Chapter 7: Recommendations for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
Rogers begins the final chapter with a very strong statement: “It seems to me that the church and every person within the church is faced with a choice: to witness to an ancient Near Eastern cultural bias of male gender superiority, or to witness to Jesus Christ and his redemptive life and ministry…The purpose of the Bible is not to forever weld us to an ancient culture. The purpose of the Bible is to tell us the story of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection” (109).
Following this strong statement, Rogers calls for action: “If you believe, like I do, that homosexuality is not a sin and is not prohibited by the Bible, then the next question becomes, how do we heal the church of this injustice that has divided us? Clearly, policies, by-laws and church constitutions in some cases, will need to be amended” (109-110).
Rogers says there have been certain precedents for official apologies from denominations: in 1995, the Southern Baptist Convention apologized for “condoning” racism and in 2001 Presbyterians asked the forgiveness of African Americans for the denomination’s historical involvement with slavery and segregation. Rogers believes that as a denomination, we need to apologize for our collective sin of homophobia. An apology is important, and perhaps a first step, but Rogers believes that it needs to be followed with action:
“Progress requires more than words. We need to demonstrate the depth of our understanding of Christ’s message through action. We need to give LGBT people full and equal rights within the church and work for their rights within the broader society. That means marriage, ordination, and every other right necessary to bring people who are homosexual into full equality with people who are heterosexual. The trajectory of Christian history is in the direction of ever-greater openness and inclusiveness. We rejoice now in the leadership in our churches of people of color, women, and divorced and remarried people. The time will come when having gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in Christian leadership will be just as routine” (111).
Rogers goes on to share that while denominations today hold the Bible as the primary source of authority and guidance, each group has additional documents and subordinate standards that they turn to. For Presbyterians, it is our church’s Constitution, which includes both the Book of Confessions and the Book of Order. Rogers spends the remainder of the chapter discussing flaws in both the Book of Confessions and the Book of Order of the Presbyterian Church (USA).
Book of Confessions
At the 218th General Assembly in San Jose, June of 2008, the Heidelberg Catechism was one of the heavily debated issues with regard to homosexuality. At GA, 30 seminary faculty members signed a petition, asking for a more traditional translation of the Heidelberg Catechism of 1563 (background information here). Jack Rogers was one of those who spoke on behalf of this petition at GA, and he writes about it in this book. He shares the Question and Answer 87 in the Heidelberg Catechism:
Q. 87. Can those who do not turn to God from their ungrateful, impenitent life be saved?
A. Certainly not! Scripture says, “Surely you know that the unjust will never come into possession of the kingdom of God. Make no mistake: no fornicator or idolater, none who are guilty either of adultery or of homosexual perversion, no thieves or grabbers or drunkards or slanderers or swindlers, will possess the kingdom of God.”
Before Rogers had come to a different understanding of homosexuality, he thought this was fairly clear evidence of the denomination’s policy and thoughts on homosexuality. However, then he remembered that Johanna Bos, a professor at Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, had stated that the text of Answer 87 was not authentic (115), but was rather an addition to the text from the 1960s.
Rogers went back and read through the original Latin version of he Catechism, a Dutch version, a 1645 English edition from London. And in every one of the translations he found and read, the list of the “impenitent sinners” was always exactly the same, in the same order: “unchaste person, idolater, adulterer, thief, covetous man, drunkard, slanderer, robber, or any such like” (116). In each of the translations, it went from adulterer to thief, not one mentioning “homosexual perversion.” Rogers believes this was inserted in by someone with the “general 1960s American assumption that homosexuality is inherently perverse” (118) and this insertion goes against the original intent of the Catechism.
At the 218th GA, the Assembly voted to put together a special committee to look into this issue and bring back a recommendation to the 219th GA. More information about that decision can be found here.
Book of Order
In many ways similar to the Book of Confessions, Rogers believes the Book of Order also “embodies a trajectory toward ever-greater inclusiveness of people” (119). In Chapter 3, “The Church and Its Mission” we see this principle of inclusiveness very clearly. It calls the church “to a new openness to its own membership…becoming in fact as well as in faith a community of women and men of all ages, races, and conditions, and by providing for inclusiveness as a visible sign of the new humanity” (119). However, in Chapter 4, inclusiveness is made even more explicit:
“The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) shall give full expression to the rich diversity within its membership and shall provide means which will assure a greater inclusiveness leading to wholeness in its emerging life. Persons of all racial groups, different ages, both sexes, various disabilities, diverse geographical areas, different theological positions consistent with the Reformed tradition, as well as different marital conditions (married, single, widowed, or divorced) shall be guaranteed full participation and access to representation in the decision making of the church” (119).
This paragraph makes room for a great richness of diversity – however Rogers believes “this paragraph will be even more complete when it is amended to include the phrase, ‘different sexual orientation'” (120).
Finally, Rogers shares briefly about G-6.0106b, or Amendment B. The full text of G-6.0106b is below:
“Those who are called to office in the church are to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church. Among these standards is the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage of one man and one woman, or chastity in singleness. Persons refusing to repent of any self-acknowledged practice which the confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and Sacrament” (120).
There have been endless debates over Amendment B since its creation but Rogers says the intent of Amendment B was clear from the beginning: “to find some sort of theological basis to bar people who are gay and lesbian from being ordained” (121). Rogers mentions there are several issues related to G-6.0106b. One of those is the understanding of the term “chastity.” For many it has been equated to “celibacy.” However, as Rogers displays through both the Heidelberg Catechism and Westminster Larger Catechism, chastity is something that applies to all people, both single and married.
The second issue Rogers raises focuses on what exactly “the confessions call sin.” He writes:
“The confessions are historical documents that reflect not only general biblical principles, but also the ethical standards of the time and culture in which they were written” (124).
He references many “sins” that the confessions mention that we do not consider as such today; Rogers states there are over 250 sins mentioned in the Book of Confessions, and “we all practice at least some of them in good conscience” (125).
I want to conclude with the final two paragraphs from this chapter:
“As I have shown, neither the Bible nor the confessions, properly understood, is opposed to homosexuality as such. However, many Presbyterians treat homosexuality as if it were the most important issue facing the church and the worst imaginable sin a human being can commit. Allowing three sentences in the Book of Order to preempt our biblical and theological tradition is a grave mistake that needs to be corrected.
The best methods of interpretation, from the Reformation on down through today, call upon us to interpret the Scripture through the lens of Jesus Christ’s life and ministry. Using this method, we see clearly that Jesus and the Bible, properly understood, do not condemn people who are homosexual. In church governance, our confessions and Book of Order embody a trajectory of ever-greater inclusiveness. To bar gay and lesbian people from ordination and marriage is a violation of these fundamental principles of our faith. One day soon, our church will once again upload these biblical and confessional principles by welcoming our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender sisters and brothers as full and equal members in our church and society. The Holy Spirit is at work in the church. Praise God” (126).
This post is part of an ongoing review of Jack Rogers’s book “Jesus, the Bible and Homosexuality.” For more information about the series, you can read the first post here. Individual Chapter Reviews: Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 3, Chapter 4, Chapter 5, Chapter 6 and Chapter 7. I also share some Final Thoughts about the book here.