Viewpoint
May 3, 2008

Better not to say blessing same sex relationships is appropriate
By Winfield Casey Jones

I was disturbed when I read words about the "appropriateness" of blessing same-gender relationships by the Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick, stated clerk of the PC(USA)'s General Assembly in reaction to the recent decision of the Permanent Judicial Commission in the case of Jane Adams Spahr versus the Presbyterian Church (USA).

After correctly stating "The PJC's decision reaffirms what our directory of worship says, that marriage is between a man and woman and that no officer should present a same-sex union as a marriage," Cliff went on to say, "At the same time the decision recognizes the importance of pastoral care and the appropriateness of same-sex blessing services as long as they are not presented as marriage ceremonies." In fact I believe that the comments of the clerk were inappropriate. It would have been more appropriate if he had said that while such services raise a number of philosophical, theological, and moral questions and are in conflict with traditional Christian practice, IF they do not resemble weddings, they are not currently prohibited by our Book of Order or Permanent Judicial Commission decisions.

I am sorry the clerk felt he had to go beyond commenting on the legality of such blessings under current PC(USA) church law and enter into the perilous territory of telling a deeply divided church that they are "appropriate." The appropriateness of such services is precisely part of the cluster of issues which deeply divides the church, and it is for an individual session, and not the GA stated clerk, to determine their appropriateness! I think we would have been better served if the clerk had said something like this:

"The Presbyterian Church (USA) welcomes all who trust Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord into its membership. While our whole church believes that God deeply loves homosexual persons and that we should provide pastoral care to them, our church is deeply divided on the issue of the appropriateness of same sex blessings.

One part of the church holds the traditional position that scripture and our confessions declare that homosexual relations are sinful and fall short of God's good plan for creation. This part of our family feels that the most loving and pastoral approach to all persons, including homosexuals, is to call them out of sin-including same gender sexual relationships--into marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness.

Another part of our church family believes that the traditional readings of scripture and of our confessions that homosexual practice is sinful and falls short of God's plan for creation are not God's truth for this time and place. Because this portion of our church believes that same gender sex in committed, monogamous, and lifelong relationships can be good, it also believes that it is a form of pastoral support and pastoral care for the church to bless these relationships between people of the same gender.

The church is united in its conviction that Jesus died for, and God loves, all people -including homosexual people. But the church is deeply divided over whether the most loving and godly approach is to call people to repent of homosexual practice, or to bless and encourage them in faithful, lifelong same-gender relationships. Unless or until the PC(USA) adopts a specific rule about blessing or not blessing same gender relationships as part of its Constitution, we can only say that what may be judged appropriate for one congregation may be judged to be inappropriate for another."