DENOMINATIONAL CONCERNS
The Session of Fountain Inn Presbyterian Church met on Monday, October 17, 2011 and voted to take the following actions in response to the passage of Amendment 10-A.
1. A proposed overture (see below) will be sent to the Foothills Presbytery with a request to send it to the General Assembly in July, 2012. The overture requests that the PC(USA) affirm the historical beliefs concerning biblical authority and sexual morality. The Overture in its entirety will be posted on both bulletin boards–one in the Fellowship Hall, the other in the hall next to the parlor.
2. The portion of our assessment designated for the General Assembly will be withheld for 2012. A decision will be made later on how to use this money.
FOUNTAIN INN PRESBYTERIAN OVERTURE
IN RESPONSE TO THE PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT 10A
Fountain Inn Presbyterian Church believes that the General Assembly of the PCUSA must affirm these statements:
1. The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the Word of God written, witnessing to God’s self revelation (W-2.2001);
2. The Confessions guide the church in its study and interpretation of the Scriptures, but they are also subordinate to the Scriptures (F-2.01 and F-2.02);
3. The character, qualifications and authority of Church Officers are laid down in the Holy Scriptures (F-3.0106);
4. All are called to obey the Scriptures, which teach us of Christ’s will for the church (F-10203);
5. Marriage is a gift God has given to all humankind for the well-being of the entire human family. Marriage is a civil contract between a woman and a man. For Christians marriage is a covenant through which a man and a woman are called to live out together before God their lives of discipleship. In a service of Christian marriage a lifelong commitment is made by a woman and a man to each other, publicly witnessed and acknowledged by the community of faith. (W-4.9001)
Rationale:
Whereas the 219th General Assembly approved Ammendment 10A which altered the wording regarding the ordination of church officers and was subsequently approved by a majority of the Presbyteries; whereas a specific charge for church officers “to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards” has been removed from such wording; and whereas specific language calling for church officers “to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness” has also been removed from such wording; the removal of these statements provides the distinct impression to those within and without the PCUSA that these charges are not important or not necessary for church officers, and therefore, that they are open to the interpretation of individuals and governing bodies.
Many who argued in favor of Amendment 10A believed that the responsibility for examining candidates for church office should clearly be placed in the hands of the session for elders and deacons and the presbytery for Ministers of Word and Sacrament, as it historically has been since 1758, and that a more holistic approach should be applied by these bodies to candidates for ordination. However, it is imperative that the PCUSA must also clearly state its beliefs regarding the authority of the Bible and the importance of sexual morality in today’s culture. Ambiguity regarding these historical standards will lead to further conformity to the current culture of relative morality and sexual immorality rather than conformity to Biblical standards and our confessions.
In the last century, some have come into the PCUSA that do not hold to these historic standards of Biblical Authority and sexual morality. Others have claimed that in a post-WWII society the church should not be seen as “militant” and emphasis should be placed upon the love of God, tolerance and inclusiveness. Who would argue that tolerance and inclusiveness, in a truly Christian sense, were other than desirable and virtuous attributes for the church to possess and emphasize?
Our Western society has become ever more diverse. Most observers would point to the so-called “Sexual Revolution” of the 1960’s as a watershed change in societal norms. Many people have disregarded the Bible’s clear statements against sexual immorality by promoting a more general acceptance of sex outside the boundaries of marriage between one man and one woman. The prevalence of pornography and the media’s consistent portrayal of casual sex without consequences provide evidence of our culture’s more open views of sexuality. As a result, we have witnessed significant increases in rates of promiscuity, divorce, homosexual behavior, sexually transmitted disease, pre-marital sex, teen pregnancies, and abortion rates. Furthermore, advocacy groups such as those espousing what might generally be described as the Gay Lifestyle, have become quite insistent in their demands for a Gay Moral Revolution. Ironically, PCUSA churches have not effectively confronted demands that these lifestyles be approved of, and sometimes even endorsed by the churches as a gift from God.
Churches have been less willing to stand upon the clear teaching of the Bible for fear of seeming intolerant or even militant. When historic church standards based on the Bible and our Confessions are not considered, the intensity of people’s feelings rather than the content of their beliefs becomes sufficient to validate what passes for spiritual truth. For example, proponents of the Gay Lifestyle, the intensity of whose feelings are unquestioned, have not been effectively convicted by the spiritual truth that practicing this lifestyle is sinful according to Scripture. The Bible portrays no ambiguity regarding homosexual behavior and clearly teaches that it is sinful (Leviticus 18:22; Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10). But many in the church have felt that openly calling such behavior ’sinful’ would seem intolerant or even offensive.
The Gospel, at its core, is offensive to the mind of fallen people. The Gospel requires that persons recognize their generally sinful condition as well as their very specific sins, and repent of these sins. Through God’s Grace, forgiveness for the repentant sinner is available. His Son and our Savior, Jesus Christ, loved sinners to the extreme and sacrificed His life to provide salvation for the repentant sinner.
But what if we insist that we are not, in fact, sinning? If the intensity of our belief leads us to that conclusion, it follows, logically, that we would feel no compulsion to repent of a nonexistent sin. It is as though a new moral reality has eliminated the very need for repenting for what the moral reality of Biblical Authority deemed sinful.
The PCUSA must be bound to the authority of Scripture which includes fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a woman and a man and chastity in singleness. This is clearly stated in the first few chapters of the Bible and confirmed by Jesus when He stated, “at the beginning of creation God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh” (Matthew 19:4-5; Mark 10:6-7). The prophet Malachi also confirms this by adding, “Has not the LORD made them one? In flesh and spirit they are His. And why one? Because He was seeking godly offspring. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth” (Malachi 2:15).
What are the proponents of Biblical Authority to do? We certainly do not need to condemn people or exclude them from the church. But we believe that it is crucial that people who commit sexually immoral acts should come to know of their need for repentance and forgiveness of sins. It is clear that all of us have sinned and fallen short of God’s will for us, but the Bible is clear that we must repent of our sins and attempt to go and sin no more. Therefore, it can only be a demonstration of Christian love to teach people when their lifestyle is contrary to Scripture and our Confessions.
The session of Fountain Inn Presbyterian Church believes that the PCUSA must affirm these historical beliefs concerning Biblical authority and sexual morality. Furthermore, local governing bodies must hold our church officers accountable to these standards when considering candidates for ordination.
