07-13 Albany Overture on Authoritative Interpretation of G-2.0402 and G-3.0306

The Presbytery of Albany voted by strong voice vote to overture the General Assembly to provide an authoritative interpretation of G-2.0402 and G-3.0306 in the constitution of the PC(USA). The AI rules out certain hypothetical questions relating to sexual orientation in examination questions. This overture attempts to allay conservative fears of “Kenyonization” following the adoption of 10-A,  and it protects liberal candidates in conservative presbyteries.

The Presbytery of Albany respectfully overtures the 220th General Assembly (2012) to issue the following authoritative interpretation of G-2.0402 and G-3.0306:

“Because members of an examining council are to assess the fitness of officers- elect on a case-by-case basis, in light of each person’s faith, life and witness, and because such assessments are to be made in collective discernment under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, an elder-elect shall not be required to commit during examination as to how he or she might assess the fitness of other officers-elect in the future.”

Rationale:

Following recent amendment of the church’s ordination standards, some have expressed concern that they may be disqualified from service given their opposition to ordained service by persons who are in same-sex relationships. This Authoritative Interpretation is meant to defuse apparent tensions over the potential misuse of abstract questions about this in examination.

The Constitution vests sole authority for the election of church officers in congregations, and sole authority for assessing the fitness of officers-elect in sessions and presbyteries. When they gather together to examine officers-elect, sessions and presbyteries “are not simply to reflect the will of the people, but rather to seek together to find and represent the will of Christ” (F-3.0204).

As authoritatively interpreted by General Assembly, the Constitution (G-2.0105) also makes clear that all examinations must be conducted on a case-by-case basis, in light of each officer-elect’s faith, life and witness.  Accordingly, it would be improper for any person to commit (or be asked to commit) to a particular view on matters relating to the fitness of other officers-elect outside the context of the actual examinations of such persons.  Abstract questions about whom an incoming elder might or might not find fit for ordained service in the future are inconsistent with these basic principles, and may contribute to a climate of intimidation and mistrust.  This Authoritative Interpretation is intended to make clear that such questioning during examination is improper.

Links:

• Overture Submitted
• Overture on PC-Biz