by Pastor Dan Baumgartner

“If you want to put a bunch of Christians to sleep, talk about Jesus or the Bible. If you want to wake them up, mention the word ‘homosexuality.’”

Whoever said this may have been having a little tongue-in-cheek fun, but it is truer than we might wish. Sexuality will again play a key role in national church events unfolding this month, and even if you don’t follow church politics much, I believe you should understand the issues and the possible long-range implications for Bethany. I can’t promise this will be scintillating reading, but bear with me!

The Presbyterian Church (USA), the denomination to which Bethany belongs, has struggled for nearly 30 years now with the whole topic of sexuality. More specifically, the PC(USA) has wrestled mightily with the question of whether an active homosexual lifestyle is a sin needing healing and forgiveness OR an expression of diversity in God’s good creation to be celebrated. This argument has most often been centered on discussions concerning the qualifications required for ordination as a minister, elder or deacon. The Presbyterian Church is far from being alone in this regard. Nearly every major denomination is currently experiencing painful unrest over sexual conduct and Biblical interpretation.

Let me give you a very truncated history: for many years, the standards for ordination in the PC(USA) were found in the Book of Order (part of our “constitution,” www.pcusa.org/oga/constitution.htm) and were quite general in nature. You can still find them listed out in section G-6.0106a, things like “strong faith, a love for Christ and a manner of life demonstrating the gospel.” On a national basis, the conversation about ordination and specifically about the homosexual lifestyle went on below the radar for awhile, but seemed to really heat up in the mid-1970’s.

In the PC(USA), the General Assembly is a national decision-making body comprised of elders and ministers from all over the country. It now meets every two years. Though it has some decision-making ability, many of its decisions are sent back out to the local Presbyteries (the Seattle Presbytery has 70 churches in it). As the sexuality discussion became more heated and people began to challenge the limits of accepted theology and practice, a legislative judgment called “definitive guidance” was issued in 1978, and in 1993 became an even firmer “authoritative interpretation.” Though nothing was printed in the Book of Order regarding sexuality, these binding interpretations spelled out that the ordination to leadership of practicing homosexuals was inappropriate. This interpretation guided the PC(USA) until the conversation really began to boil, and in 1993 the General Assembly asked all Presbyteries to commit to three years of study on the issue.

In 1996, the General Assembly passed the famous “Amendment B,” which was sent out to all the Presbyteries around the country, who voted it into the Book of Order (a major disappointment to the more liberal parts of the denomination). It is found in G-6.0106b and calls for ordained leaders to “live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness.” Since 1996, there have been several attempts to remove this from the Book of Order, but they have been soundly defeated each time by the Presbyteries.

In 2001, it became apparent that the bickering and arguing over sexuality was only increasing. In that year, the General Assembly formed a Task Force called the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church (only a Presbyterian could think of that name!). Hereafter I’ll refer to the Task Force as the TTFPUPC. Their charge was to take four years and engage in a process of spiritual discernment. They were asked to deal with four areas:

1. Christology (theology about Christ)
2. Biblical authority/interpretation
3. ordination
4. power

Though the group was not charged specifically with “solving the sexuality issue,” everyone knew that this was the basic reason for their formation. In these four years, it was hoped that there could be an informal moratorium on proposing amendments to the Book of Order, but the conflict continued. A few churches or Presbyteries have blatantly ignored the authority of the Book of Order, and those cases are mired in the haze of the Presbyterian judicial and appeals system.

The TTFPUPC issued its final report in August of 2005, which has become known as the “PUP Report,” as in “Peace, Unity and Purity.” The Task Force was made up of a mix of liberal, moderate and conservative folks from across the denomination. Like the PC(USA)’s debate over these 30 years, in the end the Task Force couldn’t agree on the most fundamental issues of sexuality. In Section V, Recommendation #5 is the most important piece. This recommendation essentially takes the decision-making regarding ordination standards off of the national stage and puts it into the hands of each local Presbytery, a move many call “local option.”

The fact that this recommendation wouldn’t require a change in the Book of Order becomes a moot point, because each Presbytery would live by their own opinions. The practical outworking of this would be that the North Puget Sound Presbytery could enthusiastically ordain people practicing alternative sexual lifestyles, while immediately to the south the Seattle Presbytery could refuse such ordinations.

The PUP Report now goes to the General Assembly, which takes place in Birmingham, AL, from June 15-22. It can be

• received (a pat on the back for good work and nothing happens),
• approved (as is, recommendations adopted intact with radical consequences),
• modified or
• rejected.

When General Assembly chooses one of these options, it will be in newspapers all over the place and if past history is any guide, inaccuracies and mistruths will be prevalent. This is one reason I want you to be informed.

What will happen in June? I don’t know. It’s hard for me to imagine that General Assembly would approve the report as it stands. What will happen in the future? I don’t know. I honestly thought our denomination would split over this issue years ago, and it has not. If the denomination moves to ordain homosexual leaders, I believe it will split the church. There have already been meetings and communications wondering out loud if that would be better anyway. So there is much I don’t know. What I do know is that this single issue has sapped so much energy, time and resources from the denomination over the years that we have been too busy or distracted to do good work in other areas, like outreach, missions and education. Frankly, I’m tired of it.

So, finally, where is Bethany in all of this? Bethany’s leadership through the years has consistently taken the position that any sexual activity outside of a marriage between one man and one woman is not God’s intention for our lives. Most recently, this is clearly articulated in Bethany’s Leadership Statement, adopted in 2002 after a great deal of study and congregational conversation. One reason that I enthusiastically support our Statement is that while it speaks to the issues and sins of sexuality, it equally articulates many other forms of sin we don’t hear as much about (greed, materialism, etc.), calling us to the same thing in all cases: repentance and forgiveness. And it acknowledges that we must treat others with compassion and grace, knowing that we all fall far short.

So it’s complicated. In the larger scope of history, all of this is perhaps not much more than a blip on the screen. But in the midst of a world racked with confusion over sexuality, faith and identity, it feels very weighty right now. Your prayers for clear thinking, solid interpretation of scripture, courage, and Christ’s graceful presence for all those gathering for General Assembly in Birmingham are warmly invited.