Church Orders Committee: Repentance in; Scripture out
By James D. Berkley, The Layman, July 7, 2012
PITTSBURGH, Pa. – When the dust settled in plenary late on Friday night, the General Assembly had rubber-stamped every single recommendation of the Church Orders and Ministry Committee. The lengthy and painstaking deliberation during a marathon day changed nothing from what had been recommended, rendering the Assembly rather superfluous.
So what is the state of ordination standards as General Assembly adjourns? What’s new or different?
Good News
First the good news: Presbyterians just might be okay with repentance. General Assembly approved a constitutional amendment that would add wording to the qualifications and manner of life of ordained officers of the church, declaring that it “includes repentance of sin and diligent use of the means of grace.”
While this may seem self-evident, if approved by the presbyteries, the amendment would actually be a micro-step forward in refortifying ordination standards. That the sin of homosexual practice could not be repented of but rather indulged and celebrated has been a sore spot for biblically faithful Presbyterians. Thus, this re-affirmation of repentance is welcome. But it’s the only step forward for ordination matters from this General Assembly.
Further, the gain did not come without opposition. Unbelievably, there are those who oppose repentance. One teaching elder dramatically called the introduction of repentance “redundant, unnecessary, and possibly confusing.”
To that, teaching elder Pat Thompson from Central Washington Presbytery asked questions he had asked in committee. “Why wouldn’t we want the phrase ‘repentance of sin’ or the use of ‘means of grace’?” he asked incredulously. “What is wrong with the repentance of sin? If you are against the repentance of sin, then vote against it. If you’re against Jesus dying on the cross, then vote against it.”
Evidently a slight majority of commissioners were okay with repentance and redemption, voting 54 percent to approve the constitutional amendment.
Scripture too confusing to use
The tarnished centerpiece of the committee’s recommendation, however, was an amended overture from Sacramento Presbytery, which read in part, “We decline to take an action that would have the effect of imposing on the whole Presbyterian Church (USA) one interpretation of Scripture in this matter” of “what the Scriptures teach concerning the morality of committed, same-gender relationships.” The best this committee and then the whole General Assembly could do was to declare formally that Scripture is too confusing, too subject to varied interpretations to unite around to decide matters of same-sex sexual morality.
Is same-sex practice right or wrong, according to the Bible? “Well, ya know, we just can’t decide,” has now become General Assembly’s official position. This position is intended to “be brought before each presbytery at a stated meeting in which the report from the 220th General Assembly (2012) is given.”
It’s not that faithful commissioners didn’t try for something far better. Bill Campbell, a teaching elder from Hendersonville, N.C., presented a minority report as a substitute motion to the Sacramento overture. It attempted to firm up sloppy wording in G-2.0104b, which replaced the “fidelity and chastity” standard a year ago.
The minority report gave form to unnamed standards in G-2.0104b: “These standards are found in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as interpreted by the confessions of the church and include the commitment to live a chaste and disciplined life, whether in holy marriage between a man and a woman or in single life.” This minority report would have returned the church to a biblical standard for ordination, but that very fact caused enormous opposition that led to a 71-percent no vote for the minority report. Obviously General Assembly was not at all ready to turn the clock back two years.
However, several commissioners provided tremendously faithful witness:
• Philip West, a teaching elder from Charleston-Atlantic Presbytery, warned of Scriptural relativism. “We should ignore Scripture that challenges us?” he asked rhetorically. “No. The preservation of the truth is not about this truth, that truth, or any truth, but the -truth of God!”
• Bob Bohler, JR., a teaching elder from Northeast Georgia mused that he was hearing that “either ‘all Scripture interpretations are equally true,’ or essentially ‘we’re going to ignore it.’ But the Bible is our primary authoritative source, and we’ve got to continue to wrestle over it together.”
• Dale Deist, a ruling elder from Shenango Presbytery, summed up the argument: “’I feel, therefore I am’ is not our teaching! The Bible is the holy Word of God.”
By a final vote of 63 percent in favor, 36 percent opposed, and 1 percent abstaining, the Scripture-downplaying Sacramento overture prevailed.
Loose ends
Most of the remaining matters of business were disapproved or answered in another way. Many ideas went up in flames, such as:
• That examinations for ordination or installation shall be done “in obedience to Jesus Christ, under the authority of Scripture and guided by our confessions.”
• 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.”
• That councils should be allowed to “publicize in their operational manuals any theological, ethical, and behavioral expectations that reflect prevailing biblical and confessional interpretations of that governing body.”
• That ordaining councils that uphold standards of fidelity and chastity should be safe from remedial action.
• That a list of continuing Book of Order standards for ordination would be appropriate and useful.
In other action, the Assembly voted that Candidates for ordination may not be shielded from questions about their acceptance of homosexual behavior in persons they might later assess for ordination. The Assembly also voted against returning to the titles of Minister of Word and the Sacrament and elder, retaining instead the older titles newly revived: teaching elder and ruling elder.
The cooperative ordination exams will be examined for cultural neutrality, and a study of the effectiveness of such examinations will be launched. Members of the Presbyteries’ Cooperative Committee on Examinations for Candidates will be nominated and elected differently.
In general, evangelical churches looking for succor or safety, or for accommodation of their enduring beliefs and practices in a progressive era, will be disappointed. Little quarter was given, and other than being able to query candidates about their view of ordination standards, or to expect repentance of the ordained, little ground was gained in the 220th General Assembly.
For the official account of what was decided, click here.