the Outlook Blog

After a long day of committee meetings yesterday, of becoming frustrated with parliamentary procedure and certain perspectives within the church, I needed some hope. I needed some hope that there was something in store for the Presbyterian Church (USA) other than needing to come back, year after year after year and rehash the same theological arguments and debates.

Speaking for myself (and not the Outlook), I was excited that the Church Orders and Ministry Committee voted to recommend a new authoritative interpretation (which would effectively overturn or set aside the Bush decision; article here) and voted in favor of recommending the deletion of G-6.0106b (41 in favor and 11 against; article here). If the recommendation to delete G-6.0106b is adopted by the General Assembly and ratified by the presbyteries, it would open the door for allowing gays, lesbians, transgendered and bisexual folk to be ordained and more fully participate in the life and ministry of the church. That gives me hope. But I know that it may not pass through the presbyteries, and if it does, we will be back here two years from now, having the same conversations all over again. It seems as though we're having a very hard time moving forward.

Which is why when I left all the committee meetings, and found myself at the presbymergent gathering, I felt more hopeful. Presbymergent put on a gathering last night, graciously paid for by the Office of Theology and Worship; it was a chance for people to come together and have conversation, network with other Presbyterians who are interested in the emergent church conversation, and get a chance to preview a rough-cut screening of the film "A Church Emerging" (you can watch a preview here). It is put together by Gravity Well Media, and produced by Caven Keith, who is an elder at First Presbyterian Church of Santa Cruz, which is the church that has been in the process of combining with Dan Kimball's church, Vintage Faith.

We had over 60 people show up for the evening, which was so encouraging for me. Many of these people were new to the presbymergent conversation, and I think that's a great sign. I think now that Bruce Reyes-Chow is our Moderator, there will be an increasing desire, interest in, and energy for new expressions of church in denomination, and I am hopeful that presbymergent can be a leading voice in that conversation. You can find more photos of the gathering here.

Speaking of Mr. Moderator, I also found more hope last night as Sarah and I made our way to a gathering for seminarians, hosted by Bruce Reyes-Chow. When we walked in, they were engaged in a spirited Q&A session with Bruce, and I think I have more and more hope for the Presbyterian Church (USA) the more I hear Bruce speak (which makes me think perhaps I should have applied to be his handler - who I did happen to get a photo with here). Bruce spoke about issues related to new churches, existing rural churches, the hope for young adults to become more involved in the church, his hopes for creating new spaces for conversation about controversial issues in our denomination and a lot more.

Bruce Reyes-Chow offers fresh visions for a denomination that could use some new energy and vision. And that is something that gave me hope last night.

Well, at least the New York Times does. Yesterday morning I was sitting in the Peacemaking and International Issues Committee, as they discussed and passed recommendations related to issues in Zimbabwe, Columbia, North Korea and Israel/Palestine. I was sitting between a reporter from the New York Sun (article here) and the New York Times. I'll have to admit, I was a little surprised to see a New York Times reporter covering a Presbyterian committee meeting. Perhaps that's just the part of me that wonders if anyone outside of the PC(USA) really cares what is going on here in San Jose this week. But it did remind me that there are folks, outside of the Presbyterian Church (USA), who are interested in what official statements come from the 218th General Assembly.

I have many friends who are even more cynical than I am concerning the significance of events like this, and seriously question the form of government and bureaucracy that exists in our denomination. I am equally as skeptical about our bureaucracy at times, and find it very frustrating as I sit through these committee meetings, hearing motions, amendments, substitute amendments and substitute motions made. But there is one thing I have found today: there is a host of people in our denomination who are passionate and committed to this church and care about a variety of issues within the church and in our world.

I sat in the Peacemaking committee and heard pastors, elders, activists and world leaders give impassioned pleas for voting for or against certain overtures related to Israel and Palestine. There were over 70 people who wanted to speak on the issue - both Presbyterians and others who came to lobby for their cause, including His Eminence Elias Chacour, Archbishop of the Melkite Catholic Church of Israel, and representatives from Jewish Voice for Peace, the Anti-Defamation League, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Committee to End Divestment Now and many other groups. If what the Presbyterian Church said about these important issues and policies meant nothing, why would people like this show up? Why would it even matter?

As much as I get frustrated by Robert's Rules, and the way in which committees have to make these decisions (and I haven't even gotten to the plenary discussions that start today...), there is also part of me that has to realize that to at least some degree, what we say, what we proclaim, does make a difference. And that is why events such as the 218th General Assembly matter. Because, at least some people do care what the PC(USA) thinks.

Last night I was told I should swing by the Youth Advisory Delegate (YAD) Caucus to listen to their evening committee reports. And I'm so glad that I did. First, because Bruce Reyes-Chow was given some time to address the YADs; it was great to hear some of their questions (ranging from polity questions to "How do I get you to come to my Presbytery?). You can read more about his visit here.

But secondly because it was so great to hear their committee reports. I wish there was a way that everyone else at GA was able to hear their reports; primarily because they're absolutely hilarious, but also because it gives one some perspective on all that happens throughout the day. The YADs shared stories of their committee spending hours debating about whether the word "one" or "a" should be used in an overture that was eventually voted down. They shared stories of amending an amendment, that was a substitute amendment for the original amendment, and then spending an hour or so discussing whether the substitute amendment should replace the original amendment, and then voting that the substitute amendment should not replace the original amendment, and then they were back to discussing the original amendment.

And it's not that they don't get this stuff - I'd say there are some YADs here who get this polity even better than I do. Some did share of controversial overtures that were talked about and passed through, of heated arguments over some important issues, and they were clearly in-the-know, smart and passionate about many of these issues. One YAD shared about his work on the Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations Committee. They passed 07-02, which was an invitation to interfaith dialogue, supporting the document written by 138 Muslim clerics, "A Common Word Between Us and You" and I was pleasantly surprised to hear they also passed 07-01 which calls for tolerance and peaceful relations between Christians and Muslims and states that "though we hold different understandings of how God has been revealed to humankind, the PC(USA) affirms our belief in one God, the God of Abraham, whom Jews and Muslims also worship."

I'm very impressed with this group of YADs this year, and I know that while they get this stuff, and the importance of some of these issues, they also recognize the limitations to things like parliamentary procedures and Robert's Rules and offer a good perspective on the process as a whole. So, if you want to hear the "youth perspective" and feel like you need to laugh after a long day, stop by the YAD caucus Wednesday, Thursday or Friday.

This morning I sat through the open hearing of the Church Orders and Ministry Committee - basically, the committee dealing with the "sex stuff" (as I've heard it referred to around GA the past day or so). The open hearing was a time for people who have come to speak for or against a specific overture that the committee is dealing with, to do so in 90 seconds. People who spoke were commissioners, YADs, members or supporters of affinity groups (OneByOne, Covenant Network, More Light Presbyterians and others) and other observers who came to GA. They went through all of the overtures under consideration, and when they were able to, tried to provide a balance by alternating the speakers who were for approving the overture and those who were for disapproving it.

Over 60 people participated in the open hearing, and they ranged from personal testimonies, to biblical exegesis, to passionate pleas for the church to remain "biblical" and other desperate calls for the church to become more prophetic and inclusive. Most referred to either the PUP report or G-6.0106b and its "fidelity and chastity" requirement. If you're not familiar with G-6.0106b, here is the full text:

"Those who are called to office in the church are to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church. Among these standards is the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman (W-4.9001), or chastity in singleness. Persons refusing to repent of any self-acknowledge practice which the confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and Sacrament." (G-6.0106b, The Book of Order)

Personal stories were shared from people who used to identify as LGBT and who "experienced transformation and liberation" out of that lifestyle, as well as from LGBT folk who desire to be in full-time ministry and feel passionate about their call by God to ministry. Many were supportive of the Peace, Unity and Purity report that came about at the 2006 GA, one speaker saying that "it gave our church a new way to live in community and a fresh hope for the denomination." Others said that it has caused mistrust, divisions and constant fighting over church property. Some shared how they believed that homosexuality was a sin and that we shouldn't get rid of the standards "set by the word of God" for leadership in the church. While others believed that the church needs the LGBT community to be involved in ministry; one person said "the church that doesn't welcome the fullness of all its members is not the church - it's not the body of Christ."

It was hard to keep all the overtures straight (especially since PC-Biz was down for awhile), primarily because there are so many that are so similar, but have slight variants. I'm having a hard time imagining how the Moderator of the committee will guide the discussion through all of the complex issues associated with each overture. And I also am having a hard time understanding how they will be able to go through all of the overtures without having the same conversation over and over again about homosexuality and whether it's a sin or not. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

To read a news story on the open hearings, click here.

I realized yesterday that I'm already tired - which is not a good sign considering that the intense work of the General Assembly is starting today. It's been a busy few days already. We've had four official GA Business Meetings so far; some of them interesting, others extremely boring. Bruce Reyes-Chow was elected as our new Moderator, we received nominations for the new Stated Clerk (the election will happen on Friday) and we've done a lot of other stuff that was less interesting. And now we're into the work of Committees. There are around 14 committees, some of which focus on Church Polity, Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations, Mission, Social Justice, Health Issues, Peacemaking, Worship and Youth. I'll probably be stopping in on a few committees, including the Church Orders and Ministry Committee (they're focusing on the "sex stuff"), Peacemaking Committee (which is focusing on the Iraq war and Israel/Palestine issues) and the Youth Committee, who are using a communal discernment process to determine what to discuss in their committee.

It's my understanding that the committees will spend the next two days going over all the overtures that have been brought to the committees, and then will bring before the entire General Assembly, recommendations that will then be voted on. So, while the conversations in the plenaries can get pretty heated, I've heard that a lot of the real intense work is done in the committees, before the issues are presented to the floor at plenary meetings.

I think for myself, as I'm sitting now in the Church Orders and Ministry Committee, it's pretty easy for me to become skeptical that anything very productive or helpful will come out of these committee meetings. I know that sounds rather bleak, but it doesn't seem the best way for the church to have important conversations and move forward. I am, however, hoping that I will be proven wrong over the next few days.