|
Since last we met
the Church has defeated Amendment A.
The Church has spoken.
Again.
And rightly so. Some
things are worth saying more than once. During this past year the presbyteries
have had an opportunity and obligation once again to debate and vote on the
standards of ordination. Once again, keeping faith with the whole Church
through the ages and around the world, we affirmed that we all are called to
live faithfully within a covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or
chastely in singleness, and that our officers should meet these standards.
Earlier votes - in
1997, roughly a 20 vote margin, and in 1998, a 60 vote margin – compared to this
year’s vote, 2002, an 80 vote margin, suggest that not only is the church clear
in its decision but is becoming more and more comfortable and confident with its
commitment.
The increasingly wide
margins demonstrate the growing will of the church to stand its ground in this
matter and may also suggest a desire to move toward other matters. G6.0106b,
the paragraph once again disputed, is now one of most successfully defended
paragraphs in our Book of Order. The Church has made its decision and
reaffirmed it. Again.
The Church may be called
upon to defend this ordination standard again soon, but that now seems less
likely. The margin of the vote suggests that the legislative season may be
nearing an end. It is most likely to be replaced by some combination of a
pastoral season and administrative season. The former is preferred. Which
season dominates our common life will be determined by those governing bodies
which are inclined to defy the constitution in this matter. Their restraint, as
difficult as that may be, will permit a pastoral season which will serve the
whole church well by helping to create a less adversarial environment.
In this next season,
pastoral or administrative, patience is required by those who, like ourselves,
whole-heartedly support the decision of the Church. The temptation to despair
at the interminable nature of the controversy and the attraction to a new or
other fellowship without these troubles must be resisted. We are wearied, but
not worn down. The reformation of the Church calls for a hopeful, persistent
effort which awaits God’s blessing.
If restraint is
exercised both by those tempted to defy the constitution and by those tempted to
leave the fellowship, then our common life, though presently feeling the heat of
the controversy, and surrounded by misunderstanding, and with some open wounds,
may begin slowly to cool, be clarified, and even to heal.
Not all will respond to
the defeat of Amendment A similarly. May we suggest that those who are joyful,
remember those who are not, and those who are not, seek to find wisdom in the
decision of the Church.
We note in this vote
this year a larger number of commissioners present and voting at presbytery
meetings, probably signifying a larger number of elders participating in our
common life. This is to be celebrated.
We note that a large
share of those Presbyteries voting for a change are from one Synod – the Synod
of the Northeast. We express our concern for this regional minority in our
church and for the minority within that Synod.
We note that already
there are calls for more trust from us all. Of course. We suggest that trust
is most likely to grow where it is accompanied by a call for more
trustworthiness in us all.
Our common life is not
happy. This legislative season has been difficult. Many difficulties yet lie
ahead. Church history teaches us that more often than not, the great
difficulties of the Church have followed rather than preceded the decision of
the Church. Matters of the constitutional and covenantal nature of the Church
which now face us may be painful for us all. Our hopes for the Church and our
trust in the Savior need once again to grow in us, move us forward, and move us
together. The Presbyterian Coalition humbly submits that now is a good time for
us to attend to other matters together which will bring greater glory to God.
In the end our hope
grows not merely because this Church has spoken, again, but because the Lord has
promised good. Always.
Since last we met
the Church received with joy Hope in the Lord Jesus Christ, a theological
statement which exalts the Savior in certain and confessional terms. It was
gladly received by the General Assembly and recommended for use and study to the
whole Church.
Presented by the Office
of Theology and Worship, it won immediate and widespread favor and assent.
Passed by 97%, it was celebrated. No doubt, some of that percentage was a vote
for peace rather than an appreciation of the truth, and, no doubt, there is much
work ahead. Nevertheless, 97% is better than 47%. The church was presented
with her own faith and she recognized it.
The preservation of the
truth, one of the great ends of the church, is governed by an intentionally
conservative verb – preservation. We do not invent or fabricate the truth; we
preserve it. May the church have again the humility of the apostle who said, I
pass on to you that which I received. This year instead of passing on it, we
pass it on.
Since last we met
the church has not succeeded in defending her own constitution. The issues of
discipline have not been deliberated well; the decisive difference between
dissent and defiance has not been distinguished. It is not clear if the
constitution will hold. If it does not, the church will not.
At a point in our
history when we move slowly but deliberately from a regulatory agency to a
missional church we debate the accumulated and often unexamined rules in our
common life. This is appropriate. But it must be remembered that size is a
function of trust and regulation a function of trustworthiness.
A Book of Order from an
earlier generation was given to me recently. I placed it in my shirt pocket
where it fit easily. In that generation the Westminster Standards spoke the
faith of the officers of the church. A careful subscription was solicited. If
needed, scruples were announced, judged thoroughly, and examined publicly.
Agreement on doctrinal matters was valued unashamedly. With that agreement,
closely and highly prized, came an easy presumption of the good judgment and
practices of the governing bodies. The need to manage closely the deliberations
and opinions of the officers in and by a Book of Order was minimal. Trust in
theological matters, strictly observed, produced a generosity in matters of
polity. Believing that truth leads to duty and faith to practice, trust in
others and in the whole was higher.
Evangelicals, for so
long having borne the brunt of a denomination that exhibited a fundamentalism of
the Book of Order, have no wish that anyone would bear that burden any longer.
We propose the critical and careful reexamination of the faith of the church and
that of her officers which, as in an earlier generation, long past, will produce
a Church in which
the consensus of faith is greater
the coherence of the body tighter
the trust in the members deeper, and
the rules of her common life fewer.
The current temptation
of some to engage in what I think they think is the honorable politics of
resistance may be no more than the mere resistance of polity, or it may be a
polity of another theology. Its resolution requires not only polity corrections
but theological clarity.
Denominational honesty consists, first, in
a clear unambiguous statement by a church of its doctrinal belief, and ,
second, in an unequivocal and sincere adoption of it by its members. Both are
requisite. If a particular denomination makes a loose statement of its belief
which is capable of being construed in more than one sense, it is so far
dishonest. If the creed of the denomination is well-drawn and plain, but the
membership subscribe to it with mental reservation and insincerity, the
denomination is dishonest. Honesty and sincerity are founded in clear
conviction, and clear conviction is founded in the knowledge and
acknowledgement of the truth…
The recent discussions
in the Presbyterian Church have disclosed a difference of sentiment respecting
the value of denominational honesty.
W.G.T. Shedd,
Calvinism: Pure & Mixed
chapter 15: Denominational Honesty and
Honor 1893
Ever since we began
meeting the church has experienced
the abiding troubles of a fellowship that pursues peace but not the truth on
which it must be founded, and thus experiences the sadness and pain of a people
that does not get the peace it so much wants.
The constant call for
peace unaccompanied by a passion for truth will not in the end serve the church.
[I]n loving unity, and
dreading schism, she certainly has, thus far, the mind of Christ and his
apostles. And yet, it reveals what may prove one of her greatest dangers:
for, if upon this ecclesiastical sentiment, this strong love of unity, this
sacred dread of schism, she does not hang its proper counterpoise, a still
stronger love of truth, a still more sacred dread of error, she will lack the
one thing needful, under God, to keep any church steady and safe in a world of
sin and falsehood. On this point, ecclesiastical history furnishes abundant
testimony. When love of unity overmasters the love of truth, the hope of a
safe church is gone. The first step, from this fatal disturbance of the
scriptural balance is, to confound the true idea of Christian unity with that
of merely outward, visible, secular consolidation; and then, for the sake of
maintaining this kind of unity at all hazards, comes the gradual result of
making the Church one vast compound; -- a mixture of truth and error,
superstition and corruption; ….make[ing] the whole mass unsavoury to God and
unsaving to man.
John S. Stone, on the
Episcopal Church 1853
Ever since we began
meeting, the Presbyterian
Coalition has voiced an anger in response to interminable problems besetting the
church. One of the things said about evangelicals is, I believe, true: If you
can’t get us angry you might not get us at all. This must end. The anger of a
man cannot accomplish the righteousness of God.
On your behalf I have
perfected the art of whining, constantly complaining about the absence of a
level playing field, the systematic and intentional exclusion from leadership
for over a generation, and the hypocrisy of liberals who almost never are. I
have postured and posed for you so that we may gain a more fair and more
sympathetic hearing from the church for our grievances. Friends: the days of
whine and poses are over.
No longer is this to be
about us and no longer about our anger. It is about the church, her reform, and
our hope for her.
We are called to the hardest of all tasks;
to fight without hatred,
to resist without bitterness,
and in the end, if God grants it so,
to triumph without vindictiveness.
(William Temple)
Do we have the
character?
Ever since there has
been a church, the church at her
best has been battling her own errors and at her best has remained a whole
church. Hear the seriousness of the Reformer as he learns from the Apostle.
“There was not one
kind of sin only, but very many; and there were no light errors, but frightful
misdeeds; there was corruption not only of morals but of doctrine. Does he
seek to separate himself from such? Does he cast them out of Christ’s Kingdom?
Does he fell them with the ultimate thunderbolt of anathema? He not only does
nothing of the sort; he even recognizes and proclaims them to be the church of
Christ and communion of saints.”
Calvin
on I Corinthians 1:2
May God give us such
hope in our fight and grace in our hope. |
