Assembly Answers Overtures 12,17, and 22 in the Affirmative

The PCA’s General Assembly answered Overtures 12, 17, and 22 in the affirmative today. The Assembly did so by approving a request of the Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains and Military Personnel; the request directs the Stated Clerk’s office to petition President Obama and other federal officials, requesting “the protection and meaningful continuance of the free exercise of religion within the armed forces of the United States.” The request was prompted by the possible repeal of the U.S. military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy regarding homosexuality.

The Committee of Commissioners of Mission to North America (the agency that oversees PCA chaplains who serve in the U.S. military) answered the overtures by amending the original, proposed letter. The amended letter does not reference the “don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT) policy, but stressed overarching concerns about Title 10 (that portion of the U.S. Code dealing with homosexuality in the armed forces), and protecting the free exercise of religion by chaplains. The amended letter says: “It is of utmost importance that you take all necessary measures to insure that our chaplains are free, without censure, to preach, teach, and practice in accordance with the beliefs of this denomination.”

The change in the letter reflects an ongoing debate over the extent to which the church, and the PCA specifically, should speak into public policy matters. Commenting on Overtures 12, 17, and 22, PCA pastor David Coffin wrote: “Synods and councils are rightly forbidden from intermeddling in such [matters], CF 31.4. The leaders of the church are not warranted by the Lord of the church to rule in these matters and they have been granted no particular qualifying competence.”

He noted that the PCA has already spoken to the DADT policy, referring to the “Declaration of Conscience” adopted by the 1993 General Assembly in response to the Clinton Administration’s first contemplation of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” “The PCA has spoken clearly on this subject in a manner consistent with her principles [through this Declaration],” said Coffin.

A key question is whether DADT represents a “case extraordinary,” terminology used by the Westminster Confession of Faith, which would override the guidance given in CF 31.4. During the MNA Committee of Commissioners meeting Douglas Lee, executive director of the Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains and Military Personnel (PRJC), argued that the debate of DADT is extraordinary. “This particular sin has ramifications much more broad than others,” said Lee. He continued, “DADT is part of a much, much bigger issue. It elevates homosexual behavior to a protected class.”

Overtures 12, 17, and 22 (submitted from Rocky Mountain Presbytery, South Texas Presbytery, and Savannah River Presbytery) outlined a number of potential consequences should DADT be repealed, saying that chaplains may be vulnerable to charges of discrimination if they preach, teach, or counsel in accordance with the passages in the Bible which speak of the sin of homosexual practice. Also, the overtures say, marriage retreats conducted by chaplains may have to include homosexual couples.

The overtures state that any government decision permitting homosexuals to serve openly in U.S. military services will interfere with the Christian ministry of evangelical chaplains in the armed services, particularly the nearly 270 sponsored by the PRJC.

Comments

All Fields Are Required:


Kevin


Wilkinson


Washington, DC


Pastor Coffin is correct. This is not an extraordinary matter. Gay non-Christian Americans should be able to serve openly in the military. There has been no direct threat to pastors, and these unnecessary overtures underscore that the PCA is more interested in making comments about homosexuality per se than finding an effective, unified spiritual approach to the issue. The homosexual lobby will continue to transform the culture until the Church stops being reactive and starts being radically pro-active.

2010-07-06 14:21 Permalink Reply

All Fields Are Required:


Walker


Lagerfeldt


Los Angeles, CA


“This particular sin has ramifications much more broad than others,” said Lee.

Really? More than pride? More than divorce? More than addiction to heterosexual pornography? Where is the scriptural basis for this assertion?

2010-07-06 14:26 Permalink Reply

All Fields Are Required:


Jason


Van Bemmel


Abingdon, MD


The difference with homosexual behavior is not that it's any worse than other sins, but that an active and influential lobby seeks protection and special status for those who practice this sin. If any other similar lobby existed for other sin categories, we would necessarily oppose them as well. If those who practice homosexual behavior are given civil rights status as a protected minority group (which is what they seek), then those who are "married" would have to be included in marriage retreats, marriage counseling, etc. This definitely directly affects our chaplains and their ability to effectively minister in good conscience. The courts have shown that the road from tolerance to protection is a short, straight and certain one. What is legally recognized and openly tolerated must then be protected from discrimination. Again, no other sin category seeks such civil rights protections.

2010-07-07 12:54 Permalink Reply

All Fields Are Required:


Douglas


Lee


VA


"Open homosexuality" in the military is not, as Dr. Al Mohler has passionately argued, just about the military. Federal recognition is simply the launching point for a much grander homosexual strategy. Examples are many but here are two: last week the US Supreme Court ruled that a CA Christian campus organization (Christian Legal Society) must include homosexuals and non-believers in its leadership (thus "discrimination" and "civil rights" trumps First Amendment and "free exercise" rights) – and in Canada, where homosexuality is already legitimized, military chaplains are forbidden to say anything negative.

All sin has broad results. But no other group is pining for legitimization of their sin. No other sin has this tag: "God gave them up unto vile affections (AV)" - and then lists at least 24 sinful ramifications. Religious freedom, marriage, moral definitions, hate speech, civil rights, alleged human rights violations – all are up for grabs with this sin.

2010-07-06 16:55 Permalink Reply

Leave a Comment

All Fields Are Required: