 Synod requires Baltimore Presbytery to review work of homosexual minister By John H. Adams The Layman Online Wednesday, November 9, 2005 This report was prepared with assistance from correspondents who attended the meeting of the Synod of the Mid-Atlantic. The Synod of the Mid-Atlantic has ordered the Presbytery of Baltimore to review the ministry of the Rev. Don Stroud, a homosexual minister who has declared that he willfully defies the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA). The synod said Baltimore "was delinquent in its pastoral and administrative oversight" of Stroud's "published statements and validated ministry." The synod set a March 31, 2006, deadline for Baltimore to make that review.
The report also notes that the presbytery, which is "heavily liberal," has not lived up to its own commitment to "inclusiveness," and "its conservative minority has felt, over the years, unheard of and uncared for. Even in the course of this extended review of Donald Stroud's ministry, we have been witness to the playing out of the resulting loss of trust." In taking its action, after a three-year on-again, off-again process, the synod reworded some of the language of a report presented during its Oct. 27-28 meeting in Wilmington, Del. The report by the synod's Administrative Review Commission made a number of recommendations, but the synod changed those to requirements. The synod ordered that the Presbytery of Baltimore report to the June 2007 meeting of the synod the steps the presbytery has taken to comply with the synod rulings. Furthermore, Baltimore's report will be passed on to the stated clerks of the 14 member presbyteries, which, in turn, will send copies to the congregations within their bounds.
Stroud works for That All May Freely Serve, an organization that promotes defiance of the constitution. Baltimore approved his membership in the presbytery even after Stroud said he would not comply with the ordination standard in the Book of Order "because to do so, for me, can come only at the price of denying my faith in God's grace in Jesus Christ. My conscience will not allow me to do such a thing." Through That All May Freely Serve, Stroud has advised other homosexuals to defy the constitution, an appendix to the report said, citing four examples:
The 11-member Administrative Review Commission included former General Assembly Moderator Syngman Rhee. The Rev. Lawrence Chapin, pastor of Green Springs Presbyterian Church in Abingdon, Va., served as the chairman. The commission did not declare outright that the Presbytery of Baltimore had defied constitutional standards by accepting Stroud as a member and allowing his statements of defiance to go unchallenged. Furthermore, it did not recommend that any disciplinary action be taken against Stroud. But it did require Baltimore to justify its recognition of Stroud as a minister of Word and Sacrament. An investigating committee of the Presbytery of Baltimore had quashed a previous disciplinary case in which Stroud was accused of having renounced the jurisdiction of the Presbyterian Church (USA) because of his defiance of the constitution. That case also produced a number of charges against presbytery leaders – most notably Charles Forbes, the presbytery's stated clerk, because of his closeness to Stroud. Forbes supported Stroud financially and served on the Board of That All May Freely Serve-Baltimore.
Following the investigating committee's refusal to allow Stroud to face a disciplinary trial on accusations that he had "willfully and deliberately" violated his oath of office, the Synod of the Mid-Atlantic named a first Administrative Review Commission to review Baltimore's actions. The first commission's report was initially accepted. But the issued was raised again at a called meeting of the synod in March 2004 when commissioners said the initial review failed to include a consideration of whether Baltimore had complied with the "lawful injunctions of a higher governing body," which is required in the PCUSA Constitution. Leaders of the first Administrative Review Commission said they did not believe they had to consider that issue. Throughout the process of being reviewed by the synod, the leadership of Baltimore Presbytery has remained defiant, referring to calls for accountability on the synod floor as "stupid" and "silly," threatening judicial action against the synod, and, at one point, halting the review process by receiving a stay of enforcement from members of the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission. In spite of this, the report received and adopted by an overwhelming majority of the synod was, in the words of one presbytery executive, "the best report I have seen in 32 years of ministry." It held Baltimore accountable for its actions, and, once the commissioners were given an opportunity to fine-tune it, guaranteed that every correction or lack thereof made by the presbytery will be broadcast to every congregation within the Synod of the Mid-Atlantic. The synod will have the last word on the matter at its June 2007 meeting. The Commission built its report around a series of questions that it believed encapsulated nine essential matters of concern the synod desired to have reviewed. Those questions and a summary of the recommendations made by the commission and adopted by the entire synod were as follows: 1) At the time of initial validation and subsequently, did the Presbytery of Baltimore fail to require an adequate job description of Stroud's ministry? The commission decided that there was no irregularity or delinquency under G-9.0409, although a That All May Freely Serve recruitment brochure was omitted from the information given to the full presbytery. Therefore, the synod ruled "that in all future cases, POB follow a policy of bringing all such descriptive materials before the full presbytery at the time of action." 2) In its inquiry at the time of Stroud's initial validation, did the Presbytery of Baltimore fail to uphold relevant constitutional standards? The commission cited Williamson v. Presbytery of Western North Carolina in observing that this is a "rapidly evolving area," as well as evidence that the process for reviewing Stroud's ministry was initially more stringent than for other validated ministries. It expressed concern that Stroud declared at the time of his initial validation that he would answer no questions concerning his own sexual activities. However, because no such questions were raised by the presbytery's Committee on Ministry or by the full presbytery, the commission felt unable to answer this question. The original wording of the commission's report stated, "We make the recommendation that the Presbytery of Baltimore consider devising and implementing a policy governing the appropriateness of questions to be asked by the presbytery when considering validated ministry. We also recommend that POB consider producing written materials for use by commissioners in the validation process. These materials should help the presbytery to apply Book Of Order and presbytery validation criteria to the ministry for which validation is sought." A commissioner from the Presbytery of Eastern Virginia asked why the commission recommended that the presbytery "consider" doing these things rather than simply ordering them done. Chapin replied that this was an attempt to be conciliatory and avoid the appearance of forcing the presbytery to take certain actions. The synod was more concerned with the presbytery's obedience, and promptly struck "consider" from the recommendation. The amended language insisted that "... Baltimore devise and implement a policy ... [and] ... produce written materials...". 3) Did the Presbytery of Baltimore fail to meet its obligation to perform annual reviews of Rev. Stroud's ministry? The presbytery acknowledged that it failed to review any validated ministries in 2002. However, the commission was more concerned that the reviews which have been made are "pro forma," though the presbytery insists they are merely "uncomplicated." In the amended language, the synod ruled "that Presbytery of Baltimore, in revising its process for ministry validation, consult with employing entities in its annual reviews, accessing performance review information, and ascertaining whether and how the ministry has changed." 4) and 5) Did the Presbytery improperly withhold Investigating Committee records from the Administrative Review Commission? Citing multiple General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission rulings that have constructed a solid wall between judicial and administrative process, Forbes refused to provide the requested records. The commission accepted this refusal, while opining that such decisions would be better if made according to a written policy rather than ad hoc personal judgment. Therefore, the Synod ruled "that the Presbytery of Baltimore formulate a written policy concerning the handling of all records that are not a matter of public record." 6) Did the Presbytery of Baltimore improperly allow conflicts of interest to arise in the handling of Rev. Stroud's validated ministry? Forbes also was the incorporator for That All May Freely Serve-Baltimore, the organization to which he still belongs, for which Donald Stroud works, and which has its offices in the same building as the offices for Baltimore Presbytery. Of the original Investigating Committee named by Forbes, three of the four either were members of or had made financial contributions to That All May Freely Serve. That Investigating Committee found no reason to file charges against Stroud, thus eliminating a judicial case or the possibility of a judicial appeals process. While the Consulting Committee of Baltimore Presbytery still insists that no conflicts of interest have arisen, it does acknowledge that there have been occasions when a conflict of interest might have been inferred. In an effort to address the situation, Forbes recused himself on one occasion in a recent meeting of the presbytery, and a position of associate stated clerk, for which candidates are currently being sought, has been included in a new staff design. The commission commended the presbytery for its efforts in this area, citing a need "for the elimination of any impediments to full trust." But Baltimore Presbytery still has work to do. In the amended language, the synod ruled "that Presbytery of Baltimore [develop] some procedure other than individual self-regulation." 7) In regard to the validated ministries of Rev. Stroud, did the Presbytery of Baltimore fail in its obligations of oversight and counsel? This was one of the key questions in the three-year, two-ARC investigations. When finally asked, the answer was a resounding yes. After reciting the history of the case, the commission wrote, "On the basis of this record, we must conclude that, under G-9.0409 of the Book of Order, the Presbytery of Baltimore was delinquent in its pastoral and administrative oversight of the published statements and validated ministry of Rev. Stroud, having failed to provide such counseling as was due under the circumstances." Therefore, the synod directed that "Presbytery of Baltimore ... cure this delinquency by meeting with Rev. Stroud to review his statements concerning compliance with ordination standards and to provide such counsel as is appropriate. Such meeting should be conducted ... by the next annual review but not later than March 31, 2006." 8) During the period in question, did the Presbytery of Baltimore inequitably restrain certain advocacy groups operating within its bounds? Citing a lengthy history, the commission report said, "[T]here has been a uniform sense arising out of the record before us that a certain conservative, evangelical minority operating within POB genuinely felt unheard and steamrollered. It seems ironic that in a presbytery which sees itself as inclusive, conservatives perceive themselves as excluded. … To get to the heart of it, one might look, for example, at certain apparent inconsistencies between the treatment granted Rev. Stroud in his public dealings and that granted those who opposed the cause which he espouses." The synod determined that the presbytery ought to practice the inclusivity that it preaches and show some respect to evangelicals. "We hope that the Presbytery of Baltimore will consider that it means for the Peace, Unity, and Purity Report to say that taking responsibility for harmony within the church includes a willingness to 'outdo one another' in honoring each other.'" 9) Did the Presbytery of Baltimore fail to provide meaningful criteria under G-11.0403 for validated ministries within its bounds? Again citing Williamson v. the Presbytery of Western North Carolina, the commission acknowledged that all presbyteries will need to do a better job at formulating meaningful criteria for validated ministries. Therefore, the Synod ruled "that not only the Presbytery of Baltimore but all presbyteries might benefit from a synodwide conversation in this area." Without giving specifics, the synod also agreed to consider how this might be done. Minister Commissioner Robert Howard of Salem Presbytery proposed the amendment that called for the follow-up actions by the Baltimore Presbytery to be reported to the next stated meeting of the Synod of the Mid-Atlantic in June of 2007; and that, in the meantime, this information be disseminated to the synod's presbyteries and their congregations. Baltimore Presbytery Executive Peter Nord rose to object, calling such action "silly." |
||||||
Respond to this article |
||||||
| Home
· Archives
· The
Layman ·
PLC
Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
||||||
