It is with much grief and sorrow that we write this letter to the public regarding the moral and spiritual state of the mainline, historic Presbyterian Church (USA). The Journal News reported that on Sunday, November 13, 2005 a “Gay Minister (was) ordained in Dobbs Ferry.” Many in the readership of the Journal News must be asking, “How can this be?”

For men and women to be ordained in the Presbyterian Church (USA) they must take specific vows professing belief that Jesus is their Lord and Savior and that they will live under the authority of Scripture. Two of the questions which must be answered in the affirmative include “Do you accept the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be, by the Holy Spirit, the unique and authoritative witness to Jesus Christ in the Church universal, and God’s Word to you?” and “Will you fulfill your office in obedience to Jesus Christ, under the authority of Scripture, and be continually guided by our confessions?” Many in the Presbytery of Hudson River, the governing body that ordained the gay pastor, have chosen to either blatantly defy these vows or have convinced themselves the vows mean something different from what they say.

So, “How can this be?” The interim executive presbyter was quoted as saying, “It gives me hope that the presbytery of which we are part of will again someday be at the vanguard of social issues.” We at Suffern Presbyterian Church contend the opposite has now occurred. Our presbytery has become conformist to the values of secular culture. Instead of the church “transforming culture” as the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr called for, the church has now been “deformed” by modern, relativistic thinking.

Presbyterians vow to follow Scripture as their authority for all matters of faith and personal life style (practice). However, some “progressive” Presbyterians have attempted to change the historic, plain meaning of Scripture when it comes to Biblical prohibitions against homosexual relationships. For 3500 years, since Moses gave God’s Law to the world, homosexual practice has been deemed sin. But in the last 25 years some “progressive” theologians have stated that modern homosexuality was unknown to the ancient world and that the Bible really does not speak to the idea of today’s “committed” homosexual relationships. This is not true. Both traditional and “progressive” pastors (and rabbis) today love to reference the Mosaic Law in Leviticus 19:18 “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” But is it not uncanny that the contextual injunctions in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 are ignored: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman, it is an abomination, ” and “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination…”  These passages are quite clear about the “practice” of homosexual sex- it is prohibited. While Leviticus does not address the origins of the homosexual orientation nor the elements of a “committed” relationship, the prohibition stands for the practice of homosexual sexual relations, just as it does for incest (18:9), pedophilia (18:10), bestiality (18:23), adultery (20:10), theft (19:11), hatred (19:17), and mistreatment of the poor (19:13). If one argues that homosexual practice is a “right” and that it is a matter of “justice” that gays should be ordained, that same logic would imply that adulterers, thieves, child molesters, oppressors of the poor… should likewise be granted church leadership status. Some “progressives” argue that because many Christians today do not abide by Leviticus 19:19, a prohibition against mixing breeds of cattle, different seeds in a field, or fabrics in a garment, then the prohibition against homosexuality in 18:22 or 20:13 should not be observed either.  Though we may not understand the immediate contextual reason for the Israelites living in the desert 3500 years ago to not mix these things in the Promised Land (perhaps it was for symbolic reasons to not “mix” with the pagan nations surrounding them), we do understand the reason for 18:29 “Do not profane your daughter by making her a prostitute...”  

The “sin of Sodom” is also a Biblical passage often referenced to prohibit homosexual relations. The English word ‘sodomy’ comes from Genesis 19 where God destroys the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because “their sin is very grave,” (18:20). The men of Sodom demanded to have sexual relations with the male guests that Lot had taken into his home for the night. Some argue that the sin of Sodom was not homosexuality but “inhospitality” towards the strangers who were guests in Lot’s home or that the attempted “sexual violence” (rape) against the male guests was the sin. Both of these arguments are true, but neither are exclusive. The New Testament book of Jude (7) speaks of God’s punishment of eternal fire on Sodom and Gomorrah because “they gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion.”

Some argue that because Jesus never mentioned that homosexual practice is sin, then it is not. This applied logic of arguing from silence is baffling. Jesus never mentioned rape, incest, or pedophilia. Does that justify these acts? The Apostle Paul though, addresses the issue quite specifically. Romans 1:18 says “The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.” These “unrighteous” people “become futile in their thinking” (vs. 21) and “Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,” (vs. 24). Paul goes on to say that “For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those contrary to nature and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men…”  Clearly the “act” of homosexual practice is considered sinful. Some argue that Paul is talking about idolatry here (vs. 25). He is. Paul is saying that those who do not acknowledge God become idolaters and idolaters then morally become corrupt (see 29-32). The practice of idolatry in the Old Testament (Tanach) was often accompanied by gross sexual immorality and even child sacrifice.

Homosexuality is also directly addressed in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 where Paul says, “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” Some argue that the Biblical Greek word for “men who practice homosexuality” addresses only male prostitutes, not homosexuals living in committed relationships. Two words are actually used, the first one, malachoi, means “soft ones,” or “effeminate ones,” or “male prostitutes.” The word certainly includes the idea of men and boy prostitutes (catamites) but it also refers to the whole notion of men who willingly submit their bodies to homosexual acts. The second word, arsenokoites, simply means “a man who has sex with a man.” The Apostle Paul’s words are quite clear here, such “will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

Lastly, in the New Testament, the Apostle Paul writes to Timothy about false teachers who do not understand the Law. Paul states in 1 Timothy 1:8-11 that the Law is not so much for “the just” person but for the “lawless and disobedient, for the unholy and profane, those who strike their fathers and mothers, murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers (i.e.slave traders), liars, perjurers and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine…” The purpose of Biblical Law is to expose sin and give people the opportunity to flee from it. If one concludes that the Bible does not teach that homosexual practice is sin then that person needs to be prepared to conclude that slave trading and murder aren’t either. 

In 1978 New York City Presbytery asked the national church (The General Assembly) if a Presbytery may ordain a homosexual. Our denomination studied the issue thoroughly, including the Biblical evidence above and church historical traditions, and ruled that “unrepentant, practicing homosexuals” may not be ordained. They concluded that our Constitution- the Book of Confessions (mostly Reformation era expositions of Scripture) and the Book of Order (rules and discipline), and Christian tradition all say that homosexual practice is sin therefore a practicing homosexual (not a celibate one) may not be ordained.  Each succeeding year, though, presbyteries like Hudson River made continual attempts to have the ruling changed. Because of these attempts, in 1996 the General Assembly voted to specifically amend the Constitution and give finality to the issue. The Constitution now reads, "Those who are called to office in the church are to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church. Among these standards is the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness. Persons refusing to repent of any self-acknowledged practice which the confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and Sacrament." 

Hudson River Presbytery, by approving the ordination of a gay man, has chosen to revile the Scriptures, the Constitution of its own denomination, and over three millennia of Judeo/Christian moral teaching. Rather than scoff at us, Suffern Presbyterian Church in Suffern, NY asks Rockland and Westchester county residents to please pray for our presbytery and the whole denomination, that we will “reform” again back to our Biblical moorings. We ask also that no one construe the above to justify hatred towards or mistreatment of homosexuals. No, we love them and they are welcome in our church just as any other sinner is (and we are all sinners). However, the standards for church leadership are high. We cannot compromise these standards.

Written by Dr. Allen V. Kemp, November 15, 2005