 
Preschool sexuality materials conflict with PCUSA standards By John H. Adams The Presbyterian Layman |
|||
The curriculum for three- and four-year-olds, titled In God’s Image, prompted no serious challenge. But some members of the Committee on Christian Education and Curriculum Publishing submitted a minority report sharply critical of the curriculum’s guides for parents and congregations. The minority report criticized the guides for failing to conform to scripture, confessions and the denomination’s policies. The sticking points were statements on pre-marital sex, sexual relationships outside of marriage and scriptural authority. The General Assembly voted 265 - 264, with two abstentions, against the minority report. The report would have required that the current guides include an insert that restates scriptural, confessional and denominational standards and that the guides be edited to conform to those standards in subsequent printings. Examples of conflict The minority report cited several passages in the adult guides and contrasted those statements with scripture, confessions and General Assembly positions. They included: • Page 33 of the Parents’ Guide: “What is premarital sex? Premarital sex means different things to different people.” • Page 18 of the Parents’ Guide: “… Most of us desire that our children grow up viewing sexual relationships as belonging in marriage or within a loving, committed relationship between adults.” • From the Guide to Congregations: “Abortion may be considered … when the resources are not adequate to care for a child appropriately.” ‘Moral ambiguity’ of guides Nelle McCorkle of the Savannah Presbytery, one of 15 committee members who signed the minority report, said she and others were “honestly seeking to raise children with distinctively Christian direction.” The guides, however, “mirror the moral ambiguity of our culture.” McCorkle praised the In God’s Image curriculum, but said the guides “hold to things that seem not in agreement with our confessions, scripture or policies…. We need to have some adjustments.” Ed Hurley of the Presbytery of Western Kentucky complained that committee members “were not afforded an opportunity to review the materials” until late into their sessions. “I approve of much of it,” he said. “But there are inconsistencies in messages … verbiage is an ambiguous doublespeak. … It reminds me of a refrain from the Beatles, ‘Here, there and everywhere.’’’ But Commissioner Carter Shelley, a minister, welcomed the guides for congregations and adults. “We Presbyterians welcome all the help we can get from God and the Presbyterian Publishing House.” The Rev. Jefferson Hatch of the Newton Presbytery spoke in opposition to the minority report. “You have heard the documents contain moral ambiguity and doublespeak,’’ he said. He then read from a section that affirmed marriage as “an unconditional covenant to be faithful to each other” and another that strongly opposed premarital sex. He called the curriculum for three- and four-year-olds the “final piece of the puzzle” in response to the General Assembly’s mandate to provide material on sexuality for all age groups. |
|||
|
The Presbyterian Layman, July/August 1998 contents |
|||
|
Home,
· Archives,
·
Breaking News, |
|||