Responses from 29 Overture Advocates to questions raised regarding the proposed deletion of G-6.0106b and issuance of a new authoritative interpretation
A: Yes. This is the middle ground we have been searching for. The presbyteries will act when they understand that we are not sadopting a new position on homosexuality -- we are retuning to our long heritage of honoring freedom of conscience.
Q: Shouldn't we "stop sending divisive legislation to our presbyteries?"
A: This is not new legistlation -- this is the removal of some old legislation, an experiment that failed. It seems clear that this will come to the agenda every year so long as half of our denomination feels that our policies are violating their conscience. This is the way to end this debate, by encouraging Presbyteirans to show one another the mutual forbearance in matters of conscience that is deeply roted in our heritage.
Q: Should we wait in order to "avoid dividing the church?"
A: No. the church already is divided over this matter. We have been worling on it for 25 years -- and our prohibition has ground increasingly divisive over time. More delay creates division. We must listen to the voices of the 28 presbyteries, in the 35 overtures sent to GA this year. We must not allow fear to deter us from faithfulness.
Q: Should this be referred to the Task Force?
A: No. We have already had a task force (1976-1978), a committee (1989-1991), and tow study periods (1991-96 and 1999-2001) on human sexuality. Further referral of this matter would achieve little except delay. If action on "B" is referred to the Theological Task Force, the work of that group will be dominated by this contentious matter and the broader theological discussion overwhelmed. Likewise, the Task Force cannot do its work unless there is a level -playing field, where all have an equal voice and we are not under the constant threat of further judidical acitons. After we adopt this reform, the Task Force will provide a climate in which we can agree to disagree, and explore our differences faithfully with one another.
Q: Are we acting against the clear teachings of the Bible?
A: No. The Bible is not clear on this subject. There are only six verses that speak to it, and they can be interpreted many ways by equally faithful Christians. Our Constitution requires that freedom of conscience in the interpretation of Scripture is to be maintained (G-6.0108a). Thirty-three -- more than half -- of the Biblical faculty in our Presbyteiran seminaries have submitted a statement to this Assembly stating their belief that our current posiiton is wrong.
Q: How can we endorse homosexuality?
A: We are not endorsing homosexuality. We are endorsing freedom of conscience, which has been a fundamental part of our tradition since the 1500s. This is the long-awaited "middle ground," neither requiring nor prohibiting the ordination of gay and lesbian people. Let's trust our governing bodies.
Q: Does this impose new rules or leaders on those who disagree?
A: No. A governing body believing that Scripture prohibits ordained service by gay and lesbian Presbyterians could exercise its diescretion not to ordain or ninstall them, while, in the same matter, governing bodiesw reading Scripture differently could follow their conscience as well. We ordain people to the whole church, but we install people to particular ministries. As is true now, Congregations will still elect and install their officers (G-10.0102l, G-14.0501b). Presbyteries will still examine, ordain, and approve persons laboring in their bounds (G-11.0103n, G-14.0403b, G-14.0507, G-11.0401).
Q: Qhat does the Advisory Committee on the Constitution say abotu this proposed action?
A: The ACC has advised on Ovt. 01-08 that "This overture correctly identifies the need to act on both G-6.0106b and the previous authoritative interpretations if the assembly wishes to change the position of the demonination on these matters. If both actions proposed inthis overture are approved, the goal of the overture will be achieved."
Q:What have both our Stated Clerk andd the Executive Director of the General Assembly Council said about our current standards?
A: "The regulatory approach is not working."