The Presbytery of East Iowa has sent an overture, [OVT-009] to the 220th General Assembly seeking to change the language of the Book of Order as a means of allowing same gender marriage. The overture asks that language in W-4.9000 be changed. In W-4.9001, W-4.9002, W-4.9004, W-4.9006 “man and woman” and “husband and wife” would be changed to “two people.” The rationale for the overture is contrived and theologically misconstrued. It is also dangerous for the life of the whole church. It is based on three thoughts.
1. Using [F-1.01] God’s grace is for everyone “We are called to make disciples.”
2. Marriage is a response to God’s word proclaimed “The Marriage ceremony is worship.”
3. Our polity is contradictory because we are not allowing all to worship. “The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) shall guarantee full participation and representation in its worship, governance, and emerging life to all persons or groups within its membership.” [F-1.0403]
The first point in the rationale is certainly biblical, we are called to make disciples and no one is to be turned away from following Jesus Christ. However the next two points do not follow from the first.
In the second part of the rationale the authors of the overture state that “Responding to the Word is a demonstration of the love of God for God’s people.” Instead it is the believer’s response to the love of God for God’s people as heard in the word proclaimed. And more importantly it is the act of participating in the work of Christ as the great high priest of his people. In our union with him we freely come before God in adoration. In fact, we do not come before God in any other way but through our Lord Jesus Christ.
The Book of Order lists many ways that worshipers respond to the word proclaimed, including marriage, but it is a response to God because of his word, and it is, if we are believers, always through Jesus Christ. Furthermore, the BOO explains the response as being expressed “in an affirmation of faith and commitment.” That means one has faith in the word and is committed to that word preached. Response to the word by same gender marriage has two possibilities within the mandate of this overture.
One possibility is that the word preached is not truly the word but a false word that teaches that marriage is not only between a man and a woman. (Matthew 19:4-6) In that case the ceremony would not be true worship because the word is false.
The second possibility is that the word is rightly preached but the response is not of faith or commitment to the word. For if one does not believe that marriage is between one man and one woman then there is no faith or commitment to the word. Those attempting to worship by responding to the word with a same gender ceremony would be worshiping falsely because their commitment and faith toward the word is false.
Finally if one worships in union with Christ, it will be in obedience to his word, since he is the sinless Son of God and the fulfillment of the law.
The third part of the rationale, that the church is denying some the right to worship, isn’t at all true. If we worship rightly we will have faith in and be committed to the word of God. No one is denied this when same gendered marriage is denied, because the word is not denied but rightly preached. All may freely worship by honoring the word.
And finally if we accept the final thought in this rationale, that F-1.0403, “The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) shall guarantee full participation and representation in its worship, governance, and emerging life to all persons or groups within its membership,” means that we must allow for same gender marriage it will follow that all will not only be required to subscribe to the ordination of practicing LGBT people but all will be required to marry same sex couples. This will effectively end the participation of all the orthodox in the life of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
13 comments:
It has been said by many Teaching Elders that such a push will lead them to stop doing marriages, and will probably cause many other churches to get off the fence and push to leave.
Perhaps we need to write an overture defining "christian" marriage.
PCUSA ministers are now allowed to perform same-sex unions, but the wording of a "marriage" cannot be used.
The now-permitted "same-sex unions" are troublesome to all sides. Those who want recognition of a "marriage," rankle at the lack of marriage wording and meaning. Those, like me, who believe what the Bible says about both marriage and the sinfulness of homosexual relations, don't think that something sinful ought to be blessed. So no one likes what is now permitted.
The now-permitted ceremony cannot incorporate any marriage-like wording, it cannot be called a marriage, and it needs to say that it does not in any way sanction sexual relations. It is merely the blessing of a relationship, and a week, vague, and poorly thought out "blessing" at that. LGBT people don't want it. Evangelicals don't want it. It's a sham, produced by a General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission unable to let their yes be yes and their no be no.
Jim Berkley
Roslyn, WA
Make that "a weak, vague, and poorly thought out 'blessing'...."
Jim Berkley
Roslyn, WA
Jim, I agree with all you have said. I appeared as Committee of Counsel on another matter at the GAPJC meeting that "came up with" this "union blessing" thing. I still wonder if there weren't a few winks passed around before and after the decision...and not by the GAPJC. Who is going to "police" what is said at a "blessing" ceremony?
It is important for all to leave their name, city and state if possible. At least name.
Welcome to Phase II of the attack on the authority of Scripture. 10A was not the beginning of the end but only the end of the beginning for proponents of homosexual conduct as a norm of the Church. The same folks who fought the 30 plus year war against Scriptural sexual norms, culminating in their "victory" last year, now begin Phase II. If it is Scripturally correct to ordain unrepentant practicing homosexuals, as they have argued, then this not only logical but correct. (Of course it is not correct, but who in the PCUSA really cares any more?) For those who thought giving away purity by the adoption 10A would guarantee unity and peace, welcome to your next 30 years--or less. How glad I am that God led us to a new pasture, where His word is law and His work can move forward, free from the heresy that has become the institutional norm in a once great body. For thoe who remain to fight the good fight, you are in my prayers.
Mac McCarty
Downingtown, PA
Mac I am sure it is phase two, but through several very faithful people God turned the last attempt on marriage away. I am sure it was for a purpose. All we can do is be faithful until God says it is enough.
Well said, my friend. GBU
Sorry, I forgot:
Mac McCarty
Downingtown, PA
Post a Comment