Task Force proposal would increase distrust, fragmentation
By Jerry Tankersley, January 25, 2006
The Rev. Jerry Tankersley, pastor of Laguna Beach Presbyterian Church in California, was invited to respond to the final report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity during a meeting billed as a “Come to the Table” dialogue at Pasadena Presbyterian Church on Jan. 18. Tankersley was a candidate for General Assembly moderator in 2002. This was his response to the task force report.
Jerry TankersleyThank you for inviting me to respond to the report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity. As I do so I am very much aware that we are engaged in a family dialogue and conflict. Some members of the Task Force I have known and loved for years. Some of my colleagues on the Task Force have nurtured my life in special ways. I have profound respect and love for them each. I wish to say “thank you” to the entire Task Force for their friendship and their willingness to serve and to risk becoming targets for those who disagree with the results of their report.
Let me say at the outset that whatever the outcome of the TF report, that I am committed to being in the PCUSA.
This is the covenant community that has mediated to me the forgiveness of sins, called me to accountability, taught me the transforming gospel of Jesus Christ, and encouraged me to spiritually mature in humility, patience, the pursuit of biblical/theological truth, and in relationship with my brothers and sisters. How grateful I am for our covenant connection. Presbyterians have been a gift to America and to the world, and I believe we will continue to be, even in the midst of our conflicts. Therefore, the Task Force’s recognition of our need for one another in our strengths and weaknesses, and with our diverse gifts, strikes a cord in my heart. This vision of commitment to the church was informed and inspired in my earlier years by the leadership and faculty of Fuller Seminary, as well as by others who have nurtured my love for the PCUSA.
Now, having said this, I want to make the following observations:
I celebrate the report’s good news that God loves us, saves us and empowers us to proclaim the gospel. These sections of the report need to be studied and embraced by the larger church. But I am deeply troubled by the statement beginning in line 521:
- “The theological and biblical literature on human sexuality in general and same-gender sexuality in particular is diverse, subtle, and complex. It could not readily be divided into the two categories-either approval or disapproval of same-gender relationships and practices.”
But I ask, “Does Scripture not clearly reveal the mind of Christ on the great issues of faith and life? How is it that we Presbyterians cannot now agree on whether or not Scripture has an authoritative Word to speak about God’s intentions for human sexual behavior and faithfulness? Consider Romans 1, I Corinthians 6, and Ephesians 4:17-5:3. Read Richard Hays’ chapter on homosexuality in The Moral Vision of the N.T. referenced in the report’s footnotes.
The report does witness against lasciviousness and calls for fidelity in all relationships. I am grateful for that. For nearly 30 years Presbyterians have studied and debated the biblical witness to God’s intentions in regard to human sexuality. The General Assembly’s “Definitive Guidance” statement of 1978, reaffirmed in 1991 as an A.I., and written into the Book of Order in 1997 by a majority of our presbyteries, as G-6.0106b, has clearly stated that “those who are called to office in the church are to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church. Among these standards is the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness.” This mandatory standard placed into our Constitution is consistent with what the Christian Church has believed for over 1900 years and with what our mission partners around the world believe. The Task Force Report’s ambivalence about the Scripture’s witness, if approved by the G.A., will, I believe, weaken our witness to biblical and confessional truth, confuse the church, and in a time of sexual anarchy, open us to ridicule in the eyes of the larger church and the world.
What is interesting is that the report’s recommended A.I. of G-6.0108 would allow congregations and presbyteries to ordain practicing gay and lesbian persons if they declare their “freedom of conscience” violated by the national standard of G-6.0106b and, the ordaining body discerns that the departure is not one of the “essential tenets of the Reformed faith.” To ask the G.A. to approve the suggested Authoritative Interpretation. of G-6.0108 bypasses the presbyteries through an action of a majority of G.A. commissioners at one meeting. This is too important a matter to be trusted to the vote of one Assembly. I believe we may only “promote the peace, unity, and purity” of the church by relying on what will likely be a regular biennial debate and vote about amending the Constitution. Even if the Assembly approves the report, I see no evidence that the biennial debate will cease. Already there are 17 presbyteries overturing for the removal of the standard. Therefore, let the conflict rage and let us learn how to engage the issues with integrity, in the Spirit of Christ’s truth and love, and with openness to the voice of the larger church through a majority of our presbyteries.
If the TF goal and appeal is to promote trust, recommendation #5 will only increase the lack of trust and fragmentation. I am the chairperson of our Presbytery’s Joining Hearts and Hands campaign committee. I have visited many of our sessions and pastors from whom we need large pledges and have discovered that between the concerns for the TFR and the issues of divestment/investment in Israel/Palestine, that many of our pastors and elders are not only lacking in trust, but are outraged. If the G.A. approves the TFR as it stands, I believe our Presbytery’s churches will remain in the denomination, but I fear with a growing indifference to G.A. appeals and participation. This will be tragic for a denomination that has been in a membership and mission decline for many years and is in need of spiritual and missional renewal.