by Gene TeSelle   [7-21-05]

On July 19 the Theological Task Force (TTF) released a much-awaited draft of its report. It is still tentative. "Draft" is watermarked on each page; there are a number of editorial reminders such as "Need citation here" and "Reference to recent issue of the Outlook"; and Part IV, which will make recommendations, has still not been released. But we can be sure that what has now been released will be read closely.

Jim Berkley of Presbyterians for Renewal sees the report as too sympathetic with faithful covenanted relationships, and John H. Adams of The Layman sees it as tilting toward liberation theology. There will be much more discussion in coming days.

An Introduction that makes a set of key theological affirmations is followed by sections on the process followed by the TTF (Part I), how its thinking developed (Part II), and "Resources for Peace, Unity, and Purity" (Part III). This last begins to move toward the payoff that everyone is really waiting for, the recommendations of the TTF, which are still to come.

The theological affirmations note the plurality within Christianity and within the Reformed tradition, acknowledge the frequent errors made in the past (including religious justification of slavery and the slaughter of Native Americans), and emphasize that God, not the church, is the source of authentic life and witness and the one who alone breaks "the power of sin, death, and evil."

The report on the TTF's deliberations begins by noting how they tried to examine and understand the sources of each other's pain. It reminds us that a factionalized church does not offer a sign of God's gift of peace, unity, and purity. And it calls for the "discipline of listening and reflection."

Dealing with the debated issue of biblical authority it notes that the PC(USA) honors a variety of approaches and then points out, on the basis of the TTF's own experience, that disagreements are less about the meanings of passages than about their pastoral application. When it comes to questions about same-sex relations, the TTF notes that both conservatives and liberals often base their positions not so much on Scripture as on "natural theology" (more accurately, "natural law," which is based on moral reflection about human needs and tendencies).

Not taking a position on the ordination question, the TTF poses a different question: "How are baptized gay and lesbian persons in exclusive, covenanted relationships called to participate in the life of the church in God's gracious [gap — probably "work"] of creation, reconciliation, and redemption?" (II, lines 227-29).

Now to Part III, "Resources for Peace, Unity and Purity." The TTF points out that debates within the church too often squeeze choices into "a binary format that divides governing bodies into two parties," the result being "a church both preoccupied with and weary of conflict" (lines 10-12). It repeatedly notes that parliamentary procedure is often the worst way to resolve conflicts, calling instead for more dialogue based on mutual respect and acknowledgment.

How, then, can we respect "both the will of majorities and the conscience of minorities"? (lines 19-20). Differing positions are based on "sincere efforts to attend to God's Word and Spirit" (lines 38-39), and resolutions based merely upon "technical or legal means" cannot address "the conflict of convictions that gave rise to the disagreements in the first place" (lines 88-90).

In response to these questions, Part III focuses upon four pairs of principles or "points of balance" that have shaped Presbyterian polity. The metaphor is taken seriously later on (let's hope it will remain only a metaphor): when the church is blown by "currents of culture and winds of discord," it may need to emphasize some elements of its polity "in order to restore the required tension within its points of balance, thereby righting the ship and steering the church's obedience to the leading of the Spirit" (lines 280-87).

So here are the desired points of tension and balance. Presbyterians have regularly sought, the TTF says,

To honor communal discernment of God's will and the Spirit's leading
while also
Recognizing that God alone is Lord of the conscience under the authority of Scripture

II.

To adhere to essential and necessary beliefs and practices that bind the faithful into the body of Christ
while also
Respecting freedom in non-essential matters of belief, worship, piety, witness and service

III.

To maintain a distinctive Presbyterian and Reformed witness to the world
while also
Engaging in mission with other Christians with whom we share a catholic identity

IV.

To uphold the rights and responsibilities of governing bodies that have original jurisdiction in church governance
while also
Sustaining the rights and responsibilities of governing bodies
that have the power of oversight and review

The most important "resources" in this part of the report are the frequent reminders, with references in the footnotes, of the ways pluralism has been acknowledged in the church: the recognition that "all synods and councils may err" (C-6.175); the Adopting Act of 1729, a conscious alternative to "strict subscription" to the Westminster Standards; the mutual recognition offered each time a schism has been healed (Old Side and New Side in 1758, Old School and New School in 1870, PCUSA and Cumberland Presbyterians in 1903, PCUSA and United Presbyterians in 1958, UPCUSA and PCUS in 1983. The 1870 agreement, recognizing the need for "points of balance," acknowledged the need for "guarantees for orthodoxy and Christian liberty" in a spirit of "diversity and harmony, liberty and love" (lines 184-85).

The TTF quotes, without criticizing, one of the main constitutional sources of conflict: the provision that "a majority shall govern" (G-1.0400) and that those who cannot in conscience submit have the right to take that conscience elsewhere (line 128 and note). But the rigidity of this principle helps to reinforce their emphasis on mutual acknowledgment and continued dialogue. Dialogue in congregations and presbyteries is encouraged, and some examples are noted, at least by reference to a recent issue of the Outlook.

The way not to engage in dialogue is to assume from the start that one's discussion partners occupy illegitimate positions. Something of this attitude was expressed by the Presbyterian Lay Committee in its June 21, 2005, statement entitled "Can Two Faiths Embrace One Future?" and the discussion guide issued the next day. It contends that "pluralist" or "inclusivist" approaches to denominational unity, which it associates with the Theological Task Force and the Office of the General Assembly, are "both irrational and unfaithful." That's why "plural" really means "two" — the right way and the wrong way.   [See my earlier comments on the Lay Committee comments.]

If that is the attitude adopted in dialogue sessions, we will not get very far. The very process of dialogue will be viewed as an attempt to lead true believers into paths of doubt and defection, and interchanges that take place among dialogue partners will only cause further pain and disillusionment.

Even the apostles did not find unanimity and harmony (look at Acts 15 and Galatians. They even thought they were preaching different gospels. All that James and Peter and John offered to Paul was the right hand of fellowship; none was the catechumen of another. Do we expect our own wrestlings with diversity to be any simpler?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
More comments
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

from John Harris, Witherspoon’s Membership Coordinator –

All,

A quick read of the PUP Draft Prologue and Parts I-III offers me some long term but little short-term hope. I think it also offers more hope to progressives than to conservatives. Here is my "off the top of my head" response – in full awareness that this is a draft version of the report.

I think the draft report returns to a church united by theology rather than mission or polity, but the theological consensus is not the old static confessional consensus based on Westminster. It is a fluid and dynamic consensus based on our historical confessions (plural). The Task Force even broadens the modern consensus by referring to confessional statements from Korea and South Africa.

Apparently refusing to define "the essential tenets" of the Reformed Faith, as some have called for, the report follows Jack Rogers’ lead in lifting up G-2.0300 through G-2.0500 as the best summary statement of our theological identity while also noting that even precise theological statements can be broadly construed.

While continuing a GA tendency to emphasize the Preliminary Principles (G-1.000), the report also draws attention to recent studies and reports such as "Biblical Authority and Interpretation,"by the United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America General Assembly, 1982,and"Presbyterian Understanding and Use of Holy Scripture," by the Presbyterian Church in the United States, General Assembly, 1983 as well as "The Confessional Nature of the Church," from the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) General Assembly, 1986 and a 1992 study paper on Reformed and Presbyterian theology of ordination. In my opinion, if more ministers and elders were familiar with the principles articulated in the above mentioned studies and reports, we would experience few contentious disagreements on the floor of the General Assemblies and in presbyteries.

What we do not have is perhaps the most important part of the report, Section IV, containing the Task Force’s’ practical recommendations for how the peace, unity and purity of the church may be preserved and promoted. What we have so far is firmly based on our historical as well as more contemporary confessions and grounded in our polity, especially more long-held principles. With numerous references and allusions to Scripture, the report in many places reminds me of the Brief Statement of Faith, though not as poetic. The report is also very confessional in places, confessional both in the sense of stating what we believe and in stating how we have fallen short of God's intention for us and our need to repent.

John E. Harris

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And from Chuck Rassieur, HR –

Many thanks for sending out the drafts from the Task Force on P.U.P. After reading through them now several times I have these personal comments:

1. I am particularly pleased with how these drafts acknowledge, affirm, and legitimize the wide diversity of theological viewpoints in the PCUSA. This means there should be no place in the PCUSA for any claims to having the only right position while criticizing or demonizing other Presbyterians who genuinely and sincerely hold other points of view.

2. I am also very pleased that once this report is finalized, it will be sent throughout the PCUSA for discussion, and members of the Task Force will also be traveling throughout the church to interpret their final report. For those willing to be involved, there should be a good discussion in the coming months leading up to G.A. next year.

3. I also especially appreciated the point made that potentially divisive matters in the church should not, and cannot be settled by parliamentary procedures with the winners taking all. Particularly, there needs to be theological discussion and reflection that is respectful of differing perspectives.

4. My pessimistic side anticipates that the report from the Task Force will be far more widely received and welcomed by those who already acknowledge and affirm diversity, while it may be dismissed or criticized by those who feel that their view of the truth is the only correct view. The work and final report of the Task Force is a very positive step in the right direction, but the rest of the PCUSA has a lot of work to do!

Chuck Rassieur

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MLP responds to the draft Theological Task Force report

Friday, July 22 2005 [posted here 7-27-05]
Read this also on the More Light website >>

The PCUSA's Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church has released a draft version of its report, minus the recommendations section. MLP's board has written a response, which appears below. A PDF version is also available.

More Light Presbyterians
Statement on the draft report of the Theological Task Force
July 22, 2005

The More Light Presbyterians National Board of Directors has reviewed the drafts released so far by the Theological Task Force on the Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church. We give thanks to God for the individual members of the Task Force and for their diligent and thoughtful work, which we know was not easy. We are heartened by many of the statements in the draft reports so far, specifically the following elements:

• Affirmation of Christology and Trinitarian theology, especially that "God loves us," "God saves us" and "God empowers us with a commission and calling." It is especially important for those of us who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) to hear those words because, as the draft reports recognize, the Church has often erred in alienating LGBT people. A common and painful experience of this alienation is when we hear God’s call to serve, but the Church denies the call, telling us we are not worthy of God’s grace.

• Affirmation of Reformed understandings of scripture and the Presbyterian approach to Scriptural interpretation, particularly the centrality of Jesus Christ; the necessity to interpret Scripture in light of the two-fold commandment to love God and neighbor; and the necessity to interpret particular passages in the context of the whole of Scripture.

• Affirmation of Presbyterian polity, particularly that we balance communal discernment of God’s will and the Spirit’s leading with the recognition that God alone is Lord of the conscience; that we balance adherence in essential beliefs with freedom in non-essential matters; and that we balance the rights and responsibilities of governing bodies so that original jurisdiction in church governance is balanced against oversight and review. It is because of these balancing principles that presbyteries have traditionally and historically determined the criteria for ministers of Word and Sacrament, and congregations the same for deacons and elders, aside from the few essential tenets about the person and work of Jesus the Christ.

• Affirmation that a "winning majority takes all" approach does not resolve conflicts in the Church. Indeed, LGBT Presbyterians have suffered greatly the past three decades due to unjust policies enacted with this approach, including G-6.0106(b), enacted through narrow and divisive votes both at General Assembly and in the presbyteries. Similarly, an onslaught of organized, spurious judicial attacks against LGBT people and our allies, particularly pastors of more light churches, have demonstrated the destructiveness of this wholly ungracious and unchristian approach within the church. We regret that the Task Force seems to have overlooked these attacks which have been inflicted solely by one side against the other, and have accomplished nothing except draining the Church of time, talent, and money.

• Affirmation of previous General Assembly positions that "(1) It is a grave error to deny baptism or church membership to gay and lesbian persons or to withhold pastoral care to them and their families. (2) Those who aspire to ordination must lead faithful lives. Those who demonstrate licentious behavior should not be ordained. (3) It is damaging and dangerous to teach that sexual behavior is a purely personal matter that is not relevant for Christian discipleship, leadership and community life; and (4) Sexual orientation is, in itself, no barrier to ordination."

• Affirmation of the theological meanings of peace, unity, and purity, specifically that the unity of the church is based on the indivisibility of Christ; the purity of the church is based on the belief that "truth, holiness and righteousness matter as pathways to discipleship;" and the peace of the church is to be found "where differing voices are not only respectfully engaged, but also honored as full partners."

It is of utmost importance now that we go forward as a church with this theological understanding, that

there can be no unity without diversity,
there can be no purity without integrity, and
there can be no peace without justice.

The Church must not hide behind false notions of peace as the absence of conflict, purity as the absence of openness about who we really are, or unity as the absence of dissent. We must now, without delay, turn back the prejudicial policies that have severed LGBT members from the body of Christ, that have created a "don’t ask don’t tell" hypocrisy in which those called to serve their Lord face the false choice of lying or leaving, and that have created a second-class category of membership within the Church.

The church must not delay further votes to remove prejudicial barriers to the full participation of LGBT people of faith in the life, ministry, and witness of the Church. While parliamentary procedures alone cannot solve the problem of prejudice within the Church, it is the only place we can begin to heal three decades of shattered trust with the Church’s LGBT members. It is only when these barriers are removed that differing voices can respectfully engage as full partners; then and only then can we begin to establish meaningful relationships and have honest dialogue about how together we might seek the peace, unity, and purity of the Church.

We believe that the Church is ready to be open, to be loving, to be accepting and affirming of all God's children, including LGBT persons and their families and friends. In the process the TTF used, individual members spent time getting to know one other and gained an appreciation for each other through an intense process of interpersonal engagement. We are concerned that they may have missed an opportunity to discern the good will and readiness within the larger Church for change.

We have hoped, prayed and kept vigil for the Church and its mission during the past four years, indeed for more than 3 decades of dialogue. We will continue to do so from now until the General Assembly meets in 2006. It is our hope and prayer that the Church may at last let the Spirit in, be courageous, speak from conscience, do the right thing, and heed the call to end this prejudice and injustice against LGBT members of our family so that the gifts of all may be employed to God's glory and to the furtherance of God's mission in the world.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A Letter from the
Co-Moderators of the Covenant Network
Regarding the Draft Report of the
Theological Task Force on
Peace Unity and Purity of the Church

[Posted here on 8-24-05, with your WebWeaver's apologies for taking so long!]

As Co-Moderators of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians, we wish to express our appreciation to the members of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church for the dedicated effort and personal commitment they are giving to fulfilling the 213th General Assembly’s charge to help us live more faithfully as Presbyterians in a time of disagreement.   All of us in the church have waited with eager longing for the Task Force’s insight, wisdom, and recommendations.  As the report states so well, ours “is a church both preoccupied with and weary of conflict.”  It is our hope that the final version of the Task Force report will move the church forward in its high calling to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with our God.

In the draft versions of the report, the Task Force offers important observations about the state of the ordination debate and how it has shaped us as a denomination.  The Task Force lays a particularly helpful groundwork by identifying the theological ties that bind our lives together as Presbyterians with a common Biblical, theological, and historical story.  The assertion that “In a world of divisiveness and violence, it is essential for those who confess Jesus Christ as Lord to show the reason for the hope that is within us by dealing differently with one another,” is a crucial reminder that the church must seek a “still more excellent way” to resolve its differences.

When the Task Force report discusses the price exacted from Presbyterians during this time of conflict in the church its words are particularly eloquent and sobering.  These findings include the past and present pain inflicted by Anglo-Americans on racial and ethnic groups within the church; the alienation imposed by conservatives upon liberals and by liberals upon conservatives when we caricature each others’ convictions with labels that hurt rather than help; and the alienation suffered by gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons who are dehumanized when they are described as “a major threat to the peace, unity, and purity of the church.”  We pray that this honest confession of the cost of disagreement will lessen the likelihood that the same mistakes will be repeated in the future. 

There are, however, many questions which are left unanswered in this draft version of the report.  It is our hope that the final section of the report’s findings, Section IV, will help to clarify and guide the church as it responds to the Task Force’s recommendations.