PUP task force members
debate Amendment 10-A
By Edward Terry, The Layman, October 27, 2010
Two former members of the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s Theological Task Force for the Peace, Unity and Purity (PUP) of the Church argued opposing views on the proposal to rewrite the denomination’s sexual standards for ordained officers during a Webinar on Oct. 26.
Arguing in favor of Amendment 10-A was Mark Achtemeier, an ordained PCUSA minister in John Knox Seminary. Opposing its passage was Mike Loudon, senior pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Lakeland, Fla.
The Webinar, which was sponsored by Presbyterian Outlook, comes as 173 of the PCUSA’s presbyteries are due to vote on Amendment 10-A. The proposal, if approved by a majority of presbyteries, would remove G-6.0106b, which requires that ordained officers be faithful in marriage between a man and woman or chaste in singleness. It would be replaced by the following: Related Articles
How one evangelical changed his mind on LGBT issues
Amendment 10-A: Same song, new verse
Standards for ordained service reflect the church’s desire to submit joyfully to the Lordship of Jesus Christ in all aspects of life (G-1.0000). The governing body responsible for ordination and/or installation (G.14.0240; G-14.0450) shall examine each candidate’s calling, gifts, preparation, and suitability for the responsibilities of office. The examination shall include, but not be limited to, a determination of the candidate’s ability and commitment to fulfill all requirements as expressed in the constitutional questions for ordination and installation (W-4.4003). Governing bodies shall be guided by Scripture and the confessions in applying standards to individual candidates.”
Support for Amendment 10-A
Achtemeier said that G-6.0106b in the Book of Order has been used to discourage gays and lesbians from being considered for ordination, and he outlined three reasons he believes it should be removed:
- “Amendment A will bring peace to the presbyteries by halting the endless succession of battles over proposed amendments to the Constitution,” he said. “These votes cost the church a huge price in time and energy and money and good will. We are all fretting over the vote again today, just like we were two years ago.” He also argued that Amendment 10-A is not political and that G-6.0106b “enshrines” a partisan position in the Book of Order as “official church teaching” that will encourage large numbers of conscientious Presbyterians on either side to continue to press for change.
- It will remove divisive ambiguity from the constitution. In his argument, he said the term “chastity” in G-6.0106b is misinterpreted and the statement “in obedience to Scripture” is not consistent with the PCUSA’s Confessions. “G-6.0106b becomes an inadequate vehicle for imposing simple, straightforward requirements on the church,” Achtemeier said. “… by framing its discussion of standards in terms of an interpretation and judgment about what kind and how much obedience the church is going to require, none of us live perfectly in accordance with Scriptural teaching.” He also attributed costly ecclesiastical court cases involving G-6.0106b to ambiguous language. “The amount of time and energy and money and emotion being devoted to these struggles is completely scandalous.”
- It will help us faithfully handle division. The proposed standard, he said, would give examining bodies more flexibility and differences of opinion in determining a candidate’s fitness for fulfilling the requirements expressed in the ordination vows. “Some presbyteries and some regions of the country would prove to be more open than others to the ordination of gay and lesbian believers,” Achtemeier said. “Now some people have stuck a label which says ‘local option’ on this kind of arrangement, as if that in itself were sufficient to condemn it. But local option in fact has a long and distinguished history in our Presbyterian system, especially in times of controversy.”
As his presentation drew to a close, Achtemeier suggested erring on the side of grace with regard to the issue.
“If the experts advocating the stringent position are wrong and the church follows them, it runs the risk of creating false barriers and impediments to the Gospel, driving people away from Jesus,” he said. “But if the experts who advocate the lenient position are in error and people listen to their advice, the worst we can accuse those people of are sins of ignorance, which are easily covered by grace. In a situation where there is serious doubt about the faithfulness of excluding gays and lesbians from the ministry, the safest path spiritually is to err on the side of grace.”
Opposition to Amendment 10-A
Loudon, who offered a brief history lesson on Presbyterian ordination standards and the practice of scrupling them, equated passage of Amendment 10-A with giving up on the PUP Task Force’s recommendations.
In 2006, the General Assembly approved the task force’s report and a new authoritative interpretation, which kept the fidelity-chastity standard in place but allowed candidates for ordination to scruple it as a non-essential. The legitimacy of scrupling currently is being tested in church courts with cases from John Knox and San Francisco presbyteries.
“The motion before the presbyteries is to once again draw swords and to engage in the battle on the ordination standard known as G-6.0106b,” he said. “What is especially troubling to me about this latest attempt to remove the fidelity-chastity amendment from the Book of Order is that it’s being led by many of the same progressives who just four years ago hailed the PUP report as a wonderful way to move forward together. It seems unfair to me to welcome a new way forward, and a few years later turn your back on it.”
Loudon described Amendment 10-A as “well thought out” and the best attempt yet to overturn” G-6.0106b. Though most would not argue with what Amendment 10-A currently states, he said, it’s what the amendment does not say that’s a problem.
“Those of us who are evangelicals believe the new amendment removes an important constitutional standard on sexual purity and morality,” Loudon said, adding that the standard is based on Scripture and extremely important.
Loudon also warned that the exodus of evangelical congregations, as well as the near-annual battles to change the constitution, will continue if the standard is removed. Also with more churches leaving the PCUSA, Loudon said he anticipates attempts to form a new non-geographic synod for evangelicals or a formal split in the denomination.
“I ask the presbytery commissioners to reject the new overture from General Assembly, retain the present standards, permit scrupling of non-essential tenets and continue the PUP experiment,” he said. “Let’s honestly see if there is some way our diverse denomination can move forward together and model a new way of being the people of God to a polarized nation and world. I do not believe that PUP has been given enough of a chance. Let’s give PUP time to work and help keep us together in the PCUSA.”
So far, at least two presbyteries have voted on Amendment 10-A. In both cases, the proposal was rejected. The referendum is scheduled for completion by next summer.
To track voting on Amendment 10-A and historic trends on previous referendums of a similar nature, visit The Layman’s vote chart online.
Edi
tor’s note: This article was updated Dec. 7, 2010.