GA PJC Decision in the Redwoods Same-Sex "Wedding" Case

May 02, 2008

Dear Terry,

Presbyterians have been waiting since 2004, when charges were brought, for a ruling in a disciplinary case involving "weddings" of same-sex couples that were conducted by a PC(USA) minister.

The judicial course ended on Tuesday, April 29, 2008 when the General Assembly's Permanent Judicial Commission (GA PJC) issued its decision. It was a confusing and conflicted ruling. The court issued a majority decision in which it was not of one mind, and then divided itself into three concurring opinions and one concurring and dissenting opinion. So what do we know? The minister in this case will not be censured for her action. But we don't know what will happen if similar cases arise in the future.

The accused minister is on record saying that she performed "marriages" of same-sex couples. The court said she did not. She could not have performed a wedding ceremony, they ruled, because our church constitution defines marriage as a lifelong commitment between a man and a woman. Therefore, what she conducted was not a marriage, despite what the minister claimed.

Though the constitution is very clear in its definition of marriage, the court found no existing prohibition of ministers' participation in or conduct of ceremonies that unite or bless sexual relationships between same sex couples. The majority on the court appeared to want to close this gap, but their statement is weak.

It said, "We further hold that officers of the PC(USA) authorized to perform marriages shall not state, imply, or represent that a same sex ceremony is a marriage."

The court also found that because the larger church has at least four times rejected overtures to prohibit the blessing of unions of same sex couples, "It is not improper for ministers of the Word and Sacrament to perform same sex ceremonies."

What's at the heart of this case?

The question at the heart of this case is whether the physical union between persons of the same sex is affirmed and blessed by God and ought to be affirmed and blessed by ceremonies conducted by PC(USA) ministers of Word and Sacrament.

The conduct of these ceremonies is a deliberate effort to normalize and even commend homosexual sexual relationships and to change the meaning of marriage, which the Church derives from its reading of Scripture. The Church has never understood Scripture to say anything other than that marriage is between a man and a woman. That teaching is expressed in both our Book of Confessions (5.246-.248; 6.131-.139; 7.130; 9.44; 9.47; 4.108-.109) and our Book of Order.

Marriage is a gift God has given to all humankind for the well-being of the entire human family. Marriage is a civil contract between a woman and a man. For Christians marriage is a covenant through which a man and a woman are called to live out together before God their lives of discipleship. In a service of Christian marriage a lifelong commitment is made by a woman and a man to each other, publicly witnessed and acknowledged by the community of faith. (Book of Order, Directory for Worship, W-4.9001.)

The Book of Common Worship (1946 edition, p. 184) warns: "Be well assured that if any persons are joined together otherwise than as God's Word allows, their union is not blessed by him."

Any sexual relationship outside the marriage of a man and a woman is regarded by Scripture and our Confessions as sinful. This includes fornication, adultery, and homosexual relationships.

Read the decision (page 5 especially). The court's use of words like "pastoral," "justice," and "marginalized" confuse the issue of the validity of blessing sexual unions.

There is danger in the way this decision is being interpreted and taught. Presbyweb quoted the Stated Clerk as saying, ". . .the decision recognizes the importance of pastoral care and the appropriateness of same-sex blessing services as long as they are not presented as marriage ceremonies."

There is danger in the idea that blessing such unions is "pastoral care." The issues at stake range far beyond the governance of the church and into the very heart of what it means to seek and promote the spiritual nurture and healing of our sisters and brothers in Christ.

There are strong forces in the culture trying to reject Christian marriage and to redefine the family. There is business coming to this summer's General Assembly asking the denomination to redefine marriage as "a covenant between two people. . . ," replacing "between a man and a woman."

The blessing of same-sex sexual unions in our time is a scandal to the Gospel, both theologically and pastorally. This is a case where ministers of Word and Sacrament ought not to bless what God does not bless.

When the Westminster Catechism teaches the "Moral Law," it speaks of both the negative (what is forbidden) and the positive (what is required). The Book of Order's faithful and positive definition of Christian marriage now appears to need a statement stating what is not a marriage and which ceremonies that unite two individuals in mutual commitment do not comport with Christian faith, in Scripture and in our Confessions.

The culture and the destructive forces in our denomination need to be resisted by positive actions to uphold, promote, and teach God's wonderful gift of marriage. Let's get to work on that!

For the sake of the Gospel,

Terry Schlossberg

The Presbyterian Coalition

email: terry@presbycoalition.org

phone: 703-680-4571