Related links are found at the bottom of this page

Constitutional medicine for constitutional ailment
By James R. Tony

“ Baltimore’s failure should not be compounded by the reconvening of the 214th General Assembly... the situation now requires the Synod to deal with Baltimore... the Constitution itself makes it clear that the Synod has the power to 'correct irregularity or cure delinquency.' ”

Disappointment (or disillusionment) misleads Paul Rolf Jensen to conclude that the only remedy for Baltimore’s failure to deal with Don Stroud’s defiance is a called General Assembly. It is unfortunate but understandable that Jensen’s vigorous attempts to provide an opportunity for accountability in Baltimore should lead to his disputable conclusion.

However, Baltimore’s failure should not be compounded by the reconvening of the 214th General Assembly. Bob Davis is surely right when he talks of Baltimore having begun a schism – essentially Baltimore Presbytery, and now its PJC, have given indication that they intend to provide shelter instead of accountability for Don Stroud’s defiance. We now have symptoms of disease in one of our parts. It is important for the church to remember that the Rev. Stroud has unequivocally asserted that he refuses to abide by the standard of fidelity in marriage or chastity in singleness. In fact, he acknowledges his “activity as a gay man,” which can hardly mean something other than homosexual behavior.

Because Londonderry requires presbyteries to deal with those who declare their intention to disregard the Constitution, Baltimore is now in the position of having refused to do so. Clearly, the situation now requires the Synod to deal with Baltimore. The news this week indicates the Synod’s intention to do so. Constitutionalists thank God for that. That action surely holds more possibility of a thoughtful and sober outcome than a hastily called and unwillingly assembled General Assembly.

But does the Constitution itself give the Synod sufficient power to deal with this matter administratively rather than judicially? Clearly, the Office of the General Assembly is signaling that it does – see the recent advisory opinion. But more importantly, the Constitution itself makes it clear that the Synod has the power to “correct irregularity or cure delinquency.” (G-9.0410) That power seems not to be limited except by the direction to follow the Constitution itself. “If a higher governing body learns at any time of any irregularity or delinquency by a lower governing body, it may require the governing body to produce any records and take appropriate action.” It is hard to find clearer language in the Book of Order than G-9.0408 describing “Special Administrative Review.” A reading of this section of the Book of Order might be very helpful at this time.

Baltimore is in a state of both irregularity and delinquency-irregularity because of its refusal to investigate the defiance of Don Stroud and delinquency because it has failed to abide by the lawful injunctions of the GA PJC. It needs correcting and curing.

But is the Constitution itself in tatters because of the disease of one of our parts? It is only at risk if the PC(USA) as a whole fails to continue to follow the Constitution’s guidance for how to deal with this situation. What’s needed is less rhetorical anxiety and more attention to the Constitution. Simply because we have a body part that is infected, we need not write the whole body’s obituary just yet. In fact, there is great hope that the infection itself might create the antibodies to deal with other parts that might be at risk. It seems that has been the case in this matter of ordination standards repeatedly through the years. So there is hope and experience that this might be an occasion for such healing. But only if we allow the Constitution itself to guide us. But we need this warning: this situation will not get better by itself. Constitutional medicine is needed now.