Putting away the event of the 221st General
Assembly of the Presbyterian Church would probably be the best of all worlds as
far as my emotions go, but neither my emotions nor those seeking information
will allow that. I woke up this Sunday morning thinking about the letter from the
Palestinian Business Committee addressed to Kristine—a commissioner who was a member
of the committee on Middle East Issues. It was handed to her as she began
participation in the consensus part of plenary, the part having to do with
divestment. My thought, as I awoke, was it had to be a staff person or GA
helper, who handed her the letter because no one else was allowed in the area.
And then as I entered our courtyard at church this morning a
friend asked about my perceptions of General Assembly. So let me lay it out in
a more structured way than I have in other postings.
This GA was lawless and chaotic and here are the reasons:
Marriage: As so
many have already written, the GA voted on an Authoritative Interpretation that
should never have been voted on because rather than being an interpretation it
was a redefinition of the Directory of Worship’s definition of marriage. It
contradicted not only the Directory of Worship but also the Book of Confessions
which alongside of the Book of Order is our constitution. That makes the action
unlawful.
What caused it to be chaotic is the fact that the item was
addressed before the assembly with this recommendation by the Advisory
Committee on the Constitution:
“This overture proposes an
authoritative interpretation which would allow the exercise of pastoral
discretion and freedom of conscience in conducting a marriage service for any
couple as permitted by the “laws of the place where the couple seeks to be
married.” It suggests an interpretation contrary to the clear statement of
W-4.9000.
Section W-4.9001 and related
citations (W-4.9002a, W-4.9004, W-4.9006) limit marriage to couples who are “a
woman and a man.” Because these statements are clear and unambiguous, they can
not be interpreted in a manner that is inconsistent with their plain and
ordinary meaning.
The Book of Order is not
based upon state and civil law, but the church’s understanding of Scripture and
Reformed theology. As noted in Southard v Presbytery of Boston (GAPJC
2012, 220-02), “While the PCUSA is free to amend its definition of marriage, a
change in state law does not amend the Book of Order.”
Freedom of conscience is a
foundational principle of the PC(USA) (G-2.0105) but must be exercised within
certain bounds. The exercise of freedom of conscience in and of itself is not
necessarily a violation of polity or an obstruction of constitutional
governance. Such freedom of conscience, however, is not freedom of action. All persons
in ordered ministry have a duty to fulfill constitutionally mandated
responsibilities.
If it is the will of the
assembly to change the definition of marriage, such a change is better
accomplished by amendment of W-4.9000 rather than by authoritative interpretation.”
But when the ACC was asked in plenary to explain why the AI
was not an acceptable answer for what the GA was trying to do, they gave a
different answer. And when they were asked why their advice on the item 10-03
did not match their advice on the floor they ignored the question. Leadership
in this GA was so focused on moving the PC (U.S.A.) into a position that would
conform to postmodern western values rather than biblical values that they were
willing to lay aside proper procedure even to the point of telling
commissioners that it was up to them to fix the contradictions they were voting
on.
Divestment
and Israel: I have already written a considerable amount on this subject.
The committee members were manipulated and controlled.
They were never given the other side of the story. They were even addressed by
a Palestinian who inferred that a Jewish State of Israel from its beginning was
an illegitimate state. This was Rifat Odeh
Kassis who spoke to both the committee and the plenary before the vote on
divestment. He also inferred that the first Christians were Arabs and not Jews.
And I have written about how the vice moderator of the
Middle East Committee, in her supposed devotional, stated that Jesus was not
afraid to tell the Jews when they were wrong with the inference that the
committee members should not be afraid either.
It never entered her head that positive investment with the goal of peace was
as much a Christian value as any other decision. It never occurred to her that
she was not placed in the committee to influence them.
Actions on Middle East issues were more than illegitimate,
they were imposed by outside organizations
who from the very beginning menaced the committee with their complaints that the
original moderator of the committee was unsuitable because he had traveled to
Israel via funds by a local branch of the Jewish federation and had attended an
interfaith Seder. They failed to note that he had also visited Palestinian
refugee camps.
Commissioners in the ME committee pleaded to hear the other
side and were ignored or lied to.
Life
Issues: One of the saddest outcomes of this GA was their rejection
of an overture that would have protected infants aborted alive. The committee
not only rejected care for the unborn, they rejected care for those babies who
survive abortions agreeing with those abortionists who commit such acts of
murder as snipping the spinal cords of babies surviving botched abortions.
Item 09-02 was disapproved both in committee and plenary.
This is the first two recommendations of that item:
"1. Call for the Presbyterian
Mission Agency and member congregations to enter a two-year season of
reflection upon the plight of children unwanted by human society, both born and
not-yet born, and to purposefully seek to enter the pure worship of God by
offering aid, comfort, and the Gospel to those responsible for the care of our most
desperate orphans (including those who survive abortion procedures): parents,
siblings, church and community leaders, and the medical profession.
2. Direct the Moderator of the
General Assembly and the Stated Clerk to issue statements that denounce the
practice of killing babies born live following an abortion procedure, such as
was revealed in the Dr. Kermit Gosnell clinic in Philadelphia."
One of the commissioners, an evangelical
teaching elder, privately stated that once he spoke up for the unborn he was no
longer allowed to speak in the committee. Some will be angry with me for using
this analogy but an analogy is not wrong when it is right. This clearly aligns
the PC (U.S.A.) with the German Christians of the Nazi era. They do not care
for the life of the weakest of humanity.
My
recommendations to the orthodox in the denomination (and please, this is my own
personal opinions)
The 221st General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church
(U.S.A.) has proven itself lawless. By this I mean those directing the assembly,
those organizations offering official advice, and those setting the rules,
which in many cases were not legitimate rules, paid little attention to proper
policy or even human decency as they led and advised.
It isn’t just that the GA illegitimately voted for an AI
that immediately opened the door to same sex marriage, it isn’t just that they
voted for divestment from three companies doing business with Israel, it isn’t
just that they ignored the plight of the baby who survives an abortion, it is
that they manipulated, broke standard policy and lied, that is the biggest
problem. And they did this because they call good evil, and evil good. They did
it because they have rejected the word of the Lord of the Church.
I believe there needs to be several reactions here:
There are some churches that are in conservative
presbyteries. They are in safe places. Unless they feel called to leave they
should stay. The denomination needs to hear their voices. Broken people in the
PC (U.S.A.) need to hear, over and over, God’s good news of salvation and
transformation in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
There are some churches that are in hard progressive
presbyteries. It may be hard to leave but unless the Holy Spirit is calling on
them to stay and be the voice of Christ they should probably go. Presbyteries
need to understand that those among them who are orthodox are weary and want to
serve God without giving time and money to questionable causes. They can’t
serve on Presbytery committees that wink at apostasy and false doctrine. They
can’t bless candidates who will not affirm biblical truths. They can’t be a
part of conferences where false teachers offer a false gospel.
There are some people who are called to a prophetic ministry
in the PC (U.S.A). They are called to keep speaking God’s truth until they are
no longer allowed to speak. They are called to speak as the insults pile up and
their voices grow hoarse. And they must obey the Lord.
And then there are those who are in circumstances that we
may not know about or understand, personal circumstances that change the
direction they intended to go. This is why we must not judge each other about
staying or leaving. God is the sovereign Lord over all of our decisions. He may stop some of us when we did not intend
to be stopped. He may turn some of us aside when we did not intend to turn. May
he, the Lord of our life, have mercy on all of his sheep.