Richmond session joins Virginia lobby against ban on gay marriages
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, August 28, 2006
The session of Second Presbyterian Church in Richmond, Va., has approved a resolution calling on Virginians to vote against a proposed constitutional amendment that would prohibit marriages between same-gender couples.
The Layman Online incorrectly reported that the session had already forwarded the resolution to the Presbytery of the James. But Peter McDearmon Witt, a deacon, said in an e-mail that the session has not yet delivered its resolution to the presbytery.
He said Dr. O. Benjamin Sparks and the session are holding open discussions with members of the congregation “in order to ascertain members’ thoughts on the session’s (as yet unofficial) action.”
Witt added, “It is unclear what percentage support the resolution. I do not.”
The session’s resolution, in effect, rejects what the Presbyterian Church (USA) says about marriage in its constitution.
Section W-4.9001 of the Book of Order describes a civil marriage as a “contract between a woman and a man” and a Christian marriage as “a covenant through which a man and a woman are called to live out together before God their lives of discipleship.” It does not recognize homosexual marriages.
The 2004 General Assembly, responding to a controversy that arose after Elenora Giddings-Ivory, the denomination’s lobbyist, joined gay activist groups in supporting nontraditional marriages, reaffirmed that constitutional definition of marriage. Furthermore, it instructed Ivory and others not to lobby for or against the Federal Marriage Amendment, which is similar to the Virginia proposal.
The proposed amendment to the Virginia Constitution was first approved by wide margins by both houses of the legislature in 2005. As required for an amendment to the constitution, the measure was reaffirmed by the legislature this year. A statewide referendum is scheduled on Nov. 7.
The proposed amendment to the state’s Bill of Rights asks voters to respond “yes” or “no” to the following proposition:
- “That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.
- This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.”
Virginia already has a law that prohibits marriage between same-gender couples. The amendment would restrain judges from declaring the state law unconstitutional.
The session’s resolution contends that the marriage amendment “discriminates unjustly against unmarried individuals of the same gender and other adults who want to enter into a legal partnership with each other.”
In a comment on the resolution, the session said its action “is part of a comprehensive discernment undertaken in response to the gay and lesbian members of our church. We are also considering the action of the 217th Presbyterian Church General Assembly in adopting the Report of the Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity, which calls for theological conversation and forbearance in each governing body.”
The session’s resolution quoted selectively from actions of the 216th General Assembly in 2004, including reference to “all persons are created in the image of God.” But it did not quote from the action that dealt specifically with marriage and the ban on lobbying on the Federal Marriage Amendment.
By opposing the Virginia amendment, the Richmond session is aligning with groups promoting homosexual causes, a large number of nonChristian groups and liberal Protestants.
Second Presbyterian is a 944-member congregation. Sparks served as interim editor of The Presbyterian Outlook before Jack Haberer was appointed editor.