One of the questions swirling in debates about controversies and
issues in the Presbyterian Church (USA) is whether there remains any
semblance of “essential tenets” that persons elected to office
must “receive and adopt” before they can be ordained.
As a matter of fact, there are none, the General Assembly of 1997
declared.
But the issue continues to crop up in the Confessing Church Movement;
the decision of a presbytery court declaring that Confessing Church
resolutions are illegal; the considerations of the denomination’s
Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity, and the
interpretative analyses of the PCUSA Constitution by the Office of the
Stated Clerk – as well as other venues.
Essentially meaningless
The most recent editions of
The Book of Confessions include a
20-page report titled “Confessional Nature of the Church Report.”
While the report is positioned before the 11 confessions and sets the
tone for how Presbyterians should view them, it is not part of the
confessional documents themselves. Amending a confession or including a
new confession requires a super-majority approval from at least two
thirds of the presbyteries. “Confessional Nature of the Church
Report” was never submitted to a referendum. It was merely a report
received by the 1997 General Assembly, and was placed in
The Book of
Confessions by questionable authority.
The report regards the confessions as a license for freedom rather than
a compendium of essential tenets.
Free to be 'instructed'...
“The ordination question that asks for commitment to the ‘essential
tenets’ of the confessions brings freedom in the church at several
levels,” the report says. “Ordained persons are free to be ‘instructed,’
‘led,’ and ‘continually guided’ by the confessions
without being forced to subscribe to any precisely worded articles of
faith drawn up either by the General Assembly or by a presbytery.”
The opening words of the Nicene Creed, the first declaration in
The Book of Confessions, are “We believe in one God” –
which, by the standards of the report, is not essential.
The effect of the report is to elevate the nine
Book of Order
questions candidates must answer at ordination over the substance of the
confessions themselves. That seems contradictory to the traditional
ranking of authorities in the Presbyterian and Reformed tradition –
first, Jesus Christ as “the Scriptures bear witness to him;”
second, Scripture; third, the confessions; fourth, the
Book of Order;
and, last, declarations by and reports to the General Assembly.
Conflicting issues
The report also seems to conflict with theology that is rooted in
Scripture, the confessions and polity and affirmed in national
referendums in the denomination – including the standards for
sexual behavior.
It discounts the witness of the confessions by declaring, “The
theology and ethics of confessions of every age are shaped by what seem
to be the normative or preferable sexual, familial, social, economic,
cultural, and political patterns of a particular period of history …
Despite all good intentions, they have also distorted the truth revealed
in Jesus Christ, been unable to grasp parts of the Biblical witness to
God’s presence and work in Christ, and divided the church into
churches with conflicting views of what Christian faith and life are all
about.”
Later, the report adds that Christians who wrote the confessions were “influenced
by the sexual, racial, and economic biases and by the scientific and
cultural limitations of a particular situation,” which is the
thrust of the argument made by advocates for ordaining unrepentant,
practicing homosexuals. Those advocates said Scripture, the confessions
and the
Book of Order contained outdated cultural taboos, not
divine mandates.
Ironically, the report suggests that even without theological “essentials,”
the confessions are, well, essential. “A confession of faith is
more than a personal affirmation of faith,” it says. “It is an
officially adopted statement of what a community of Christians believe.”
Taboo word: Fundamental
The report even uses the taboo word: fundamental. “In every time
and place the church is called to make the implications of its
fundamental confession of the Lordship of Jesus Christ unmistakably
clear and relevant.”
Furthermore, it describes the confessions as “the church’s
means of preserving the authenticity and purity of its faith” –
without offering any suggestion about what constitutes authenticity and
purity.
So what does it mean when a presbytery ordains a minister or a session
ordains an elder or deacon – someone who must “receive”
and “adopt” nonexistent essential tenets?
“In a presbytery the decision for ordination is always determined
by the concrete encounter between the presbytery and the candidate,”
the report says. “Presbyteries (in the case of ministers) and
church sessions (in the case of elders and deacons) are free to decide
for themselves what acceptable loyalty to the confessions means in their
particular situation without being bound to any ‘check list’
prescribed by higher governing bodies of the church.’”
Guided by ambiguity
Many Presbyterians seem guided by the ambiguity and self-contradictions
of the report, which, despite its denials, seems to repudiate the very
oaths officers are required to take and the historic role of
confessions.
The report also seems to collide with another constitutional provision –
one that was approved by presbyteries.
“While confessional standards are subordinate to the Scriptures,
they are, nonetheless, standards,” says the
Book of Order
(Chapter 2). “They are not lightly drawn up or subscribed to, nor
may they be ignored or dismissed. The church is prepared to counsel with
or even to discipline one ordained who seriously rejects the faith
expressed in the confessions.”
Ironically, Chapter 2 contains a number of tenets that had long been
considered foundational – and often described as “essential,”
until the 1997 General Assembly took that word out of the confessional
lexicon.