Overture 79

On Being Called to Covenant Community: Rightly Interpreting G-6.0108—From the Presbytery of Stockton.

The Presbytery of Stockton overtures the 217th General Assembly (2006) to approve the following as an authoritative interpretation of G-6.0108 in the Book of Order:

1. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is a covenant community (The Book of Confessions, 5.124-.141). Section G-6.0108 maintains that, for the sake of the integrity of our common life as a covenant community, it is of great consequence that our leaders adhere to the essentials of the Reformed faith and polity. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has long sought to maintain a healthy balance between requiring adherence to essentials of faith and polity, while permitting our officers liberty of conscience regarding nonessential matters.

2. Section G-6.0108 states that ordaining bodies are responsible for determining whether or not candidates or officers serving in their bodies adhere to the essentials of the Reformed faith and polity. In making this determination, there is a clear distinction between how departures from the essentials of the Reformed faith are discerned and how departures from the essentials of Reformed polity are discerned.

3. Historically, regarding matters of faith, it has been left up to each presbytery and session to determine what it considers to be a departure from the essentials of the Reformed faith. While the General Assembly and the presbyteries, through the constitutional process, could make a definitive list of the essentials of the Reformed faith, the church has chosen to leave the responsibility of discerning essentials of the faith, and departures from them, to the ordaining bodies. Ordaining bodies are guided by The Book of Confessions in this discernment process.

4. The essentials of Reformed polity, however, have been established nationally by the faithful discernment of the guidance of the Holy Spirit by the majority, and they are expressed in the Book of Order. The Form of Government and the essentials of Reformed polity expressed therein are designed to maintain order and provide the framework in and through which the unity of the covenant community may be expressed. The essentials of Reformed polity consist of the positive obligations and the definitive prohibitions within the Book of Order. Ordaining bodies do not determine the essentials of Reformed polity. Rather, ordaining bodies are responsible for examining candidates and officers in order to discern whether or not they adhere to the essentials of Reformed polity expressed in the Book of Order.

5. Further, the 217th General Assembly (2006), through its Permanent Judicial Commission in the Londonderry decision (Minutes, 2001, Part I, p. 577, paragraph 12.1028) has determined that every part of the Constitution must be read with force, since the church is a covenantal community (The Book of Confessions, 5.124-.141). In other words, no ordaining body is permitted to selectively disregard or demote an essential of Reformed polity, for this would break the bonds and breach the constructive trust of the covenant community. This is foundational to the peace, unity, and purity of the church.

6. Thus, regardless of whether or not an individual or a lower governing body agrees with the constitutional standards of the church, the covenantal nature of the church requires that in practice they defer to the discernment of the majority (G-1.0400; G-4.0301e). Protesting and laboring to effect change in the decision of the majority are proper, while defiance and subversion are not, no matter how inartfully the majority’s position might be stated. Further, to void intentionally any part of the Constitution of meaning, through reading it in non-plain face language, or by ignoring it, as if the individual interpreter is a constitution unto him or herself, is to disregard the bonds of our life together as the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). The church is a covenant community.

The meaning of G-6.0108 is a matter of great consequence for the promotion of the peace, unity, and purity of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

The proposed authoritative interpretation of G-6.0108 in this overture seeks to restore clarity to the meaning of this section of our Constitution. The meaning of G-6.0108 has recently been called into question by a recommendation from the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church. The task force has proposed a new authoritative interpretation of G-6.0108 that would change the way our ordination standards function. The proposed authoritative interpretation in this overture, “On Being Called to Covenant Community,” offers an interpretation of G-6.0108 that is consistent with its originally intended meaning and with subsequent interpretations by the higher courts of the church.

It is important to note at the outset that the authoritative interpretation proposed in this overture does not necessarily advocate for any particular position regarding how the essentials of the Reformed faith or the essentials of Reformed polity ought to be determined. Rather, this authoritative interpretation only describes what is presently the case in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). In other words, it explains this section of our Book of Order in the context of the whole Constitution, which is the purpose of an authoritative interpretation.

Central to the way in which our ordination standards currently operate are two important realities: (1) the essentials of the Reformed faith have not been spelled out in the Constitution (e.g. there is nothing in The Book of Confessions that indicates which beliefs are essential), even though that may be a prudent thing to do. Therefore, when G-6.0108 gives presbyteries the responsibility for determining whether or not candidates or officers adhere to the essentials of the Reformed faith, it implicitly requires the ordaining body to determine what are and what are not essentials of the Reformed faith.

(2) On the other hand, the essentials of Reformed polity have been spelled out by the whole church, and they are expressed in the Book of Order. Indeed, the whole church has gone to great lengths to make its intentions clear by specifying that there are different degrees of required compliance to provisions of the Book of Order. The preface to the Book of Order, which was added by the whole church through the constitutional process, states it this way:

In this Book of Order

(1) “SHALL” and “IS TO BE/ARE TO BE” signify practice that is mandated,

(2) “SHOULD” signifies practice that is strongly recommended,

(3) “IS APPROPRIATE” signifies practice that is commended as suitable,

(4) “MAY” signifies practice that is permissible but not required.

In other words, the whole church makes clear that certain provisions of the Constitution are essential, i.e. they are mandated. Such mandates represent the collective wisdom of the covenant community, and G-6.0108 clearly states that our officers must exercise liberty of conscience within the bounds of those essentials (G-6.0108a). Individuals or certain governing bodies may disagree with mandated provisions of the Constitution, but this does not, of course, give them the freedom to introduce disorder into the church by severing the covenantal bonds of the community and selectively choosing to demote a mandate to a matter of local option.

Yet the authoritative interpretation of G-6.0108 that is proposed by the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church would allow ordaining bodies to do just that. The task force helps to clarify the issue by singling out the controversy over G-6.0106b. The constitutional ordination standard expressed in G-6.0106b has been the center of controversy over sexual practice outside of marriage, including the sexual practices of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered community.

On the one hand, the whole church, through the constitutional process and by using the above specific language, has determined that it is an essential of Reformed polity that our officers live in fidelity in marriage between a man and a woman, or in chastity in singleness (G-6.0106b). And so the whole church in the Constitution maintains that a violation of this standard is a violation of an essential of Reformed polity.

***

On the other hand, the task force notes that, if its own authoritative interpretation were to pass, ordaining bodies would be permitted to overlook open violations of G-6.0106b: “If an ordaining or installing body determines that an officer-elect has departed from G-6.0106b, a manner-of-life standard, the ordaining/installing body must then determine whether this departure violates essentials of faith or polity. ... If the departure is judged not to violate the essentials … then there is no barrier to ordination” (A Season of Discernment: The Final Report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church, 2005, PC(USA), pp. 40-41, Lines 1222-1229). Thus, the task force declares the intention of their proposed authoritative interpretation: The determination of essentials of polity would be taken out of the hands of the whole covenant community and given to increasingly independent ordaining bodies. Permission would be given to an ordaining body to fragment the church by pursuing its own preferred course apart from the covenant community.

In other words, the authoritative interpretation proposed by the task force would allow an ordaining body to selectively overturn the corporate judgment of the church (G-1.0302), by determining for itself what are and are not essentials of Reformed polity (see especially section C.2 of the authoritative interpretation proposed by the task force, Ibid., p. 36, Lines 1063-1065).

If the PC(USA)’s ordination standards are to be changed, we do have good, Presbyterian ways of changing these standards, i.e. by using the constitutional process. Yet passing the authoritative interpretation proposed by the task force would undercut the constitutional basis of the church in at least two ways. First, it would introduce a fundamental change in the way our constitutional standards operate without being approved through the constitutional process. Second, it would give each ordaining body the right to determine arbitrarily which portions of the Constitution it will uphold. Yet the Londonderry decision of the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission put it well: “The only appropriate avenue to change or remove a provision of the Constitution is through the process for amendment provided within the Constitution itself.”

Finally, we should mention two ways in which the authoritative interpretation proposed in this overture will help the church live into the best aspects of the theological task force report. First, the task force has proposed that our denomination go through a period of careful discernment. Therefore, it would be imprudent to presume a conclusion to the discernment process before it has even begun. The authoritative interpretation in this overture would introduce no change, but would add clarity, the very things necessary for a stable environment in which to engage in the honest and candid debate and discernment that the task force earnestly recommends.

Second and lastly, the Theological Reflection section of the task force report confidently affirms the authority of Holy Scripture and the Lordship of Jesus Christ. We share these affirmations wholeheartedly and want our lives to reflect those affirmations. For decades the church has been asking the following related question: “Can we uphold the authority of Scripture, faithfully living under the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and at the same time adopt ordination standards that condone sexual activity outside of marriage between a man and a woman?” And, as a covenant community, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has answered this question, three times in the last decade, through the constitutional process, by saying that we cannot. In short, the authoritative interpretation proposed in this overture reflects what the church believes is the best way to live faithfully within the key theological affirmations made by the task force.

Therefore, we humbly request that the General Assembly not approve the authoritative interpretation proposed by the task force. In its place, we ask the assembly to approve the authoritative interpretation in this overture, which restores clarity to G-6.0108 and promotes the peace, unity, and purity of the church.