 |
|
8. OUTLINING A POLICY
The General Assembly in 1997 called for further work to be done on issues of human sexuality. This Report is the result of that work. Decisions have now to be made in the light of the material offered by the Working Groups and the churches commitment to unity. This section begins by outlining the challenges that face people throughout the church in the light of this issue and continue by developing a policy direction for the United Reformed Church.
8.1 Uncomfortable challenges
8.1.1 The Core Group suggests that the issue of homosexuality, as well as the wider issues of sexuality, presents a challenge to all, of whatever outlook or experience. It also presents a challenge to the whole church and to every church.
8.1.2 At the personal level
8.1.3 At the corporate level
8.1.4 Such challenges can be difficult to face and can threaten fellowship and unity. It is imperative therefore to ask how relationships within the life of the church should be conducted and how a difficult discussion like this is to be handled. The answer has partly to do with Christian grace and ordinary decency. It has partly to do with recent experience of this particular issue. All of us need to check our own attitudes and the way we respond to one another. The following points are pertinent for each of us, whatever views we currently hold.
8.2 The need for a decision
8.2.1 The four groups commissioned by the Mission Council to do further work on the concerns identified by General Assembly in its 1997 Resolution 18 have all referred to the tensions with which we are now living and the utmost difficulty of coming to a common mind. The whole church might wish for the luxury of extended time for quiet reflection and even more study. At the same time there are clamorous voices seeking the urgent resolution of the straightforward question - will the United Reformed Church ordain people in a homosexual relationship to the ministry of Word and Sacraments? Others again are hopeful that there might be a swift and peaceful resolution to an issue which has threatened the unity of this and many other churches.
8.2.2 Some decisions are now needed which ideally will help to draw the church together again around what may be an uncomfortable but unifying agreement. It may be worth repeating here the principles (set out in 3.2 above) which have seemed paramount to the Core Group in its discussions and which require some conclusion to be reached. Within the context of seeking the mind of Christ, and endeavouring to be true to the Gospel, the Core Group committed itself to seeking to offer a way forward, which as far as possible:
8.2.3 In the event, and after much wrestling with the issues, it has proved impossible to respond evenly to all of these points. Nevertheless, and although there is much tension and threatened division over this particular issue, there is a broad framework of agreement about other issues throughout the church - a point echoed by the working groups. The affirmations set out in section 7 offer an opportunity to celebrate in thankfulness and unity some of those fundamental points of agreement.
8.2.4 At issue here is not only the question of homosexuality and ordination, but the unity and peace of the church. The group on the Authority of General Assembly and Other Councils has offered guidance about how to handle difficult issues in future. Among other things, they plead for a longer period of reflection before decisions are reached - a comment which is echoed by some of the ecumenical partners. The group indicated their view that in keeping with the nature of the United Reformed Church, the General Assembly might from time to time offer to the church some definitive clarification on a particular issue, whilst as a general rule avoiding prescriptive rulings of a kind which could lead to the development of a kind of 'canon law' (B1.1.5). This seems to be one of those moments when such definitive clarification is required.
8.2.5 The Group on Wider Issues of Sexuality also urges a non-prescriptive route. The group has offered some statements as a basis for discussion rather than as a set of rules for application, but also recognises (D2.5) that there is need for some ethical frameworks for the expression of sexuality.
8.3 The need for a sensitive decision
8.3.1 It is evident that any decisions, of whatever nature, will have profound consequences for many individuals as well as for congregations and the whole church. Within the church, there are now, and probably always have been, homosexual people taking a full, valued, gifted and accepted part in its life. A report such as this, and any conclusions that flow from it, is of enormous significance for them in a very personal way.
8.3.2 The 1997 General Assembly, in Resolution 17, renewed and re-emphasised its commitment - established so clearly in the Basis of Union - to seek if at all possible to remain together as one church. That requires of everyone throughout the church the greatest patience, carefulness and concern, lest secondary issues become the basis for fresh divisions.
8.3.3 People hold a variety of convictions about what is acceptable sexually, and the limits of what is acceptable are different in different cultures and at different times in history. The task for the church at this time is to discern its response to Scripture and to contemporary knowledge and culture. That does not presuppose what the answer may be, but it does indicate the need for careful study and decision.
8.3.4 While people naturally tend to hold their convictions with passion, the shared life of the church requires that passion is tempered with compassion and humility, with a readiness to test convictions, and if necessary to change them, in the light of Scripture and growing understanding.
8.3.5 For some people this process seems like a journey in which we need to be patient with one another, not rushing to condemn or reject others, not closing our own minds or insisting on claiming our own 'rights'. In the imagery of pilgrimage we must not lose touch with one another as we travel on at different rates, all the more if the landscape looks different where we are. On this journey, and recognising that none of us has yet arrived, it must be our deep concern to seek to understand and obey the will of God, and to do what is best for the whole life of the church and community.
8.3.6 For others the process may be more like testing the foundations to ensure that what is built has solid ground beneath it. The shape of the foundations may determine the shape of the building, just as principles should shape behaviour. In the image of a building, we need to be in agreement about what is safe ground for building, lest building on shallow ground not only brings about the collapse of that part of the building but damages the whole.
8.3.7 Others again will offer different images, but each will need to reflect something of the range of issues at stake - the life and unity of the church, the shared search for truth, the faces and needs of people known and unknown, the present diversity of understanding.
8.4 Clarifying the main issue
8.4.1 The key question facing the church is whether a committed, practising homosexual relationship can be recognised as a valid Christian expression of sexuality, and whether a person in such a relationship might be accepted for training and ordination to the ministry of Word and Sacraments. There is no question of widening this discussion to include those who are technically 'bisexual', that is, who may be physically active with people of either sex, since that clearly involves some kind of unfaithfulness to one partner or another. Nor does it relate to those in multiple relationships, that is, who are not in a long term committed relationship, since that too implies unfaithfulness. In other words the question applies to a narrowly defined and particular group of people which is in fact likely to be very small in number.
8.4.2 At the same time, there are some people whose situation may seem to be very similar, in that they share a very close relationship with someone of the same sex, yet one which is not sexually, or more precisely genitally or erotically active. There are others too whose orientation may be homosexual or heterosexual or somewhere on a scale between the two, but who deliberately do not express, or who abstain from expressing, their sexuality in an active way.
8.4.3 In terms of what actually happens between people in relationship, it would not be appropriate to ask directly and explicitly how the relationship is expressed physically. That would be intrusive, prying and legalistic. It would be to investigate one area of conduct and isolate it from others that might be equally significant. (The Ordination and Human Sexuality Group refers in C1.4 to creating a unique category of exclusion.) It would also be a breach of that relationship of mutual trust which should mark the shared fellowship of the church. At the same time the church has an obligation both to affirm very positively the value of mutually caring, loving and supportive friendships, and also to offer guidance about patterns of behaviour which it deems to be compatible with the gospel. It will regard such issues generally as personal and private, and it will not therefore expect to enquire into private and personal matters. But the church must also remind people that they are not simply private individuals, since they are answerable to God and to the community, and since all actions have consequences for others. It will hold out a further challenge to those called to serve as ordained ministers of Word and Sacraments since they have a particularly public and exemplary role.
8.4.4 The key question might then be expressed as - can the church positively affirm not only a homosexual friendship but such a friendship which involves sexual activity? For some there can be no distinction between the two aspects, they belong integrally together - a homosexual friendship implies the possibility of sexual activity. For others the distinction is vital. This tension lies at the heart of the present discussion.
8.4.5 The arguments for distinguishing between orientation and practice arise largely from the need to assert that the things human beings wish to do, feel driven to do, or feel are by nature right to do, may not in fact always be right or acceptable. Different criteria need to be applied in assessing whether what is in a person's "nature" is appropriate when turned into actions (see also D2.3.2a). The arguments against making this distinction are based on the belief that loving, committed sexual relationships are valid whatever the orientation of the persons involved, and that it is a matter of integrity that they should be able to express their orientation in practice. The Core Group suggests that since the latter position has still to be accepted, it is necessary to work with the former since it leaves the relationship between orientation and practice open.
8.5 Shaping a policy
8.5.1 The Working Groups have found great benefit in being able to hear the differing views of their members. While opinions may not have changed, there has been a growing measure of understanding and mutual respect. However, valuable as their experience and their work has been, the groups have not been able to move far beyond the diversity expressed within them, and - apart from the Group on the Authority of Councils - have not been able to offer any substantial conclusions or suggest a way forward.
8.5.2 The first conclusion to be drawn might be that this represents a true picture of the position of the church. There is great diversity, strong differences of opinion are held and a common mind, at least over issues of sexuality at this moment, seems impossible.
8.5.3 It has been argued above (8.2) that this diversity cannot be sustained without being held within some framework of agreement. Decisions are needed so that congregations and councils can be offered some guidance and so that this one issue does not remain dominant and disproportionate. The Core Group has therefore had to consider other aspects of the discussion and review carefully the options before the church.
8.5.4 Central to that review has been the church's deep commitment to unity. Within the traditions which made up the United Reformed Church there was in the past a readiness to stand out (and stand alone, if necessary) in order to witness to what was believed to be the truth. Both sides in the present discussion draw upon this history in advocating their views. However, the Basis of Union (see 6.3 above) requires a much greater readiness on the part of all to take seriously the understandings of others for whom Christ died. As with the discussion of food offered to idols in 1 Cor 8, those who believe that they are free to act need to be sensitive towards those who are offended by that view (1 Cor 8:9). This is what respect for tender consciences means in practice. Thus a way forward should be found so that none feels excluded from the church as a result of the current discussion. Every endeavour must be made to find ways of living with different convictions while holding on to Christ. Some words from an earlier generation and a different context come to mind: Our appeal must be to the Lord of all our consciences, and to His Spirit whose mind is to be discerned from what He does. We declare our readiness to learn and – what is more difficult – to unlearn, according to what He manifests to be His will as His Spirit works among the churches. [The Free Churches and the Lambeth Appeal, 1921, section v (2)].
8.5.5 In its reflection on the different ways in which scripture is understood, the Biblical Authority Group concluded that even now the church is not of a common mind on the matters which are before us. However, the group goes on to reiterate the principle that in seeking a way forward we need to stay together, since schism damages our ability to listen and to discern God's Word, and that there needs to be a continuing process of patient explaining and courteous listening. Unity is vital to our being able to hear properly.
8.5.6 While the church as a whole has very evidently found this a painful and difficult matter to discuss - all other churches which have addressed this issue have experienced the same difficulty - it needs to be said that it has also been a necessary and good debate in a number of ways. At the very least it has sharpened awareness of some of the contemporary issues of sexuality. The church has to take gay and lesbian concerns as well as sexuality in general more seriously.
8.5.7 The debate has also highlighted areas for affirmation. In this regard it is important to emphasise the positive place and value of friendship - without the kind of sexual overtones which can so easily devalue or prejudice relationships. People need to be free to develop friendships with those of their own and the opposite sex - such friendships need to be honoured and affirmed.
8.5.8 Those who are single also need to be affirmed. Some single people do not at present feel an integral part of church life. Some may feel that their sexuality is being questioned. Some who may not have chosen singleness may feel vulnerable as the sexuality discussion continues around them. They have a vital place within the family of the church.
8.5.9 Sexuality itself needs to be kept in proportion. It is not the most fundamental feature of human existence. Sexual activity needs to be treated as only one aspect of sexuality and of relationships. It is clearly an area which has significant moral implications, but so do many other aspects of behaviour which do not always receive as much attention.
8.5.10 Any decision taken at this point has to face the fact that for a significant number of members of the church the appropriateness of sexual relationships between people of the same gender has not so far been established. Indeed, for many people homosexual activity remains an issue which causes deep offence, at its strongest because it is seen as a contradiction of God's purposes and as morally wrong. This remains true, in their understanding, even if the relationship in question is deep, loving and committed.
8.5.11 It has also to be recognised that world-wide only a few churches have taken the step of either affirming homosexual relationships in any formal way, or agreeing knowingly to ordain those in homosexual relationships, and that no other church in these islands has done so. While no church tradition should be bound to do only what others do, any decision taken by the United Reformed Church has to be viewed in the wider context of ecumenical relationships such as local ecumenical partnerships, and in open awareness of other churches.
8.5.12 Similar considerations arise in relation to the social context, although very different conclusions are drawn by different people. For some the church should be showing prophetic leadership, in response to the gospel, by charting a new path of acceptance - indeed if it does not do so soon it will be left behind by the world itself. For others it is a matter of showing prophetic leadership, also in response to the gospel, by challenging the world's standards of behaviour and patterns of living.
8.6 Defining a policy
In the context of the affirmations commended to the church in section 7, the United Reformed Church affirms and welcomes people of homosexual orientation within the life of the church and society, but does not believe that there is a sufficiently clear mind within the church at this time to affirm the acceptability of homosexual practice.
8.6.6 It will be readily recognised that for some this may not be a clear enough statement in relation to what they believe to be the sinfulness of homosexual activity. For others it will be too clear a statement which denies actions which they believe to be an intrinsic to the expression of homosexual orientation. The statement is offered in a conscious awareness of the diversity of reactions it will receive. It is also offered out of concern for the wholeness and unity of the church.
8.7 Possible consequences
8.7.1 A number of consequences would follow if the statement in paragraph 8.6.4 were to be accepted. The following notes relate to some that can be foreseen. The consequences are complex and will need further thought. The notes here are therefore no more than outlines of the kind of issues which may arise and, in some cases, the kind of response that might be appropriate. It is suggested that Mission Council should be asked to do further work on the detail of these consequences during the coming year for report to the Annual Assembly in 2000. (Resolution 37)
8.7.2 Candidates for the ministry of Word and Sacraments
Candidates for ministry should be made aware of the General Assembly statement at an early stage in the assessment process, and should be asked whether they would be willing to exercise their ministry in conformity with this statement. This issue might be raised orally alongside other points clarified during the assessment procedure.
8.7.3 Ordination and induction
The essence of the policy being outlined is that the church, acting as a whole, cannot affirm the acceptability of homosexual practice. This places a responsibility on a candidate to make a judgement about his/her own life in the light of this policy. The process of assessment leading to training and ordination (involving local church, district council, the Assembly's Assessment Panel and synod), and any subsequent enquiry leading to a call, has within it the possibility of appropriate questions being asked about any aspect of life and conduct - but only if there is good reason to do so. In other words, enquiry should not be intrusive.
8.7.4 A minister in a homosexual relationship
The acceptance of the proposed statement would not of itself justify bringing a case under the Section O process against a minister in a homosexual relationship (see Basis, Schedule E, para 2). (Resolution 36)
8.7.5 A minister sharing a manse with a friend
Questions might arise about a minister sharing a home with someone of the same sex. In such a case it is reasonable to suppose that two such people are good friends. It is not then appropriate to enquire in detail about that relationship or to assume that it is a sexual relationship.
8.7.6 Other issues
Among other issues which need further work are the implications of the statement for elders and members and also the future care of existing ministers who are in a homosexual relationship.
8.8 Procedure
8.8.1 The Core Group was convinced by the direction of the argument of the Authority of Councils Group concerning the handling of divisive and contentious issues. In the spirit of that Group's report, it is suggested therefore that the main recommendation (Resolution 34), if agreed by a simple majority of the members present and voting at the General Assembly in 1999, should be referred to synods, district councils and local churches for wider consideration. It is further suggested that these councils be invited to register their dissent only if they do not wish the statement to be accepted. A negative motion to this effect would require a simple majority of those present and voting. Should the General Secretary receive notice by the due date that more than one third of synods or district councils or local churches have voted accordingly, then the Assembly in its concern for the unity of the church would not proceed to accept the statement.
8.8.2 If any negative response amounts to one third or less in each of these groups of councils, then a motion to accept the statement (requiring a simple majority to be passed) would be put to the Annual Assembly in 2000.
8.8.3 The timetable suggested for this procedure is that responses should be required to be received by the General Secretary by 14th March 2000, ie before Mission Council on 21st March. This should allow time for discussion in local churches and district councils before the spring synods. (Resolution 35)
8.9 Resolution 19 (General Assembly 1997)
Resolution 19 of 1997 (see page 7 above) set out an interim measure during the process of further reflection and discussion called for under Resolution 18. It is now considered that with the reception of these reports from the Working Groups and the Core Group, that period of reflection and discussion is complete and that Resolution 19 no longer applies. (Resolution 38)
|