On other overtures

Some of the other overtures

Some overtures move beyond the sexuality issue

An overview by Chris Iosso, Witherspoon Issues Analyst

[5-12-01]

In a clear sign of where the Church’s attention has been, 26 of the 46 overtures received by May 5 focused on changes in the Assembly’s position on "Amendment B," which has been interpreted to bar homosexual ordination. We comment on those separately.

In addition to the usual overtures which would weaken the church’s justice work and bind members’ consciences, there are two overtures which speak to the payment of per capita and mission monies, a worthy request for equitable mental health coverage in the medical plan and for other health insurance providers (#16), an overture calling for stronger environmental measures to prevent the extinction of species (including our own!), and one which calls for an evaluation of the charitable choice proposals in light of traditional Presbyterian concerns for separation of church and state and "free exercise" of religion. We comment here primarily on those overtures with clear justice or ministry implications, apologizing to those space prompts us to leave undiscussed.

The Per Capita overtures from Scioto Valley (Ovt. 01) and Philadelphia (Ovt. 11) both seek to deal with the fact that congregations in our system are not obligated, except morally, to pay their per capita, or mission monies for that matter. The withholding of per-capita has been a major conservative weapon over the past decade in the church, most notably in the year when Amendment B was passed. Conservative churches withheld more than $1 million dollars in an apparent effort to weaken the national church and to coerce moderate and liberal congregations. The Witherspoon Society takes few specific stands but sees a very clear principle of mutual respect for the ministries of others at stake here, along with the connectional nature of our church.

We have similar concerns of principle in relation to Overture 5, which seeks to regain for commissioners and observers the right of free speech and assembly within the Assembly hall. To prohibit expressions of collective concerns and emotions is more worthy of an authoritarian church and not of Presbyterians, however uncomfortable demonstrations may make us feel. Certainly there are reasonable ways for the Stated Clerk to handle demonstrations "decently and in order" without the current demeaning rule.

Theology by power play?

The Presbytery of San Joaquin echoes the Presbyterian Layman’s Confessing Church movement by calling in Overture 43 for ministers to subscribe to a pair of selective proof texts that seem to view as inadequate our present vows of ordination, membership and baptism. This is partly an effort to control and exclude people who would lift up different parts of the Bible’s witness to Jesus Christ, or who simply oppose over-simplifying our faith into a few slogans.

San Joaquin’s solution to the complicated issue of homosexuality is a set of equally simple assertions about getting the National Ministries Division to fund change ministries (Ovt. 41), as if thousands of gay people hadn’t already been driven to suicide after trying to become heterosexual. It is because of insurance liability and the very frequent "backsliding" by ex-gay ministry leaders that previous General Assemblies have avoided backing programs like "One by One." This year we would note the statement by over 900 members of the American Association of Pastoral Counselors drawing attention to the pastoral damage caused by Amendment B and the churches’ general anti-gay stances. "Purity" is also a very non-Reformed, shame-related concept to stick onto human sexuality; it is much more common in traditional Roman Catholic teaching.

This year, as usual, there are overtures—four in all—calling for various actions to limit women’s choice in the matter of abortion. Overture 26 is an attempt to prohibit all third trimester abortions by focusing on the tiny number of "partial birth" abortions. It is important to remember than strong majorities of Presbyterians (about 80%) all over the country still favor respect for a woman’s individual Christian conscience. This year the overture claims to "resolve" a discrepancy between two statements of previous General Assemblies which are not in fact contradictory, but the effect is to narrow the range of choice for responsible women and their families. In its own words, this overture would "eliminate the application for such medical coverage based on the good moral choices by beneficiaries." In other words, this overture would dictate a choice for women in advance. We too would like to see abortions decrease, but we believe European-style birth control education and contraception would help a lot more than the pro-life groups, which are actually in close cooperation with the Roman Catholic Church in what they recommend.

Overture 40 would shackle our support of the National Council of Churches by linking it to the dues and other payment policies of other denominations. Last year, the effort was to get us out of the NCC entirely, using the stick of financial shortfalls (which no one is ignoring!). This approach is very much like the efforts to "fix" the United Nations by cutting their funding. Previous General Assemblies have resisted this simple-minded approach, while noting that the NCC management performance needs to improve. Commissioners will need to decide whether one year is enough for a turn-around, and whether a punitive set of conditions are all of equal weight. The whole overture seeks to create distrust of the National Council, and reflects many years of similar attacks by well-funded right wing foundations which want the churches never to look at Christian values in business or politics. The tone of unilateral threat in this overture seems unworthy of our Presbyterian Church.