Presbytery supports congregation at odds with PCUSA constitution
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, December 6, 1999
NEW BOSTON, N.H. – The Presbytery of Northern New England gave Christ Church of Burlington, Vt., three cheers for expressing its intention to defy the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA).
During its meeting in New Boston Dec. 4, the presbytery:
- Voted in favor of a Christ Church overture to the 2000 General Assembly to eliminate G-6.0l06.b, the “fidelity/chastity” requirement for church officers, from the Book of Order
- Elected by a four-vote margin an elder from the 60-member Christ Church as vice-moderator of the presbytery.
- Appealed the finding of the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Northeast, which said the presbytery erred when it gave Christ Church the green light to dissent from G-6.0106.b.
Ruling is sidestepped
Furthermore, the presbytery decided to ignore two components of the commission’s ruling: one required the presbytery to correct its irregularity and the second required the presbytery to “work pastorally with the session of Christ Church with the ultimate goal of bringing them into compliance with the law as it now exists.”
The Rev. Joan Mabron of the Presbytery Council said it would have been illogical to acknowledge an irregularity and also file an appeal to the denomination’s highest court, the Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly.
Based on the chronology of four trials in the Northeast on actions that opposed or violated the ordination standard, the case involving the Presbytery of Northern New England could be the first national church court decision on a test of G-6.0106.b.
Other congregations included
Instead of singling out Christ Church for ultimate compliance, the presbytery approved a plan to name a committee “to work pastorally with churches where there is a concern for balancing parts of the Book of Order.”
Ironically, that committee could scrutinize congregations that sought to uphold the constitution as well as those expressing their intent to defy it.
The committee plan did not spell out which congregations would come under the scrutiny of the committee or what the committee’s functions and powers would be.
However, Stated Clerk S. David Stoner, a former executive director of the General Assembly Council, told The Presbyterian Layman that the committee would visit four congregations: Christ, Mid-Coast, Litchfield and Londonderry. He said the committee would have no disciplinary powers, but that it could recommend disciplinary action in its annual report to the presbytery.
The sessions of Christ and Mid-Coast have formally adopted dissents from the Constitution. Litchfield and Londonderry protested those dissents and the presbytery’s approval of them. The only two involved in the synod court case were Christ and Londonderry. The session of Londonberry filed the complaint against the presbytery.
Annual reports called for
The presbytery’s instructions to the committee are “to meet and discuss with each session the particular areas of the Book of Order where there are concerns” and “to report annually to the Presbytery on their learnings and the sessions’ progress toward compliance.”
The Rev. Samuel A. Shreiner III, pastor of Londonberry, complained during the presbytery meeting that the language about the committee was unclear and ran contrary to the synod decision that focused on Christ Church. He urged the presbytery to vote against the committee motion until the judicial proceeding was complete. The Presbytery voted 48-35 to establish the committee immediately.
Londonderry is a fast-growing evangelical congregation in Londonderry, N.H. In 1997, its membership was listed at 331. Currently, more than 500 people attend its three Sunday worship services and membership is approaching 1,000.
The synod trial, titled Londonderry v. Northern New England, arose out of a statement adopted by the session and congregation of Christ Church. The statement “condemned” the fidelity/chastity ordination standard as “hypocrisy regarding inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered Christians in the full life of the church” and “bad polity which will serve only to further distrust, intolerance and chaos in the church.”
Presbytery changes its decision
The Presbytery of Northern New England first ordered Christ Church to comply with the Book of Order, but later reconsidered. It appointed a committee to draft possible responses. The proposed responses ranged from continued admonition that Christ Church obey the constitution to concurrence with Christ Church’s opposition. In its final vote on the matter, the presbytery endorsed Christ Church’s repudiation of G-6.0106b.
The presbytery’s decision was challenged almost immediately by Londonderry.
In its written decision, the synod commission said there are acceptable ways for a governing body to express its disagreement with a denominational policy, but that they do not include outright violation or an expression of intent to violate the constitution.
A resolution opposing a policy, without any expressed intention to violate the policy, is an acceptable form of disagreement, the commission said. But a declaration of intent to violate the constitution creates the danger of schism, the synod said. The decision quoted from a 1983 report to the 195th General Assembly that said schism can result “when a governing body violates the constitution in which our visible unity is defined.”
Christ Church’s resolution
The commission’s ruling quoted from the Christ Church resolution that said “we vow to continue welcoming persons living singly or in committed relationships, regardless of sexual orientation, into the life, membership and leadership of this congregation on an equal basis, including eligibility for election and ordination as a ruling elder.”
In response to that assertion, the commission said, “Although it is true that the official policy of the Presbyterian Church (USA) is to prohibit ordination and installation on the basis of practice and not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, the session’s action nevertheless expresses an intention not to comply with an explicit constitutional provision.”
The commission said the presbytery failed in its responsibility to see “‘that the orders of higher governing bodies are observed and carried out.’ At a minimum the presbytery had a responsibility to determine that the session’s resolution was an irregularity and to record its disapproval of the session’s resolution.” The commission said the presbytery had no authority to override its first resolution requiring that Christ Church abide by the constitution. “The presbytery … shall either require compliance with … (that) resolution or such other action as the presbytery shall take so that the sessions shall be moving toward compliance with Maxwell v. Pittsburgh Presbytery…”
In Maxwell v. Pittsburgh Presbytery, a benchmark case in the denomination, a candidate for ministry was denied ordination after he stated that he was opposed to the ordination of women and could not in good conscience support such ordinations.