Dangerous Precedent: GA, Same-Gender Marriage and Authoritative Interpretations

The 220th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) meets in Pittsburgh in just over a week.  The list of business to be considered is long and there are a number of issues that invite comment, however one stands out; requests from a handful of presbyteries that the GA issue an Authoritative Interpretation of the Book of Order on the question of same-gender marriage in states where it is legal.

Authoritative Interpretations (AIs) have roughly the weight of a Supreme Court decision in the secular world.  AIs are statements by a particular GA in which that GA 1) interprets the language of the constitution on matters of controversy and 2) establishes that interpretation as binding on the whole church.  An AI cannot alter the language of the constitution, however like the Supreme Court, the GA is the final word on such matters so their AI of a particular question cannot be appealed except to the next GA.  So an AI is nothing to take lightly.

The authors of the overtures for an AI on same-gender marriage are asking the GA to state authoritatively that same-gender marriage and opposite-gender marriage are theologically equivalent at least in places where they are legally equivalent.  Supporters argue that this is a workable compromise while the church determines where it will go on the question of same-gender marriage across the board.  The ability of pastors and congregations to exercise their conscience and responsibility for pastoral care is being hampered and this AI will free churches in jurisdictions where this question has been settled to follow their conscience on whether or not to allow same-gender marriages in a particular church.

On its face the overtures are straight-forward and matter of fact and do, I believe, represent a workable compromise on a deeply divisive and emotional issue.

However...

Were I a commissioner to GA this summer, I would vote NO on these proposed AIs.  It is not because I oppose same-gender marriage.  I not only support it, I believe that the church remains in a posture of sin so long as we fail to recognize fully the dignity of God's work in the lives of two people who discern that theirs are lives meant to be spent in covenant relationship.  Same or opposite gender matters not in the face of God's good work through relationships of honest, mutuality and covenant.

Despite my firmly held theological beliefs, I would still vote NO on these AIs.  I would vote NO because I believe that adoption of this language sets a dangerous precedent for the church in it's witness to the world. 

Under these AIs, pastors and congregations would be free to exercise their conscience on the question of same-gender marriage in states where such marriage is legal.  This is a fatal and dangerous flaw in the proposals. To even imply that the state has a hand in determining the boundaries of theological and prayerful conscience in the church is as shocking as it is offensive.  Under the logic of these AIs, my conscience as a pastor is bound by the voters in my state who have enshrined a homophobic anti-marriage clause in our state constitution.

 Really? 

Are we really prepared to tell Presbyterians in Washington state, where same-gender is legal as the result of legislative action, that they may exercise their conscience on this matter only to withdraw that freedom if the voters approve an anti-marriage initiative in November? 

To set a precedent that popular will at the polling place is the arbiter of the boundaries of theological conscience in the PC(USA) surrenders the church's calling to be a prophetic voice in the world.  It is difficult to speak truth to power if you have to wait for the power's permission to speak.

I believe that the PC(USA) must expand our understanding of marriage and our perspective on the love and work of God in the lives of all people.  We cannot do that if we insist on waiting for the world to give us permission.  If the GA is to speak with authority on the question of marriage, let them say that the PC(USA) stands firmly with the children of God and that we will not let any force in the world- the courts, the legislature or even the voters- limit the horizon of God's good works of love in covenant relationships.