Unity, diversity and schism Reflections on 'Historic Principles, Conscience and Church Government' Commentary by Robert P. Mills The Layman Online Wednesday, June 16, 1999 "The basis of Presbyterian polity is theological. Our polity is not just a convenient way of getting things done; it is rather the ordering of our corporate life which expresses what we believe. The connection between faith and order is inseparable. At its heart, the polity of the church expresses our Reformed theology. What we do and the way we do it is an expression of how we understand our faith." In 1983, the year the former southern and northern Presbyterian churches reunited following more than a century of separation, General Assembly commissioners adopted the previous paragraph as part of a report titled "Historic Principles, Conscience and Church Government" (Minutes, pp. 141-158). That document, which has not been superseded by subsequent Assembly action, makes significant statements about the unity and diversity of the Presbyterian Church (USA). It also talks frankly about schism. It is understandable that unity, diversity and schism were on the minds of the commissioners who reunited the former UPC(USA) and PC(US) in 1983. Today, with a congregation voting to install an elder in defiance of the denomination's constitution, a presbytery telling one of its congregations that it need not obey the Book of Order, another presbytery taking under care a candidate who defiantly does not meet our ordination standards, and a denominational award being given to a woman who told her presbytery that she would no longer work within the PCUSA's polity because she wants to spend her energy subverting it, it is also understandable that these same topics weigh heavily on the minds of commissioners preparing to gather in Fort Worth. The Fort Worth Assembly will be voting on nominations and proposals that could not only shape the future of the PCUSA but in fact determine whether the PCUSA has a future as a single denomination. It is in the light of this Assembly's business that these reflections on "Historic Principles, Conscience and Church Government" (hereinafter abbreviated HP) are offered. Ignoring constitutional provisions The paper's introduction asserts, "It is perhaps fair to say that no knowledgeable member or officer of the church can agree with every requirement in the 'Form of Government' and with every position which the church takes on every issue." However, it also recognizes "the assumption of our polity that governing bodies which conduct their business in accordance with the procedures of our form of government - guaranteeing the rights of every member - are more likely to reflect God's will for the church than individuals acting in their private capacity or as members of ad hoc, self-appointed groups" (HP, p. 142).
In these observations, HP has proved prophetic. Less than two decades after reunion, Northern New England Presbytery has told one of its congregations that it need not obey a portion of the constitution that it finds troubling. First Presbyterian Church of Stamford, Conn., has voted to install an elder in flagrant violation of specific Book of Order language forbidding such an installation. And West Jersey Presbytery has taken under care as a candidate for the Ministry of Word and Sacrament an individual whose ordination would violate the constitution. In coming under care, the individual declared that the denomination must change to suit his lifestyle preferences. Technically, such actions constitute schism, a breaking away of one part of the denomination from another. When a congregation or presbytery pridefully determines that it may exempt itself from specific Book of Order mandates, it has by that action broken away from the PCUSA and chosen to live by its own rules and regulations. Unless the Fort Worth Assembly takes decisive action to end such divisive activities, more and more congregations and presbyteries are likely to declare their functional autonomy from the PCUSA. As the number of autonomous governing bodies grows, the possibility of denominational unity will quickly recede to the vanishing point.
The great shibboleth of modern Presbyterian schismatics is that "God alone is Lord of conscience" (G-1.0301, quoting the Westminster Confession). The use of this mantra, however, meets its match in the recognition that "Scripture is our highest authority and no governing body may legislate contrary to what Scripture plainly teaches. … No church governing body may bind conscience contrary to Scripture. It can, however, interpret Scripture and require that those who disagree either submit or withdraw peaceably. Because of the right to withdraw, the individual conscience cannot be bound by actions of the church" (HP, pp. 151-152, emphasis added). As the historical section of HP recounts, Presbyterians have a history of dividing over issues of biblical interpretation. What is different this time is that those who oppose the decisions made and affirmed by the General Assembly and the presbyteries are not withdrawing peaceably. Instead, they are insisting on retaining all the rights and privileges of PCUSA membership while simultaneously demanding the freedom to violate any constitutional standards they choose. Freedom of conscience is the rationalization the schismatics offer for their actions. However, the reality is that the PCUSA cannot bind any individual's conscience. The schismatics are free to leave at any time. They freely choose not to do so. As recently as 1983 Presbyterians officially recognized that those who could not, in good conscience, obey the constitution should peaceably withdraw from the denomination. Now, however, such integrity is lacking in a growing number of our governing bodies. In place of fidelity to ordination vows, an ethic of personal preference prevails. The historic Presbyterian practice of majority rule has been replaced by an older model, a return to the period of Israel's judges, when "there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes" (Judges 17:6, RSV). 'Seriously divisive conflict' "The church must trust that truth can be discerned, that it is possible for the will of God to be understood and obeyed. The church follows the intention of its own polity, with careful study of Scripture and a sincere desire to be obedient to its Lord. … "Central to Presbyterian polity is the insistence upon consultation and coordination among the various parts of the whole. Each governing body must conduct its business with faithfulness to the constitutional procedures requiring consultation with other bodies. … "Majority rule is not a mystical or abstract concept. It is simply a reflection of the fact that the whole church, as it acts, can do only that which most of the church is willing to do. When through the violation or short circuit of proper procedure the will of a minority is imposed on a judicatory or on the church, seriously divisive conflict is often the result" (HP, pp. 152-153). Again, HP here proves prophetic, if understated. With presbyteries and congregations boldly defying a constitutional provision affirmed by two-thirds of the presbyteries, "seriously divisive conflict" hardly does justice to the state in which the PCUSA now finds itself. Various governing bodies have effectively declared themselves to be in schism from the PCUSA. Their actions are not in dispute. The question "Are we two denominations?" can only be answered in the affirmative. The real question has become "Are we two different religions?" The Wheeler Doctrine The relevance of that question is evident in an address by Barbara Wheeler, president of Auburn Seminary, published by the Covenant Network, an organization formed to promote the ordination of gays and lesbians, in which Wheeler outlined a strategy by which liberal revisionists could seize control of the PCUSA. In her opening paragraph, Wheeler eschews obeying the denomination's constitution in favor of "countenancing actions that are wrong and possibly also making statements that are untrue." Not content to disavow one denomination's constitution, the Wheeler Doctrine subordinates Scripture to ecclesiastical politics. If lying is required to achieve the desired political objective, the Wheeler Doctrine calls for the ninth commandment to be set aside. (It is worth noting that in advocating lying one implicitly acknowledges that truth exists, that it can be known, and that it can be obeyed. And it is worth quoting HP's observation that there is "no way to disconnect faith from practice. What we believe is reflected in our actions, both individually and corporately. Wrong opinions are harmful to persons and to the unity of the body. Wrong opinions will lead to unfaithful behavior. The truth of a particular idea is often revealed in the way it leads people to behave" [p. 150]). It is neither a long nor a difficult traverse down the slippery slope from the ninth commandment to the first. The willingness to bear false testimony against another member of the covenant community, thereby intentionally defying the God who established the covenant and the community, implies the worship of another God, a deity more tolerant of the asserted belief that the end justifies the means. After all, if God can be reimagined to suit any audience or occasion, why should God's commandments, let alone the historic principles of the Presbyterian Church, not be the subject of similarly reimaginative processes? Faith, order and reality "The basis of Presbyterian polity is theological. Our polity is not just a convenient way of getting things done; it is rather the ordering of our corporate life which expresses what we believe. The connection between faith and order is inseparable" (HP, p. 145). If faith and order are indeed inseparable, and if some Presbyterian governing bodies no longer agree to live under the same order, the inescapable conclusion is that some in the PCUSA no longer share the same faith that makes the majority of Presbyterians one in Christ Jesus. That is the reality facing commissioners in Fort Worth as they prepare to debate the issues of unity, diversity and schism. Their decisions, and the responses of Presbyterians in the pews, may mark 1999 as a turning point in Presbyterian history. |
|||
| Respond to this article | |||
| 1999
General Assembly issues The Top Ten issues at General Assembly Capsule reports on the past 10 General Assemblies |
|||
| Home
· News
· PLC
Publications ·
The
Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives · History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
|||
