 The integrity gap  The Layman – Volume 35, Number 3 – Posted June 3, 2002
The virtue of integrity is almost universally respected in secular culture. Its antithesis – deceit – was aptly described by Shakespeare as “that glib and oily art to speak and purpose not.” Like culture, the American church is experiencing an increasing “integrity gap.” From Catholic priests who solemnly vow celibacy but practice, condone or refuse to discipline pederasty, to PCUSA officers who solemnly vow to be governed by our church’s polity but practice, condone or refuse to discipline blatant defiance – the watching world sees deceit, not integrity. Compassion and tolerance also ought to be distinguishing traits of a disciple of Christ, but fidelity requires us to distinguish between the duties required in personal relationships and the responsibilities required as officers of the church. Our personal will must not only be captive to the Word of God, written and incarnate, but also must be subordinate to duties of office. The church must be able to trust its officers to faithfully perform their duties. Without that trust, there cannot be a government of law, only a government of churchmen. Governments merely of men, not of law, inevitably become despotic. When officers of the church refuse to perform their duties out of a misplaced personal sense of conscience or tolerance, morally responsible people do not see such conduct as caring and compassionate. Blessed by common sense from common grace, morally responsible people see such dereliction of duty for what it is – at best hypocritical, and at worst deceitful. The undeniable fact that all of us sin and fall short of God’s glory does not excuse us from the obligation to discharge the duties of an office freely undertaken. Even pagan judges of a secular law court understand that having vowed to uphold the Constitution, they must do so in every case or recuse themselves for any case requiring its application. If their conscience compels them to conclude that they no longer believe the Constitution should be upheld, integrity requires that they resign from office or accept removal for lack of confidence. When pastors or elders defiantly proclaim they will no longer abide by our constitutional standards, they effectively renounce jurisdiction of the PCUSA and ought to resign from their office as a matter of simple integrity. Being duty-bound to uphold and defend the constitution, general presbyters and stated clerks do not have the option of tolerating or condoning defiance of the constitution. They do not have the option of benign neutrality and cannot leave the administration of justice by church discipline to others. Personal integrity and fidelity to the call of office require either faithful enforcement of the constitution or resignation from office. Upon refusal to do either, it becomes the duty of the responsible judicatory to make that choice for them by a vote of no confidence and request for resignation, for the sake of Christ’s integrity and the witness of the whole Church to the world. Robert L. Howard of Wichita, Kan., is chairman of the Presbyterian Lay Committee. |
||
| Home
· News
· PLC
Publications ·
The
Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |
||
