By Tricia Dykers Koenig: “It has been claimed that an authoritative interpretation of W-4.9000, the marriage section in the Directory for Worship, is an attempt to amend the Book of Order without votes from the presbyteries. On the contrary, an authoritative interpretation does not aim to amend what the Book of Order says about marriage – there are other overtures that would do that. An authoritative interpretation simply states that decisions made about pastoral care and worship that do not conform in every detail to the words of W-4.9000 do not necessarily constitute an offense subjecting a minister to discipline.”
Would it be permissible for the PCUSA to interpret and/or amend the Book of Order section on marriage to reflect the reality of same-gender marriage, even though The Book of Confessions uses the language of “a man and a woman”?
Based on the way the Confessions have functioned in the church – especially since 1967, when a collection of documents was substituted for the Westminster Confession – yes. The Book of Confessions is not a compilation of proof-texts from which to glean answers to questions not contemplated by the authors, and contains numerous examples of assertions that are no longer appropriate or necessary expressions of our faith. General Assemblies have taken actions in the past that are directly contradictory to the letter of the Confessions.
Ken Evers-Hood, pastor of Tualatin (OR) Presbyterian Church, gave this charge to David Norse at his ordination to the Ministry of Word and Sacrament by the Presbytery of Philadelphia on January 5, 2014: “… This day. What we are doing here. It is about you…and it’s not. And you will spend the rest of your days Feeling wonderfully caught between The two, sometimes not knowing what to do But on your best days trusting that knowing that you don’t know Is the very best place to be To follow after where the one wild spirit is blowing in your ministry”
Dr. Terence Diggory: “I offer here my current reading of Genesis 2 and Mark 10 in an effort to keep the conversation going with people who will disagree with me as well as with those who will agree. So far, my reading has not altered my belief that same-sex marriage is consistent with God’s intention for marriage. But my reading has considerably expanded my understanding of God’s redemptive inclusiveness, beyond the confines of sexuality, and of the ways that intention can be traced throughout the Bible. The Bible itself, we should remember, took shape as a conversation that believers today have a responsibility to keep going.”