Clarity on Overture 15

Overture 15 doesn't do what you think it does. Its focus is quite narrow.

Words can be confusing. Last year in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), we learned a number of elders were unclear on the meaning of identity. This year a minority of the Overtures Committee tried to avoid the confusion regarding identity by proposing this amendment to our Book of Church Order (BCO) Chapter 7:

Men who describe themselves as homosexual, even those who describe themselves as homosexual and claim to practice celibacy by refraining from homosexual conduct, are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America.

The proposed BCO amendment is clear, succinct, and straightforward. It bars anyone from office who describes himself according to his sinful and unnatural lust.

There seems to be a great deal of hostility to the change proposed by Overture 15 (Item 1 before the Presbyteries), but I wonder how much of the opposition comes from misunderstanding what the proposed amendment would do rather than reading the plain language.

I. Confusion by the Stated Clerk

In an otherwise anodyne summary of the history and state of the PCA given at Southwood PCA in Huntsville, Alabama, Stated Clerk TE Bryan Chapell, PhD described the “present division” within the denomination as centered on homosexual desire and whether “the desire itself is disqualifying.”

The Stated Clerk gave an overview of his efforts “organizing people from both sides” at General Assembly to resolve this matter. He indicated he urged “the opposing sides” to “listen to each other” and invited them to collaborate “in the same room” to resolve the scandal surrounding homosexuality in the PCA. The Stated Clerk notes the meeting he organized resulted in an “agreed upon proposal” (presumably Overtures 29 and/or 31), which easily passed the Overtures Committee.

The Stated Clerk then proceeded to give background on Overture 15 and how it came to the floor. TE Chapell stated, “sadly, those who were not in the room” came with another proposal (i.e. Overture 15) in addition to the “agreed to proposal” (i.e. Overtures 29 and/or 31) produced by the group brought together by the Stated Clerk.

He then characterized the “very divisive” Overture 15 as proposing to amend our BCO to state regarding homosexuality, “the desire itself is disqualifying.”

Both the consensus proposal crafted by those invited by the Stated Clerk to a meeting and the proposal of those “not in the room” passed the Assembly and are now before the presbyteries for consideration.

II. Clarity from the Text

While some might commend the Stated Clerk for trying to bring consensus between the wings of the PCA regarding officer qualifications, the trouble here is how he mischaracterized Overture 15.

Later, in a Q&A portion at the very end of his presentation, the Stated Clerk described the issue as whether or not, “the same sex attraction itself is more heinous, so heinous that it is automatically disqualifying.” That is a surprising description of our intramural disagreement given there is currently no proposal to disqualify someone from office on the mere basis of experiencing unnatural lust.

Overture 15 would not declare the mere presence of homosexual desire to be disqualifying. While there may be a minority within the PCA who would bar anyone from office who confesses unnatural lust, overture 15 would not do that.*

Overture 15 is narrowly focused on barring from church office any man who describes, characterizes, or defines himself according to his sinful desire. It is regrettable the Stated Clerk has furthered the confusion on this proposal rather than providing clarity on it.

Others have noted much of the disunity in the PCA comes from misunderstanding one another; our Stated Clerk has an opportunity whenever he visits the congregations of the PCA to help us understand one another and to speak clearly and accurately about the issues.

When a “divisive” (to use TE Chapell’s word) proposal is mischaracterized, it exacerbates the division within the PCA. It is indeed important that the saints not only know what we stand for, but also understand accurately what is being proposed and debated at presbyteries in the coming months.

III. Call to Action

I do not assert TE Chapell intentionally mischaracterized Overture 15. To his credit, TE Chapell issued a blanket disclaimer and apologized if there was anything he said poorly.

I hope elders debating the overtures will take care to read the items before them in advance of the votes on BCO Amendments. Whether you vote for or against Overture 15 (Item 1), please do so on the basis of what it actually says.

In his address, the Stated Clerk encouraged people to read the AIC Report on Human Sexuality rather than believe the “folly and spit” on the internet. I likewise hope the elders considering Overture 15 (Item 1) will not simply listen to what they have heard about it or read about it on a random blog post, but will read its brief and humble text:

Men who describe themselves as homosexual, even those who describe themselves as homosexual and claim to practice celibacy by refraining from homosexual conduct, are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America.

---

A request for comment was made to TE Chapell. A response was not forthcoming by the time of publication. An article written by TE George Sayour includes comments from TE Chapell on this matter; it is available on PresbyterianPolity Blog.

*If my Covid-addled memory is working properly and I accurately recall, there was notably one elder at the 2021 General Assembly who argued in a floor speech in a way that could be construed that he personally favors prohibiting those who experience dishonorable passions from church office.