Discussion of families paper becomes heated By John H. Adams The Layman Online Thursday, January 22, 2004 LOUISVILLE, Ky. – The discussion of what was once a controversial paper on families got heated Wednesday, even though the paper has been toned down theologically and politically to give it a chance to survive a second trip to the General Assembly. Ronald Stone, an elder and a retired professor of Christian ethics at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, expressed his dissatisfaction that the theological overview for the families paper – a section mandated by the 215th General Assembly in 2003 – had a missing ingredient: sin. "You missed the doctrine of sin and the lack of bringing in our sinful condition early on," Stone told Charles Wiley of the Office of Theology and Worship. As of Wednesday, Stone and other members of the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy of the Presbyterian Church (USA) had made no final judgment on the 86-page paper. They are scheduled to do that later this week. Stone was upset that the theological section, which Wiley prepared with the help of others on the denomination's Theology and Worship staff, had not highlighted sin as a factor in problems that families face. "There isn't much in the first part of this paper about the way things are," Stone said. "It takes on a theological idealization. I need more realism in this theological discussion. I need it because I read the Bible. Much like families in the 21st century, it has incest, rape …" After a long pause, Wiley, who has researched, written, revised, and edited his way through 14 drafts of the theological section, responded. "I couldn't disagree with you more. I don't buy it. I guess I should be congenial." The families paper will be discussed later this week by the committee but Wiley made an early appearance because he had to travel to Indiana Wednesday afternoon. Stone pressed his criticism – later raising the issue of polygamy. He questioned the paper's conclusion that polygamy, as reported in Scripture and as practiced by some Jews, was limited to kings and the very wealthy. Wiley said that polygamy was supported by few Old Testament Jews or, later, Christians. Stone and Wiley challenged each other to reveal their sources for their different views about the practice of polygamy. Stone cited an older resource; Wiley cited a later one. Their discussion led to other issues about the paper on families. Committee member Gordon Edwards, a pastor in Portland, Ore., and also a member of the General Assembly Council, suggested that the family paper needed to add a definition for the word "chaste." He didn't spell out his reason for that request – but the word is a lightening rod on the question of ordaining homosexuals. Gay activists say homosexual couples can have a "chaste" sexual relationship if they treat each other with pure or "chaste" intentions. Church law – specifically the "fidelity/chastity" ordination requirement – regards "chaste" as the absence of sex outside of marriage. Nile Harper of Ann Harbor, Mich., a retired pastor who is the chairman of the committee, agreed with Wiley. "We're not going to try to resolve gay marriages and we're not going to try. We're trying to seek a broad-ranging unity." The evolution of the paper on families has been true to Harper's point. It began as a paper that suggested that homosexual marriages were on par with traditional marriages. Because of its lack of a theological orientation and traditional morality, the original paper was also viewed by many as being supportive of having children out of wedlock and cohabitation. The latest draft before the committee this week skirts those controversies. One of the reasons the revisions are more in tune with the church's traditional understanding of marriage and families is that the writing team was expanded to include Presbyterians from the traditional stream. One of them, Alan Wisdom of Washington, D.C., a research associate with the Institute of Religion and Democracy and a key figure in the 215th General Assembly's debate of the original paper, attended this week's meeting and was given a pat on the back for his contributions. Before the General Assembly had its final say – calling for a wholesale revision of the families paper – Wisdom had worked with others to prepare a substitute paper to a General Assembly committee. The committee approved the Wisdom paper, which held up marriage between a man and a woman as the model for Christians, but the full General Assembly approved neither. "We are richer and wiser for having had the privilege of your strong participation," Harper told Wisdom. Sue Dickson, an El Paso, Tex., minister who serves as the vice chair of the committee, said she liked the way the paper has evolved. "It was amazing," she said. "It was an illustration of how God can bring us together." And Wisdom, who attended this week's committee meeting as an observer, said he had nothing to add. "I feel I had plenty of chances to express myself within the families writing team. I am grateful for the opportunity that ACSWP gave me. I cherish the relationships" with other writing team members. Jim Berkley, issues director for Presbyterians For Renewal, was covering the meeting for his organization's Web site, but he stepped out of his journalist's role by making comments at the meeting's public hearing. He urged ACSWP "to be sure that you are clear and that you say what you want to say in a way that could be understand by anyone who reads the families paper. Let your yes be yes and your no, no." Berkley criticized the makeup of ACSWP. "ACSWP may be one of the least diverse groups in our Presbyterian structure in terms of viewpoints. The general understanding within the church is that this group is made up entirely or almost entirely of persons with the same general viewpoint. I think you would gain a better hearing from the rest of the church if you open your membership so that this would not just seem like the Democratic Party." Berkley also praised the committee for having Wisdom serve on its writing team for the families paper. "I think you strengthened the paper by having Alan Wisdom. I would encourage you to consider the same thing for other papers."

Respond to this article

Home · Archives · The Layman · PLC Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Feedback · Links