Wilkins comments

Commissioner Lewis Wilkins sees Overture 8 as the only way our church can escape our impasse, and move forward with the task force on peace, purity and unity of the church

[7-5-01]

Lewis Wilkins, who was a minister commissioner at the 2113th General Assembly in Louisville, offered these reflections on the Assembly's action approving New York's Overture 8. Lewis is pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Lovington, New Mexico, and directs consulting, training and research for the Plains Institute in Lubbock, TX.

The worst consequence of the 78-79 interpretations and the consequent ping-pong games with G-6 has not been barring homosexual church members from ordination.

The worst consequence has been the way placing sex debates in a dominating, privileged position has fostered the influence of Hard Right fundamentalism in the church.

Item - it has given fundamentalists an organizing focus, which they have exploited with a vengeance.

Item - it has made it hard to have any serious theological conversation at all about the real issues that are divisive in the church. Example: talking about different, incompatible views of Scripture's role and interpretation in the church has been blocked by charges, from the right, that anyone who disagrees with their interpretation of ths famous 7 passages on which they rest their G-6 case is out of accord with "orthodoxy" in regard to Scripture.

The same skewing of conversation in a direction that favors fundamentalism has occurred whenever we've tried to talk about the lordship of Christ, the sovereignty of God, or the nature and mission of the church (including how authority is appropriately exercised).

The result has been that the boundaries which long protected us from fundamentalist incursion have been seriously weakened.

The GA actions on G-6 are not anybody's disaster, and can give us a window of opportunity to repair some of the damage of the last 25 years.

1. The 78-79 actions were not the result of any real threat that the church would be over-run by gay and lesbian elders and ministers. Nor is there evidence of any real threat today, if we return to the status quo ante. The actions were born of fear, pure and simple, and these, like other fear-driven responses, have not served the church well.

2. If we return to the constitutional place where we were before 78-79, where will we be? Churches will be able to elect, and sessions to ordain as a deacon or elder, any member that sessions determine is suitable for ordination under Scripture, the confessions and the Book of Order. Presbyteries will be able to ordain any candidate for ministry that they determine to be suitable for ordination, under the same criteria. No member will have a right to be ordained; all will have the right to be considered for ordination; all sessions and presbyteries will have a solemn obligation to take Scripture and the confessions seriously when they discern fitness for ordination. No church will be required to have deacons, elders or pastors they don't want; all will have the right to choose who they want to lead them, without externally imposed constraints that assume their judgment is not to be trusted.

What's wrong with this picture? I can't see anything wrong with it. If it is averred (as it will be) that externally imposed constraints already have been applied e.g. in regard to eligibility of women and racial ethnic minorities to hold office, I'd concede the point and say: when we started giving sessions and presbyteries the right to consider all members for office, we had a long way to go. In that process, the church took other fear-born actions that mistrusted governing bodies to make wise decisions. In hindsight we can see that those actions, like this one, had negative as well as positive consequences. Maybe it's time to remove from our polity all of those rules that coerce a majority's view of the right that must be done, and leave all those decisions to sessions and presbyteries, taking into account in every case Scripture, the confessions and the Book of Order. Then presbyteries would have to talk persuasively with churches that don't want to ordain women, for example, about Scripture, the confessions, and what our polity says about membership and gifts. In the long run, I think that might achieve more than beating them over the head with G-numbers.

I also think that passing the G-6 amendment in the presbyteries is the only way the task force on the peace, purity, and unity of the church has the chance of a snowball in hell to do what it's been charged to do.

Only if we get the skew of post-78 off the table can we expect to have any useful conversation about our real theological differences. I think it's just that simple.