I just ran across this item about two curious decisions in the Presbyterian Church (USA) Court system. In two separate instances, pastors were accused officiating or blessing same-sex marriages. They were charged and tried, and both acquitted. I wasn’t even a little surprised. What surprised me were these quotes - one from on of the judges explaining their decisions:
“Since church and state define marriage as between a man and a woman, she cannot have done what she was accused of, the court ruled yesterday.
‘It can’t be an offense to the constitution to attempt to do the impossible,’ said the decision, read by the Rev. Stewart Pollock, chairman of the Permanent Judicial Commission of Pittsburgh Presbytery.” (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)
“That court refused to find California minister Janie Spahr guilty of performing same-sex marriages on the grounds that the church constitution defines marriage as a covenant between one man and one woman. Thus, Spahr couldn’t have performed same-sex marriages because there is no such legal thing, even though she called the ceremonies marriages.
‘One cannot characterize same- sex ceremonies as marriages for the purpose of disciplining a minister of the Word and Sacrament and at the same time declare that such ceremonies are not marriages for legal or ecclesiastical purposes,’ the top court said in a complex and mixed ruling.” (Louisville Courier-Journal)
That is the type of argument people use when they know they’re guilty. That’s the kind of argument Jim Carrey used in Liar Liar. It’s not how Christians ought to conduct themselves.
I don’t believe in denominational courts and constitutions, anyway. Baptist Faith and Message is about as strict as I’m comfortable with. But if a denomination does have these systems in place, they should use them to honor God and honor the commitments they’ve made. Not weasel out on technicalities.
Technorati Tags: judge, pcusa, same_sex_marriage, technicality
Blogs4God
