wfn.org | Signs of the Postdenominational Future

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

18-May-1999 
99191 
 
    Signs of the Postdenominational Future 
 
    Analysis by Joseph D. Small 
    Coordinator for Theology and Worship 
    Reprinted with permission from "The Christian Century" 
 
    The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has been through a quarter century of 
disagreement and division over homosexuality.  In the past several years, 
the church has engaged in wrenching debates over amendments to its Book of 
Order, the legislative portion of the church's constitution.  After a 
yearlong debate the church in 1997 adopted an amendment (known as Amendment 
B) that set as a condition for ordination (which includes ordination to the 
"lay ministries" of elder and deacon as well to the ministry of word and 
sacrament) "the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant 
of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness." 
 
    During the next year the church debated, and eventually rejected, an 
alternative amendment (known as Amendment A) that would have changed the 
"fidelity in marriage and chastity in singleness" stipulation to "fidelity 
and integrity in all relationships." 
 
    The Battle of the Amendments brought into being two organizations on 
opposite sides of the struggle.  The Presbyterian Coalition is an alliance 
of "renewal groups" that worked to enact and maintain the church's 
prohibition of the ordination of self-avowed, practicing homosexuals.  The 
Covenant Network of Presbyterians, on the other hand, is committed to 
including gay and lesbian persons fully in the life of the church and to 
eliminating constitutional barriers to ordination. 
 
    Although it was the issue of ordination for gays and lesbians that 
brought these two groups into existence, each group has wider interests. 
Each has articulated reasons for its continued existence as it seeks to 
shape the life of the church.  Each held large national meetings in the 
fall of 1998 to rally support for its vision.  These developments suggest 
that a new form of church organization is emerging, one that may offer a 
glimpse of a future in which denominations play a distinctly different role 
than they have played in recent decades. 
 
    When the Presbyterian Coalition held its third annual meeting in Dallas 
last fall, the mood was markedly different from the previous year's 
conference.  In 1997 the conference drew 1,000 angry participants; they 
were upset over the proposal of Amendment A (fidelity and integrity) and 
determined to defeat it in the presbyteries.  The rhetoric of schism 
predominated.  The `98 conference drew 600 participants who were able to 
see themselves as representing the majority of the church.  Though no one 
imagined that the debate on homosexuality was over, attention could be 
turned to other issues. 
 
    The focus of the gathering was a Declaration and Strategy Paper that 
contained a declaration of faith, "Union in Christ," and an outline of 
strategies on mission, worship, polity, theological education, educational 
ministries and church discipline. 
 
    The "Union in Christ" statement was remarkable in that it was presented 
as a response to the grace of Christ, not as a reaction to church problems. 
Trinitarian in structure and liturgical in form, it begins with the 
affirmation that "Jesus Christ is the gracious mission of God to the world 
and for the world."  It acknowledges that this confession takes place in a 
church in which Christ's lordship often is "denied or marginalized or 
undermined or ignored," and brief mention is made of the sexuality issue: 
"In these times of moral and sexual confusion we affirm the consistent 
teaching of Scripture that calls us to chastity outside of marriage and 
faithfulness within the covenant of marriage of a man and a woman." 
Nevertheless, the statement functions like a traditional statement of 
faith. 
 
    The nature of this statement raises a question about its relation to 
the PC(USA)'s official confessions and to its recently approved catechisms. 
"Union in Christ" recalls the Barmen Confession made by the Confessing 
Church in Germany in the 1930s, a confession promulgated by one part of the 
church over against other parts of the church.  The subtitle, "A 
Declaration for the Church," contains an implicit challenge.  Although 
speakers emphasized that the declaration is a "gift" to the church and not 
a demand, even gifts can be confrontational. 
 
    In contrast to this carefully crafted declaration of faith, the 
Coalition's account of strategies to renew and transform the PC(USA) is 
vague.  It gives voice to discontents and hopes rather than expressing 
clear directions for action.  Organizers repeatedly stated that the 
strategies were "fluid" and "works in progress." 
 
    In spite of its many inadequacies, the Strategy Paper is an important 
window on conservative-evangelical viewpoints.  Moreover, the Strategy 
Paper demonstrates that the Coalition's existence is not generated by the 
politics of sexuality alone.  Sexuality issues are the lightning rod that 
attracts a range of other concerns and expressions of resistance to the 
PC(USA)'s official policies and practices. 
 
    Within the Coalition one detects a tension between those who press for 
more direct challenge of the PC(USA) and those who remain open to 
possibilities for influencing the structures of the church.  Although the 
moderates predominate, their capacity to control radical elements is not 
limitless.  As the Coalition moves toward elaborate structures - an 
expanded governing board, the employment of a coordinator, a regularized 
budget and program - internal struggles may intensify.  If the moderates 
prevail, they may force radicals into forms of independent action.  Much 
hinges on whether the moderates' strategies appear to be effective. 
 
    Beneath the moderate-radical tensions are intramural tensions between 
card-carrying evangelicals, Presbyterian traditionalists, proponents of 
orthodox Calvinism and other varieties of conservative orientation.  The 
Coalition is a confederation not only of organizations but of cultures and 
temperaments.  The sexuality debate brought them together on the basis of 
what they all oppose.  The Declaration is intended to keep them together on 
the basis of what they affirm.  But it is uncertain that, apart from a 
common enemy, they hold enough in common to stay together. 
 
    Whatever the moderates' good feelings about their influence in the 
denomination, it was evident from the literature tables at Dallas that 
Coalition members were erecting parallel structures. Information was 
available on a range of ministries for youth, women, elders and pastors. 
Evangelism and justice ministries were presented as alternatives to PC(USA) 
programs, and there were signs of a placement system operating outside the 
PC(USA) structures.  People were working on a new confirmation curriculum, 
a theology journal, and a range of church school materials.  It is clear 
that many evangelicals in the church will not invest in the renewal of 
PC(USA) programs, publications and structures, but will continue to develop 
their own resources and networks. 
 
    On the other side of the church, the Covenant Network of Presbyterians 
attracted more than 300 people to Denver - about twice as many as attended 
the `97 inaugural meeting.  That first meeting was hopeful, focused on 
strategies to support the adoption of Amendment A.  At the 1998 gathering 
one sensed a mix of resignation to the establishment of Amendment B in the 
Book of Order (at least for awhile), anger at the perceived changes in the 
church that made Amendment B possible, and determination to bring about a 
change in the church's policies on the place of gay and lesbian persons. 
 
    Having lost a battle, members of the Covenant Network retain hope that 
the outcome of the war will be different.  But the analysis of the battle 
and of needed strategies took different forms.  One could detect at least 
four different groups whose interests intersect but are not identical. 
 
    Most visible were the pastors of urban congregations.  This was the 
group in charge of the Covenant Network and its conference program.  These 
pastors, whose chief concern is the full inclusion of gay and lesbian 
members in the life and mission of congregations, approach the issue from a 
primarily pastoral perspective.  How can they minister to gay and lesbian 
members of their congregations when church policy bars "self-affirming, 
practicing homosexuals" from ordered ministries in the church and from 
church-blessed committed unions?  Many of these pastors serve historic, 
downtown churches that attract gays and lesbians.  For these pastors, 
homosexuality is an immediate pastoral issue. 
 
    A second group is composed of parents and family members of gay and 
lesbian persons.  People in this group have been torn by love for their 
sons and daughters and love for a church that excludes their children from 
exercising ordered ministry and from living out committed personal 
relationships in the context of the church's sanction and blessing.  For 
families, homosexuality is an immediate personal issue. 
 
    A third group is the social justice activists.  Veterans of the 
struggles for racial justice, women's rights, economic parity, peace and 
the environment, this group sees the struggle for gay and lesbian rights in 
the church to be in continuity with a long tradition of Presbyterian 
struggles for justice.  The issue for this group is less pastoral and 
personal and more representative of a larger struggle. 
 
    Perhaps the smallest group represented was gay and lesbian persons 
themselves.  Clearly, the matter is intensely personal for these people. 
Gays and lesbians have their own organizations, strategies and tactics, 
however.  While appreciative of the Covenant Network's efforts, it is not 
their network. 
 
    The Covenant Network conference was a tightly packed two days of 
worship, lectures, small group meetings and workshops.  Sermons seemed to 
be addressed as much to the whole church and its dilemma as to the gathered 
congregation.  Lectures were excellent, although their focus on general 
issues of biblical interpretation, theology and the role of the Book of 
Confessions was a step removed from the existential concern that assembled 
the audience.  It was not until the final lecture that a speaker 
acknowledged "the elephant in the living room" by speaking directly 
(although briefly) about the ordination of gays and lesbians. 
 
    The somewhat cool detachment of sermons and lectures did not carry over 
into small groups, workshops and (especially) conversations around the 
edges, however.  Even though small groups were random collections of 
strangers, people understood the nature of their common concern and were 
able to share their stories openly.  The workshops were replete with 
impassioned expressions of pain, anger, frustration, sadness, fear and 
hope. 
 
    Even so, all the public events - including an open mike speak-out - 
were surprisingly contained and polite.  "Surprisingly" because so much of 
the conversation around the edges was bitter and angry, directed at 
"evangelicals," the Presbyterian Church, church leadership and even 
Covenant Network leadership.  "How could they [church leadership] allow 
them [evangelicals] to take over our church [the PC(USA) and its 
structures], and why aren't they [Covenant Network leadership] more vocal 
and vigorous and effective?" 
 
    Most participants in the Covenant Network conference have spent their 
lives in a church whose values, aims and programs reflected their own. 
Thus, the perceived shift in the church's ethos and perceived changes in 
denominational priorities, leadership, policies and programs provoke a deep 
sense of loss.  Grief and anger alternate within an odd experience of 
disestablishment. 
 
    The four constituent groups - pastors, family members, social justice 
activists, and gay and lesbian persons - share a basic commitment: "The 
church we seek to strengthen is built upon the hospitality of Jesus." 
There are major differences in the assessment of proximate goals, however. 
One fissure is symbolized by the difference between those who speak of "gay 
and lesbian persons" and those who speak of "gay, lesbian, bisexual and 
transgendered persons."  The former, whose concerns are primarily pastoral 
and ecclesial, are willing to work within established channels to achieve 
long-term goals.  The latter are impatient with any strategy short of a 
frontal assault on the church's current constitutional standards.  A second 
fissure exists between those who see the issue of gay and lesbian 
ordination as one among a number of crucial issues and those who see it as 
the defining issue. 
 
    Neither the Covenant Network nor the Presbyterian Coalition is a 
homogeneous bloc - although each group imagines the other to be cohesive, 
efficient and powerful.  The Coalition has had to deal with life after 
victory on the issue of homosexuality.  The Covenant Network has yet to 
discover whether it can hold together in the face of defeat.  What if 
defeat is a prolonged reality? 
 
    Yet both groups are convinced that they cannot count on denominational 
structures in pursuing their aims.  The workings of PC(USA) headquarters in 
Louisville are strangely irrelevant to the Coalition and to the Covenant 
Network.  They do not look to the denomination for leadership or decisive 
support.  Each group raises its own money and seeks to support its own 
structures and staff to carry out its programs.  In addition, both 
Coalition and Network are affiliated with more specialized groups that have 
their own funding, structures, staff and programs. 
 
    The Coalition voted to expand its board, employ an executive director, 
and regularize its annual budget of more than $250,000.  It intends to 
promote its declaration of faith by publication of a study guide for 
personal and congregational use.  It also plans to refine and promote its 
strategies for renewing specific aspects of denominational life. 
 
    The Covenant Network already employs an executive director and has an 
annual budget of about $175,000.  Its energies are directed primarily at 
opening the church's ordered ministries to gay and lesbian persons, but the 
executive committee made it clear that the Covenant Network will address 
other issues as well.  It will seek to expand its influence via a 
newsletter, Web site, theological papers, regional conferences and a third 
national conference this fall. 
 
    The evolution of these two large, broadly based groups shows an 
evolution of "postdenominationalism" in the old mainline Protestant 
churches.  Decline in denominational loyalty and the demise of 
denominational hegemony have been apparent for years.  These realities, 
reinforced by the triumph of market consumerism throughout the culture, 
have led to the multiplication of special-interest groups throughout the 
church. 
 
    Voluntary societies that embody and promote specific causes are not 
new, of course.  In the 19th century organizations such as the American 
Sunday School Union, Christian Endeavor, the Women's Christian Temperance 
Union and scores of missionary societies emerged as espressions of church 
life.  The contemporary church landscape is packed with organizations 
descended from that pattern.  Where many of these special-interest groups 
differed from their forebears, however, is that they seek particular and 
general change in denominational policy and practice.  In the PC(USA), 
these politically active groups have proliferated in the past decade, 
aligning themselves on the ecclesial/theological/ethical/political left and 
right.  For every "Voices of Sophia" there is a "Voices of Orthodox Women," 
for every "More Light Presbyterians" there is a "Presbyterians for Faith, 
Family and Ministry." 
 
    The new factor in the PC(USA) is the emergence of alliances that gather 
together the special-interest groups of both right and left.  The 
Presbyterian Coalition and the Covenant Network of Presbyterians are the 
major players in the consolidation of evangelical and liberal blocs. 
Although other alliances exist, notably "Semper Reformanda" on the left and 
"Presbyterian Renewal Network" on the right, the Presbyterian Coalition and 
the Covenant Network of Presbyterians have substantial money and staff. 
These two blocs exercise far greater influence that their separate 
constituency groups. 
 
    A second new reality for the PC(USA) is the marginalization of 
established denominational agencies by the liberal Network as well as the 
evangelical Coalition.  Evangelicals have felt estranged from 
denominational policies and programs for decades; liberals could always 
rely on denominational support for their causes.  Conversely, the 
denominational bureaucracy viewed evangelical groups as outsiders while 
liberal organizations provided grass roots support.  Now, both liberal and 
evangelical groups are developing their own policy mechanisms and program 
capabilities.  They look to the denomination for less and less. 
 
    These developments are pushing the PC(USA) toward a new understanding 
of its internal relationships.  The task of denominational leaders is to 
cultivate relationships with all the church's critics, developing 
consultative arrangements that can be mutually enriching.  Relating to 
large, staffed, well-financed blocs will be far different from dealing with 
isolated little groups.  In addition, the denomination's agencies and 
governing bodies must recognize that the major alliances no longer see 
denominational structures as the primary players.  Governing bodies and 
agencies of the church will have to make their case in an increasingly free 
market of ecclesial life. 

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  This note sent by Office of News Services, 
  Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
  to the World Faith News list <wfn-news@wfn.org>.
  For additional information about this news story,
  call 502-569-5493 or send e-mail to PCUSA.News@pcusa.org

  On the web:  http://www.pcusa.org/pcnews/

  If you have a question about this mailing list, 
  send queries to wfn@wfn.org