Well, good news. The assembly defeated the attempt to delete G-6.106b (The Fidelty in Marriage and Chastiy in Singleness standard). It was soundly defeated by at least 70% (don't remember the exact number. Recommdation 6 of the PUP stated that we should not eliminated the standard (at least this year). So the main agrument on the floor was that we should trust each other and not vote to change the standards. I am so tired of the trust agrument (see several blogs below).
Here is PUP report section D. (as amended on the floor):
d. Whether the examination and ordination and installation decision comply with the constitution of the PCUSA, and whether the ordaining/installing body has conducted its examination reasonably, responsibly, prayerfully, and deliberately in deciding to ordain a candidate for church office is subject to review by higher governing bodies.
I will tell you that my prayer this whole week is that God will show us the way and He would work in what seemed like impossible circumstances. I think that amendment and lack of opposition to it might be God's way through this General Assembly. Know we juswt have to proclaim louder Jesus and the Truth. During the dicussion and vote during the PUP report--my particularly prayer was that God would reveal His glory.
Thank you Jesus for showing us the way of repentence. Thank you for calling me to follow you even onto death (so that I might live in you). Lord, help me to die more each day to myself. More of you, less of me. More of you, less or me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
There is a way undo the action on PUP#3. If one lonely commissioner can be found who is in remorse for having voted yes on the PUP Report, that person could wait to the end of business on the last day and make a motion to reconsider. At that point many of those who had voted yes will left to catch a plane, etc. Certainly, the ML, TAMFS crowd will not be hanging to organize to defeat a motion to reconsider. Think about. Go find a remorseful commissioner. It only takes one.
This tactic was actually about fifteen or so years ago.
Technically yes, but that really isn't upright. The reality is I don't think Rec. 5 changes anything--regardless of what the press says (or MLP/TAMFS). I think the wording with the amendment is explict and binds the presbyteries from doing anything contrary to the constitution.
Post a Comment