To the Editor:

As a lawyer and as a self declared unrepentant practicing gay man ordained within the PCUSA, I was amazed and flabbergasted at Rev. Hager's response to Paul Rolf Jensen regarding the complaints he has filed, including one against my pastor, Rev. Steve Van Kuiken. I am not only amazed because as a member of a PJC, Rev. Hager should know better than to make such statements, but also by the fact that her statements evidence such sloppy and wrongheaded thinking about the legal import of G-6.0106(b).

I understand that it is heresy to say so in "progressive" circles in the PCUSA today, but no amount of clever interpretation or misuse of Wier can allow moderates to escape responsibility for the sexual apartheid they have put in place in the PCUSA. I know how seductive is the legally sloppy and morally and theologically bankrupt "interpretive" strategy that is currently in vogue with Covenant Network, some portion of the Three Sisters, and other "progressives" in the church.

I believe Paul Rolf Jensen has done true progressives and GLBT persons a favor in the church by assuming that the moderates who have allowed G-6.0106(b) to be placed in and remain in the Constitution meant what they said by their votes – self declared unrepentant practicing GLBT persons are barred from ordained ministry in the church in any form. He now dares them to have the stomach to enforce what they did not have the stomach to stop.

While I know that there are those who have grabbed onto an amazingly simplistic reading of the GA PJC's decision in Wier to support the silly argument that progressives can somehow comply with the constitutional sexual apartheid of the PCUSA and keep their soul, I have yet to see a clear explication of this that made any sense. Certainly, Rev. Hager's articulation does not do so.

Wier, a remedial case, begins with the factual, moral and theological predicate that "homosexual practice is proscribed by the General Assembly," and that the moral and theological basis for the GA's adoption of G-6.0106(b) is that all homosexual activity is inherently sinful, unnatural and evil (Like it or not, this is the official position of the PCUSA that we all are asked to be complicit in through membership and ordination questions). With this as the starting point, the Wier court goes on to say:

"In the instant case, even if one assumes the allegation of "practicing homosexual" were true, the complaint fails to meet the specificity that G-6.0106b compels in that it did not allege any such specific details. The plain language of the Constitution clearly states that disqualified persons must self-acknowledge the proscribed sin. Self-acknowledgment may come in many forms. In whatever form it may take, self-acknowledgment must be plain, palpable, and obvious, and details of this must be alleged in the complaint.

Since the standard for self-acknowledgment is that it be plain, palpable, and obvious, the ordaining and installing governing body is in the best position to make any such determination based on its knowledge of the life and character of the candidate. In the instant case, when the accused, along with all the other candidates, responded affirmatively to the Session's inquiry regarding their ability to be compliant with the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), specifically, G-6.0106b; and because the Session had no reasonable cause to believe otherwise, based on its knowledge of their lives and characters, including that of the accused, no additional inquiry was warranted."

What Wier holds, therefore, is that any "declaration" of homosexual activity places one within the ambit of the prohibitions set forth in G-6.0106(b), in which ordination is proscribed. Now the questions become, "what is declaration?"; "Does one have to declare specific homosexual acts in order for G-6.0106(b) to be operative?" Along with Wier, other cases hold that the declaration of things which the confessions call sin must be made in some formal process of inquiry by a session or presbytery or, that if there are sufficient facts present to warrant further inquiry (e.g. same-sex people who live in the same house, sleep in the same bed, share children, have their pictures together in the church directory, or have had a marriage conducted), the session is obligated to conduct further inquiry.

As Wier states, "If that governing body has reasonable cause for inquiry based on its knowledge of the life and character of the candidate, it has the positive obligation to make due inquiry and uphold all the standards for ordination and installation. Consideration for inquiry is to be made solely on an individual basis (GA Minutes, 68, 166, 1998)." Thus, all Wier offers is an opportunity to closet people and the church into some military style "don't ask, don't tell."

For example, if one reviews the minutes of my church's session, one finds that within the past six months, persons were ordained as elders and deacons who had made clear self-declarations to the session identifying themselves as practicing, unrepentant gay or lesbian persons prior to approval and ordination. These courageous statements from some elders and deacons are included in the session's minutes.

Because of the unrepentant self-declaration of activity that the Confessions clearly call sin – namely homosexual activity, no person who makes such an unequivocal declaration can be ordained in compliance with G-6.106(b). These elders and deacons are a perfect example of the ultimate endpoint for Wier and for the morally mushy "interpretive" approach being pushed by Covenant Network and others that says compliance with G-6.0106(b) is desirable – namely that those who have been open in their declaration of their involvement in proscribed activity (like having sex with their partner or just having an active sex life as a gay or lesbian person) are prohibited from being ordained by G-6.0106(b), while those who have been more furtive, coy, circumspect or just plain closeted, can be ordained with abandon.

Maybe where these folks want to end up is that only furtive, coy, circumspect or just plain closeted gay and lesbian persons are eligible for ordination, but I hope not. That is "don't ask, don't tell" in practice, and is simply a continuation of the current sexual apartheid.

So I say to my progressive friends, the time has come to stop counting on sympathetic PJCs who are willing simply to ignore their responsibility under the Constitution to further a theological position that the church has rejected, and simply say we will not abide by G-6.0106(b) in any form and will not be complicitous in the sexual apartheid it imposes on the PCUSA, no matter the consequences.