|
Update |
 |
Clarity deepens Australian divisions over gay ordination |
|||||||||||||||
|
In August we introduced readers to consensus decision-making in the Uniting Church in Australia. Elsewhere we reported, misleadingly, that the UCA had become the first Australian church to allow gays and lesbians to become ministers: sorry about that. Below, Kim Cain sets the record straight. As the story shows, even the best decision-making procedures don't necessarily help when opinions are sharply polarized, while clarification may simply pour petrol on the flames.
Live crosses by television news reporters, front page stories in major metropolitan newspapers, nationwide talkback radio coverage and interest by international media - Resolution 84 made news. Now, months after the vote, the talk within the church - Australia's third largest - has not stopped. There have been packed meetings around the countryside, petitions from conservative members and, by late September, the promise by leading evangelicals of a "Reforming Alliance". Special synods, sparked by deep-seated concern, have been called by some state bodies. Which is interesting - and amazing - for a resolution that was supposed simply to clarify existing procedures! Indeed, the proposer of Resolution 84 - Rev John Mavor, a well-loved and respected former national president - insisted it was an expression of the greater unity of the church, "where in Jesus' name we respect each other whilst acknowledging our differences". Resolution 84 came to the assembly after a national consultation on sexuality and ministry that included conservative, progressive, migrant-ethnic and "middle-of-the-road" members. Almost unanimously, they agreed that clarification on gay ordination was needed. But that consultation was just one more discussion in a 20-year debate on sexuality and homosexuality in the UCA. In 1988 the assembly agreed that "celibacy in singleness and faithfulness in marriage" (CISAFIM) was a standard accepted by some as a suitable sexual ethic. At another time it said that "homosexuality was of itself not a bar to ordination" and a wide range of criteria should be taken into account when assessing the suitability of a candidate. Consistently, the assembly refused either to explicitly condemn or to explicitly accept homosexual clergy. In 1997 a specially formed sexuality task group issued a report, Uniting Sexuality and Faith, which suggested "right relationships" as the appropriate sexual ethic for all church members, including ministers. Right relationships, it said, were loving, committed, non-promiscuous, non-exploitative and genuine relationships between partners, which could be heterosexual or homosexual in nature. The report was received at the 1997 Perth assembly but, amid heated discussion and the threat of a walkout by Aboriginal and migrant-ethnic congregations, did not "go to the vote". The two-decade debate evidenced a widespread acceptance of the right of homosexual people to belong to the church, to participate in holy communion and to be members of church councils. And it led to imaginative and strong statements on marriage, codes of conduct for ministers and church officials, and procedures for dealing with sexual complaints. But the differences on the ordination of homosexuals became ingrained. Today, "CISAFIM" and "Right Relationships" are widely seen as two mutually exclusive sexual ethics held by people within the UCA. All along the church maintained that presbyteries (regional bodies) have the spiritual maturity and wisdom to discern God's calling for ministry. And it is presbyteries that ordain.
What Resolution 84 tried to do was offer clarity. Namely, to recognize that two genuine positions, though mutually exclusive, were held by people within the church; and that - as had always been the case - each presbytery should decide on the suitability of a candidate for ministry on a case-by-case basis. Importantly, it also said that this "may include consideration of the manner in which the applicant's or candidate's sexuality is expressed". Many hoped this would be seen as "win-win": conservatives could ask the "sex question", but progressives could welcome an affirmation that homosexuality was of itself not a barrier to ordination: gays and lesbians were free to have their call tested case by case. Four times in the July debate the assembly could have turned aside, but pressed ahead. It also refused a request to refer the resolution back to councils and congregations for concurrence, insisting that no new doctrine was being established.
But simplistic media reporting of the resolution as a vote "for gay ordination" shocked and dismayed many UCA members, especially those far from the courts of the church. The debate immediately shot to the extremes, with the original purpose - unity and clarity in the church - left hanging untidily in midair. EMU (Evangelical Members within the Uniting Church) - an anti-gay lobby - was outraged. Mary Hawkes, its national leader, told a press conference that thousands of people would leave. "And I hope they all leave together, not in drips and drabs." EMU says it will work around the current leadership to change the church. "We are not talking about sitting around tables here," Hawkes told the Melbourne-based newspaper The Age. "The gloves are off," responded one moderate, "the question now is will there be space in our church for the diversity of opinion and unity in Christ, that makes us a truly mainline, Protestant church?" It is easy to overstate the danger of schism within the church. Most UCA people are not outraged by this vote, most will not see their future membership depending on it, many are simply not interested. To date, only two ministers have left the church, along with various groups of church members. Some congregations have chosen to withhold their central offerings; denominational leaders, however, are confident of "holding the majority" and many now talk of dealing with the pastoral implications rather than the decision itself. Kim Cain, Uniting Church in Australia
|
Resolution 84, endorsed by over 80% of the voting members at the 10th UCA assembly in July, was widely but inaccurately reported as making the Uniting Church in Australia the first Australian church to openly accept homosexual people for ordination.
          |