| GA 2010: General Assembly tables overtures that would have allowed pastors to perform same-gender marriages |
| Written by Katie Pate, Outlook special correspondent | ||||||||||||
| Friday, 09 July 2010 23:59 | ||||||||||||
|
MINNEAPOLIS — Eight overtures that would have empowered Presbyterian pastors to perform marriages for same-gender couples in states where these marriages are legal were effectively tabled with little discussion in a late-night session of the full 219th General Assembly July 8. The exhaustion of commissioners and staff showed when the assembly was allowed to make amendments that rendered a motion and its substitute effectively the same ... one to accept the final report of the special committee with the minority report attached, and another to accept the minority report of the special committee with the final report attached. The Assembly supported the main motion, voting 439-208 to send the final report of the special committee, with the minority report attached, to presbyteries for further study. This was a significant departure from the recommendation of the 219th General Assembly Committee on Civil Union and Marriage, which debated both reports at length earlier in the week, and referred just the majority report, with minor amendments, to the full Assembly, with a margin of 47-8. The action on the final and minority reports had far-reaching effects when a deft parliamentary move by Ryan Balsan of New Brunswick Presbytery put forth a successful substitute motion to answer overtures 12-02, 12-03, 12-04, 12-07, and 12-10, which would have changed the Directory for Worship of the Book of Order to allow marriage to be between “two people” rather than a man and a woman, and overtures 12-06, 12-08 and 12-09, which would have provided an authoritative interpretation to allow marriages between “two people.” Balsan argued that approving any of the overtures that would allow marriages between same-gender couples would prejudice congregations’ study of the final report. “Make space for discernment on this issue,” he said. Karen Chamis of Elizabeth Presbytery argued against the notion that the study precluded the approval of overtures that would allow same-gender marriages in the meantime, comparing the issue with her session’s approach to dealing with raccoons in the attic of their church. “We are going to call an exterminator, but we’ll also study the issue to try to find a way to keep the raccoons out,” she said. “There are times when we need to do both things. And somehow, we’re adults, we handle it, and we get the work done.” The substitute motion, to let the action in 12-12 be considered the response to all pending items coming from Committee 12, was approved 348-324. At the close of the Civil Union and Marriage Committee’s report, the assembly engaged in silent prayer, followed by a prayer from Moderator Cynthia Bolbach, who said, “We are not winners or losers, we are just trying to figure out where our denomination is headed. We ask your blessing as we move ahead in this conversation. Amen.” Your Responses (6)
Greg Han
said:
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed|
Houston TX I was a commissioner to GA 219, and while I agree with Bill that study is necessary, I do wonder how much study is going to happen in the next two years without some sort of urgency. One has to only look at both nFOG and Belhar, two issues that have been available for "study" for four years (in some form or another), and I got the sense that both people in the church and people at GA were not really as up to speed with either issue as they should have been. I can assure you, with presbytery votes on both matters due by June 2011, there is going to be study, and, unfortunately, much of that study is going to be in the form of "cramming." More from a pedagogical point of view than a theological point of view, I wonder if sending a vote down to the presbyteries as well as the study papers would have been wise. This would have more closely linked study with evaluation. Now, with study but no real "test" on the matter until (potentially) 2012, and then another year for presbyteries to vote if constitutional changes get through GA220, how closely will study and evaluation be connected? It's like giving a study guide to high school seniors, but telling them that the sophomores (or even freshmen!) are going to be the ones taking the test, and they may or may not know about the study guide. While Bill was concerned about sending a vote along with the study papers would have appeared to make the study papers "unnecessary," I wonder if sending the study papers along with a vote would have actually made people STUDY the topic. For those of you who want people to make thoughtful and informed decisions on important matters like this, regardless of theological disposition, PLEASE make sure your churches take the time to look at these study papers. You never know who is going to be a commissioner from your presbytery to the next GA. |
Steven Vance
said:
|
Greenwood, IN I find it interesting that the issue of homosexual marriage and ordination keeps coming up. Either we, as a denomination, are going to follow biblical principles or we aren't. If not, we are not a church, but a social organization that is passing itself off as something it is not. Maybe over the next two years the delegates should read the Bible instead of studying social issues. As Noel Anderson stated: "At present, the louder voice is that of defecting Presbyterians. Theirs is a direction plenty are following. Push the gay marriage agenda, and it will only get much, much worse." |
Noel Anderson
said:
|
Bakersfield, CA Since when do clergy need "guidance" from GA on what constitutes legitimate marriage? There should have been more attention given to the need to claim a definition of "Christian Marriage" that is quite independent of whatever states may say. A majority of pastors will never perform same-sex "marriages" no matter what either states or pop culture demands. GA has never led the church; its decisions are mere earmarks for the flow of national consensus. At present, the louder voice is that of defecting Presbyterians. Theirs is a direction plenty are following. Push the gay marriage agenda, and it will only get much, much worse. |
Karen Chamis
said:
|
Roselle, NJ No... it was not the best analogy... but it was what I had late at night after an exhausting session. ;-) The point being there are times when we need to do both things - to act AND to study. Unfortunately, we've put aside acting at this point. We've also put clergy who live in areas where G&L marriage is legal in a difficult place, and without the benefit of direction pro OR con from GA. |
Bill Teng
said:
|
Alexandria, VA The analogy of raccoon in the attic is problematic at best because there's no good reason to keep the raccoon there. It would have been truly disingenuous if the GA on the one hand recommended the special committee reports to be studied by the church and, on the other hand, made decision that would render the study unnecessary! |
Kevin Bixby
said:
|
Milwaukie, OR First, I'm amused and puzzled by the raccoon analogy. Talking about extermination at something as controversial as a gay marriage assembly?!?! If there's a G&L PETA out there, you're going to hear from them. This shelving of the gay marriage issue may be a blessing. It gives congregations everywhere the chance to realize two things: 1) This issue is real and alive, and it's not going away. 2) We have two years to really delve into it. Explore it through discussions, forums, Bible studies and see how the Spirit is moving us. Ignoring it is no longer an option. Kevin Bixby Milwaukie Presbyterian Church |
Write a Response
