Ordination Standards

 

Months ago, Nancy Grittman, the Stated Clerk of Twin Cities Presbytery, invited me to attend a Twin Cities Presbytery meeting. After consulting calendars, we agreed that the date that worked best was May 10, 2011.

Twin Cities, in planning its voting on Amendment 10-A, the new Form of Government, and the Belhar Confession, decided at some point that it would vote on 10-A on May 10. 

Little did Nancy or I know that Twin Cities' vote on 10-A on May 10 would be the determinative vote on its adoption.

I expected to come to Twin Cities to talk with presbyters about the current state of the presbytery, how it sees its future, what it envisions as the future structure not just of presbyteries but of the PC (USA) generally -- conversations that I've been having in many presbyteries.

Instead, I witnessed a significant moment in our life together as the PC (USA). 

I was privileged to listen as Twin Cities commissioners wrestled with the issue that has dominated our life together for these last 30 years.  What was shared Tuesday night in Minneapolis are the same emotions that have been shared all across our denomination: the pain of gay and lesbian Presbyterians who feel excluded from full participation in leadership unless they renounce any participation in a committed relationship, juxtaposed with the pain of those who feel that any change in our ordination standards violates the clear commands of Scripture.

Twin Cities' affirmative vote on Amendment 10-A gave 10-A the necessary majority vote needed to mean that it will replace the current G-6.0106b in our Form of Government.

We all know, however, that the vote by Twin Cities it does not mean that we as the PC (USA) are of one mind on this issue. We are not. We are, and we continue to be, divided on whether gay and lesbian persons in committed same-sex relationships should be considered for ordination and/or installation.

That conversation will continue. But as we continue that conversation, I call on us to also focus on an important part of 10-A: its directive that standards for ordained service "reflect the church's desire to submit joyfully to the Lordship of Jesus Christ in all aspects of life."  I've highlighted "in all aspects of life" because I believe that we, as a church, have all too often failed to heed what a high calling all of us -- as deacons, ruling elders, or teaching elders -- are called to when we are ordained.

I believe that we are in danger of losing our historic parity between ruling elders and teaching elders (aka Ministers of Word and Sacrament). There are many reasons for that. One main reason is that all too often we sidestep the demands of what it means to be a ruling elder. Ruling elders are called to measure their community of faith's fidelity to the Word of God, which is an awesome task. Being able to do that goes way beyond sexual practices -- although sexual fidelity is one part of whether they are suitable candidates for ordained office.

How often do candidates for ruling elder get asked whether they are tithing, or working sacrificially towards tithing? How often do Nominating Committees, or Sessions, really ask whether a candidate for ruling elder has the emotional maturity to serve as a ruling elder?

"Measuring a community faith's fidelity to the Word of God" -- how often does that high bar really get used in choosing candidates for ruling elder?

I've seen a lot of blog comments talking about how the PC (USA) is descending into moral laxity. I'll save discussing whether a committed same-sex relationship constitutes moral laxity for another day.

For today, I ask this question:  does your congregation ask prospective elders whether they tithe, or are moving towards the goal of tithing? 

Sacrificial giving -- and not just of time and talent, but of money -- now THAT's a standard for ordained service that we ought to be talking about.

 

Comments

[Lquander]

Amen! I find presbyerians very reluctant to have discussions about money but have no qualms over debating sexuality.

[Mary M]

great post!

[Karen Stokes]

And perhaps Committees on Preparation and Committees on Ministry should ask that same question of Teaching Elders.

[Thomas L. Fultz]

As one who is not in agreement with passage of 10-A, it will take time to evaluate whether it in fact impacts my integrity to proclaim the Gospel prophetically and authentically. I do pray that other Presbyterian-flavored Christians will assist me in understanding how sexual expression other than in a marriage between one man and one woman is submitting to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Also, how can we claim connectional government when each governing body uses a standard of anticipating faithful living in fulfillment of ordination vows and there is nothing to enjoin us toward the unity in any essentials of doctrine.

Thomas Fultz
Ruling Elder
Westminster Presbyterian, Mobile, AL

[Thomas L. Fultz]

As I reflected further on the Moderator's blog of May 12, 2011 I was dismayed that the Moderator has elevated a new standard for ordination of Ruling Elders - a commitment to tithe. Cheerfully supporting God's work financially is important for disciples of Jesus Christ, as is using our time as good stewards. My concern is that the New Testament witness and the Confessions of the PC(USA) do not call for disciples of Jesus Christ to tithe. so why is the Moderator holding up that as a standard that Sessions should consider in examining candidates for Ruling Elder? Has she read Matthew 6, Luke 2:1-4, Luke 12:22-34, Luke 18:18-30, Titus 5-9 and 1 Timothy 3:2-12 and found any expectation of Elders to tithe? Which of the Confessions calls for a tithe? I could find none. Why would there be one standard for Ruling Elders that would not apply to Teaching Elders or for Deacons? Expecting Officers to be generous and joyful givers to the work of God among us is a Scripturally based standard, but once again the Moderator fails to affirm the historical and orthodox standards of the PC(USA) and exchanges them for her own views. This approach is what we can expect as a denomination with each governing body deciding the standards for office based on the likelihood of a candidate to live out their ordination vows, but without any specificity on what is expected to serve as a disciple of Jesus Christ. Each governing body can make up its own standards and evidently if our Moderator is any example, they can create them without regard to Scripture or our Confessions.

Thomas L. Fultz
Ruling Elder

[Thomas]

I am not Presbyterian, but a good friend of mine is. She once sat on a committee which selected the pastor of her church. She didn't feel qualified to make such a decision, but no one else seemed willing to do the job so she volunteered.
Years later she and I were discussing some basic Christian beliefs and I mentioned that Jesus is *God* (God the Son, the second person of the Trinity). She was shocked that I would make such a claim. She had always thought that He was only human. She had no idea that He is both human and divine. Needless to say she was embarrassed when she discovered that the Presbyterian Church does teach that Jesus is divine (as do other mainline Christian churches). She had gone 50 years of her life without ever grasping this fundamental doctrine.
Now, how could such a person be competent in selecting a pastor for her church? How could someone who has such a limited knowledge about basic Christian doctrine be given the task of reviewing applicants for ministering to her congregation? Did she ask the right questions? If she had heard an incorrect response do you think she would have caught it? If the most fundamental doctrine was foreign to her, how could she have known to look for other theological or spiritual flaws?
Your argument in this post seems to boil down to this: "Nobody asks about tithing, so why should we ask about sexuality?" - Indeed, it seems that no one bothers to ask about a great many things in the Presbyterian Church. Don't ask about tithing, or homosexuality, or belief in a Triune God, or the virgin birth, or bodily Resurrection or many other Scriptural Truths. Where will this end?

[Sherri Kutsch]

So, Madame Moderator, are you stating that not tithing is an equal sin as is a homosexual relationship? REALLY??? I am so unhappy and disheartended with my denomination right now, and that just made me question my affiliation even further! I surely hope that all the new members gained by the passage of this abomination of an ammendment are worth the ones that will not be around to see it fullfilled.

[Randy Stear]

Let's see, since 1983, the PC(USA) has lost one third of its members, while the population of the country has grown by 30 percent. And we're describing the passage of 10-A as "a significant event"? Will the last one out the door please shut off the lights?

[Sherri Kutsch]

And as for your comment: "That conversation will continue," regarding the passage of 10-A, THAT'S THE PRECISE PROBLEM!!! IT HAS CONTINUED!! This issue should not be on the table now or ever! God must be laughing at us, or crying!! Or at least waiting to see who will actually stand for His Word and follow Him, not the world!