OVERTURE

ANENT MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

From the Presbytery of Lochcarron-Skye

Whereas:

1. the Church’s historic understanding of the Biblical teaching on homosexual practice has been questioned in recent years.

2. a lengthy period of reflection has elapsed without a resolution of the issue.

3. it is undesirable that the courts of the church should be asked to judge on individual cases in advance of any such resolution.

It is humbly overtured by the Reverend the Presbytery of Lochcarron-Skye to the Venerable the General Assembly to receive the Overture set out below,

“That this Church shall not accept for training, ordain, admit, re-admit, induct or introduce to any ministry of the Church anyone involved in a sexual relationship outside of faithful marriage between a man and a woman”.

Some comments on what happened

(These are personal comments submitted by William Philip, who is one of the current FCC steering group, and should be read only as that, and not as necessarily representing any others.)

As someone who was not a commissioner this year, but did observe these crucial debates from the Gallery of the General Assembly, I offer the following account of what happened, and a few personal observations:

On Monday 26th May, prior to the Overture being heard, a motion introduced by Dr John McPake and Dr Angus Morrison was agreed by the General Assembly. Its terms are that a Special Commission will now be setup ‘representative of the breadth and unity of the church’ to report to the General Assembly of 2011. Meantime, all courts, councils and committees of the church are not to issue public statements or to make decisions in relation to contentious matters of human sexuality with respect to ordination and induction to the Ministry of the Church of Scotland. The General Assembly also specifically instructed Presbyteries to observe a moratorium on ordinations and inductions which might appear to prejudice the Special Commission before it reports..

The Overture, when it came to be called, was withdrawn in the light of the above, and because the moderator declared he would allow no further discussion of homosexuality in the discussion, if it were to be heard. A full explanation of the matter from the Rev Ivor Macdonald who was to present the Overture was published in the Herald newspaper and may be read here http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/letters/display.var.2510788.0.congregations_can_distance_themselves_from_kirk_by_joining_fellowship.php

This outcome was a great disappointment to many (myself included), who felt that the church was thus denied the opportunity to give with clarity, to a watching world, a public reaffirmation of its historic orthodox position.

Those who presented this motion, however, believe that this is the best way for the church to be given time to fully consult at every level, so that in 2 years time such a reaffirmation may be made, and with greater clarity and authority. I am assured of their very best intentions in this, for the good of the gospel and our church. I personally do not doubt their word, as Christian brothers, or their desire for an outcome that is honouring to God and the Scriptures, although I fear that the situation has resulted in great confusion and distress in our churches. But, regardless of what our level of personal confidence may be in such a process, we must surely be much in prayer in our churches (indeed, especially among those aligned with the Fellowship of Confessing Churches) for those on the Commission who will be labouring to this end.

But it may surprise people that the debate surrounding the Aberdeen case was not the most upsetting part of the Assembly for many who were there. Indeed, several have commented to me that there seems to be a very different level of feeling about the whole proceedings among those who were actually present, and so experienced the whole atmosphere of what was going on throughout the week. (Those who were not present would be helped to understand the depth of distress by speaking with some who were.) One such instance occurred on Tuesday 27th May, when the Assembly heard a report on singleness. During the debate, one evangelical minister asked the question how, with such an equivocal position on chastity taken in the report, we were to encourage purity until marriage among younger people? A mocking response was given by a minister proudly announcing to the Assembly his own pre-marital sexual exploits, and making feigned ‘repentance’ for such ‘sins’ to the sound of loud applause and roars of laughter. This was felt by many to be the absolute low point of a General Assembly of which many have said to me that they have never felt such a deep sense of shame.