1

THE RCA “CONSCIENCE CLAUSES”

From Rev. Tom Stark, East Lansing, Michigan

May, 2004

Dear Friends:

The proposal to the 2004 General Synod to delete the “conscience clauses” needs to be acted on with an accurate understanding of the history and intent of the clauses, and the implications of changes.

1. Moves toward opening the offices began with a forty-four page booklet (18 pages dealing with Scripture) to the 1958 General Synod, recommending that all offices be open to women but making clear “that in case the offices are open to women... each congregation and each consistory continues the responsibility of deciding whether the Spirit of God is calling anyone to an office.... No deliverance of General Synod ... will change the Reformed principle of church polity that the power of ordaining and installing rest in consistory and classis.” That booklet was referred to by many succeeding synods.

2. When the offices of elder and deacon were opened to women in 1972 the General Synod Executive Committee published in the Church Herald: “... bylaws, if these limit [these offices]... should be changed to be in accordance with The Government of the RCA ... [This] does not mean that a congregation must elect women to be elders and deacons.... a consistory/congregation may still determine by its own procedures which members are to be nominated. ... such nominations cannot be disallowed because a member is a female.” So by-laws limiting women’s election as elders or deacons have been illegal since 1972, and have no connection with the Conscience Clauses. And there is no basis for implying that congregations must elect women elders or deacons.

3. The Synod in 1973 said “In practice, the ordination of women will be adopted in some churches and not in others, depending on the interpretation of Scriptures and the judgment of the consistory and congregation as to what will most contribute to the upbuilding of the church.”

4. The 1979 General Synod, by a 54% secret ballot, upheld the Judicial Business Commission ruling that ordinations of women ministers which had been appealed should be sustained. In the debate Dr. Elton Eenigenberg from Western Seminary, a frequent Parliamentarian at General Synod, argued that the report should be upheld, allowing those classes which wished to ordain women ministers to do so, and the others which did not wish to do so would not have to.

1

5. After the 1979 action some classes voted not to receive ordained women ministers, or license or ordain women candidates. A full page ad of protest was published in the Church Herald, signed by two past Presidents of General Synod and others from across the denomination, including those who favored and opposed the ordination of women as ministers of the Word, arguing that judicial action had subverted the requirement that the Book of Church Order be amended.

1

6.. Before the 1979 judicial action a ruling in the Presbyterian Church USA had held that ministers, elders, and seminary students, even if willing to serve with ordained women, could not be ordained and installed unless they agreed with the ordination of women, and would participate in such ordinations.

7. In the spring of 1980 the General Synod Executive Committee urged the Synod: “To call for careful avoidance of pressure which might lead either one who supports or one who opposes the action permitting the ordination of women to the office of minister of the Word to offend against his or her conscience, and to urge that no member of the church be penalized for conscientious objection to, or support of, the ordination of women”. This language became the heart of the “Conscience Clause.”

8. The lack of theological consensus, continued challenge to the legality of women serving as ministers of the Word, the prospect of women being unsure if they could be considered as candidates for licensure, ordination or transfer, and the concern about individuals being pressured to take actions against their consciences, as guided by Scripture, led to the “Proposal to Maintain Peace in Diversity Concerning Women In Church Offices”, adopted unanimously by the advisory committee at Synod, with scarcely any dissent on the floor, and then by two-thirds of the RCA classes, including a majority of the classes in every regional synod.

9.The “Conscience Clause” is a package amendment to four different places in the Book of Church Order, voted on as one amendment. The first section made clear that ministers of the Word are “men and women”, and other parts guaranteed that women would have the right to be enrolled, licensed, ordained and transferred, thus ending any “collective conscience” for the classis.

10 The proposed amendment this year only removes 3 of the 4 parts of the package, not the first section providing that ministers are “men and women”.

11. This year’s GSC report includes a quotation from the 1998 report from the Commission on Church Order (actually the Commission on Theology), without noting that it was not adopted by the General Synod. That report intended to set the stage for a “purge,” by alleging that no one can respect a women in office if they would not participate in her ordination, and therefore that the offending members should be examined by the classis or leave the RCA. They were happy to accept the Conscience Clause where it guaranteed the right of women to be ministers in all classes, but were willing to make the ordination of women a test of whether a person can remain in the RCA. (If consistently applied it would lead to breaking fellowship with denominations in the National Council of Churches and the World Council of Churches, and with many of our mission partners overseas, rather than being a community which walks in peace as Christians who do not share all the same scriptural interpretations.)

  1. When the Commission on Church Order proposed eliminating 3 of the 4 clauses, to

the Synod of 2002, they said, however: “Removing the clauses changes nothing in ordination practice. It would not compel participation in the ordination of any particular candidate. It would not reopen the question of women in office. It would continue present practice. . . .” (That amendment fell short by three classes, not one, as this year’s GSC report says.) Since the 2002 Synod adopted the 2002 Commission on Church Order report, thus rejecting by inference the 1998 effort to have all who have scriptural objections justify themselves to the classis or leave, I would like to assume that this year’s recommendation from the General Synod Council is consistent with the 2002 Commission on Church Order view, especially since the GSC report quotes the 2002 statement above. But then they also quote the 1998 Commission of Theology report, which was rejected by the 1998 Synod, and say the Commission for Women agrees with that view.

13. A proposal last year for an “alternate route” for women whose pastors, consistories, or classis object to women in office requires comment. The conscience clauses removed the “collective conscience” option for a classis, which clearly existed before l980. Now classes must enroll, examine, license and ordain. That is a non-issue, and any failures should be challenged on the basis of the conscience clauses themselves. Similarly, candidates for the ministry are recommended to classis by a consistory. The pastor’s approval is not required. That is also a non-issue. As to a consistory- I can see no way that a consistory is obligated to recommend a woman candidate if the majority is not scripturally convinced, not because of the conscience clause, but because of the historical record above (1, 2, and 3).