“Peace, Unity and Purity” or “Pie-in-the-Sky”

The PCUSA has been engaged in a constant battle over ordination standards since the mid-seventies. One arm of the church has been trying to change our polity to allow the ordination of practicing, unrepentant gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons as Elders, Deacons and Ministers of the Word and Sacrament (pastors). Another arm of the church has been trying to keep an orthodox, Biblical, view toward ordination that would prohibit the ordination of any person who will not abide by the view of fidelity in the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness. A third arm of the church just wishes that the problem would go away (some may disagree with my view of this third arm of the church.).

The Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity (TTF) was formed at the 213^th General Assembly (2001) “to lead the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in spiritual discernment of our Christian identity for the 21^st century…” (Minutes, 2001, Part I, p. 29). The TTF was to address the issues of Christology, Biblical authority and interpretation, ordination standards and power. The TTF has concluded its work and has published a report that will go to the 217^th General Assembly (2006).

Did the 213^th General Assembly really believe that the TTF would usher in a time of peace, unity and purity? “Peace” was never defined. Is it the absence of disagreement? Is it something that a General Assembly document can “force” upon the church? What about Jesus’ statement, “Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three.” (Luke 12:51-21) The same types of questions can be asked about “unity.” The mantra for the PCUSA has been unity in diversity. What a crock! There are pastors and leaders in our denomination who do not believe that Jesus is the only way to God. They deny the bodily resurrection and most, if not all, of Jesus’ miracles. How can there be unity with this kind of diversity. Finally, what is the definition of “purity?” What standards will be used to define purity? Several years ago a paper was written by a General Assembly committee that wanted to introduce a new standard called “justice love.” The paper went on to say that any consensual sexual contact between adults who value and uphold the other person would be all right. Fortunately, the paper was rejected. The authors of the paper have a very different view of purity than is found in scripture. Who decides the definition of “purity?” So, did the General Assembly really believe that the TTF would bring in a time of peace, unity and purity?

The cynical side of my personality doesn’t believe it for a minute. The commissioners probably hoped for the best. If the denomination’s leadership truly believed it then they were/are the most inept leaders of all time. The two main opposing groups in this battle hold their convictions as a part of the core of their being. Neither side was/is going to back down. I feel that it was a pie-in-the-sky idea at best. It would allow General Assemblies to bypass the controversial issues for five years. The assemblies could (and did) say that we should let the TTF do its work before dealing with the divisive issues.

Well, the pie has fallen out of the sky. The 217^th General Assembly (2006) will have the task of dealing with that pie (task force report). Presbyterians around the world are waiting to see what the assembly will do.

Have a slice of pie as you watch and wait! (I’ll take a slice of pecan pie… hold the ice cream!)