"And when Paul and Barnabus had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabus and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue." (Acts 15:2)
The above quoted verse reminds us that dissension and debate are nothing new to the Church. In the first generation after Christ's death, resurrection and ascencion, the Church began to have arguments, disputes and divisions. The Church has gone through seasons of contentious splits and celebrative reunifications throughout the centuries. At every General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, issues are debated, sides are taken, lines are drawn, votes are tallied and results are sent to the presbyteries. Some of the recommendations of GA are ratified by the presbyteries and other decisions are overturned.
I'd like to offer my own personal responses to some of the recommendations that are coming from the 219th General Assembly. One area of question is our current Book of Confessions. This book is part of the PCUSA's constitution and includes eleven confessions of faith from different times and different places. A confession of faith reflects the church's faith and itentity in the context of a particular circumstance and a unique situation. Oft times the confession of faith is in response or reaction to a distinct heresy within the church or a specific injustice in society or at a point of the reunification of two seperate denominations.
There are two recommendations in regard to the BofC before the denomination at this time. One is to bring a more authentic and reliable translation of the Heidelberg Catechism of 1562. Scholars have informed the denomination through the years that the version in our current BofC is a poor translation with several inaccuracies. Like a good version of the Holy Bible, a good translation of our confessions is important. And so, an updated translation of the catechism is in order.
The second motion was to add the Confession of Belhar to the Presbyterian Church (USA) Book of Confessions. In 1984 the Dutch Reformed Mission Church and the Dutch Reformed Church in Africa united to form the Uniting Reformed Church in South Africa. This creed was adopted by the URCSA in 1986. It was written to build unity in the church and reject apartheid in society.
While the emphasis is overwhelmingly focused on unity - almost to the exclusion of purity, holiness and righteousness - the document is Biblically based and there are no glaring heresies that I can see. In studying our confessions, our denomination recognizes them to be "subordinate standards to the authority of Jesus Christ, the Word of God, as the Scriptures bear witness to Him." (Book of Order G-2.0200) Perhaps we can take the opportunity here at FPCSA to study and discuss the Confessions of Belhar and its meaning in the context of apartheid in South Africa as well as in the context of the whole church.
There are two other recommendations coming to the presbyteries that I am deeply concerned about. Ons is to adopt a simplified form of Gevernment section to the denomination's Book of Order and the other is to change the standards of ordination. The simplified form of Government would set aside literally 100's of rules. I have read this document and I jokingly call it "Government-Lite." I believe or current rules were written because of years of struggles and difficulties within the church. They came into being through bad experiences, thoughtful debate and prayerful discernment. There have been a number of times I have thanked God for our Book of Order because it brought clarity to particularly difficult situations. This new Form of Government muddies the waters. One reason I was attracted to the PCUSA was because of its thoughtful constitution. This change would cause me great concern.
Our denomination has been debating ordination standards, with particular emphasis on same-sex partners, for years. The GA is asking the presbyteries to amend the constitution by removing the requirement that candidates for ordination live a life of "fidelity within marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness," and replace it with the requirement for officers to submit "joyfully to the Lordship of Jesus Christ" in all aspects of life. The discernment of what that Lordship looks like is left to the discretion of the governing body that will ordain the candidate.
No matter which side a person takes on the subject of same-sex partnerships, the deeper question raised by this amendment reminds me of basic civics: what belongs to the federal government and what belongs to the states? I believe that the standards for ordination of church officers should be consistent throughout the denomination. Rather than bring unity to the denomination, this amendment would further drive a wedge of division.
If this amendment passes, we will see a deep rift among the denomination. Presbyteries will be lumped into an "us and them" mentality. What will happen when a particular church wants to call an ordained minister from another presbytery to serve as their pastor, only to discover that their choice does not meet the standards for ordination in their presbytery? Division. What will happen when a church member is ordained to serve as an elder in one church, then moves across country and joins another church but is disallowed from serving as an elder because their current church has a different set of standards than their former church? Contention.
This question of same-sex partnerships and church leadership standards has brought pain and frustration to countless church folk on both sides of the issue. People on both sides of the issue have left their church families. Congregations on both sides of the issue have left the denomination. Many churches have left the denomination in the last ten years because of this one issue. The amendment will not fix the problem. It will only exasperate it.
With my whole heart, I believe that this issue will never be favorably resolved for all parties concerned. For this reason, I believe the denomination should split. I know that many good Presbyterians, who I respect a great deal, would balk at my opinion. But I believe this issue will continue to bring dissension and strife to our community of faith. Like a cancer, it will bring a slow death until we deal with it aggressively. We spend too much time and energy pouring resources into this one issue. We have become a laughingstock to the world. And the enemies of the gospel rejoice at our distraction.
I believe two denominations should be established: one that would maintain the historic standards for ordination and the other that would open the door to ordain those in same-sex partnerships. To illustrate my point, the greatest difference between PCUSA and the PCA (Presbyterian Church in America) is that the latter does not ordain women. These two denominations have recognized their differences and have respectfully lived side-by-side in communities for decades. I think establishing two seperate denominations along the lines of marriage would be a similar distinction.
Ordained pastors could choose the denomination with which to be affiliated. Individual congregations could do the same. Congregations that have formerly left the PCUSA could be invited to affiliate with the newly formed denomination that best relates to them. If we split, we can set aside the constant bickering.
Ironically, even as I write this, I recognize that FPCSA is one of the few congregations that would have difficulty choosing which denomination with which to affiliate. Our membership is pretty evenly split. Somehow, we have learned to live in the tension. Then again, who wants to attend a church where there's tension? We have lost many members - on both sides of the issue - because of the debate surrounding ordination standards. In many ways our particular congregation is a microcosm of the denomination.
For these reasons, I do not think removing the current standards for ordination is a good idea. I forsee it will bring more division, more dissension and more desertion.
I very much doubt that a split is in the future for our denomination. I am an isolated voice on this subject, but that's my two cents... for whatever it's worth. I do know that I want to focus my energy and time carrying out the mission of our denomination and our congregation. I hope my church family is committed to the same.
May God richly bless us even as He blesses others through us!
In His Love & Service,
Lance
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)