He said “the key text” for most people is I Timothy, chapters 3 through 5. Loudon also led his fellow task force members, in small groups, into other texts: Exodus 28, Leviticus 8, Mark 10, Titus 1, I Corinthians 12, I Peter 5, Hebrews 13, John 21 and Ephesians 4. The pattern that emerges, he said, “is that God calls broken, flawed persons to leadership, not demanding perfection but calling us to high standards.”

Jesus is the model for Christian leadership, he continued, noting Mark 10, where the disciples are vying for position and power, and Jesus rebukes them, calling them to be servants. “We are redeemed by Christ and equipped by God,” he said. “We walk in the footsteps of the savior. It’s about servant leadership and ministry, not power and authority.”

In many Biblical passages, noted the Rev. Sarah Grace Sanderson-Doughty of upstate New York, “ordination is implied, but not discussed.”

Reflecting on Hebrews 13, Joan Merritt of Bellevue, WA, observed, “It’s clear that leaders have been appointed, but there’s no information about how it’s happened.”

The Rev. John Wilkinson, a pastor from Rochester, NY, spoke about the “mystery” of I Cor. 12. “The presence of gifts and the ordering of them are all God’s,” he said. “There may be structure and standards, but they are not apparent here.”

At least a few of the passages touched uopn the theme of maturity in faith. Barbara Wheeler, the president of Auburn Theological Seminary in New York City, said that, in Ephesians 4, for instance, Paul seems to emphasize the ends of discipleship “that may be even more important than the list of functions.” Citing the 12th and 13th verses of the chapter — “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the son of God, to maturity” — Wheeler said: “Everyone’s told to grow up and speak the truth in love so the whole body can mature.”

Likewise in I Timothy 4, William Stacy Johnson, a professor at Princeton Theological Seminary, pointed out, Paul teaches that spiritual gifts are given by God, “but must be cultivated.”

In her opening Bible study on the same passage, Frances Taylor Gench, a professor at Union Theological Seminary/Presbyterian School of Christian Education in Richmond, VA, emphasized the same concept, translating the term for new Christians as “seedlings” who must be nurtured to maturity — a responsibility of church leaders.

The passages in the New Testament that imply ordination of some kind offer “profiles of qualifications,” she said, “not job descriptions telling (church leaders) what to do.” Gench said those passages amount to “a catalogue of virtues.”

“Because the church has an important function to fulfill, offices are established to ensure that fulfillment,” she said.

Calvin envisioned four ordained offices — of pastors, teachers, ruling (or governing) elders and deacons, Sanderson-Doughty noted: “The scriptural foundations for ordained offices were clear for Calvin.” She cited Ephesians 4:11-13, I Corinthians 12:28 and Romans 12:6-8.

Although other “offices” are cited in scripture, Calvin developed a rubric of “temporary” and “permanent” offices.

“Temporary offices (such as apostles and, interestingly, evangelists) are those necessary for the establishment of the church, but not necessary for its continuity once established,” she said. “God could call back these (temporary) offices when necessary.”

On the other hand, “Calvin considered pastors, teachers, deacons and elders as permanent, needed so long as the church continues to exist,” she said.

Sanderson-Doughty said it is also interesting that Calvin had little to say about ordination standards, focusing instead on gifts for ministry. “He was more concerned with attitude, and what was to be professed, preferring to emphasizes that extensive work needs to be done by pastors (and teachers) to lead people to ‘true righteousness,’” she said.

Calvin distinguished between the “inner call” to the individual church leader and the “outer call” to and from the faith community, she continued, and for Calvin, “the outer call was more important than the inner call.”

Mark Achtemeier, a theology professor from Dubuque Theological Seminary in Iowa, agreed. “Calvin had a really different understanding of inner call, that it comes after the outer call,” he said, “while we tend to think of it as ‘gut feeling.’ The implication is that the church needs to be more about recruiting and less about validating a ‘career choice.’”

Mentioning for the first time the divisive debate over the ordination of gay and lesbian Presbyterians, the Rev. Victoria Curtiss of Ames, IA, said: “We need to grapple more with this idea of primacy of external call. The idea that it’s the responsibility of communities to identify people, and our constitutional provisions that exclude whole categories of people, don’t mesh.”

“It’s a confusing mix,” Achtememeier agreed.

To those who believe the questions asked of candidates for ordination are set in stone, he had a message: “I was ordained in 1951, and I have lived through five different sets of ordination questions.”

A major shift in the theological underpinnings of ordination came in 1967, when the former United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (UPCUSA) adopted The Book of Confessions, Demarest said.

“When we moved from (the) Westminster (Confession) alone to The Book of Confessions, we opened the way to increasing theological pluralism and diversity among our members,” he said. “We have never settled this fundamental shift — though we had deep and abiding theological disputes even when there was Westminster only.”

Even the task force’s namesake ordination question — as to whether a candidate will “further” the peace, unity and purity of the church — has a checkered history in the denomination, Demarest pointed out.

In the earliest Form of Government, in 1788, one of four ordination questions was: “Do you promise to study the peace, unity and purity of the church?”

By 1886, “unity” had been removed from the question, which had become: “Do you promise to be zealous and faithful in maintaining the truths of the gospel and the purity and peace of the Church?”

That question was still in the ordination vows of the Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUS) in 1977, Demarest said, but in the mid-1960s, the UPCUSA had put “unity” back into the formula.

In 1981, when the PCUS and UPCUSA were preparing for reunion, the UPCUSA, reworded the ordination question: “Do you promise to further the peace, unity and purity of the church?” That language was retained after the 1983 reunion.

A further aberration — for pure Calvinists, at least — occurred in the northern stream of the church, then known as the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (PCUSA), in the mid-20th century, Demarest said. That denomination ordained women as elders beginning in 1930, but didn’t ordain a woman minister until 1956, he said, “in spite of the fact that the ordination questions (for elders and ministers) were identical.”

Wheeler commented: “Different de facto ordination standards for ministers and elders between 1930 and 1956 should have theologically offended those who held to the Reformation ‘distinctive’ of parity of ministers and elders.”

The Rev. Milton J. “Joe” Coalter, of Louisville, responded: “If we truly believe in the priesthood of all believers (one of Calvin’s central tenets), we ought to look at the questions asked of members, which are far different from the ordination questions. ... It’s peculiar, to me, that members are not required to believe the same as officers.”

Achtemeier, returning to the “maturity” issue raised during the theology discussion, said, “We shouldn’t be talking about officers being better persons, but about officers being more mature Christians.”

If that’s the case, said the Rev. Scott Anderson of Milwaukee, WI, “when all is said and done, the difference between officers and members is more than just function.”

“What difference should that make in our ordination standards?” asked Anderson, adding, “We need to look at our doctrine of sin, if we believe that the role of officers is to make members better Christians.”

Demarest concluded the inconclusive marathon by reminding his fellow members that their task in the next two years — the group will make its final report to the 2006 Assembly — is found in G-4.0301d of the Book of Order (“Principles of Presbyterian Government”): “Presbyters are not simply to reflect the will of the people, but rather to seek together to find and represent the will of Christ.”

“We all have our own agendas,” Demarest said, “but have experienced and committed ourselves to think less about what our constituencies will think of us, and more about what is the will of Christ.

“We are living out how a diverse group of people seeks out the will of Christ.”