Sexual orientation alone is no disqualification, PJC rules

by John Filiatreau, Presbyterian News Service

[3-5-03]

Click here for the full text of the GA PJC decision.

LOUISVILLE -- March 5, 2003 -- The Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly ruled on March 4 that sexual orientation alone "is insufficient to make a person ineligible for ordination" or even warrant a closer-than-usual examination of a candidate for ordination.

"If a person does not self-acknowledge a practice that the confessions call sin, then a governing body has a positive obligation to make further inquiry only if it has direct and specific knowledge that such person is in violation of the ordination and installation standards," the commissioners ruled. "... A hunch, gossip or stereotype is not a sufficient ground to compel ... further inquiry."

The so-called "fidelity/chastity" provision of the constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA), G-6.0106b, says that a person who refuses to repent of "any self-acknowledged practice that the confessions call sin" is ineligible for ordination or installation.

The PJC said "reasonable grounds must include factual allegations of how, when, where and under what circumstances the individual was self-acknowledging a practice which the confessions call sin."

The case arose in September 2001 after the Redwoods Presbytery voted to ordain Katie Morrison, a self-acknowledged lesbian, on the unanimous recommendation of its Committee on Ministry.

The following month, seven minister members of the presbytery filed a remedial complaint in which they claimed that the ordination was "irregular" because the candidate's self-disclosure of her sexual orientation "triggered a duty of further inquiry that was not fulfilled." They asked for a declaration of irregularity, an order setting the ordination aside, an admonition to the presbytery to "adhere to the Book of Order," and a further examination of Morrison.

They also filed for a stay of enforcement, but that request was denied.

San Joaquin Presbytery filed a similar complaint in November 2001, although it didn't ask that Morrison's ordination be set aside. It further contended that the Redwoods PJC had abused its discretion in refusing the stay of enforcement. The two complaints were consolidated before trial.

Redwoods moved for dismissal, contending that the complainants had not stated "a claim on which relief could be granted" because neither complaint alleged "that the candidate self-acknowledged a practice which the confessions call sin."

The GA PJC said San Joaquin made no allegation concerning self-acknowledged practice because it believed, on the basis of a 1993 decision, that sexual orientation alone was sufficient for further questioning. However, the commissioners said, that precedent was superseded by G-6.0106b's "acknowledged practice" standard. G-6.0106b was put in the Book of Order in 1997.

The commissioners pointed out what it called "the theological defect" of the 1993 decision (in LeTourneau vs. Twin Cities Presbytery): an "assumption that one category of persons is more prone to sin than other categories of persons."

"The doctrine of total depravity teaches us that not only do all fall short of the glory of God, but that there is no part of our person that is not in need of the redeeming grace of our Lord Jesus Christ," they wrote. "Thus, sexual orientation alone would be no more sufficient or reasonable grounds for further questioning than would singleness, obesity or any other categorization. In other words, stereotypical profiling is not a reasonable or valid ground for singling out a candidate for additional questioning."

James V. Jones, a California elder who represented San Joaquin Presbytery in an oral hearing on Feb. 28, emphasized that the case was not an action against Morrison, who he said "has erred not at all."

"This is not a case about a candidate, not a disciplinary hearing," he said. "It is about a remedy for a manifest irregularity. ... The failure of the governing body ... to inquire and see whether or not this person is in error."

Asked why he would have singled out Morrison for further questioning, he replied, "The answer, very precisely, is G-6.0106b."

Jones told the commissioners, "There must be a remedy for an ordination that has gone awry. ... If it is patently unconstitutional, how can we not remediate?"

The GA PJC's ruling affirms the synod PJC's dismissal of the complaint.

In another high-profile case involving homosexuality and church service, the GA PJC ordered a presbytery trial of a church officer's objection to the installation of a gay elder to the session of West End Presbyterian Church in Albany, NY.

The commission ordered the Synod of the Northeast to return the case to the PJC of the Presbytery of Albany for a trial of a complaint filed by elder Daniel J. McKittrick after the West End session examined Scott Edwards and two other elders-elect on April 29, 2000. McKittrick said Edwards' examination was insufficient because he wasn't questioned about his self-acknowledged homosexuality. All three elders were installed for three-year terms the next day.

McKittrick asked the presbytery PJC to set aside Edwards' installation. He said Edwards had told his examiners that he was gay and was in a 15-year relationship with another man. McKittrick also complained that the session moderator had cut the examination short, then hurried the installation, to forestall debate.

McKittrick said during last week's hearing that Edwards "made some statements, basically said he understood the constitution, but didn't agree with it and didn't intend to abide by it."

"There's some social action at work here," he added. "They want to send a message."

Arguing that Edwards' installation violated the "fidelity/chastity" clause, McKittrick asked the presbytery PJC to declare the examination "irregular" and to set aside Edwards' installation pending a proper examination.

McKittrick claimed that officials of Albany Presbytery, "a couple of self-appointed guillotines," put out "terrible disinformation ... accusing my wife and myself of un-Christian acts in this case" and pursued "a two-year campaign to keep me quiet." He charged the presbytery with "bullying, stacking the deck, silencing dissent."

He said pursuing the case had made him "a pariah in my own church ... considered a homophobic type of person, which I am not."

"I just want the record set straight," he said. "I have no evil intent for Scott Edwards. ... (But) if we throw our process out the window, there goes Presbyterianism."

Jerry McKinney, representing the West End session, said its members had "attempted to comply with the constitution ... to the best of their ability." He argued that McKittrick should have filed a disciplinary case rather than a remedial one.

McKittrick responded, "How do you file a disciplinary case against a whole presbytery?"

The presbytery and synod PJCs both ruled that, because ordination and installation are essentially the same, an installation cannot be set aside by remedial action, but only by disciplinary action. McKittrick disagreed, arguing that installation and ordination are separate. He drew a distinction between "perpetual" and "temporal" functions of office, contending that the "temporal" function of service on session could be set aside without impairing the "perpetual" function of ordination. The GA PJC agreed with McKittrick.

The commissioners also said the synod PJC erred when it ruled that McKittrick's complaint did not "set forth facts upon which relief could be granted." They said a PJC has authority to "either order such action as is appropriate, or direct the lower governing body to conduct further proceedings in the matter."

The GA PJC urged the synod and presbytery PJCs to "act with all due speed" to schedule a trial and reach a decision before Edwards' term expires on April 30.

As to McKittrick's request that the installation be set aside, the commission ruled that, when a challenge to an installation is "predicated upon presumed guilt of an individual installee, then a disciplinary case, not a remedial (one), is in order." They said a presbytery PJC could set aside an installation only "after a full trial on the facts alleged to constitute an irregularity," and only if it concluded "that the session erroneously decided that the candidate was eligible (an irregularity) or that the session failed to conduct a proper examination (a delinquency)."

The commissioners agreed with McKittrick that the one-day period between examination and installation offered "no practical opportunity for a protesting or dissenting party to seek a stay of enforcement."

"The Presbyterian custom of conducting business ''decently and in order' should not be converted into a race," they wrote. "... We encourage governing bodies to permit sufficient time ... so that there can be no intimation that any governing body intended to shield its action from scrutiny."

The GA commission also decided, in a case from the Presbytery of Elizabeth (NJ), that an investigating committee formed in response to a request for "vindication" must follow "all established investigative procedures, including the notification of the accused of his or her rights."

The Rev. Thomas D. Lynn requested a vindication inquiry by the presbytery in 1999 in a dispute over his sale of a car to a couple in his congregation. He was vindicated in that matter; but in the course of its work the committee heard negative testimony about his pastoral care and counseling practices.

Formal charges were filed against Lynn, and he eventually was found guilty of threatening and intimidating members of his congregation and failing to maintain confidentiality of information shared with him in a counseling setting. The presbytery assigned Lynn to a program of rehabilitation. He appealed its decision.

"To some, it may seem a bewildering result that, in the course of requesting vindication for unfounded allegations of misconduct, one can be found innocent of wrongdoing ... but guilty of misconduct in other situations that come to light in the course of investigation," the GA PJC said in its ruling.

While the commission agreed with Lynn that he should have been advised of his rights, it accepted the synod PJC's finding that the failure to do so in this case didn't have any effect on the outcome.

Thus it upheld the synod PJC's dismissal of Lynn's complaint.