Inclusivity and the Challenge of Process

 Friends, 

 

Thanks to the nomination of some of our members, I was invited to spend last week at the Chautauqua Institute as the chaplain and a guest at the Presbyterian House. The Presbyterian House is one of several faith houses at Chautauqua and the one with the absolute best location. And, apparently, they are the only house to serve all three meals a day to their guests – all of which made me very happy. The reason I say they have the best location is because the Presbyterian House is right across the sidewalk from the Amphitheater, which is the main meeting space for the institute, hosting daily worship services, plenary speakers, and lots of music. From the upper porch of the Presbyterian House I was able to listen to a jazz concert, the symphony and the marvelous choir, and some of the plenary speakers – from a wicker rocking chair with a book in hand. It was multi-tasking at its best! 

 

During that same time, the 226^th General Assembly was taking place in Salt Lake City, UT. This year’s GA meeting was a hybrid of virtual meetings for the committees at work, then in person meetings for the gathered assembly.  Apparently that went well enough to where they voted to follow the same procedure in 2026, when the GA gathers again in Milwaukee. Today, I will highlight a couple of important decisions that were made (or not made) during the meeting. Some other time I’ll introduce some of the folks who were voted into office. 

 

A significant portion of the assembled time went to “The Olympia Overture.” This was a two-part overture from the Olympia Presbytery to amend our Book of Order (the policy portion of our constitution). The first part was applied to a section entitled “Foundation of Presbyterian Policy” that currently reads, “In Christ, by the power of the Spirit, God unites persons through baptism regardless of race, ethnicity, age, sex, disability, geography, or theological conviction” (F-1.0403). The overture was to amend the language to include sexual orientation and gender identity among the categories against which the Church will not discriminate. That part of the overture passed handily with little discussion, 389-24. The content of this amended section was the basis of the second part of the Overture. 

 

The second part of the Olympia Overture brought more debate and a closer vote. It was a change to the portion of our Book of Order entitled, “The Form of Government” which addresses ordination. In particular, this part of the Overture addresses a section (G. 2.0104b) that instructs ordaining bodies – the local congregation for deacons and elders; the presbytery for ministers – with regard to what they can or cannot explore during the ordination process. The Overture was to insert the amended “principles of representation and participation” (addressed by the first part of the Overture) into this portion of guidance, to ensure that ordaining groups do not discriminate against ordination candidates on the bases of sexual orientation and gender identity. The Overture was amended slightly to include the church’s historic commitment to “freedom of conscience.” The amended overture passed, 297-130. Now, both parts of the Overture will return to each Presbytery for ratification, requiring a simple majority to take effect. 

 

I know this looks like lots of technical polity gibberish, but the approval of this Overture is a big step forward in the church’s attempt to be more inclusive. In particular, many of our non-binary and trans siblings have worked hard to see this happen. The part about instructing ordaining bodies was more controversial, partly because once upon a time the Book of Order tried to instruct ordaining bodies not to include LGBTQ candidates, and many of us found that to be intrusive on our own discernment process. So, the pushback – as far as I can tell as someone not in the meeting – seemed less about whether or not to be inclusive and more about whether or not to intrude on the discernment process of churches and presbyteries for ordination.  

 

Another Overture, that was initially passed, then reconsidered, then withdrawn, was an Overture to divest from the fossil fuel industry altogether. Instead, the General Assembly opted for a different motion, which calls for some immediate divestment, but allows for some continued engagement on behalf of the Presbyterian Committee on Mission Responsibility through Investment (MRTI). You can read a detailed report here.

 

My very distant outsider perspective: In both cases, it seems that the General Assembly is trying to be both forward-thinking and yet wise to the diverse paths that “moving forward” might take. 

 

Final thought: My favorite report from the GA was that during one period of waiting for a vote result to be tallied and reported, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church took to the floor of the Assembly Hall and did “The Electric Slide.” 

 

Dance on, friends,

Mark of St. Mark