The Presbyterian Church (USA) taught me something this week: Apparently, changing one’s denominational constitution to redefine marriage is a peachy keen idea even if it will alienate about a quarter of one’s presbyteries (i.e., congregational districts).
First, a disclaimer: As a professing member of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, I don’t know all of the details. But the PC(USA) has graciously provided several materials explaining their decision and detailing the entire ratification process.
As of Tuesday, March 17, a majority of the PC(USA)’s 171 presbyteries has tallied votes in favor of defining marriage as “a unique commitment between two people, traditionally a man and a woman.” Their General Assembly, or overarching governing body, proposed the amendment in June 2014, giving the presbyteries the opportunity to discuss the change and vote to accept or reject it. A simple majority would solidify the amendment. Now, even with roughly 40 presbyteries still to cast their votes, the change will go into effect in June 2015.
It is a bit disturbing that some prominent PC(USA) members seem quite nonchalant about the intra- and inter-denominational ramifications of this decision. Though their church’s decision may only apply to their members and ministers legally, the consequences of this change affect all denominations.
Approximately one-third of the presbyteries who have already voted, which is about one-quarter of all PC(USA) presbyteries, cast their vote against the redefinition of marriage. To be fair, PC(USA) did try to accommodate the possible dissenters: Ministers are not required to marry same-sex couples and congregational leaders may establish whether their church property can be used for same-sex marriage ceremonies.
Regardless of these compromising measures, the decision ignores this minority of presbyteries. As quoted in the New York Times, Paul Detterman, national director of The Fellowship Community — a PC(USA) group that opposes the decision and has decided to remain in the PC(USA) — said, “We definitely will see another wave, a sizable wave, of conservative folks leaving.”
Yes, and I’m sure they will. That’s the beauty of private association. If someone doesn’t like what the church declares as its doctrine, she is allowed to leave.
However, let us also take note of a statement by Ruling Elder Heath K. Rada and Rev. Larissa Kwong Abazia, Moderator and Vice Moderator respectively of the 2014 General Assembly: “[W]e encourage the congregations, presbyteries, and synods of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to continue to be in conversation about marriage and the family. We hope [to continue]…a dedication to partnership in the midst of our diversity of opinion.”
To continue the discussion about a fundamental moral question with consequences in both personal and public life seems like a prudent measure. But what about the fact that “a sizable wave” of the opposition will probably leave? How much of a discussion is really going to occur?
If intra-denominational politics are sticky with this attempt to keep the PC(USA) unified even with the scriptural disputes of several of its members, then what about inter-denominational politics?
Alan Wisdom, interim editor of the Protestant journal Theology Matters, observes, “I don’t see any further large mainline denominations making the same move.” Which makes sense — PC(USA) is one of the latter churches to jump on board with this movement. The Episcopalians, United Church of Christ, Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, and others beat them to it.
PC(USA)’s decision is not the beginning of some new crusade for social justice; rather, it continues to widen the chasm between “conservative” and “liberal” members of the catholic church. And by catholic, I mean the true sense of the word — the whole, universal, body of Christ.
Many members and leaders of PC(USA) believe this decision will allow them to reach out to homosexuals in a way that is more loving and honest than ever before. But acquiescing to the world’s call for gay marriage is not necessary in witnessing to individuals of any sexual orientation.
