Trust No Covenant Network Bearing "Gifts"
Unctuous is a word that often comes to mind when I read a statement from the Covenant Network (CN). In a suave and clever manner, CN unctuously implies one thing while actually saying another. The October 28 statement by the Covenant Network board provides a telling example.
The CN statement endorses a political tactic that relies on an Authoritative Interpretation (AI) to make a sweeping change in Christian practice concerning marriage. The endorsed AI would permit Presbyterian teaching elders “to celebrate same-gender marriages where they are sanctioned by the civil authorities.”
An AI allows a single General Assembly vote to rule authoritatively about what the Presbyterian Church (USA) Constitution means in any case where the wording of the Constitution is in dispute. An AI such as the Covenant Network is supporting, however, would presumably need to declare that although the Constitution speaks clearly in numerous places about marriage only in terms of one man and one woman, it actually means any two people.
This would be a case of an Authoritative Interpretation making absurd what is already clear and unambiguous. Such would be an abuse of an AI, by employing it, rather than an outright amendment, to reverse the actual meaning of the Constitution, rather than merely disambiguate it.
Too clever by half
Shrewd as Covenant Network is, it knows that getting a constitutional amendment past 173 presbyteries nationwide would be a monumental task, perhaps "a bridge too far." Thus, CN is cleverly opting for an AI, which is effected by the vote of only a single General Assembly.
The track record is clear that CN can likely get a General Assembly to do its bidding. The General Assembly voting commissioners are a skewed population of Presbyterians, more theologically and politically liberal in opinions and beliefs than Presbyterians as a whole. CN ought to be able to play the next General Assembly like a violin and get its AI passed without breaking a sweat. The AI would allow for same-sex marriages. Mission accomplished.
However, had Covenant Network joined its more gung ho but less politically adept More Light Presbyterians cobelligerents in opting for full-blown constitutional amendments to allow same-sex marriages, CN would have a much riskier task on its hands. It would need to amend the Book of Order, the Directory for Worship, and several confessions. That process would require approval by two General Assemblies, plus approval by two thirds of the presbyteries (for the confession amendments).
Such an undertaking would be a big order, and presumably CN would fail. Then it would have to deal with defeat. So CN has decided to take the easy route with an AI. An Authoritative Interpretation does the job—albeit cheaply, but it would work.
False impressions
What's more, Covenant Network comes across as such nice folks, such reasonable diplomats for “tend[ing] to the unity of the denomination,” for not disturbing the waters with yet another constitutional amendment vote. But such unctuous talk is as phony as a $3 bill. If CN truly valued unity, it would not use the oily stealth of an Authoritative Interpretation to get illegitimately what it has hustled for years at the expense of denominational peace, unity, and, most of all, purity.
The Covenant Network is clever and effective. However, it is not and probably never will be a true statesman in the life of the PCUSA.
No one should be fooled by Covenant Network’s shrewd tactic with only the false appearance of restraint and good order. CN plans to get exactly what it wants, but at a bargain price—and with some bogus goodwill thrown in in the deal.
[Viola Larson makes two good points about the Covenant Network statement on her blog: Naming His Grace".]
The CN statement endorses a political tactic that relies on an Authoritative Interpretation (AI) to make a sweeping change in Christian practice concerning marriage. The endorsed AI would permit Presbyterian teaching elders “to celebrate same-gender marriages where they are sanctioned by the civil authorities.”
An AI allows a single General Assembly vote to rule authoritatively about what the Presbyterian Church (USA) Constitution means in any case where the wording of the Constitution is in dispute. An AI such as the Covenant Network is supporting, however, would presumably need to declare that although the Constitution speaks clearly in numerous places about marriage only in terms of one man and one woman, it actually means any two people.
This would be a case of an Authoritative Interpretation making absurd what is already clear and unambiguous. Such would be an abuse of an AI, by employing it, rather than an outright amendment, to reverse the actual meaning of the Constitution, rather than merely disambiguate it.
Too clever by half
Shrewd as Covenant Network is, it knows that getting a constitutional amendment past 173 presbyteries nationwide would be a monumental task, perhaps "a bridge too far." Thus, CN is cleverly opting for an AI, which is effected by the vote of only a single General Assembly.
The track record is clear that CN can likely get a General Assembly to do its bidding. The General Assembly voting commissioners are a skewed population of Presbyterians, more theologically and politically liberal in opinions and beliefs than Presbyterians as a whole. CN ought to be able to play the next General Assembly like a violin and get its AI passed without breaking a sweat. The AI would allow for same-sex marriages. Mission accomplished.
However, had Covenant Network joined its more gung ho but less politically adept More Light Presbyterians cobelligerents in opting for full-blown constitutional amendments to allow same-sex marriages, CN would have a much riskier task on its hands. It would need to amend the Book of Order, the Directory for Worship, and several confessions. That process would require approval by two General Assemblies, plus approval by two thirds of the presbyteries (for the confession amendments).
Such an undertaking would be a big order, and presumably CN would fail. Then it would have to deal with defeat. So CN has decided to take the easy route with an AI. An Authoritative Interpretation does the job—albeit cheaply, but it would work.
False impressions
What's more, Covenant Network comes across as such nice folks, such reasonable diplomats for “tend[ing] to the unity of the denomination,” for not disturbing the waters with yet another constitutional amendment vote. But such unctuous talk is as phony as a $3 bill. If CN truly valued unity, it would not use the oily stealth of an Authoritative Interpretation to get illegitimately what it has hustled for years at the expense of denominational peace, unity, and, most of all, purity.
The Covenant Network is clever and effective. However, it is not and probably never will be a true statesman in the life of the PCUSA.
No one should be fooled by Covenant Network’s shrewd tactic with only the false appearance of restraint and good order. CN plans to get exactly what it wants, but at a bargain price—and with some bogus goodwill thrown in in the deal.
[Viola Larson makes two good points about the Covenant Network statement on her blog: Naming His Grace".]
posted by Jim at Monday, October 31, 2011
3 Comments:
Jim,
Just too prove the point of what you have written about the Covenant Networks actions, here is a posting about Davis community Church in my Presbytery whose pastor is now one of the moderators of CN. "Davis Community Church, in Sacramento Presbytery & Covenant Network lawyers make plans for pastors to officiate at gay and lesbian civil marriages" at:
http://naminghisgrace.blogspot.com/2008/11/davis-community-church-in-sacramento.html
I wrote this in 2008 I think it was right before Proposition 8 passed which was a surprise to the LGBT community.
Viola Larson
Sacramento, Ca
What do I think about same sex sexual relationship?As an evolutionary biologist I can see a genetic cause for obesity. A primitive fat person can survive a long boat trip or a famine. Such a survivor will have children who carry the weight accumulating genes. Same sex couples will leave no same sex genes. So why would person choose the same sex life style? They can have many sex partners with out the worry of commitment to rising children. If one doubts that same sex persons have many partners think of the AIDS epidemic.
Now for the church. Same sex partners are more than welcome to sit besides me in the pew. I do not think their life style is a happy one and preachers should be role models for their congregation.
Dr. Craig H. Davis
50+years PCUSDA
Dr. Craig,
as a evolutionary biologist, could it be possible that sexual orientation is genetic. since the child will receive the sexual gene from the father and mother. a genetic error could result in a male receiving his mothers sexual origination gene instead of his fathers, thus allowing a gay from straight parents?
Post a Comment
<< Home