The rationale for the veto of Jane Adams Spahr’s receiving the Woman of Faith Award appears to be that her current ministry is not in keeping with the policies of the Presbyterian Church. Such a rationale fails in two significant ways:

1. It does not reflect an accurate understanding of her ministry
2. It is not based on a thorough knowledge of the policies of the church with regard to homosexuality.

The Ministry of Janie Spahr

Lets look at her ministry. She was called to serve as an Evangelist in a special ministry known as That All May Freely Serve — sponsored jointly two Presbyterian congregations — Westminster Presbyterian of Tiburon, CA and Downtown Presbyterian of Rochester, NY. Her ministry has been validated by her presbytery.

What is the nature of her ministry? While loyal to the Presbyterian Church, That All May Freely Serve strives to be a catalyst for constructive change in the church . Its program, as its name makes clear, is focused on educating the constituency of the church regarding the misunderstandings and prejudices which have resulted in legal barriers to the inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons in the ordained and employed leadership of the church. Through programs of education, dialogue, counseling and outreach this ministry seeks to foster true reconciliation in the church.

The Policies of the Church Regarding Homosexuality

The basic point of reference for policies of our church regarding homosexuality is the definitive guidance approved by the UPCUSA General Assembly in 1978. What is of course best remembered from that policy statement is its advice to the presbyteries that unrepentant homosexual practice does not accord with the requirements for ordination.

But in addition to its advice about ordination, the 1978 General Assembly also produced further policies regarding the church and homosexuality which are often ignored as in the current case. What were some of those additional policy statements? Consider these quotations taken from the text of the 190th General Assembly minutes.

"Persons who manifest homosexual behavior must be treated with the profound respect and pastoral tenderness due all people of God. There can be no place within the Christian faith for the response to homosexual persons of mingled contempt, hatred, and fear that is called homophobia.

"Homosexual persons are encompassed by the searching love of Christ. The church must turn from its fear and hatred to move toward the homosexual community in love and to welcome homosexual inquirers to its congregations. It should free them to be candid about their identity and convictions, and it should also share honestly and humbly with them in seeking the vision of God’s intention for the sexual dimensions of their lives.

"We of the 190th General Assembly (1978) realize that not all United Presbyterian can in conscience agree with our conclusions. Some are persuaded that there are forms of homosexual behavior that are not sinful and that persons who practice these forms can legitimately be ordained.

"This is wholly in keeping with the diversity of theological viewpoint and the pluralism of opinion that characterize the United Presbyterian Church. We are concerned not to stifle these diverging opinions and to encourage those who hold them to remain within the church. As Paul clearly teaches in Ephesians. 4: 1-16, as members of Christ’s body we desperately need one another. None of us is perfect. No opinion or decision is irreformable. Nor do we mean to close further study of homosexuality among the presbyteries and congregations. Quite the contrary, the action we recommend to the judicatories includes a firm direction to study this matter further, so that fear and hatred of homosexual persons may be healed and mission and ministry to homosexual persons strengthened and increased. The pluralism that can bring paralyzing weakness to the church when groups pursue their vision in isolation from one another can bring health and vigor when they practice pluralism-in-dialogue.,"

In addition to that strong counsel to the church, fourteen policy recommendations were also approved as guidance in the further consideration of the church’s relation to homosexuality. By and large those policy recommendations are today ignored by many in the church and are not well known even now in some offices of the General Assembly’s division charged with furthering the national ministries of the church.

What is the import of those policy recommendations? Essentially they call the church at every level to be in continued dialogue concerning the church’s relation to its gay and lesbian members; to engage in programs of education, counseling, and outreach both to its gay and lesbian members and to those members at risk of allowing fear and hatred pull them toward homophobia.

Conclusions

When the specifically validated ministry of Jane Adams Spahr is examined with honesty and when the full and complete set of policies of the church in relation to homosexuality are taken into consideration, it is impossible to claim that her ministry is not in keeping with the policies of the Presbyterian Church.

Quite the contrary, her ministry is deeply committed to programs of dialogue, education, counseling, and outreach to all persons in the church who struggle with the implications of homosexuality as a factor in the church’s life. It is a true ministry of reconciliation which takes as its hallmark the very policy instructions given to the church by the 1978 General Assembly — working to overcome homophobia in the church and society; enabling dialogue to take place concerning the role of gay and lesbian members; providing counseling and support for them in defining their identity as persons of devout faith. All these policies of the Presbyterian church are represented in the ministry of Jane Adams Spahr.

Finally

If the reference to Janie Spahr’s ministry not being in keeping with church policies refers to the recent constitutional change (Amendment B), it is difficult if not impossible to see the connection. She is not seeking to be ordained. She has been ordained for over 20 years and continues in a ministry validated by her presbytery. Is it then simply that she is among thousands of Presbyterians working to change the church’s policies? It would be interesting to poll the Presbyterian women who have received the Woman of Faith award in past years. It is quite likely that most if not all of them, including the two other 1999 nominees join Janie Spahr in believing that the current policy regarding the ordination of gays and lesbians needs to be changed.

But of course that should not be the issue. The only question here is the one which the selecting committee has already answered; that Jane Adams Spahr, as a Presbyterian woman truly reflects the highest standard of Christian devotion and discipleship and is surely worthy to receive the Woman of Faith Award.