Presbytery must rescind
vote supporting lesbian
By John H. Adams, The Layman, March 25, 2009
The Presbytery of San Francisco has been ordered to rescind its vote certifying lesbian activist Lisa Larges as “ready for examination …, with departure.” The departure is Larges’ statement that she will not comply with G-6.0106b, the “fidelity/chastity” requirement in The Book of Order.
The March 22 ruling by the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Pacific fell short of what the complainants in the case sought. They wanted the synod court to declare that the presbytery had acted unconstitutionally by allowing Larges to declare her unyielding defiance of a constitutional “essential.”
The synod also ruled against the complainants on a number of points. But, though avoiding a straightforward declaration on the constitutionality of the presbytery’s action, it did address two key issues in the case.
- the presbytery to “execute its constitutional obligations to the entire church to enforce mandatory churchwide ordination standards.” The court did not identify what it meant by “mandatory.”
- Admonishing the presbytery to ensure that its Committee on Preparation for the Ministry “faithfully meets its covenantal obligations to candidates under its care who insist on departing from mandatory standards.”
The court included a citation from Londonderry et al v. Presbytery of Northern New England: “[W]hen an individual or governing body threatens to move from verbal dissent to active disobedience, it is the obligation of the covenant community to seek to prevent the dissenting party from falling into contumacy.”In another area, not specifically addressed by the complainants, the commission said the presbytery’s process for Larges was flawed. Stating that the proper time to consider whether a candidate’s “departure” from a constitutional requirement constitutes a failure to adhere to the essentials of the Reformed faith and polity is during the examination itself – not before the examination. The synod did not identify what is essential in The Book of Order.
“The debate and vote on Jan. 15, 2008, was not an examination for ordination,” the synod court said. “The language of the motion on the floor was to certify the candidate as ‘ready for examination … with departure,’ thus an examination could not yet properly take place in advance of such certification.”
The San Francisco case is titled Naegeli et al v. Presbytery of San Francisco. The complainants are Mary Holder Naegeli, J. Mark Stryker and Margaret H. Gelini, ministers and members of the presbytery. They filed their complaint after the presbytery voted 167-151 in January 2008 to certify Larges as a candidate for ordination despite her statement of departure.
She is a self-affirmed lesbian who has not been shy about her sexual orientation or behavior. The complaint culls from many of her written statements prepared for the presbytery. They include:
- She says she believes that “holy relationships of homosexuality … have parity with marriage.”
- She calls “celibacy is morally repugnant.”
- She says Presbyterian polity “does not bar Presbyterian ministers from marrying same-sex couples.”
- And she declares that G-6.0106b “makes an idol out of heterosexuality in a relationship of marriage between a man and a woman.”