For more information about National Capital Presbytery Commissioners, click HERE.
Please note that no anonymous comments will be allowed on future posts.

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

 Committee 05--Church Orders and Ministry, Second Full Day

While it is only Wednesday morning, yesterday seems like a very long time away.  Church Orders and Ministry reconvened at 9:30 a.m.  One of our Youth Delegates suggested we begin by gathering in a circle for prayer.  Given what the day held for us, it was a good way to start our time together.

One aspect of the committee work I came to appreciate was the counsel and information provided to us by the representative from the Advisory Committee on the Constitution--ACC.  (Every time we asked for the ACC rep, I kept thinking basketball!)  Jim Wilson served us well, answering our questions, seeking to clarify language, explaining the effect each overture would have upon our constitution, offering counsel on whether or not the overture in question achieved the desired effect.  We would not have been able to do the work charged to us had it not been for Mr. Wilson and to him I am grateful.

The short story is that we passed the overture from John Knox Presbytery which asks the General Assembly to approve an additional authoritative interpretation of G-6.0108 that would replace the conclusion in Bush v. Presbytery of Pittsburgh (Remedial Case 218-10) that the authoritative interpretation of G-6.0108 approved by the 217th General Assembly (2006) does not apply to the second sentence of G-6.0106b.  With this action we answered many other overtures that addressed Authoritative Interpretations and the Peace, Unity and Purity report.

We also passed an overture from Boston Presbytery that calls for the deletion of G-6.0106b.  The actual motion was:  Approve with Comment--Presbyteries are strongly encouraged to consider this overture using a process of listening and discernment.

For the full text of all overtures, check out http://www.pc-biz.org/

So, these are the short stories and I don't have to tell you that there was much more than what I have shared or what will be reported in the media.  There is hurt and anger and sadness on all sides of this issue.  I came to this assembly convinced that G-6 needs to be deleted from our constitution and my view on that has not changed.  What has changed is my commitment to engage others who disagree with me on this issue and to pray for the whole of the church as we continue to struggle with this issue.  What follows is what I offered to the gathered group as we were in quasi-committee (ask Dick McFail for explanation!):

My heart tells me that G-6.0106b should be deleted from our constitution. I do not understand why this one issue of fidelity and chastity is the only standard to be singled out as the church speaks about fitness for ordination.
 
I am aware that those who disagree with me will be little swayed by my view.  As I sat yesterday and listened to the line of people ringing the walls of this room, as I listened to overture advocates, as I listened to the debate by members of this committee, I have become jealous for the 4 ½ years the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity had to engage issues that are so divisive within our church.  I am convinced that this denomination will never come to any real understanding on whether to ordain gays and lesbians as long as we put it to debate and vote.  While Robert's rules may be helpful in other situations, in this situation it fails us.  From an invitation to strategize before arriving at GA, to groups meeting to talk about plan of action, to seeing who can get to the microphone first, I have become very jealous for the 4 ½ years afforded the Task Force. We know their story—20 very different people coming together to pray and study scripture and hear one another's story and at the end produce a unanimous report.
 
Alas, we do not have 4 ½ years, we have the rest of today.  And we will continue to debate and will vote and the full body will debate and vote and in 2 years time, there will be overtures coming again to this committee.  And the process will begin again.  I shared with a table mate last night that it makes me very sad that we cannot figure out a way—or perhaps don't want to figure out a way—to pray and study scripture with those who see this issue differently from the way we see it.   My prayer is and I'm going to be very specific with God—that before this Assembly convenes in Minneapolis that God will place upon our hearts—all of us—every single person who has been in this room—those we have heard speak and those who have simply listened to what has been said—that God will place upon our hearts, a desire to pray and study scripture with someone with whom we disagree and that God will give us the courage to make it happen.

Sharon Core

5 comments:

seeking to stay in the PCUSA said...
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lorraine said...

It makes me sad also, that this issue is the one that seems to come up again and again for our ordained ministers.

Continuing to pray for you, and for all of the commissioners. :)

Lorraine

Louise Winfield said...

It does seem to me that the Holy Spirit of love and grace is finding a home in you at this moment, Sharon. Blessings and SHALOM as you continue your work of discernment and reflection. Louise Winfield

Marilyn Dorn said...

Thank you very much for your blog and for your candor. But maybe you're being a bit hard on yourself and on Roberts rules. It seems to me that what you/we're doing in our Presbyteries and in the General Assembly is in fact the PUP Committee's 4 1/2 years writ large. It's hard to see these things when you're in the midst, but I'm thinking that God is working this out on a big scale, denomination-wide, so it will indeed take more tha 4 1/2 years. But I think we're moving forward, and in fact that's the beauty of the Presbyterian way, at least for me. Thanks again for sharing, Marilyn Dorn, Elder, Christ Presbyterian Church, Fairfax

National Capital Presbytery said...

This comment was remmoved because it was written anonmously. In the spirit of openness and honesty, we can not allow comments with such harsh tones unless people are willing to put include their name.