# PCUSA votes to change definition of marriage



## Bill The Baptist (Jun 20, 2014)

I guess this shouldn't surprise us, but I was still a little shocked to learn that the PCUSA leadership has just voted to change the definition of marriage and to allow ministers to perform same sex marriages. It still has to be approved by a majority of the presbyteries, but it seems likely that this abomination is inevitable. http://news.yahoo.com/presbyterian-assembly-gay-marriage-christian-212658672.html


----------



## TheCalvinist (Jun 20, 2014)

no surprise here, still a great shame. I know at least the Pittsburgh presbytery will almost surely vote this one down, and my Church leadership is firmly against this.


----------



## scottmaciver (Jun 20, 2014)

'...What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?' (2 Corinthians 6:14).


----------



## steelbender (Jun 20, 2014)

Very sad to see folks who should be brothers, turning from God's word.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 20, 2014)

Here is where I repeat what I always say in these situations. That any real "conservative" should have left eons ago over real doctrinal issues (like ordaining Arians, Pelagians, and frankly atheists). 

When I was given the "Left Foot of Fellowship" by West Virginia Presbytery of the PC(USA) over Substitutionary atonement (and other controversial theological positions) at the same presbytery meeting a young man was ordained who believed that the Trinity was best understood as a "fellowship of lovers". 

No joking.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jun 20, 2014)

Does anyone have any clear notion of how this will be received in the presbyteries? Was this GA reflective of the presbyteries? I wonder if there are any here who have any sense of the mind of the presbyteries as an aggregate with respect to this?

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 20, 2014)

Hearing from friends of mine in the PC(USA) (both liberal and orthodox) they say this will pass easily.


----------



## mvdm (Jun 20, 2014)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> the "Left Foot of Fellowship"



Saving that term for future use!


----------



## Shawn Mathis (Jun 20, 2014)

This appears to be more than homosexual marriage. The letter the PC(USA) GA sent out specified that pastors are now allowed to perform "any such marriage they believe the Holy Spirit calls them to perform." The redefinition of marriage is in the broadest terms possible: "marriage involves a unique commitment between two people, traditionally a man and a woman."

Transsexual is included in "people." Pedophilia could be included as well. 

The Presbyterian Lay Committee is calling the decision an "abomination" (more here).


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jun 20, 2014)

I've heard it, to keep the metaphor consistently negative, referred to as "the left boot of dis-fellowship."

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jun 20, 2014)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Hearing from friends of mine in the PC(USA) (both liberal and orthodox) they say this will pass easily.



Well that's too bad. I wondered if anyone had a finger on the pulse with respect to this. 

I pray, of course, that it would not pass the presbyteries, waiting on Him who's go the whole world in His hands.

Peace,
Ala n


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 20, 2014)

My take on all seven of the traditional "mainline" denominations is that they ALL have significant support for the pro-gay position. A June 2014 infographic by the Pew people lists my former denomination (ABCUSA) in the "Prohibits Same Sex Marriage" classification. Since I know openly gay clergy (some of them legally married to one another) in the ABCUSA, some of them in key leadership roles, it is difficult to understand what the meaning of "prohibits" is. So, NOTHING surprises me that pertains to any of the following: ABCUSA, Disciples of Christ, ELCA, PCUSA, UCC, UMC, and TEC. For the more congregational churches (e.g., Baptists), there would be nothing to prevent a pastor from officiating at a wedding of anyone legally eligible for marriage in that state. With 19 states permitting same-sex unions, my guess is that there are a LOT of mainliners doing weddings either with, without, or against the directions of their judicatories in those states. And, some mainline pastors have solemnized "covenant" services for same-sex couples for years, even without the benefit of legal marriage.


----------



## Edward (Jun 20, 2014)

Shawn Mathis said:


> marriage involves a unique commitment between two people



How narrow minded of them. I predict that they will be re-visiting this within 10 years. Perhaps on multiple grounds.


----------



## Edward (Jun 20, 2014)

TheCalvinist said:


> I know at least the Pittsburgh presbytery will almost surely vote this one down, and my Church leadership is firmly against this.



I'll extend some understanding to a preacher marking time to retirement. Others in 'leadership' in the presbytery are deserving of either pity or contempt. Some things should be more important than bricks, millwork, and stained glass.


----------



## KMK (Jun 20, 2014)

The UMC and UCC have been doing 'Divorce Ceremonies' for years. Once the church embraced divorce anything can pass as marriage.

Divorce Ceremonies On The Rise - ABC News


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Jun 21, 2014)

Apparently when NBC originally posted the item it read:

"DETROIT — The top legislative body of the Presbyterian Church in America voted by large margins Thursday to recognize same-sex marriage as Christian in the church constitution, adding language that marriage can be the union of "two people," not just "a man and a woman.

The votes, during a national meeting in Detroit, were a sweeping victory for Presbyterian gay-rights advocates. The denomination in 2011 eliminated barriers to ordaining clergy with same-sex partners, but ministers were still barred from celebrating gay marriages and risked church penalties for doing so."

Fortunately it was later updated to read accurately:
Presbyterian Church Leaders Declare Gay Marriage Is Christian - NBC News

I suspect there will be some blowback from the error.

A post elsewhere from someone who keeps up with this, a PC(USA) elder, reads:
"The article {NBC News} is confused. Two actions were taken. 

One, with 61% voting yes, is an Authoriatative Interpretation of the Constitution, allowing gay marriage in states where it is legal. (It was already permissible to conduct civil unions.) There is a statement that no teaching elder or Session has to participate.

The second, with 71% voting yes, is a proposed amendment to the Directory for Worship, changing the definition from a man and a woman to "two people, traditionally a man and a woman." This has to be approved by the Presbyteries.

The authoritative interpretation is effective tomorrow. It replaces a previous one that prohibited any pastor from participating in gay marriage, but not in blessings or civil unions. An AI can't change the constitution. However the wording of the Directory appears to be based on the fact that civil marriage is between a man and a women. Since that is changing, it's conceivable to argue that a situation arises that is not covered by the wording. Since this is open for argument, it's possible that this will come to the Permanent Judicial Commission. But cases normally take a couple of years to get there, before which the vote on the constitutional amendment will have been finished.

In the past votes on this topic have been fairly narrow. That the proposed amendment got 71% suggests that things have changed enough that the presbyteries will approve the amendment."​


----------



## Herald (Jun 21, 2014)

DMcFadden said:


> My take on all seven of the traditional "mainline" denominations is that they ALL have significant support for the pro-gay position. A June 2014 infographic by the Pew people lists my former denomination (ABCUSA) in the "Prohibits Same Sex Marriage" classification. Since I know openly gay clergy (some of them legally married to one another) in the ABCUSA, some of them in key leadership roles, it is difficult to understand what the meaning of "prohibits" is. So, NOTHING surprises me that pertains to any of the following: ABCUSA, Disciples of Christ, ELCA, PCUSA, UCC, UMC, and TEC. For the more congregational churches (e.g., Baptists), there would be nothing to prevent a pastor from officiating at a wedding of anyone legally eligible for marriage in that state. With 19 states permitting same-sex unions, my guess is that there are a LOT of mainliners doing weddings either with, without, or against the directions of their judicatories in those states. And, some mainline pastors have solemnized "covenant" services for same-sex couples for years, even without the benefit of legal marriage.



Dennis, 

Which is why our church has decided to publish, and add as a codicil to our doctrinal statement, a position paper on biblical marriage. Of course this will not stop a future congregation from reversing course, but we are taking the step to state now what we believe. I do not want some homosexual couple choosing our church for a battle ground and stating, "Well, there is nothing in their church documents that prevents gay couples from joining."


----------



## KMK (Jun 21, 2014)

Herald said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > My take on all seven of the traditional "mainline" denominations is that they ALL have significant support for the pro-gay position. A June 2014 infographic by the Pew people lists my former denomination (ABCUSA) in the "Prohibits Same Sex Marriage" classification. Since I know openly gay clergy (some of them legally married to one another) in the ABCUSA, some of them in key leadership roles, it is difficult to understand what the meaning of "prohibits" is. So, NOTHING surprises me that pertains to any of the following: ABCUSA, Disciples of Christ, ELCA, PCUSA, UCC, UMC, and TEC. For the more congregational churches (e.g., Baptists), there would be nothing to prevent a pastor from officiating at a wedding of anyone legally eligible for marriage in that state. With 19 states permitting same-sex unions, my guess is that there are a LOT of mainliners doing weddings either with, without, or against the directions of their judicatories in those states. And, some mainline pastors have solemnized "covenant" services for same-sex couples for years, even without the benefit of legal marriage.
> ...



We did the same last summer. In addition, it is stated in our bylaws that we only officiate weddings of our own members.


----------



## Herald (Jun 21, 2014)

KMK said:


> Herald said:
> 
> 
> > DMcFadden said:
> ...



I think this is a prudent position to take. I know it will not make a church lawsuit proof. I believe the Supreme Court will rule against state rights on same-sex marriage on the erroneous grounds of civil rights. The final holdouts are going to be faith based organizations; not all of which will be Christian. Homosexual advocacy groups will target these organizations. The courts have proven to be their friend, so that is where they will turn to for help. The churches that will be most at risk are those who have not articulated an official stand on the grounds of religious liberty. I can hardly believe I am writing these words because it makes me sound like an alarmist. Only time will tell. In any event we must be about the business of preaching the Gospel and making disciples. God will preserve His church, even if certain segments of it have gone into apostasy.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Jun 21, 2014)

Herald said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> > Herald said:
> ...



Soon we will be thrown out of the synagogue, and the true church will only become stronger for it. "Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate. Therefore let us go forth to Him, outside the camp, bearing His reproach. For here we have no continuing city, but we seek the one to come."-Hebrews 13:12-14


----------



## reaganmarsh (Jun 21, 2014)

KMK said:


> Herald said:
> 
> 
> > DMcFadden said:
> ...



We also added the biblical description of marriage to our bylaws last year. Come to think of it, the Georgia Baptist Convention sent an email to all the pastors encouraging us to take this step now. Legally, in reality, it probably won't do much. But at least we'll have defined our convictions re: Scripture's position on the matter. 

Re: the OP, this decision by the PCUSA seems almost like a mere formality at this point...sad. May our Lord be pleased to grant repentance and reformation to their communion. May we be reminded anew of the necessity of biblical and confessional fidelity, and warned afresh of what making shipwreck of the faith is, does, and costs.


----------



## KMK (Jun 21, 2014)

Herald said:


> In any event we must be about the business of preaching the Gospel and making disciples.



The mission of the church has not changed even though the definition of marriage has!


----------



## bookslover (Jun 21, 2014)

I don't know why anyone should be even mildly surprised at this. As far as orthodoxy and the PCUSA go, that ship sailed about a hundred years ago.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 21, 2014)

Richard is on target. Leadership in the mainlines is so lopsidedly liberal that it amazes me when they stumble on something vaguely orthodox. Aping the worst features of secular culture, however, has not had the effect some of them thought it would. Surrendering one's theological convictions does not cause the unbelieving worldlings to respect you, merely to see you as impotent and irrelevant to them and to their daily lives. Membership trends are still in a steady downward direction despite their best/worst efforts at accommodation to culture.

The mainlines are still intent on inhabiting the sidelines en route to becoming flatlines.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jun 22, 2014)

Quite right, Dennis. All their compromise and cultural capitulation garners them nothing but contempt. The PCUSA has gone, over the last 50 years roughly, from their high water mark in 1965 of 4.25 million to 1.78 million at the end of 2013, a staggering decline. 

It reminds me of Martyn Lloyd-Jones's trenchant observation that the church does the world the least good when it seeks to be most like it. It does nothing for the world (they don't need a religious echo of themselves) and the church is rendered impotent by its abandonement of the gospel. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Mushroom (Jun 22, 2014)

I sadly fear that many of the few faithful denoms and Churches today are doing this while the tsunami fast approaches:


----------

