The Presbyterian Church (USA) and homosexuality

Menu

Gay/lesbian ordination (1978 to now)

Sponsored link.

Quotations from delegates to the 2001 General Assembly:

	"Biblical obedience is mandatory, not optional. If we can't call sin 'sin,' how can we have any credibility? " Mary Brondyke, an elder in Boston Presbytery.
	"We've had enough talk. Equal opportunity has been paralyzed by G-6.0106b. Justice comes first." Mary Kuhns, a minister member of Mid-Kentucky Presbytery.
	"I'm against the ordination of homosexuals, though I love 'em. But we've been fighting in this ditch for 28 years and ditch is getting deeper. It's starting to affect our mission work, our youth ministry and our evangelism and I'm ready to try something else. Please, let's get on with being the church, taking the gospel into the world and offering them something else other than arguments." Elder Marj Carpenter of Big Spring, TX, a former General Assembly moderator, at the 2006 General Assembly.

Overview:

Many authors divide Protestantism into three groups: conservative, mainline and liberal denominations.

	A near consensuses can be attained among conservative denominations on sexual matters, such as homosexual behavior. They base their belief on a group of passages from the Bible. They regard it as inherently sinful and disordered, chosen, caused by poor parenting, and changeable through prayer and counseling.
	Meanwhile, liberal denominations have adopted the findings of most human sexuality researchers and mental health professionals: that homosexuality is morally neutral, as is heterosexuality. Sexual orientation, whether heterosexuality, bisexuality or homosexuality is not chosen, is unchangeable, and is caused largely by genes.

A consensus within mainline denominations is impossible to attain; they are divided within families, congregations, presbyteries, and geographical regions between religious conservatives and liberals.  Gulfs have opened between young and old members, between urban and rural areas, and between northern and southern sections of the country. Intelligent, devout, prayerful Presbyterians all read the same Bible but come to opposite conclusions about what it says about homosexuality.

The hottest debate in recent years is whether sexually active gays and lesbians should be eligible for ordination. Back in 1993, the church's General Assembly voted 72% in favor of continuing a ban on lesbian/gay ordination. Since that time, there has been an increasing acceptance within society of homosexual orientation and behavior as a valid, normal, and acceptable form of sexuality for a small minority of adults. Some members of the Presbyterian Church have followed these social trends; others retained their conservative beliefs.

The debate reached a crisis point in the late 1990's when the opposing sides became roughly equal in influence. If current trends continue, then sexually active gay and lesbian candidates will be considered for ordination. It is debatable whether the church can stand the strain of this transition without triggering a schism.

Homosexual orientation essays in this section:

	Ordination developments: 1978 to 1997 - including the approved Amendment B sexual purity code 1998 to 2000 - including the failed Amendment 00-A 2001, and 2002 - including deletion of the Fidelity and Chastity clause 2003 - no significant change 2004 to 2005 - no significant change, yet 2006: Possible resolution of the ordination problem at the 2006 General Assembly 2008-2009: Fidelity and Chastity paragraph amended and sent to presbyteries for authorization Reactions to the 2008 decisions
	Statements that favor homosexual ordination: Resolution by Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area (Minneapolis/St. Paul) titled "Resolution of Witness to the Gospel in Response to Amendment B." The Covenant Network of Presbyterians' " A Call to Covenant Community" Statement of aplology by Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area
	Related topics: The Presbyterian Church (USA) and homosexuality [menu] Stresses between conservative and liberal Presbyterians

Author's personal thoughts:

The denomination is seriously divided, as are other mainline Christian faith groups:

Religious liberals in the denomination generally approach lesbian/gay ordination as a civil rights issue. They stress "liberty and justice for all." They tend to base their beliefs partly on biblical themes that run through Scriptures -- like justice, equality, and love.

Religious conservatives generally regard homosexual behavior, no matter what the circumstances, to be a very serious sin -- sufficient to automatically preclude a person from being considered for ordination -- regardless of their talents and other factors making them suitable to be a minister. They generally base their beliefs mainly on the six "clobber passages" in the Bible which they feel refers to homosexuality.

The question simply will not go away. The historical record in the U.S. shows that when a minority organizes and demands equal rights, that they will usually eventually attain them. This has happened with slavery, racial segregation, women's right to vote, inter-racial marriage, women's equality in employment, etc. It is happening with respect to les/gay ordination on a denomination by denomination basis. This has tended to start with the most liberal and progress towards the more conservative faith groups. 

My view in 1991 was that there was a strong possibility that the Presbyterian Church (USA) would undergo a schism, as it did over slavery in the 19th century, and did over female ordination in the early 1970s. This would split the denomination into two approximately evenly sized faith groups: one accepting and one rejecting gay ordination and civil unions. This would be a largely geographical and a urban/rural division. Separations in religious denominations resemble marital separations -- they may start out with people behaving rationally, but they tend to quickly degenerate.

I felt in 1991 that the only other obvious path was to continue the debate for years in to the future. If Presbyterians could wait long enough, support would probably swing to the liberal side. Opinion polls of high school seniors indicate a far more liberal stance on homosexuality in the future.

By 2001, Presbyterians seemed to be growing weary of the endless conflict, which has extended over three decades. Another option began to look attractive: that of a local option: leave the existing standards in place which discriminate against gays and lesbian candidates for ordination, and give the ordaining bodies some wiggle room to approve at least some candidates who do not meet the standards. This satisfied nobody. But many Presbyterians saw it as the only alternative to church schism. It was approved at the 2006 General Assembly. This may provide a model which more conservative denominations can choose to follow to avoid schism.

It is interesting to note that at the same time that the 2006 General Assembly was discussing the local option, the Episcopal Church, USA was meeting to discuss other matters related to human sexuality:

	Consecration as bishop of homosexual priests involved in a loving committed relationship, and
	Performance of rituals to recognize same-sex couples in loving, committed relationships.

They chose to proceed along a different path which may threaten the stability of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

In 2008, the General Assembly approved an amendment to section G-6.0106b of the denomination's Book of Order. This went to the denomination's 173 presbyteries for final approval. If the change had been approved, it would have allow candidates of all sexual orientations to be equally considered for ordination. If a schism is in the PCUSA's immediate future, this amendment would probably have trigger it. However, the amendment was defeated.

End of Author's thoughts:

Copyright © 1996 to 2008 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Last update: 2008-JUN-28
Author: B.A. Robinson

Sponsored link:

Web ReligiousTolerance.org