Responding to Amendment O: Issues to Consider

Presbyteries now face the decision whether or not to amend the church’s Constitution explicitly to forbid covenant blessings (Holy Unions) for same-sex covenantal life partners. This unwise amendment would prematurely end a vigorous theological and pastoral discussion between good and faithful Presbyterians and will require that celebrations of covenant commitments will become an unreasonable and unfortunate litmus test for ministry.

Our denomination has historically placed trust in its elected church officers to exercise local ministry and mission wisely. Amendment O, were it to be adopted, would radically undermine this tradition of confidence in the integrity of our ordained leadership.

The language of Amendment O has wide-ranging implications for ministers, church officers, and congregations that go well beyond limiting their freedom with regard to the pastoral and congregational care of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender church members. The following thoughts are offered as a basis for discernment and discussion as presbyteries prepare to vote.

THE WORDING OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT & WHERE IT WOULD FIT

the Directory for Worship] Scripture and our Confessions teach that God’s intention for

If approved by 87 presbyteries, this amendment will be added to the Directory for Worship immediately following the paragraphs discussing marriage — in the chapter entitled "Ordering Worship for Special Services." This chapter outlines ways in which the church recognizes or celebrates "special occasions and transitions in the life of the church’s members" such as:

Services of Welcoming and Reception Commissioning of Specific Acts of Discipleship

Services of Acceptance and Reconciliation.

THE PURPOSE OF THE DIRECTORY FOR WORSHIP

The Directory for Worship is the second section in the Book of Order, following the Form of Government. As stated in its preface,

"This Directory for Worship reflects the conviction that the life of the Church is one, and that its

THE USE OF PRECISE LANGUAGE IN THE CONSTITUTION

FIVE ISSUES RELATED TO MARRIAGE WHERE THE CONSTITUTION USES "SHALL"

(See The Directory for Worship, W-4.9000 — Marriage).

• The legal requirements of the state
• The privileges and responsibilities of Christian marriage
• The nature and form of the service
• The vows and commitments the couple will make
• The nature of these commitments to their lives of discipleship
• The resources of faith of the Christian community to assist them to fulfill these marriage commitments.

2. Following these discussions, should the minister determine that it is unwise that the couple marry, the minister shall assure the couple of the "church’s continuing concern" for them and not conduct the ceremony.

3. During the marriage service the couple shall declare their intention to enter into Christian marriage and shall exchange vows of love and faithfulness.

4. Prayers shall be offered for the couple, the communities which support them, and for all who

seek to live in faithfulness.

5. In the name of the triune God the minister shall declare publicly that the woman and man are

now joined in marriage.

WITH AMENDMENT O TWO ADDITIONAL SHALLS WOULD BE ADDED

6. Church property shall not be used for…
7. …and church officers shall not take part in conducting any ceremony or event that

pronounces the blessing of God upon any relationship that is inconsistent with God’s intention of fidelity in marriage and chastity in singleness.

ENFORCEMENT AND WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Should "The Ministry Gag Order"be approved, its plain and common sense interpretation could lead the church into new and uncharted territory with reference to the policies and practices that govern ministers and churches in relation to how they carry out their ministry and mission. Many interpreters assert that a fair and even-handed enforcement of Amendment O will mean that…

If the minister has not counseled the couple in all areas mentioned in W-4.9000 (see above)

If at least one of the partners is not a professing Christian (including engaged children and

…then disciplinary charges will be filed against these ministers and sessions in like manner as those who conduct commitment services for their same-sex congregational members. Assuming a fair and equitable application of Amendment O, charges against pastors and sessions will abound.

THE AMENDMENT ABRIDGES FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE OF CHURCH OFFICERS

Presbyterians of good faith and conscience are deeply and passionately divided on the issue before us. Conflict and controversy surrounding the place of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Presbyterian Church members has existed for decades. As noted by recent cases before the General Assembly’s Permanent Judicial Commission, radical inconsistencies exist within the Constitution itself with reference to church membership and full inclusion. Amendment O would make matters worse. In the search to form a reasonable resolution for those who disagree, mutual forbearance must be restored. This is an issue for prayerful and loving discussion. Judicial cases cannot help but create a hopelessly adversarial situation — to the great detriment of our church.

Since what a person believes about sexual orientation has not been declared an "essential tenet of faith" in our denomination, it is of the utmost importance that we not bind the consciences nor practical pastoral activity of any officer in the church. Adoption of this "Ministry Gag Order" amendment, however, would do just that.

AMENDMENT O AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR FAMILIES AND FRIENDS

Church officers with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender -- or non-married heterosexual —children, grandchildren, and other relatives and friends could well find themselves in the untenable position of having to choose between blessing their loved ones in life-long covenantal relationships and following the new demands placed on them by proposed Amendment O.

"DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL" IS NOT AN OPTION

Many interpreters of this proposed amendment assume that Amendment O requires that all heterosexual couples presenting themselves to Presbyterian clergy for marriage and/or who seek to celebrate their wedding day on Presbyterian property be chaste at the time of the service. If this is the case (to be determined later through the judicial processes of the church) clergy and sessions that intend to offer the hospitality of the church and its ministry for these joyous occasions would then have to inquire into the current sexual activity of each couple. If the couple is not chaste and refuses to be so at the time of the marriage, Presbyterian officers would be unable to invoke God’s blessing in such a service. The church’s ministry of hospitality could not be extended and the couple would have to find another context in which to celebrate their love.

"O" WILL HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON CONGREGATIONAL EVANGELISM

If this amendment were to pass, Evangelism committees should be careful in inviting same-sex couples into church membership, lest those couples desire that their church home provide a context wherein God’s blessing on them might be sought. Worse, sessions would have to take care in approving for church membership same-sex couples and non-married heterosexual couples, lest that imply giving "the approval of the church." In fact, all congregational outreach strategies would require re-evaluation in light of this Ministry Gag Order Amendment.

OTHER QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER BEFORE VOTING ON AMENDMENT O.

1. Should ordained officers of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) be prohibited by church law from invoking God’s blessing?

Scripture and our Reformed tradition teach that God is sovereign in all of God’s work, including those whom God chooses to bless. The church would gravely err and fall into extreme hubris were it to call upon its people to refuse to pray God’s blessing on any part of God’s own creation.

1. What are the implications of binding the authority of Sessions to direct the use of church

property?

The Constitution states that the "session is responsible for the mission and government of the particular church. It therefore has the responsibility and power…to provide for the management of the property of the church, including determination of the appropriate use of church buildings and facilities" (G-10.10102o).

In the rush to exclude the possibility that Presbyterians might choose to bless the union of two of their own, this proposed amendment would abridge the basic right of the session to choose what is right for its mission in its community. What session’s right might be the next to be abridged?

2. What are the implications of binding the authority of the pastor to determine his or her pastoral responsibility?

The Constitution asserts that all baptized members "are entitled to pastoral care" (G-5.02021) as it helps pastors to determine how to minister faithfully (G-6.017a). Were Amendment O to be added to our church’s Constitution, church officers might find that they were prohibited from performing sensitive pastoral functions, such as baptizing the child of an unmarried heterosexual couple or officiating at a funeral for a same-sex partnered member that has died from AIDS -- lest these pastoral actions be interpreted as pronouncing a "blessing."

Because the language of "The Ministry Gag Order" is both vague and sweeping, it is not clear what else will become a chargeable offense. Simple and basic welcoming ministries to faithful gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Presbyterians and outreach to the wider community are difficult in the best of our present circumstances. Were Amendment O to be adopted, if a session were to determine that a local chapter of PFLAG (Parents, Friends and Families of Lesbians and Gays) is consistent with the ministry of the congregation and were to offer meeting space, that is a probable transgression. Other organizations such as 12 Step programs with special outreach to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender members might be banished from church property in that their organizations’ goals are in support of healthy relationships for all.

5. What is the most important thing one can do to work for the defeat of Amendment O?

Adoption of Amendment O would needlessly cast mean-spirited doubt on the integrity of our duly elected, ordained and installed church officers. Surely we can trust our local sessions and pastors to exercise wisdom and discernment in the care of their congregations and ministries. Let us remain faithful to our Presbyterian tradition of basic support and confidence in our congregations, sessions and ministers to provide caring pastoral outreach in their community.