In lieu of recommendations they offered a covenant. It is about exercising mutual forbearance in times of disagreement. Within that framework, they offered these nine points:
Exercising the "mutual forbearance" to which we are called:It is a start. It doesn't answer the questions that are pressing such as whether or not the church will strip me of my ordination if I perform a marriage for a same-gender couple in my congregation or whether or not we are going to create updated liturgies and forms of worship for same-gender marriage services.
1. We agree that Christ calls all kinds of persons into fellowship with him, regardless of race, sex, occupation, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, or any other worldly condition, and that congregations are to welcome all persons who respond in trust and obedience to God’s grace in Jesus Christ and who desire to become part of the membership and mission of his church.
2. We acknowledge that the 218th General Assembly (2008) acted to “renew and strengthen the long-standing Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) commitment to equal protection under the law for lesbian and gay persons and the 216th General Assembly (2004)’s affirmation of the right of same-gender persons to civil union and, thereby, to all the benefits, privileges, and responsibilities of civil union.”
3. We confess that we are brothers and sisters bound together in Christ, and that while these conversations are difficult and intense, our disagreements do not negate our unity. Threats of departure or coercive ways of achieving uniformity are ultimately unhelpful and do little more than draw lines and force us to become more deeply entrenched in our positions and prejudices.
4. We agree that God alone is the source of all blessings. By the grace of God and through the power of God’s Spirit, individuals and congregations are able to bless God, receive God’s blessings, and praise God’s glory. Contrary to popular piety, neither a minister nor the church blesses a person or a relationship. When ministers conduct services of blessing, they bear witness to the blessing of God on that couple and testify publicly to that blessing in the congregation of believers.
5. We agree that Christian marriage is not a “right” conferred upon anyone, but a gift given to us by God to nurture and form human beings into the kind of sacrificial, self-giving love that we see in Jesus Christ. To speak of someone’s “right” to be married is to confuse God’s free gifts with human entitlements.
6. We acknowledge that our interpretations of Scripture lead us to different conclusions regarding homosexual behavior and same-gender partnerships. We all confess that Scripture holds out a transforming hope of radical change in Jesus Christ that requires us to be dead to sin and alive to all that is good. However, for some of us, that makes faithful, mutually loving, marriage-like unions of same-gender couples unacceptable; for others of us, that makes faithful, mutually loving, marriage-like unions of same-gender couples acceptable.
7. We acknowledge that there is no consensus within either the scientific community or the Christian community about the roots of homosexual orientation. Is sexual orientation coded into our DNA, or is it influenced by our environment? Since we do not have agreement regarding those questions, let us lay them aside and move forward.
8. We acknowledge that current law, in which clergy act as agents of the state, is a source of confusion. On behalf of the state, ministers are granted the authority to officiate at marriages, and yet no authority is granted them to dissolve such unions. Some argue that the church should relinquish its state-sanctioned power to marry. Others feel that, even in confusion, it should be retained to further the cause of the gospel.
9. We acknowledge the presence of same-gender partners in our communities and congregations. Together, we are members of the body of Christ and joined by the reconciling work of Christ. As the body of Christ, we affirm the call of the church, in its ministry and mission, to offer to all persons God’s gracious provision of redemption and forgiveness, calling all persons into loving obedience to God’s will.
Like I said, it is a start. This is the first time a committee has wrestled with the complex question of same-gender marriage and so it is appropriate that it include a lot of history, definitions, the variety of approaches ecclesiastical bodies have taken toward marriage, and the history of civil law. It is also appropriate that we emphasize how important it is to be nice to each other and civil in our discourse.
But this report (and the existence of this committee) should not dilute the responsibility to advocate for justice for LGBT people and their families. I am all for mutual forbearance. However, in a condition of imbalance of power, to state that both sides need to exercise mutual forbearance can serve to keep unjust structures intact. The problem is not that we are not polite to each other. The problem is that we have injustices in the church and in society that need redress.
This report and the existence of this committee does not substitute for legislative action at the 2010 General Assembly on behalf of marriage equality. Let us work on those resolutions for justice.