Carmen answers the questions she has been hearing frequently since the passage of Amendment 10A.
Q: As a conservative, what should I do and what should our church do as the PCUSA moves toward gay ordination?
A: First of all, let’s clarify: There are no genuine "conservatives" in the PCUSA if by conservative you mean radical-right or fundamentalist Christians. The very fact that the most conservative organization in the denomination, The Presbyterian Lay Committee, is led by an ordained woman speaks to that reality. Over the past 45 years the PCUSA has migrated so far to the left that we can no longer see the right from our current vantage point.
The vote to eliminate all standards of sexual practice is not a sudden dramatic departure from the historic faith. This is but one stride further along a path that diverted many years ago from the Westminster standards, the five Solas of the Reformation, genuine submission to the authority and Lordship of Jesus Christ and the revelation of the will of God in the Word of God. The PCUSA has been breaking itself apart over liberal and progressive agendas since 1925. We are simply now reaping the fruit of what has been sown.
And that fruit is not simply gay ordination. The new language adopted by the majority vote of PCUSA presbyteries allows for the ordination of non-celibate single heterosexuals, married people who commit adultery, people practicing open marriage, as well as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
Now, to your question about "expected responses" among "conservatives." I will take the question in two parts: for congregations who can be so identified and for individuals, whose responses will be more immediate and potentially more radical than the congregations of which they are currently a member.
I foresee that congregations within the PCUSA who describe themselves variously as evangelical, conservative, orthodox or traditional in their beliefs and practice will choose one of four paths forward.
1. Some will avoid all sense of conflict by acting as if nothing has really changed. This will reinforce what many already experience as de facto congregationalism. They will say to their neighbors, "That's the national church. That's not us." One variation on this theme will be the acknowledgment that although the official rules have changed, "it doesn't apply to us." These people are hoping that the change will have no force or effect in their context. One wonders how such will fare when the time comes to call a new pastor or receive into their community those ordained elsewhere in the nation. One also wonders how these congregations will respond further down the road when the issue is not ordination but the wholesale redefinition of marriage and mandatory payments to the Board of Pensions to support benefits for the same-sex partners of church employees.
2. Some will leave to join other existing branches of the Presbyterian church. This path has already been trod by more than 100 churches in the past few years. Many have departed over the bridge built by the New Wineskins Association of Churches to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC). But others have departed to the Evangelical Covenant Church (ECC), the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) and to independence. Where it is possible, these congregations will seek gracious dismissal from their current presbyteries. In more hostile settings, disaffiliation will be the path they cut. Real and financial property will be at issue as the denomination continues to assert an imposed trust over all local church property. (See the Second Edition, A Guide to Church Property Law, ed. Lloyd Lunceford, 2010.)
3. A group called Fellowship-PCUSA is working to lay the groundwork on a multi-faceted model that seeks to alleviate the conscience of those who do not necessarily want to stay but whose congregations are too hetero-genius to achieve a sufficient vote to leave or are located in states where current church property law favors the denomination's assertion of trust. They also universally want to get beyond the morality debates that have mired the PCUSA for decades. Their missional design includes creating as many shadow-presbyteries within existing presbyteries as is possible as well as a new (but still tangentially connected) denomination for those who must leave but don't want to go to the EPC, PCA, ECC or elsewhere. The model envisions subscription to a list of essentials, realignment into new presbyteries, a national association of like-hearted missionally-minded Presbyterians and a return to accountability that is based in Calvin's "company" of pastors and elders. Great hope is being placed in this group of tall steeple pastors by many smaller congregations across the country. They will meet August 25-27 in Minneapolis.
4. Finally, there are those uniquely called to remain within the PCUSA as a witness to the truth, no matter what. These missionaries have a very special anointing by the Holy Spirit. They will not be silenced and they cannot be driven out for fear of the rising tides of cultural accommodation. They have a Jeremiah like calling and spirit. They will ultimately recast what "renewal" will mean in the next generation and they will find easy fellowship with their counterparts in the Word Alone network in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in American (ELCA), the Good News movement in the United Methodist Church (UMC), and the Faithful and Welcoming churches of the United Church of Christ (UCC).
The larger question for a denomination that has lost more than half its members in a generation is "what will individual members do?" For some the line in the sand was the vote itself. They are already gone. For others, the line in the sand will be news of the first actual ordination of an openly gay candidate for ministry. That could occur as early as July 10 for elders and deacons and soon thereafter for ministers of the Word and sacrament. For others, the line in the sand will be a decision of the denomination's General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission (GAPJC) that so subverts the truth that it can no longer be said that the PCUSA adheres in any way to the revealed Word of God in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. The GAPJC has relevant cases pending before it. Those cases will be heard the last week of July.
Two other lines in the sand are already foreseeable. The first is the redefinition of marriage. Overtures will come again to the 2012 meeting of the General Assembly in July in Pittsburgh. As an amendment to the Book of Order's Directory for Worship, the voting cycle would take an additional year. However, to genuinely redefine marriage in the PCUSA, several changes would have to made to the Book of Confessions. That process requires majority votes by two successive General Assemblies (2012 and 2014) and a 2/3 majority vote of presbyteries. The more pressing line is the extension of benefits to same-sex domestic partners through the Presbyterian Board of Pensions plan (likely to occur January 2013). Participation in the plan is mandatory for all PCUSA churches and there is currently no way to opt out.
Q: There’s some talk that the vote on 10A is the fault of the New Wineskins’ churches that have left. Do you agree? What other factors contributed to the shift in the vote?
A: Actual departures certainly hurt the vote in a few presbyteries but it is blame-casting to point at those who left and say it’s their fault that we are where we are. In a denomination that claims to have more than 10,000 congregations, it is silly to say that the departure of just over 100 could swing the vote so far so fast. Too many presbyteries flipped in this voting cycle to blame the change on those who have left via New Wineskins.
In some presbyteries specialized and retired clergy outnumber the ministers who are actually serving viable congregations. We know by our own Presbyterian Panel surveys that the further removed a person is from the pews, the more liberal their theology. We also know that based on 2009 statistics, more than half of the PCUSA's congregations have less than 97 members, and the majority of those function without pastoral leadership. Who then is informing and equipping those congregations for votes on issues at presbytery meetings? Are they even showing up to vote? An additional problem is faced when larger churches, which tend to be more conservative, are under-represented at presbytery meetings. Working age lay people are also generally under-represented as many presbyteries meet on week-days. There is also the issue of fatigue. People are tired of saying "no," even though "no" is the right thing to say.
Q: It seems like there are fewer Renewal groups than there used to be. Who are the people that oppose gay ordination and what are they planning to do now?
A: Again, the issue is much larger than gay ordination. What we're facing is a departure from any explicit expectation of sexual behavior among the ordained leadership of Presbyterian churches. We're talking about non-celibate unmarried heterosexuals, married heterosexuals who do not restrict their sexual experiences to their spouse, as well as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. The key opponents and groups to all that? In reality, the majority of Presbyterians in the pews – who did not get to vote on the matter. It is yet to be seen how many of them will vote in the coming weeks, months and years by finding more fertile church soil in which to cultivate their lives in Christ and produce good fruit for His Kingdom.
A bevy of folks have posted responses to the action. It would be worth reading the statements by the Presbyterian Lay Committee, the Presbyterian Renewal Network, the Institute on Religion and Democracy, Presbyterians for Renewal and the Presbyterian Coalition.
Please submit your questions pertaining to the passing of Amendment 10-A to Carmen.