Trinity Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

Sermons 

Title: "Report from the 217^th General Assembly"

Text: n.a.

This was the first biennial General Assembly

in the history of the Presbyterian Church in this country …

That is to say,

it’s been two years since the last one, in Richmond,

and it will be two years until the next one, in San Jose.

(California, that is, not Costa Rica!)

Prior to now,

they’ve always been held every year.

But guess what!

This one was also only a week long,

and yet, all the work got done!

Hmm.

Makes you wonder what else we might accomplish

if we only met once every five years, or thereabouts!

This year, our Assembly met at the same time and in the same location

as the General Assembly of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church,

and had various worship experiences and meeting times together …

though of course, no business meetings.

So even with those extra things added in,

all the business got done,

and got done on time.

Amazing.

So one of the things I report to you

is that being better stewards of our resources

by only meeting every other year

seems to be working, at least so far.

Imagine the money saved by not having to pay

a whole Assembly’s worth of travel expenses

and hotel rooms for 600-plus commissioners,

and a couple of hundred advisory delegates,

and GA staff from the Louisville office,

etc., etc.

There’s also a tremendous savings in terms of staff time –

that is, the GA staff who work for the church full-time at the national level.
They estimate that, when the Assembly met annually,

they spent nearly half their time doing things

that were preparation for the upcoming Assembly.

Now, they only have to do that every other year.

So, we are freeing up time and resources

for the real mission of the church

by only meeting once every other year.

I think that’s great.

It would be even better

if we weren’t already facing budget cuts and shortfalls.

That is, I’m afraid that the money saved

may only help us to hold steady,

and not to do anything new or different.

But enough about that.

It is, after all, pretty much a triviality,

except for its implications in terms of mission and ministry.

Let me say a little to you about the new moderator.

There seems to be an unwritten rule

that the Assembly will alternate between

electing an elder as moderator,

and electing a minister.

It’s been that way, almost without fail,

in the thirty-plus years that I’ve been observing the GA.

So, since our moderator for the last two years

was an elder, Rick Ufford-Chase …

as it turned out, all four of the candidates for this year’s moderator

were clergy: two women and two men.

The Assembly elected Joan Gray,

a minister member of Greater Atlanta Presbytery.

(Interestingly, second place in the balloting

went to the other clergywoman!)

She has served seven churches in the Atlanta area,

and has taught at Columbia, Johnson C. Smith, and Princeton Seminaries.

And if you’ve ever used the book

Presbyterian Polity for Church Officers

to help you sort your way through our Book of Order …

she’s one of that book’s authors.

In fact, Gray describes herself as a "polity wonk."

Her current work – before being elected Moderator, anyway –

is as an intentional interim pastor.

That is, she does not seek permanent pastoral positions,

but specializes in the skills needed to shepherd congregations

through the transition between installed pastors.

During the Q-and-A period before the election,

Gray said, "I don’t have all the answers,

but I have a passionate faith in the God

who through us is able to do more

than we could ever imagine."

It is that kind of humility

that, I think, attracted many of the commissioners to her.

She did an excellent job

ensuring that all voices were heard in the debates,

and also organizing the Assembly’s processes

to be sure that everything was fair and clear.

Now, let me tell you briefly about something that didn’t go so well.

As happens with every Assembly,

the amount of paperwork produced

is truly astonishing.

In fact, it has become a tradition that the youth advisory delegates,

at the end of each Assembly,

plant a tree as partial penance

for all the trees killed

in the conducting of Assembly business.

Anyway, this year the Assembly went paperless.

Whereas in previous years,

a large pile of reports has been mailed out ahead of time

to each commissioner and advisory delegate,

this year, nothing at all was mailed.

Instead, it was all on line.

The new system, called "Les" – I suppose, a play on the notion of "less" paper –

was available through the PC(USA) website in the weeks before the assembly,

and was then available through wireless internet connections

during the assembly.

Every commissioner and advisory delegate

needed to have a laptop computer;

there were hundreds of loaners available

for the people who don’t own a laptop.

So when business came before the Assembly,

instead of shuffling through a huge stack of paper,

people had to navigate their way through the onscreen menus.

Probably you would have to say

it went surprisingly well for a first time.

But – think about it – the median age in the PC(USA) is mid-50s.

Many of the commissioners are significantly older than that …

especially elder commissioners, who are frequently retired folk,

who don’t have to worry about the hassles

of taking a week off from work.

I know there are many older folks who are computer-literate …

but I know many more who aren’t.

And there are also lots right in the middle,

who may have learned how to use e-mail

to communicate with children and grandchildren,

but don’t ask them to navigate their way

through a complicated series of reports and amendments and etc.

So it seemed to me that moving to this all-electronic system

made participation more difficult

for some of our longest-term members.

There were frequent pleas for the Assembly to slow down,

to move through its business a little more slowly,

because people were discovering that

by the time they had found the right report on "Les,"

the Assembly had already voted and moved on.

It didn’t happen on any of the key reports

or the controversial items,

but people were concerned.

I’ll be interested to see

what adjustments they make for future Assemblies.

The largest item of business before the Assembly,

and the one that attracted the most attention pre-Assembly,

was the Report of the Task Force on the Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church,

called the "PUP report" for short (Peace, Unity, Purity … P-U-P)

Yeah, I know that’s not exactly the most exciting title

in the history of God’s church on earth …

Nevertheless, the report was the result of four years’ work

by a task force of 20 people

who were to consider how the church can move beyond

its current impasse over numerous doctrinal and polity issues.

The main "social issue," so to speak,

was the question of ordination of non-celibate homosexual persons.

But behind that are lots of other questions

about biblical interpretation,

theological interpretation,

ordination standards,

authority in the church and where it rests …

that is, is it local or national? …

The task force was made up of a group of people

about as diverse as you can imagine.

People representing both ends of the spectrum,

and people representing the broad middle,

who pretty much wish that people at both ends would just hush up.

The task force met for four years;

they worshiped together, studied together,

shared their own faith stories …

and even though few opinions were changed,

the task force members themselves were changed.

They realized that even though they might never agree on some questions …

and even though some on the task force

still weren’t sure that they thought others on the task force

ought to be ordained leaders in the church …

still, they were unanimous in agreeing that

every one of them belonged in the church,

and every one of their voices needed to be heard.

The task force wrote a unanimous report

suggesting a way beyond our present impasse.

Let me emphasize, unanimous.

That is a miracle that borders on the

walking on the water kind of thing.

They agreed on seven points which, if the Assembly adopted them,

would enable us to move ahead even while holding onto our differences.

I won’t review all seven with you;

that’s way too much for one morning!

The one which generated the most controversy

was their recommendation regarding the ordination question.

What it boils down to – first in "church-ese," and then I’ll unpack that for you –

is that they recommended that the Book of Order remain intact;

that is, the "fidelity/chastity" provision in Chapter 6 remains,

but in essence, it is to be considered as

a "standard" rather than an "essential."

Now of course, fidelity and chastity ought to apply across the board,

but in fact, that language was really added only for the purpose

of forbidding homosexual behaviors;

i.e., since they can’t legally marry,

they have to be celibate, q.e.d.

What the task force was recommending

was that the Assembly offer an authoritative interpretation of this section

which makes it clear that, while we still value fidelity and chastity,

we recognize that they are not essential tenets of the Reformed faith.

They are matters about which "people of good faith may differ" …

especially, when it comes to the question of persons

who have no legal opportunity for marriage.

And the recommendation was that individual congregations, in the case of elders,

and presbyteries, in the case of pastors,

have the ultimate authority in determining

whom they will or will not ordain,

based on all that they know about the person,

not just their sexual orientation and relationships.

The standard doesn’t go away,

but it becomes only one thing among many

that should be considered by an ordaining body.

You knew this had a chance of passing

because both the people on the far right and those on the far left

didn’t like it.

Groups like More Light Presbyterians

felt that it didn’t go far enough;

that it still stigmatizes homosexual relationships.

And they’re probably right …

but realistically, this is as good as we’re going to get any time soon.

Conservative groups like the Presbyterian Coalition and the Lay Committee

began their politicking long before the Assembly,

and you could tell how they had spun the report

by the sound-bite phrases that kept coming up

from commissioners in debate.

Highland Park Pres. and Oak Cliff as well,

went on record as opposing the report

as it did not contribute to the "peace, unity, and purity" of the church.

(But isn’t it interesting how, for the conservative groups,

"purity" only ever refers to sexual matters?

It’s never about the purity of your investments,

or your spending patterns,

or what you read or the movies you see,

and whether you did it on the Sabbath.

It’s only about who you sleep with.

But I digress …)

At any rate, as I’m sure you’ve seen in the news,

although they probably didn’t get it quite right,

the task force report did pass the Assembly,

by a vote of 57%.

Another recommendation of that report, which also passed,

was that the Assembly agreed – both for itself,

and also for Assemblies in the near future –

not to undertake further amendments to the Book of Order about these matters

until the church has had the opportunity to live for a time

with the current action.

And as much as I would like to see the offending language

stricken from the Book of Order,

I think this is something we can live with for the time being.

We do need to be thinking about the peace of the church.

And this decision does open up opportunities

for our congregation and others

to do what we’ve been doing without fear of judicial action,

and for presbyteries to consider all the gifts of all their candidates for ministry,

not just their sexualities.

I don’t know whether Grace Presbytery will do that,

but the door is open

in a way it has not been before.

To those who claim that this action will "split the church,"

I say only that it will only split if they split it.

Why are they afraid? Have they no faith?

Finally, a sad note:

I was looking forward to seeing a friend of mine from San Angelo at the Assembly,

who was there as an elder commissioner from Tres Rios Presbytery.

Nelson was the chair of the PNC that called me to San Angelo,

twenty-plus years ago,

and we have remained friends for all this time.

I knew I had a special place in Nelson’s heart

the one time he accidentally called me "Gigi" …

which was the name of his beloved Sheltie!

Nelson died of a heart attack

in the elevator, in the convention center,

just before the opening plenary session.

He had postponed an upcoming heart surgery –

which would have been his sixth or seventh –

so that he could attend the Assembly.

And while I cried my eyes out when I learned about it …

I also know beyond any doubt

that Nelson died doing what he loved the most,

which was the work of the church.

General Assembly isn’t just about the business at hand,

it’s also about the people.

The ones you meet,

the ones you haven’t seen in a decade or more,

the seminary classmates that you only see at GA,

even the ones who are just wrong on so many issues!

It’s about the quiet wisdom of the elder elders,

and the passion of the youth advisory delegates,

and the different visions of the ecumenical delegates.

It’s not just about how the votes go,

but it’s about what you learn.

It’s not just about what happens on the floor of the Assembly,

but also what happens in the exhibit hall,

and over the lunch table,

and out in the hallways.

It’s why being a connectional church is such a wonderful thing,

even though it’s sometimes also a pain in the patoot.

It’s about a church that’s bigger than us gathered here,

but also includes us gathered here,

and, this year, took an additional step

to be even more inclusive.

I give thanks to God for the Presbyterian Church,

and can’t imagine anyplace else I’d rather be.

May God continue to shape us into the church

that God needs in our day and in our place.

Amen.