Deciphering the rhetoric:
It’s actually not all about sex
Commentary by Carmen Fowler, The Layman, June 29, 2009
If you have been following “the vote” this year, then you know that Amendment 08-B was defeated (78-95). Efforts to change the language of G-6.0106b and the parameters of sexual behavior required of ordained officers in the Presbyterian Church (USA) failed. You have likely also read or heard as many opinions about “the vote” as there are Presbyterians. Let’s “decipher” the post-vote rhetoric.
Carmen Fowler
What has not changed?
The Word of God has not changed. The position of the Church universal has not changed. The minds of the vast majority of Presbyterians worldwide, has not changed. On paper, the standards of the PCUSA have not changed. The constitution still says that ordained officers in the Presbyterian Church (USA) must “live either in fidelity in marriage between one man and one woman or in chastity in singleness.” That has not changed.
So, what has changed?
The cultural environment and the denominational climate have changed. The first time the issue of sexual behavioral standards for ordained officers was raised (back in the 1970s) the sexual revolution and the civil rights movement were only beginning to make their impact on society. In the subsequent 30 years, we have gone through a denominational re-formation that has included a reunion and more than one separation. We have experienced a precipitous decline in our “reach” both in terms of a constriction of mission personnel deployed around the globe and in terms of our market segment of Christians in the U.S. The word “Presbyterian” has lost all meaning in our culture as our “franchises” do not serve up anything approaching “similar fare” and “we” no longer define what it means to be “Presbyterian” even among Presbyterians.
Additionally, perceptions and, yes, percentages have changed. Presbyterians might still be talking, but only to ourselves and frequently only to other Presbyterians who agree with us. The percentages of Presbyterians turning out to vote on issues that affect our common life is also changing. It may be apathy, it may be fatalism, it may be fatigue, it may be a sense of irrelevance, but whatever their cause, it is poor performance in terms of percentage participation in a system that depends on it.
The other thing that has changed since the last time we voted to retain these standards (2001’s Amendment A) is the 2006 General Assembly’s Authoritative Interpretation (AI) of those standards. The 1978 AI was repealed and replaced in 2006 by a new AI that renders compliance with these standards optional. The effects of that change are only now being realized as disciplinary cases make their way through the church courts.
What will likely not change?
ECOTs (Evangelical, Conservative, Orthodox, Traditionalists – call them what you will) will continue to defend the non-negotiable Biblical and historical standards of Church leadership. That is not likely to change. PRILs (Progressive, Revisionist, Inclusive, Liberals – call them what you like) will continue to pursue what they view as a matter of Biblically based, God honoring, justice. That is not likely to change either. Both “camps” are entrenched and each is already reloading for the next General Assembly voting cycle. We will be doing “this” dance again. That is not likely to change.
What needs to change?
The system, the posturing, and the focus need to change.
- The system (the entrenched, intractable, hierarchical, sometimes Draconian bureaucracy) that we mistakenly call “the church,” must change. She must change because her design is outdated and outmoded. She is an iron-sided (and too often iron-hearted) battleship in the days of fast-cutting, easily-redirected, quick-responding sailing vessels. Her course that was charted in Scripture remains the same but her means, her methodologies, her modes of operation, and yes, much of her crew need to change. They have led us off course and foundering in a sea of cultural relativity. What would a 21st century missional Presbyterian polity and ecclesiology look like? This is what we must discern and become.
- The posturing (on both sides of the aisle) must change. If you’ve been to a wedding recently, it will be easy for you to imagine the moment that the bride begins to walk down the aisle. All attention turns her way. Everyone “attends” to her. It doesn’t matter if they came to stand up for the groom, they now all turn their attention to the bride. Somewhere along the way, we have all lost sight of the bride. We have been so busy posturing and sneering and hurling insults across the aisle that we forgot that our being together is all about the advancement of the bride, the Church, to her Christ. And yes, her purity matters – as does the sanctity of her relationship with the Bridegroom.
- Hearts must be changed. Jesus matters more than any of our “personal” agendas. Advancing the Kingdom matters more than the advancement of any of our “little” kingdoms. If you have ever thought or said something like, “I will pursue this without end – even if it destroys the church,” then, speaking the truth in love, your heart needs changing. It is not all about “you” or “me” or what we feel or what we want. It is now and forevermore, all about Jesus.
Indeed, let us pray, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. Caste me not away from your presence and take not your Holy Spirit from me. Restore unto me the joy of Thy salvation.”
When we get beyond the rhetoric there is the reality that Christ still reigns. In the end, every knee will bow to Him, no matter what. He ultimately overcomes the world. Toward that day we persevere. Into that reality we lean. Until then, we pray and set ourselves at His service. Let us again take our stand with the Lord who never changes, in the midst of a world that never stops changing.
Carmen Fowler is president of the Presbyterian Lay Committee and executive editor of its publications.