wfn.org | Commission Upholds Decision Allowing Gay Elder to Serve on Session

[PCUSA NEWS <pcusa.news@ecunet.org>]

Reply-To: wfn-news list <wfn-news@wfn.org>
11-March-1999 
99100 
 
    Judicial Commission Upholds Decision 
    Allowing Gay Elder to Serve on Session 
 
 
    by Alexa Smith 
 
LOUISVILLE, Ky. - Although an appeal is likely, the Permanent Judicial 
Commission (PJC) of Southern New England Presbytery has upheld a 
Connecticut church's decision to install a gay elder to serve on its 
session. 
 
    The commission's 4-1 decision, handed down on March 6, is the first 
test case of a hotly debated - but overwhelmingly approved - amendment to 
the constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) that requires deacons, 
elders and ministers to "live either in fidelity within the covenant of 
marriage between a man and a woman, or in chastity in singleness." The 
requirement is provision G.60106b of "The Book of Order," but commonly 
known as Amendment B. 
 
    The case was initiated by two members of the First Presbyterian Church 
in Stamford, Conn. - Mairi Hair and James McCallum -  who argued that the 
pending installation of Elder Wayne Osborne, 38, at the Stamford church 
would violate the 1997 constitutional provision that prevents practicing 
homosexuals from being ordained or installed in church offices. 
 
    The Stamford church pointed out that, while Osborne admitted to being 
in a relationship with another man, he had declined to say whether it was 
"a sexually active partnership." The church contended that provision 
G.60106b requires that repentance of any practice the church's historical 
confessions deem sinful must be "self-acknowledged." The church also 
maintained that its session went through a thorough process of nomination, 
examination and election as it considered re-installing Osborne as an elder 
in the 700-member congregation. 
 
    The PJC concluded that the session's examination of Osborne, "though 
arguably imperfect, satisfactorily discharged its duty to inquire," and 
that Osborne's acknowledgment of his homosexual orientation "falls short of 
the self-acknowledgment of an unrepentant homosexual practice established 
by Amendment B as a bar to church office." The commission went on to say 
that the language of Amendment B implicitly requires "voluntary, 
self-disclosure. ... To interpret Amendment B otherwise," it wrote, "is to 
begin down a slippery slope that leads to inquisition." 
 
    "Yes, he evades the question," the Rev. Blair Moffett, a co-pastor of 
the Stamford Church,  told the Presbyterian News Service in a March 8 
telephone interview when asked about Osborne's  declining to answer the 
session's inquiry about his sexual practices. "The question is: Does he 
have a right to do that? He has, I believe, the right and privilege under 
our constitution to acknowledge - or not - behavior understood by all of us 
to be private. 
 
    "The Session," Moffett said, "has the responsibility under the 
constitution to examine people for office, and it did the best it could: It 
took the constitution seriously, it looked at what Amendment B required 
 ..." 
 
              A representative of the complainants, Elder William Prey, a 
member of a PC(USA) congregation in Old Greenwich, Conn., said the case is 
under study and an appeal is likely. 
 
    "We, of course, need some time to study the full decision,"Prey said in 
a written statement, "and IF we find there is a basis upon which to appeal, 
as provided for in our constitution, we would feel obligated to continue 
with the case. As always, our goal throughout this process is to continue 
to work within our churches as we seek to abide by our scriptural and 
constitutional standards for all members and elected leaders." 
 
    If the decision is appealed, the case would go next to the Permanent 
Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Northeast, and, beyond that, to the 
General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission. 
 
    A stay on Osborne's installation has been continued for 30 days by 
order of the PJC, in order to give time for an appeal. An initial stay was 
granted on the morning of the planned installation. 
 
    The PJC also said in its ruling that it was "not established by the 
preponderance of evidence" that the session was behaving defiantly. 
 
    Responding to a charge that session members failed to be governed by 
church polity, the PJC said that the session conducted its examination and 
election of Osborne "reasonably, responsibly, and deliberately within the 
Constitution of the Church." On the fifth complaint filed against the 
session - that it had previously indicated in documents that Osborne's 
installation would be contrary to Amendment B - the PJC said, while the 
documents could have been "more carefully worded," they provide a "wholly 
inadequate basis for a finding of bad faith." 
 
    According to "The Hartford Courant," Osborne appeared at a press 
conference at the church on the day after the decision was made. 
 
      "My prayer," he reportedly said then, "is that we all will continue 
to fight to further the cause of God's inclusive love. I also continue to 
hope this process will illustrate that sexual orientation should not be 
used to discriminate, and that gays and lesbians continue to be called to 
God's service." 
 
    Osborne served his first three-year term on the session in 1994, but, 
according to "The New York Times," he divulged to the congregation that he 
was in a long-term relationship with another man - a fellow congregant - 
between then and now. 
 
    The 21-page majority decision was approved by Elder Samuel Hamilton of 
First Presbyterian Church of Hartford, Conn., the PJC chair; Elder Mark 
Carta of the Wilton Presbyterian Church,Wilton, Conn.; the Rev. Gail 
Faithfull of Bedford, N.Y; and the Rev. Barbara Hager of New London, Conn.. 
 
     The Rev. William P. Showalter of Orleans, Mass., a retired pastor, 
wrote a dissenting opinion, arguing that the Stamford session was remiss in 
its examination of Osborne, first and foremost by "not [being] adequately 
prepared." Further, Showalter said, it did not "adequately question" 
Osborne, particularly if it had "prior knowledge or assumption of 
knowledge" about Osborne's "sexual activity as a single person." 
 
    "There certainly appeared to be a clear violation of a clear 
constitutional requirement, (which) is important in a connectional church," 
said Prey. 
 
    Prey contended that the debate about the Stamford church's election of 
Osborne is more about process than about politics - and is not an anti-gay 
action, although some people may view it that way. 
 
    "We're not against Wayne Osborne himself," he said. "We know and love 
Wayne Osborne. He is a gifted individual. This is not a gay-bashing thing." 
 
    Neither is it an attempt to defy the church's constitution, said 
Moffett, who has taught polity at Yale Divinity School for 15 years - 
although that accusation has been made against the congregation. 
 
    "We did everything the constitution requires," he said. "This wasn't 
easy. This is kind of new territory ... and it was a not a very pleasant 
thing to do. ... (We're dealing) with a thoughtful, talented, faithful, 
gifted person who is well-known in this congregation and who served as an 
elder already. It was the most normal thing in the world (that he be 
considered). And from that point on, this has been purely and simply an 
effort to deal responsibly with that nomination. ... 
 
    "It just so happens (that) we've been trying to do that in a 
mine-field." 
 
    The trial was held on Feb. 26 at the Quinnipiac School of Law in 
Hamden, Conn. 

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  This note sent by PCUSA NEWS
  to the wfn-news list <wfn-news@wfn.org>.
  Send unsubscribe requests to wfn-news-request@wfn.org