Sebastian elder appeals synod court's decision By John H. Adams The Layman Online Monday, November 4, 2002 Background for Sebastian case Text of Sebastian resolution Story about Presbytery PJC decision Story about Synod PJC decision Text of presbytery PJC decision Text of Synod PJC decision Sebastian appeal to synod court Blessing response to synod appeal A synod court's decision that the Confessing Church resolution adopted by the session of First Presbyterian Church in Sebastian, Fla., did not violate the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA) has been appealed to the highest court in the denomination. Although they told The Layman Online on Sept. 16 that they would not appeal the synod decision, lawyers for the complainant did file an appeal with the Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly that was dated Oct. 28. Norman F. Blessing The lawyers represent Sebastian elder Norman F. Blessing, who, since losing the case, has told other members of the Sebastian session that he had lined up "other groups" to support his continued effort to have Sebastian's resolution declared unconstitutional. He did not identify those "other groups." David C. Wilson, a Presbyterian and a securities lawyer in Winston-Salem, N.C., said after the synod court's decision that there would be no appeal because the court had affirmed Blessing's right to continue serving as an elder at the Sebastian Church. The Sebastian session never took any action to deny him his right to serve on the session, even after he repeatedly stated his opposition to the Confessing Church resolution. Although he rarely attended worship services at the Sebastian church since the trial before the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the South Atlantic, Blessing continued meeting with the session and voicing his opposition to its Confessing Church resolution. His appeal expresses that opposition formally. It makes three allegations, all similar to those expressed by Blessing during the presbytery and synod trials: 1. Irregularity in the proceedings, receiving improper testimony and error in constitutional interpretation. The appeal said that the synod court erred "in admitting, considering and relying on the testimony and stipulation of the appellee's counsel and that of its pastor, Reverend Eleanor Lea, that the Sebastian 'confession' is a statement of faith rather than a 'confession'" for the whole denomination that would require the concurrence of two-thirds of the presbyteries. It said the synod court ignored the testimony in the presbytery trial that "established that the appellee's confession was a document to which appellee required its pastors, church officers, prospective officers and members to subscribe. Accordingly, the 'confession' was a confession in the constitutional sense and not simply a statement of faith." 2. Error in constitutional interpretation and injustice in the decision. The appeal said the second resolution in the Sebastian statement – "Holy Scripture is the revealed Word of the Triune God, and the Church's only infallible rule of faith and life" – was unconstitutional. It contended that the word "infallible" was inconsistent with the second ordination vow for church officers, which calls Scripture "the unique and authoritative witness to Jesus Christ in the Church universal." Blessing's argument against the use of the word "infallible" goes to the heart of the issue. Scripture is described as "infallible," which does not mean inerrant, in the Westminster Confession of Faith. Historically, Presbyterians have said that confessions are of higher authority than the Book of Order, where the ordination vows are listed. During the trial before the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Presbytery of Central Florida, Blessing argued that the Book of Order took priority over the confessions and Scripture. The Sebastian session never said it would use the language of the second tenent in its resolution to replace the language of the ordination vows. 3. Injustice in the decision Finally, the appeal contended that the Sebastian session had failed to respond to court orders, including an order to publish the synod court's decision verbatim in the Sebastian church newsletter, The Presbyterian Post. In fact, the Sebastian session did publish the decision in its newsletter that was distributed Oct. 26. It received notice of the appeal on Oct. 29.

Respond to this article

Home · News · PLC Publications · The Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives · History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links