Appeal Decision

Presbyterian Synod Judicial Commission Reverses Decision Granting Minister Right to Officiate Marriage Ceremonies for Same-Sex Couples

Rev. Spahr commented on the ruling, saying, “I am deeply saddened that our church has chosen not to recognize the loving relationships of members of its own family.” Rev. Spahr continued, “These couples and many like them have found a sacred trust in their love for each other; this reversal of the Presbytery’s decision promotes a belief that somehow this love is less than valid.” Spahr said, “The church’s pervasive attitude of prejudice promotes violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.”

Decision denies same-sex couples equal marriage rights within the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), click for more detail of Synod decision

Below the first rainbow bar is the web spinner's transcription of the
Redwoods PJC DECISION & FINDINGS.
The second rainbow bar marks the end of the transcription.
Any transcription errors are the responsibility of the web spinner

Thursday photos Friday photos

An Adobe Acrobat copy of the DECISION & FINDINGS as released by the PJC

FINDINGS 1ST CHARGE 2ND CHARGE CONCLUDING AFFIRMATION MINORITY REPORT

End of the page

Presbyterian Church USA Through the Presbytery of the Redwoods		) )	Case 2004 Concerning "Minister B"
	Complainant,	)
Vs.		)	Trial Date: March 2, 2006
		)
The Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr		)	DECISION
	Accused,	)
		)

The Permanent Judicial Commission of the Redwoods Presbytery, having conducted a trial in the above proceeding, and having deliberated and voted in accord with Section D-11.0403 of the Book of Order, reports its decision as follows:

The issue before this commission is: How does the constitution - specifically the Book of Order (Sec. G-6.0108 and Sec. W-4.9001), the Authoritative Interpretation of 1991/1993 (hereafter AI), and the Benton Case - apply to the charges against the Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr, (hereafter Spahr)?

FINDINGS
1. Section W-4.9001 is a definition, not a directive. We note that its application to the performance of marriage ceremonies for couples of the same sex has been disputed, at the highest levels of polity, for 15 years - i.e. at least since the request for an interpretation made in 1991 to the Advisory Committee on the Constitution. The issue remains unsettled because the authors of the AI, having available a lexicon in the preface to the Book of Order, chose to say that such marriages "would not be proper" rather than use mandatory language. The AI establishes the performance of same sex marriages as a matter of propriety. We find that neither the AI or the Benton Case prohibit the performance of such marriages by ministers of the Word and Sacrament. Therefore we find that no offense has been committed within the meaning of Sec. D-2.0203(b).

2. Section G-6.0108 describes the scope of freedom of conscience within boundaries. The subject of same sex marriage has not been shown to be outside of, or contrary to, the essentials of the Reformed faith as understood by Presbytery of the Redwoods. Conscience is subordinate to constitutional mandates and to essentials of the Reformed faith, but conscience takes precedence over propriety. We find that Spahr was acting within her right of conscience in performing marriage ceremonies for same sex couples. We also find that the accused acted within the normative standards of Redwoods Presbytery, faithfully reporting to it her activities at reasonable intervals.

Concluding affirmation
We affirm that the fundamental message of the Scriptures and Confessions is the proclamation of the Good News of God's love for all people. It is a message of inclusiveness, reconciliation, and the breaking down of barriers that separate humans from each other, and that this proclamation has primacy in the conduct of the Church.

Minority Report:

The issue before this commission is, How does the constitution - specifically the Book of Order Sec W4.9001 and G6.01008b and the Benton Case - apply to this case?

The language in W4.9001 states in part, "For Christian's (sic.), marriage is a covenant through which a man and a woman are called to live out together before God their lives of discipleship".

It follows that a minister, "having pledged in ordination vows to be governed by our church's polity and abide by its discipline" is prohibited from performing a marriage between two persons of the same sex.

The accused has stated that she has performed marriages of same sex couples since 1972. I agree with the prosecution that the beliefs of the accused are to be respected but that the actions of the accused must still be constrained by what is prohibited by the constitution.

s/ Elder Janet Moor
March 3, 2006

By:
s/Elder Ray Alden, Moderator		s/The Rev. Douglas Huneke, Clerk

s/The Rev. Lynda Burris		s/The Rev. Robert Jones

s/Elder Dee Schilling		s/Elder Michael Stone

March 3, 2006