LOUISVILLE —
A church court has ruled that the Presbytery of Cincinnati acted
wrongly last summer when it stripped the Rev. Stephen Van Kuiken
of his ordination for having performed a same-sex marriage in
defiance of a direct order.
The favorable ruling
 on
Van Kuiken’s appeal restores him to membership in the Presbyterian
Church (USA), and to the ministry, as an at-large member of the
presbytery. It does not affect an agreement he negotiated late
last year dissolving his pastoral relationship with Mount Auburn
Presbyterian Church.
After a Feb. 6 hearing, the Permanent Judicial Commission (PJC)
of the Synod of the Covenant unanimously (9-0) upheld each of
four arguments Van Kuiken had made in his appeal, ruling that:
- The presbytery’s action violated a stay of enforcement
Van Kuiken had obtained pending his appeal of the prior decision
of the presbytery’s PJC;
- The presbytery should not have presumed that Van Kuiken had
renounced the church’s jurisdiction without first determining
officially that he had performed “a work” disapproved
by The Book of Order;
- Presbytery officials had not given Van Kuiken proper notice
of the PJC’s decision or consulted with him about the
potential consequences before voting to expel him;
- Van Kuiken’s performance of a same-sex marriage ceremony
was not “a work” as the term is used in the Book
of Order (G-6.0502).
That section of the constitution reads: “When a church
officer, after consultation and notice, persists in a work disapproved
by the governing body having jurisdiction, the governing body
may presume that the officer has renounced the jurisdiction of
this church.”
Van Kuiken told the Presbyterian News Service on Feb.
11: “To a large degree, I feel vindicated by this decision
that the presbytery was wrong to summarily remove me for doing
a same-sex marriage. The good news is that it allows me to continue,
within the system of the Presbyterian Church, to challenge the
legitimacy of the Benton decision and how that decision is being
used to deny freedom of conscience and religious expression ...
(and) to impose a narrow Biblical interpretation on all the members
of our church.”
Van Kuiken was referring to a 2000 ruling in which the General
Assembly PJC said, in a case from upstate New York (Benton, et
al. v. Presbytery of Hudson River), that PC(USA) ministers and
sessions may not use liturgies for Christian marriage in ceremonies
for same-sex couples, and should not allow church facilities to
be used for same-sex union ceremonies determined to be the same
as marriage ceremonies. The decision upheld the definition of
marriage in The Book of Order as a covenant between a woman
and a man.
Van Kuiken said he believes the synod PJC’s ruling “will
force presbyteries to think twice before they take high-handed
measures, and force them to consider fair and due process.”
He added, however, that he feels that his own “career and
reputation have been irreparably damaged.”
Cincinnati Presbytery Executive Janis Adams said the PJC’s
decision was read during a presbytery meeting Tuesday night. “The
presbytery believes in the polity of our government and in the
judicial process,” she said. “I’m quite sure
the Committee on Ministry will deal with this at its next meeting.”
The presbytery acted against Van Kuiken during a special called
meeting on June 16, 2003, when elders and ministers voted 119-45,
with four abstentions, to uphold a finding of the presbytery’s
Committee on Ministry (COM) that Van Kuiken had “renounced
jurisdiction” of the Presbyterian Church (USA) by refusing
to be bound by its orders.
The effect of the vote was to remove Van Kuiken as pastor of
Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church and as a minister member of the
PC(USA) and to instruct the stated clerk to strike his name from
the presbytery’s roster.
The presbytery’s PJC had ruled in April that Van Kuiken
was guilty of having “married” homosexual couples,
in violation of the PC(USA) constitution. The ruling concluded,
addressing Van Kuiken: “The Presbytery of Cincinnati, in
the name and authority of the Presbyterian Church (USA), expresses
its condemnation of this offense, and rebukes you.”
(In the same case, the PJC found Van Kuiken not guilty of ordaining
and installing deacons and elders “who refuse to repent
of self-acknowledged practices which the Confessions call sin”
— that is, homosexuals.)
The PJC ordered Van Kuiken to refrain from performing such same-sex
marriage ceremonies in the future, and urged him “to use
diligently the means of grace … that your actions may be
without offense to the Constitution.” Van Kuiken filed an
appeal (obtaining an automatic stay of enforcement), and vowed
to defy the presbytery PJC’s order, declaring on his church’s
Web site, “I will not change from my position.” Then,
on May 17, he performed what he billed as “A Service of
Christian Marriage” uniting two lesbians.
In response, the presbytery’s Committee on Ministry recommended
that the presbytery declare that Van Kuiken “has persisted
in a work disapproved by the governing body having jurisdiction”
and that it therefore “presumes that he has renounced the
jurisdiction of this Church.” That recommendation was the
subject of the June 16 meeting.
Presbytery officials met with Van Kuiken on April 25 to provide
“pastoral care.” They contend that they warned him
then that he could be presumed to have renounced jurisdiction
of the church. Van Kuiken says no such warning was given. Officials
met with him again on June 4 “to inform him of the COM’s
recommendation to be offered at the upcoming special Presbytery
meeting and to express concern for his welfare.” On June
5, the synod PJC said Van Kuiken had “properly and timely”
filed an appeal and suspended the censure of rebuke against Van
Kuiken.
Van Kuiken asked to meet with the COM before the June 16 meeting,
but his request was denied.
During the special meeting, the presbytery approved the COM’s
recommendation, in effect withdrawing Van Kuiken’s ordination
and his membership in the presbytery. On July 3, he filed an appeal
with the synod PJC. That was the case taken up in the Feb. 6 trial
and the ruling released yesterday.
The synod PJC ruled that it was wrong for the presbytery to use
its PJC’s decision of last April as the basis of its own
decision in June regarding subsequent “alleged offenses
by Rev. Van Kuiken.” Doing so while the PJC decision and
censure were on appeal, the commissioners said, deprived Van Kuiken
of “the protections of due process and fundamental fairness.”
Moreover, they said, the section of the Book of Order
invoked in the case, G-6.0502, “is properly applied in administrative
matters, whereas the Presbytery’s action was disciplinary
in its intent.”
Finally, the PJC said, “The Presbytery’s presumption
that Rev. Van Kuiken had renounced jurisdiction ignores the fact
that he acknowledged jurisdiction of the church by filing the
appeal.”
The PJC cited a 1994 case, Wilson v. Presbytery of Donegal, in
arguing that “a presbytery’s disapproval of the work
in question is a condition precedent to any finding of renunciation
of jurisdiction.” The presbytery PJC’s disapproval
wasn’t sufficient, it said, because a PJC is not a “governing
body” as specified in G-6.0502.
The PJC also agreed with Van Kuiken’s contention that he
was not given “proper notice and consultation,” as
required by the Book of Order.
“Under the circumstances of this case, where a minister
may be found to have forfeited his or her career,” the synod
PJC said, the accused must be given “fair notice and understanding
of the consequences of the minister’s actions.” It
said neither of the two meetings between presbytery officials
and Van Kuiken was sufficient to meet that condition. Such a meeting
and such a warning should have come before the May 17 wedding,
it said, and Van Kuiken should have been given “opportunity
to desist.”
It said the presbytery also was wrong to refuse Van Kuiken’s
request to meet with the COM before the special presbytery meeting.
The Rev. Bruce Archibald, the moderator of the COM, had argued
that “there wasn’t time” for such a consultation
before the June 16 meeting, and that “since the COM motion
had been made, there was no point.”
Finally, the synod PJC ruled that “G-6.0502 may not …
be used administratively to impose the highest degree of censure
(D-12.0105) by removing a minister from office and membership
in the church without the necessity of judicial process.”
While the phrase “work disapproved” has never been
authoritatively interpreted by the General Assembly or the GA
PJC, it said, it believes the term is “related to a minister’s
vocation,” and “may not be used to apply to a particular
act of a minister’s work.”
Van Kuiken, a 19-year veteran of the ministry, said he now belongs
to a non-denominational faith community, known informally as the
Gathering, that has “come together around a group of former
members of Mount Auburn church ... and I feel supported by those
folks.”
The Cincinnati Enquirer reported that Van Kuiken, who is married
and the father of two daughters, accepted an $80,000 severance
package from Mount Auburn.
-
Files marked with this icon can be downloaded
in printable Adobe Acrobat format. This file requires the free
Acrobat Reader. For best results, right-click the link (or click
and hold for Macintosh), select "save target as" and
save the document to your desktop for viewing and printing.
 |
