The Presbyterian Church Crisis - 2THE GAY AGENDA. ITS COMING TO US SOON. HERE IS WHAT THEY WANT- WILL WE LET THEM HAVE IT? DATE
OF PUBLICATION: OCTOBER 1999 OVERTURE 99-74 SAME-SEX BENEFITS REQUIRED On
June 23, in a strongly divided vote, a committee of the General Assembly
recommended that the Board of Pensions of PCUSA study into the feasibility
of offering medical and pension benefits to lay employees who are engaged
in same-sex partnerships. It is astounding that, of the 40 people on that
committee, fully one-half of them voted to authorize this study.
(The vote was 20-15-5.) A
similar situation is developing in our own denomination. Although many
members are not strongly pro-liberal, a growing number of church leaders
are. The
original motion, Overture 99-74, was brought before the committee on June
22. It called for extending the benefit plan to all denominational members
who are engaged in long-term committed [homosexual] relationships.
Yet the constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA) prohibits the
ordination and installation of persons who engage in sex outside of
marriage! Pastor
Donald Baird, of Fremont Presbyterian Church, Sacramento, California,
added this comment: This overture is patently absurd. It proposes
subsidizing those who are openly in violation of what the church requires.
It would be difficult for me to explain to my congregation that our church
says marriage is our sexual ethics standard but we will provide benefits
for those who don't live up to it. Pastor
Robert Henley of Eastminster Presbyterian Church, Wichita, Kansas, told
the committee: This proposal asks the Board of Pensions to do something
that the constitution does not allow. This proposal is intended to put the
ordination of homosexuals back on the table. If it passes, it will become
a major battle ground. When supporters of Overture 99-74 saw it might fail to gain committee approval, they came back the next day with an amendment: Let the benefits apply only to non-ordained PCUSA employees. In bringing this amendment, Richard Lundy, of the Presbytery of the Twin Cities, said it would take the ordination controversy out of the debate and concentrate on justice for lay employees. This
is not about ordination standards; its about civil rights! declared
Pastor Lauraine LaFontaine, a lesbian minister from Denver. Lesbian
evangelist, Jane Spahr, fresh from having received the Woman of
Faith Award from the Women's Ministries Program of the General Assembly
Council, told the committee: Friends, this is about health care and
bereavement rights, insurance for loved ones . . I don't care what your
sexual orientation is. I want you to be able to have a healthy life
together. At this,
Carol Shanholtzer stood up: Marriage is defined as a relationship
between a man and a woman. Our denomination has no policy requiring that
we treat same-sex relationships in the same way as we treat marriage. Pastor
Harold Porter (who noted he has over 100 gay/lesbian/bisexual members in
his congregation) said the denomination was falling behind cultural
ethical standards. Citing employment policies of the Walt Disney
Corporation, he said, The world is going forward on this, and the
Presbyterian Church (USA) is in a taillight position. Pastor James Hazelett of Cascades Presbytery
jumped up and replied, The church is not in the position of copying
culture. Frankly, I dont care what Coors Beer says about same-sex
relationships. When we say no to cultural trends, we become headlights,
not taillights! Hazelett
significantly pointed out that the phrase, long-term committed
relationships, is vague and could apply to a variety of situations.
How long is long, and what about heterosexual couples in open
[common law] marriages who say they are in committed
relationships? One would think that this amendment would also fail,but Richard Lundy and Harry Smith pushed it through to success with this astounding argument: First,
Lundy said that General Assembly stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick had
already written an official letter on behalf of PCUSA, demanding civil
rights to gay/lesbian/bisexual persons in the general public, and that the
letter specifically listed pension rights of same-sex partnerships
as one of those rights. Lundy then argued that Kirkpatricks public
position placed the denomination in a dilemma. It was advocating equal
pension/health care rights for homosexuals in the nation while refusing
those rights in the church. (Here is
the background of this: To temporarily satisfy the cries of the liberals,
the 1996 General Assembly had voted for the Office of the Stated Clerk
to explore the feasibility of entering friend-of-court briefs and
supporting legislation in favor of granting civil rights to same-sex
partners in business and industry; and they did so by affirming the
Presbyterian Churchs historic definition of marriage as a civil
contract between a man and a woman, yet recognizing that committed
same-sex partners seek equal civil liberties in contractual relationships
with all the civil rights of married partners. It was on that basis,
that Kirkpatricks letter was sent in 1997 to members of the Hawaii
Legislature.) When
Lundy finished, Harry Smith, Chairman of the denominations Mission
Responsibility through the Investment Committee, expressed his hearty
agreement. In January 1999, Smith said, his committee met with
representatives of several other denominationsto decide which
corporations they would target for moral offenses. The other
denominations wanted to file shareholder resolutions against Exxon,
because it has so far failed to provide benefits for its same-sex
employees. Smith concluded that PCUSA must correct this hypocrisy. Hearing
this, the committee voted to recommend that the General Assembly agree to
a feasibility study
of medical and pension benefits for lay employees who are living in
long-term, committed same-sex relationships. Two
points should be noted here: (1) Earlier compromises with the liberals led
to later onesfor they never stop pressing for further concessions. (2)
A growing number of Christian denominations are giving in to liberal/gay
demands. On
June 26, the General Assembly defeated the same-sex benefits study
by a vote of 215-304-2. That was a rather close vote. OVERTURE 99-2 THE FIDELITY AND CHASTITY CLAUSE The
fidelity and chastity clause in the PCUSA constitution is G-6.0106b.
It requires fidelity and chastity in marriage. This is something
that homosexuals are very much opposed to! On
Monday morning, June 21, the committee on Church Orders and Ministry held
open hearings. Most of the comments concerned efforts to amend G-6.0106b. Lauraine
LaFontaine, the lesbian pastor from the Denver area which we quoted
earlier, spoke: I believe that G-6.0106b is divisive and painful . . I
watch the session struggle with how to be faithful to the
constitution when the constitution contains bad theology and bad polity
. . I pray you have the courage to do the right thing, to pass Overture
99-2 (which would eliminate that clause). Bill
Moss, an elder from San Francisco, rose and said, I have been in a
loving relationship with my partner, Chris, for 9 years . . [We have] the
extra-Biblical standard of G-6.0106b, which proclaims to the world an
ethic of exclusion. Jane
Spahr, lesbian winner of that special award, told commissioners that
G-6.0106b is killing gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. The
church is participating in our death. G-6.0106b is exclusive. It says that
we cannot serve. In doing that, it says that we are less than . .
And saying that people are less than promotes violence. When
we ask children Why did you beat up lesbian people, they say
Because our church told us they are bad. Interesting
enough, Spahr added this point: Thirty-three percent of gay and lesbian
people commit suicide . . We are complicit in their death . . Many of my
friends who want to serve have gone on to other denominations, and so have
their families. We want to serve. We want to be in leadership. (In
another tract study, Homosexual Fact Sheet [WM801], we printed a
remarkable number of facts about the miseries and early deaths which
homosexuals experience. There is a price to be paid for
eliminating virtue and purity from ones life.) Having
listened to the discussion from the floor and ignoring a parliamentary
ruling that they no longer could take the action, the Committee on Church
Orders and Ministries approved Overture 99-2, which required that
G-6.0106b (the fidelity and chastity clause) be deleted from the
PCUSAs Book of Order. On Friday, June 25, Overture 99-2 came to the floor of the General Assembly. Sara
Simm, from the John Knox Presbytery, told the commissioners that G-6.0106b
is saying that sexual behavior outside of marriage is a sin, not a
standard for ordination. Douglas
Baird, elder from Western North Carolina Presbytery, stated flatly, If
presented with a candidate for ordination who would not qualify under the
provisions of the Book of Order, I personally would take the risk
of condemnation and vote to approve his ordination and installation rather
than risk the possibility of excluding someone who is indeed called to
office in our church. In
response to that, it might be asked, Who called him? The
Assembly was concerned to placate the liberals and homosexuals; so, in
place of the original Overture 99-2, the Assembly adopted a minority
report which stated that the fidelity and chastity clause would, for
the present, remain on the books. But a two-year study would be started to
see how something different could be worked out.
The 213th General Assembly, meeting in 2001, would receive a report on the
matter and render a decision. Now it was time to vote on the matter. Would the Assembly approve the compromise, called the minority report? But,
before doing so, committee moderator Kathrine Runyeon, a minister from
Redwoods Presbytery, urged the commissioners to delete G-6.0106b.
Justice delayed is justice denied . . The heart of the gospel is
Christs call to follow him. Let us remove constitutional
restrictions that makes it impossible for certain persons to follow
Christs call to ordained service . . Let us live by grace, not law,
removing this section of the constitution and allowing us to ordain all
with gifts for ministry. After
Runyeon spoke, the moderator called for a time of silent prayer. Following
the prayer, the vote was taken. The General Assembly voted 293-243-2 to
adopt the minority report as the main motion. Then they approved it
319-198-7. Conservatives
left the meeting very concerned. It was true that the fidelity and
chastity clause remained on the books, but the liberals would now have
two years to pursue their objective of abolishing it. So
once again the church had compromised. Keep giving a little to the
liberals is the plan to be followed. That plan is being carried out in our
own church as well. OVERTURE 99-36 BANNING GAY CONVERSIONS A
cardinal premise of homosexuals is that they are born that way. Added to
this, is their contention that it is terribly wrong to attempt to persuade
a homosexual to stop being one! On
April 13, the New York Presbytery approved a radical overture that would
require repentance by anyone in the Presbyterian Church (USA),who would
dare to convert a homosexual from his ways or even say that homosexual
activity is a sin! This
overture would direct all agencies of the General Assembly . . to
refrain from supporting, implementing, or sponsoring therapies of
ministries which attempt to alter a persons sexual orientation. The
proposal, Overture 99-36, would in effect substitute the position of the
American Psychological Association (APA), in place of that given in the
Bible. The New
York overture repeatedly quotes from the APA, including these two
statements: No scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness
of any conversion therapies that try to change orientation. Therapy
directed specifically at changing sexual orientation is contraindicated .
. since it can provoke guilt and anxiety while having little or no
potential for achieving change in orientation. Of
course, there are many psychologists, psychiatrists, and pediatricians who
maintain the opposite position. It
should be remembered that the Journal of the APA recently printed
an article, stating that sex between children and adults is not harmful
and, in fact, can be a positive experience for the child. According
to organizations which try to convert homosexuals from their problem, a
1997 survey of over 2000 professional therapists offering reparative
therapy for 860 homosexuals indicates a documented shift in respondents
sexual orientation, thoughts, and actions. (Organizations which focus on
helping such people out of their problem include Exodus International,
National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH),
Transforming Congregations, and One-By-One. Among
others, the presbyteries of Genessee Valley and Chicago have concurred
with Overture 99-36, and want it enacted. There are a lot of Presbyterians
in Chicago, yet that is what they want. On the last day of the General Assembly, Saturday, June 26, the Assembly rejected Overture 99-36, and in its place approved a compromise statement (recommendation 453-62) which read in part: No
church should insist that gay and lesbian people need therapy to change to
a heterosexual orientation,
nor should it inhibit or discourage those individuals who are unhappy with
or confused about their sexual orientation from seeking therapy they
believe would be helpful. RESOLUTION TAKING OVER CHURCH PROPERTIES This
proposal was not submitted in time to be placed as an overture at the Fort
Worth Assembly. So it might be presented at next years Assembly. But
do not underrate its significance! The
Beaver-Butler Presbytery in Pennsylvania considered the resolution on May
17, with the plan of submitting it for placement as an overture. But
church rules forbade acceptance of such a late resolution as an overture. Specifically,
this proposal would ask the General Assembly to begin steps toward
permitting governing bodies (either presbyteries or local congregations)
that refuse to abide by the PCUSA constitution, to leave the denomination
and take contested property with them. The
objective was to encourage the liberals to get out of the Presbyterian
Church and go form their own. Though it would fracture the denomination, both conservatives and liberals could gain from enactment of this proposal. First, let us view how the liberals could use such a ruling: The
liberals, feminists, and homosexuals want to take over the Presbyterian
Church. That is their intention, but what if they do not succeed? The
backup plan of the liberals would be to pull local congregations and
Presbyteries out of the denomination entirely. The
problem is that PCUSA owns the properties. So the liberals and fellow
travelers need to get an overture passed which will permit them to
withdraw while retaining local church buildings, lands, and equipment. Either
takeover or fractionize! If such an overture is enacted, then the
homosexuals (generally unencumbered with families) can move to an area,
gain control of a local church and then take it out of PCUSA! An easy
way to acquire a lot of property for the gay cause. Second, let us consider the conservative position: The
two-county presbytery, north of Pittsburgh, which originated this
resolution is strongly conservative, not liberal! The resolution was
triggered by growing opposition, in that presbytery, to the selection of
lesbian Jane Spahr as one of this years three recipients of the
PCUSAs Women of Faith award. As soon
as the Beaver-Butler Presbytery learned that the award would be given to
her, they called for a meeting to prepare the resolution; but the deadline
for overtures was May 5 and already past. However,
it was decided that the proposed resolution could be considered by the
General Assembly as a commissioners resolution, for which there is no
pre-Assembly deadline. The
conservatives wanted to provide a door by which the liberals could get
out! We
deal with essentially the same problem in our own church today. If all the
liberals would leave, we could worship and work in our church in full
accordance with our 19th century historic beliefs. But they refuse to
leave, continue to gain concessions, and are ejecting some of the
faithful--while other historic believers leave in disgust.
We are having a shaking, but it is an upside down one! There is a growing conviction that the time has come to tell governing bodies and individuals in the Presbyterian Church that they should leave the PCUSA if they cannot abide by the denominations ordinance standards. As John Towns, a retired business executive and Beaver-Butler Presbytery leader, says, We are spending so much time on this [dealing with the encroachments of apostasy] that were not getting on with the great commission of the church. Another elder, Tom McMeekin, said, It is time that we began a discussion about those who cannot agree, to separate from the Presbyterian Church. I hope it would be an amicable [peaceable] split . . [Pastor Robert] McCrumb said the language of the resolution was intentionally moderate so that a principled split might occur, with governing bodies that favor ordaining homosexuals allowed to leave the PCUSA peaceably with their funds and assets. Behind Gentle Phrases, an Amicable Split Sought, Presbyterian Layman, May 14, 1999. The
resolution ultimately failed to be approved even
in the Beaver-Butler Presbytery. But it is an ominous sign of coming
events. The liberals do not intend to relax their efforts, and every year
they gain added strength. Just as in our own denomination, trouble is
ahead for the Presbyterians. [This issue] could be a sleeper that would change the face of the Presbyterian Church (USA). The issue is whether steps should be taken toward a split in the denomination . . There is a precedent. In 1982, the General Assembly approved the reunion of the United Presbyterian Church (US) and the Presbyterian Church and included a provision that allowed dissenting PCUS congregations to leave the denomination with their property and money. There was an eight-year window for withdrawal, ending in 1991. Currently, there is no withdrawal option available to congregations. If a congregation does withdraw from the PCUSA, it forfeits its property and money. The Proposed overture by Beaver-Butler did not spell out that process. Rather, it asked the commissioners to authorize a study of how a separation could be arranged peacefully. Commissioners Resolution Could Be Sleeper Issue, Presbyterian Layman, June 8, 1999. Whether
it comes from the conservatives or the liberals, this issue is not dead.
It is indeed sleeping, and will inevitably awaken. NNPCW FUNDING The
National Network of Presbyterian College Women (NNPCW) is a very
respectable title for the most active and powerful of independent
Presbyterian lesbian organizations. As
mentioned earlier, NPUSA funding for activities of the NNPCW was cut off
at the 1998 General Assembly at Charlotte, North Carolina. But then at its
close when, holding hands, the liberals formed a ring around the entire
auditorium and tearfully sang a song,the commissioners voted to
continue funding them for another year. A majority of the delegates
were fearful to offend the lesbians and fellow travelers. As in our own
church, the fear was that the liberals might leave and take their money
with them. Investigators for the Presbyterian Layman discovered that NNPCW had brazenly placed a link, called Christian Views on Homosexuality, on the denominations web site in the section, Resources We Offer. On
Resources was material promoting Re-Imagining God theologies and
endorsing homosexual behavior. Also included were links to online lesbian
dating services and very hard core pornography. The
objective was to lead ordinary Presbyterian women into pornography, and
reorient them to become lesbians. I will not list the items in those
links, but the Presbyterian Layman description is really bad. At about the same time, Sylvia Dooling, leader of Voices of Orthodox Women, a Presbyterian women's group, attended the 1998 Re-Imagining Revival to see what it was like. This is how she described it: They took a bit of Christian vocabulary, mixed it together with pagan worship of goddesses and mythology, threw in a pinch of religious science, a teaspoon of native American spiritualism, a crumb of Maryology, and a whiff of the occult. Put them together and what do you have? a new religion that not so new. Rather, it is merely a reincarnation of first century Gnosticism. Sylvia Dooling, quoted in Troubles Mounting for College Womens Network, Presbyterian Layman, September 9, 1998. As the 1999 General Assembly neared, a task force was presented with the teachings of the NNPCW. It was shocked. At the same time, an overture was presented to stop all denominational funding of NNPCWs activities. In response, 40 speakers came to the Mission Coordinating Committee and warned it not to stop the funding, or the women would stop contributing to the church. How did the task force respond to this pressure? It voted to ask the Assembly to give the NNPCW another chance. Intense pressure was applied and, to make a long story short, the 1999 Fort Worth Assembly voted not to terminate, but to DOUBLE the amount of money given to the group annually! Henceforth, the NNPCW would be given $96,000 to spend on its homosexual recruitment activities! Two things should be noted in connection with this matter: First, if you wish to know how thoroughly pagan homosexuality is, read the boxes on the bottom of pages 14 and 15. Second, a document entitled NNPCW Supporters Talking Points was circulated at the General Assembly on the afternoon of Thursday, June 24, 1999. The talking points were organized under subheads, making it easy to rebut any argument that might come up in the debate. Each subhead contained two to seven talking points. The
first talking point on the list was this: Rush to a microphone early.
If someone else has already made your points, choose others. Below
that was a list of specific talking points, which consisted of dodges and
denials. They totally denied that those web links ever existed. Third, NNPCW representatives met with Youth Advisory Delegates (YAD) on Wednesday night, June 24, and denied that they worshiped goddesses, taught anti-Christian sentiments, or had pornography site links. It is
clear that gays and lesbians can be very hardened, untruthful people. CONCLUSION OF THE FORT WORTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY Thus we
see that a number of compromises were made at the 1999 General Assembly
of the Presbyterian Church (USA). As is happening in our own denomination,
PCUSA leadership keeps making concessions in order to appease the
liberals, feminists, and gays, and year by year, more victories are
being won. Let us briefly consider two other
events which occurred that week: VOICES OF SOPHIA CELEBRATION Voices
of Sophia is another lesbian Presbyterian women's organization.
Sophia is Greek for a personified feminine person named
Wisdom. It is another name for their mother goddess. On
Monday morning, June 21, about 250 men and women gathered for a Voices of
Sophia celebration. They sang praises to Sophia, danced in rings, and held
raised hands in a Sophia blessing. Freda
Gardner, General Assembly moderator, appeared briefly and encouraged them
in their carnival. Voices
of Sophia has been in the forefront of the controversial Re-Imagining God
movement. Apparently they do not want the God of the Bible (because of the
standards given therein), so they imagine that they can re-imagine
Him (i.e., make Him into their own image, after their own
likeness). Johanna
W.H. van Bijk-Bos, professor of Old Testament at Louisville Theological
Seminary, told the gathering that there needs to be a sabbatical on
malespeak, and that women must raise their voices against male
domination, sexism, and heterosexism. The
following taped quotations from her talk will help you better understand
the message of feminists: Men
should remain silent . . There must be a sabbatical on malespeak . . We
must crash right through the gender barrier despite opposition,
including attempts at silencing wisdom from the far right . . a smear
campaign from those who clutch their patriarchal ways . . Men should
listen to wisdom. Learn to listen. To whom does women-wisdom
[Sophia] call? Men. What is our message? Listen [men] and learn.
Women-wisdom does not murmur in a tiny tone. She is a loud woman.
She embodies no ideals of femininity that I have ever heard of . . Learn
the rejection of innocence. Innocence does not save women from abuse. We
must roar like lions . . Resistance begins with chaos . . Men must hear
and be healed of the rage of women. MEETING OF MORE LIGHT PRESBYTERIANS On Saturday evening, June 19, Mike Brown, pastor of the Christ Church in Burlington, Vermont, spoke to a Celebration Dinner hosted by the More Light Presbyterians. This is another independent Presbyterian homosexual organization! The denomination appears to be riddled with them. Were here, were queer . . deal with it! Brown proclaimed-to a standing ovation of the sold-out crowd of more than 200. Brown was in Fort Worth to receive the groups Inclusive Church Award and to help stage a demonstration the next morning in front of the Convention Center, where more than 10,000 Presbyterians were scheduled to worship. (Browns congregation has been told, by the Northern New England Presbytery, that it is not required to obey the ordination standards in the PCUSAs Book of Order. It was on this basis that they went ahead and ordained Brown, an open homosexual.) Claiming that he is committed to Gospel values, Brown later said quite the opposite: We could be faithful to our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, or we could be a scandal to the Gospel. Why have we presented this
lengthy account of what is taking place in the Presbyterian Church? It was
done so you can better understand the nature, extent of the ominous threat
confronting our own denomination, and more fully grasp the message and
tactics of the lesbians, gays, and feminists. LOWERED CHURCH MORALITY BRINGS LEGAL DANGERS Amendment
A was brought up in earlier Assemblies and, although not enacted, will be
introduced as an overture again. This amendment to the PCUSA
constitution would permit the ordination of persons who refuse to limit
their sexual behavior to the covenant of marriage. Aside
from Scriptural reasons for opposing such proposals, lowering the morality
standards of the church creates enormous legal exposure! The following article is by Robert L. Howard, senior partner and chairman of Foulston & Siefkin, a 70-member law firm based in Wichita, Kansas. He has 38 years of experience in the defense of individuals and institutions against claims for civil damages and is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers. Ordained an elder in 1960, he has been active in the teaching and missions ministries of Eastminster Presbyterian Church in Wichita. He is vice-chair of the Presbyterian Lay Committee. Here
is the article: Under
standard legal principles, corporations and institutional entities,
including churches, are liable for injuries or harm caused by their
officers or employees of the entity if their conduct was within the course
and scope of their employment or official duties. Sexual misconduct and
harassment cases are burgeoning throughout the United States, and
plaintiffs attorneys almost always seek to impose liability on entities
above or behind the perpetrator of the offending conduct in order to
recover more substantial damages. Civil damage liabilities In July of this year, a civil jury in Dallas, Texas, rendered a verdict of $119.6 million against the Catholic Diocese, finding gross negligence in its handling of a priest who allegedly sexually abused boys at three churches. Any church that repudiates previously established prohibitions against sexual misconduct by its ordained ministers and officers, and substitutes an unclear policy permitting its ministers and officers to determine their own standards, invites costly legal claims, regardless of the ultimate merit of the suits. Creative plaintiffs lawyers will inevitably claim such church action had the effect of granting actual or apparent authority to its ministers and officers to self-define standards of sexual behavior, bringing any such behavior within the course and scope of the duties or church-related activities of the ministers or officials. Sexual
conduct is actionable as sexual harassment if perpetrated on
employees of the church, or as sexual abuse if perpetrated on
parishioners and counselees of the church. PCUSA church corporations and
entities, from congregations to General Assembly, are liable for civil
wrongs committed by its ministers, officers, or employees if their actions
are within the actual or apparent scope of authority established by
policies of the church. Even if misconduct occurs outside the scope of
authority, a church can still be subject to liability if it was negligent
in failing to prohibit wrongful conduct. An employer, for example, that
knows of sexual harassment in the workplace in violation of its own
policy, yet fails to take remedial steps, creates liability for himself. While it
is true that the General Assembly has adopted official policies against
sexual misconduct/harassment and, one hopes, all synods and presbyteries
have adopted similar policies, Amendment A proposes a change in the
Constitution that will seriously impair, if not effectively rescind, the
validity of such subordinate policies. If the prevailing constitutional
standard leaves it to individuals to define the limits of acceptable
conduct, an agency of the church may not be viewed as credible in its
defense if it relies on subordinate policies. Ultimate
liability is one thing; legal exposure is another. Those who defend
Amendment A may argue that, in leaving it to individuals to define for
themselves the limits of acceptable sexual behavior, churches move further
away from, rather than closer to, responsibility for behavior that
individuals choose for themselves. It might also be argued that sexual
harassment or abuse is, by legal definition, unwelcome or nonconsensual;
whereas, under Amendment A, fidelity and integrity mean mutuality and
reciprocity. Such arguments are unlikely to prove successful in court
because of the legal theories by which liability can be imposed. One thing
is certain: Amendment A clouds the outcome of the litigation it surely
invites. And such suits, even if unsuccessful, are costly to defend. Legal theories of liability Negligent Failure to Prevent or Remedy. Courts consistently hold employers responsible for sexual misconduct, by those in authority, toward subordinates where the employer has also been negligent. Entities of the church may be found negligent and liable for failing to prevent or remedy sexual misconduct, after it knew or with reasonable care should have known of it. Failure to prevent or remedy after knowledge was the basic theory used by plaintiffs in the recent Texas case. Abuse of
Delegated Authority to Control Work Environment. The United States Court
of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently held that an employer may also
be held responsible where it delegated authority to control the work
environment to a supervisor who then misuses that authority to aid
perpetration of sexual harassment. Apparent
Authority. Where the minister, officer, or supervisor of the church
purports to act or speak with authority of the church, the victim need not
prove that the church had actual notice or knowledge of the misconduct, or
that the church was negligent in some way in preventing or remedying it.
Rather, the victim need only prove that: (a) the harasser/abuser appeared
to be acting under the authority of the ordination standards of the
church, (b) the victim thought the harasser/abuser had such authority, and
(c) harm resulted. Conclusions All entities of the PCUSA are subject to the law allowing recovery of damages for sexual harassment in the workplace or sexual misconduct against those who should be protected by the church, such as parishioners and counselees. The law places the burden on the church to monitor voluntary and involuntary sexual relationships involving those whom the church has a duty to protect. The
church cannot close its eyes to such relationships. Legal principles
imposing liability for sexual abuse/harassment apply regardless of gender
or sexual orientation of the abuser/harasser or of the victim. What is
initially deemed a voluntary relationship and claimed holy may become
involuntary and hostile, with severe personal psychological damages. An
ordained officer of the church often has the power to continue a
relationship after sexual contacts are no longer welcome and the
church can find itself responsible for the results. Most
insurance policies do not cover the cost of defense or damage awards
incurred in sexual harassment/abuse cases. Such costs can be enormous and
will rob the church of funds needed to further its mission. The
existing constitutional policy makes it absolutely clear that the PCUSA
does not condone any form of sexual misconduct. With Amendment B in
place, no victim can reasonably claim that a minister or officer of the
church had the actual or apparent authority to engage in sexual
relationships that may turn into harassment or abuse. Unfortunately,
proposed Amendment A does not prohibit sexual misconduct. Rather, it
effectively delegates authority to ministers and other ordained officers
of the PCUSA to self-define what sexual relationships are acceptable by
claiming any relationship is conducted with fidelity and integrity.
It is a toss-up whether those who engage in sexual misconduct or the
lawyers who will seek to impose liability for such misconduct will be the
most creative in defining fidelity and integrity. In the real world of high-dollar
litigation, the only safe sex is fidelity in the covenant of
marriage between one man and one woman or chastity in singleness. Surely
we, as people of The Book and the great Reformed tradition, should
have standards at least as high as those imposed by the courts of law.
vf God requires of us earnest prayer
and continual resistance to wrongdoing. DEFINITION OF TERMS Because
we are reading about a totally different denomination, many terms will be
new to us. The following list may help. We will most frequently refer to
the underlined ones. Presbyterian Church (USA) (The acronym is PCUSA)This large denomination is in a state of crisis because a sizeable number of its Presbyteries are liberal. Presbytery The
name of each local group of congregations. The presbyteries are powerful
in the church structure (which is why the denomination is called
Presbyterian). They have authority to recommend resolutions (overtures)
to the yearly General Assembly (GA). The delegates
sent by the presbyteries to the GA are called commissioners.
The moderator (equivalent to our General Conference
president) is elected for a one-year term. Recent ones have been liberal. General
Assembly Council Executive Committee A
small group of about a dozen people, most of whom are liberal. These are
the top leaders of the General Assembly Council (GAC;
comparable to our General Conference staff), which carries on PCUSA
business in the interim between General Assemblies. The Book of
Order is equivalent to our Church Manual. The Constitution
is equivalent to our General Conference Working Policy. National
Ministries Division (NMD) Somewhat
equivalent to our General Conference Ministerial Association. It tends to
be conservative. National
Network of Presbyterian College Women
(NNPCW) A
strongly pro-feminist, pro-gay, and anti-Bible organization of women. They
are strongly supported by some, intensely disliked by others in the
church, and treated with indifference by most. The United
Presbyterian Church (USA) and the Presbyterian Church (US)
merged in 1983 to form the present denomination, Presbyterian Church
(USA) (which they refer to as PCUSA). The
Covenant Network An
organization of gays and lesbians, dedicated to promoting the ordination
of homosexuals in PCUSA. Presbyterians
for Lesbian and Gay Concerns The
name describes it. More Light Churches Network Another
feminist-gay Presbyterian group. Recently both organizations combined into
one: More Light Presbyterians (MLP). Other
feminist, lesbian, gay, transsexual activist organizations are also at
work to disrupt PCUSA, until they control it. These include Presbyterians
for Gay and Lesbian Concerns, Hesed, Voices of Sophia [the
goddess Wisdom], Advocacy Committee for Women's Concerns, National
Association of Presbyterian Clergywomen, Association of Presbyterian
Christian Educators, That All May Freely Serve, Re-Imagining God
Conferences (proclaiming God to be a woman), and Presbyterian
Parents of Gays and Lesbians. GLARF Gay,
lesbian and radical feminist activists. Because they work closely
together, this acronym was invented by conservatives. GLBT gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgendered
coalition, another acronym coined by conservatives. NATIONAL NETWORK OF PRESBYTERIAN COLLEGE WOMEN Here
is a sampling of some of the statements . They reveal what these people
live for. It also shows they are pagans in theology; they are not
Christians. The following
quotations are from Young Women Speak, a resource published
by the National Network of Presbyterian College Women and recommended by
them to Presbyterian young people: God
is letting me know that it doesn't matter whether I have a relationship
with a man or a woman, just as long as I remember that God is the center
of the love. I
view the message of the Bible to be very helpful and relevant to my
society. However, I also understand that there are issues of both long ago
and today that are uniquely distinct to the particular period of
time. Young Women Speak, chapter on Sexuality and
Spirituality. Thus
it would seem that loving members of the same sex is neither more nor less
sinful than loving members of the opposite sex. Young Women Speak,
chapter on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Life. Is
it possible that all you need is a good gay lover? Ibid. If
you've never been sexual with a person of the same sex, how do you know
you wouldn't prefer that? Ibid. These
lesbians worship a woman goddess of their own imagining (which they call
Sophia or Christa). The following poem is from Young Women Speak: Who
do people say we are? Partner to our Sister God . . Daughter
of the Daughter of God, A Psalm Affirming Identity The following
quotations are taken from speeches and books of people who have been
recommended as resources by the National Network of Presbyterian College
Women. We
must keep in mind as we go, now and forevermore that the body of Christa
cannot be, and should never become, an exclusively or uniquely Christian
body. Carter Heyward, Touching our Strength: The Erotic as Power
and the Love of God, p. 117. We
are learning that to be ecumenical is to move beyond the boundaries of
Christianity. You see, yesterdays heresies are becoming tomorrows
Book of Order. From a speech made by Mary Ann Lundy to Voices of
Sophia during the 1997 General Assembly in Syracuse. Lundy, former
director of Women's Ministries in the PCUSA, established the NNPCW when
she was a Louisville staff member. She also got the Presbyterian Church to
divert $66,000 from its Bicentennial Fund to help finance the first
Re-Imagining Conference in 1993. When she resigned from the PCUSA, she
became a deputy general secretary of the World Council of Churches. I don't think we need folks hanging on crosses and blood dripping and weird stuff. From a speech by Delores Williams at the 1993 Re-Imagining Conference (Presbyterian professor at Union Theological Seminary in New York). Jesus in reality was not God . . Jesus was human like us, and also, like us, he was infused with God, with sacred spirit, and in that sense was divine, and he had a clue. From a speech made at the 1998 Re-Imagining Conference by Carter Heyward, a self-described lesbian activist and professor at Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Mass. In view of the overwhelming patriarchal cast of the Bible, we must ask whether it is possible for feminists to maintain a belief in the centrality of Scripture and its authority. Johanna W.H. van Wijk-Bos, Reformed and Feminist, A Challenge to the Church, p. 63 (professor of theology at Louisville Theological Seminary). My understanding of God is not primarily defined by the doctrines and ritualistic practices of Christian churches, Buddhist temples or any other religion. God is found in the life experiences of poor people, the majority of them women and children, and She is giving power. Chung Hyun Kyung, Inheriting Our Mothers Gardens: Feminist Theology in Third World Perspective, edited by Letty M. Russell et al., p. 69. A Marxist view of Jesus gives the Gospels afresh both to Christians and to atheists and so provides each group with new insights of itself and the other. Such readings contribute responsibly and beneficially to global issues. Phyllis Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality, p. 6 (professor of sacred literature at Union Theological Seminary in New York). Personal growth for either wife or husband may well require intimate friendships besides that with the partner . . Intercourse cannot arbitrarily be excluded. James B. Nelson, Embodiment, p. 146 (professor of Christian Ethics at United Theological Seminary in Minneapolis-St. Paul area). I do not claim Christian spirituality encompasses all truth or the only truth. In my prayer life, I also use devotional material from other faith perspectives. Chris Glaser, Coming out to God: Prayers for Lesbians and Gay Men, p. 21 (former moderator of the group, Presbyterians for Lesbian and Gay Concerns). To advise teenagers against pre-marital sex represents an ethic of control . . of judgment . . To do that to teenagers one more time because they are teenagers violates what were trying to do with this whole report. Sylvia Thorson-Smith, keynote speaker at the August 1998 meeting of the National Network of Presbyterian College Women. But Jesus is not, as dominant Christology has insisted, the possessor of a unique relationship with God. Beverly Wildung Harrison, Making the Connections, p. 262 (professor of Christian Social Ethics at Union Theological Seminary, NY). Young people living together in trial relationships . . should be encouraged as positive and ethically appropriate. Op. cit., p. 109. |