply with
an express provision of the Constitution, however inartfully stated.
Assertions of inconsistency, confusion, or ambiguity may justify the
right to protest. They do not create a right to disregard any part
of the Constitution."
- 5. Oddliefson called the Authoritative Interpretation "defective
because it violated the Confessions." But he mentioned only one
Confession – the Confession of 1967, which stresses
reconciliation and inclusiveness. Homosexuality is not mentioned in
the text of the Confession of 1967. It does include a passage that
Oddliefson doesn't cite: "Anarchy in sexual relationships is a
symptom of man's alienation from God, his neighbor, and himself."
|