 Baltimore Presbytery votes against enforcing church law By John H. Adams The Layman Online Wednesday, November 6, 2002 The Presbytery of Baltimore has recommended that the presbytery "shall not pursue any disciplinary or remedial complaints growing out of attempts to enforce the provisions of G-6.0106b" – but it's not policy yet. Furthermore, the presbytery, in an overwhelming vote June 27, proposed that the policy, being developed by the presbytery's council, include informing "session and presbytery investigating committees and the Presbytery Permanent Judicial Commission that in the conduct of their business they shall be instructed by" the presbytery's refusal to enforce G-6.0106b. The text of the presbytery's proposal was published in the Fall 2002 newsletter of More Light Presbyterians after the presbytery council developed a statement titled "On Seeking Reconciliation in the Church." That statement did not suggest that the presbytery defy the constitution. But Charles Forbes, stated clerk of the presbytery, told The Layman Online that liberals were not satisfied with the council's statement and that they added their own conditions for council consideration. That response from the full presbytery includes:
Forbes said the council has not responded to the presbytery's proposal. What the presbytery ultimately does about the constitutional ordination standard could have a bearing in a disciplinary case filed against a minister in the presbtery, the Rev. Donald Stroud, who works with a gay-activist organization called That All May Freely Serve. Stroud was also quoted in the fall edition of the newsletter of More Light Presbyterians as saying, "I cannot comply with G-6.0106b of 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. G-6.0106b makes God complicit in unjust oppressive violence that pits members of the Body of Christ, constituted as the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), one against the other and rends the peace, unity and purity of the Church." Virginia lawyer Paul Rolf Jensen filed disciplinary charges against Stroud, accusing him of renouncing his ordination vows by openly defying the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA). Stroud has acknowledged that he is in a homosexual relationship, but he declares that such a relationship is not sinful. The Presbyterian Church has always said that sex between two men or two women is sinful and not in line with God's creative purposes for humankind. But the denomination has also said that church membership is based only on profession of faith in Jesus Christ and that homosexual activity is not a barrier to becoming a member. In three national referendums, each by a larger margin, presbyteries have said that married officers must practice fidelity and chastity if they are single. The church does not recognize marriage between two people of the same sex. Meanwhile, the Presbytery of Baltimore has kept Stroud – who could lose his Presbyterian ordination if it were determined that he violated his ordination vow – out of harm's way. A presbytery investigating committee that was appointed to review Jensen's charges against Stroud refused to call for a trial. Jensen responded to that refusal by submitting a petition for review to the presbytery, which, according to the Book of Order, was required to respond within 90 days. Jensen said the deadline passed without a response. But Forbes said the deadline has not passed and that he has prepared a recommendation in response to Jensen's Petition for Review. That recommendation will be made public a week before the presbytery's next meeting, Nov. 14, he said. On Nov. 5, Jensen asked Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick to intevene and require the Presbytery of Baltimore to meet its obligations to handle the case according to the constitutional rules of discipline. Kirkpatrick has said repeatedly that it is not his job to enforce the constitution. But he has also said ministers and elders have no right to defy the requirements of G-6.0106b. He has encouraged presbyteries and synods to "work pastorally" with defiant officers. The presbytery resolution now being considered by the council said the presbytery will "support sessions and ordained officers who cannot in good conscience comply with G-6.0106b, in accordance with the clear language of G-6.0108b, which states that the determination of what is or is not essential to reformed faith and polity 'ultimately becomes the responsibility of the governing body' in which officers serve." The presbytery's refusal to allow the Stroud case to go to trial would effectively invalidate Jensen's complaint, regardless of its merit. But another presbytery or an elder within the Baltimore presbytery could file a complaint with the synod court accusing the presbytery of one or more irregularities, which are not disciplinary offenses. Full text of Baltimore Presbytery's statement on G-6.0106b On Seeking Reconciliation in the Church Adopted by the Council of the Presbytery of Baltimore, June 10, 2002 as Amended by the Presbytery, June 27, 2002 After careful consideration of the many positions and perspectives regarding G-6.0106b during a day-long retreat on May 2, 2002, and at several council meetings, the Council offers this statement to all who serve Jesus Christ within the bounds of our Presbytery as a first step toward providing a context for discussion and decision making. Presbyterians have struggled with ordination standards since 1978, and the recent defeat of Amendment 01-A raised the level of controversy. While there are congregations comfortable with G- 6.0106b and there are congregations whose consciences are deeply troubled by G-6.0106b, many other congregations do not consider the issue a high priority. We believe that most of us want to live together in a beloved community strongly committed to Jesus Christ. In recent years, the controversy has often been framed around votes. Groups have worked hard to convince fellow Presbyterians of the rightness of their position in preparation for decisions at various levels of our judicatories. This has not helped us understand the history and hurts of those with whom we disagree. Now we need not only to be honest and articulate about our own positions, but also to truly hear each other, to hear each other clearly enough that we can paraphrase each other's reasoning. We implore everyone to respond in a new way, to practice active listening and focus not on opposing positions in the controversy but on the great, central affirmation we share: Jesus is Lord! Each of us, whatever our position on G-6.0106b, has declared this. We believe this truth must overarch all issues. Only a focus on Jesus' Lordship will enable us to move together beyond conflict so that we can be about our urgent work of declaring God's love for the whole world. We in no way belittle the pain and frustration felt by all in this controversy. Nor do we ask anyone to be less than fully honest in their position: statements of conscience must not be suppressed. We do not ask anyone to shift their position on the issue in the least. We believe in and urge a policy of patience and mutual forbearance across the church. We seek a climate where we wait, without actions such as provocative dissent or judicial charges, while we study and share ideas, free of suspicion and battle among factions, to work through our differences. We recommend that disputes be solved through mediation and conciliation. Further, we will honor every session's compliance with G-6.0108b. (This last sentence was added by the presbytery.) Together, especially in moments of dispute over scriptural interpretation, let us strive to preserve the peace, unity, and purity of the church whose manner is one of grace, hospitality, and cooperation and whose Lord is Jesus Christ. At the same presbytery meeting of June 27, 2002, the presbytery adopted the following motion with overwhelming support:
|
|
| Respond to this article | |
| Home
· News
· PLC
Publications ·
The
Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives · History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
|