Church court dismisses case against installation of homosexual elder By John H. Adams The Layman Volume 35, Number 1 Posted February 8, 2002 The Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly has rung the bell and declared that the fight is over without a decision in the case of a self-acknowledged homosexual who was elected – but not installed – to the session of First Presbyterian Church in Stamford, Conn. The commission, which is the highest court in the Presbyterian Church (USA), dismissed the case with the rationale that the three-year delay in the installation of Wayne Osborne essentially vacated the seat to which he was elected. Therefore, the court said in a ruling made public Dec. 4, Osborne’s eligibility for installation is “no longer relevant to the disposition of this case.” During a hearing Nov. 30 in Atlanta, John L. Harter, counsel for First Presbyterian Church, was asked whether Osborne’s seat was being reserved for him. Harter told the commission that it had been held vacant for three years after Osborne was scheduled for installation in June of 1998. However, Harter said he was uncertain whether that continued to be the case. Nonetheless, the commission concluded that the window of opportunity had closed for Osborne to serve the three-year term. Thus, the commission sidestepped the central issue in the case: Whether Osborne was eligible under the rubric of section G-6.0106b of the Book of Order – the constitutional requirement that married officers remain faithful to their spouses and that single officers remain chaste. The Book of Order forbids ordination and/or installation of any officer who refuses to “repent of any self-acknowledged practice which the confessions call sin …” That provision is what created the contention in Osborne’s case. Osborne had previously served as an elder when he was asked to consider being a candidate in the 1998 election. Before the election, in what was described as a tearful meeting, Osborne told the elders that he was gay and that he was in a “committed, loving relationship” with another man. He did not say point-blank that they were sexually active. Osborne was elected to another term. Two members of the congregation filed a complaint asking that his installation be prohibited until it could be determined whether he met the requirement of G-6.0106b. The Presbytery of Southern New England gave the Stamford church the go-ahead to install Osborne, but the Synod of the Northeast said both the presbytery and the Stamford session had failed to fully question Osborne about his live-in relationship. After the synod decision, the Stamford session met again with Osborne and asked him about his relationship with his mate, saying: “Is this a sexually active partnership?” According to the case record, Osborne replied, “I decline to answer this question.”

Respond to this article

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