Assembly minute 03.12.04 as varied by ASC minute 03.69 (and formerly known as Resolution 84)¹ begins by taking note of theological expressions made at the Ninth Assembly, Adelaide, 2000 (Assembly minute 00.25.03), namely:-

"(a) we celebrate that the Church’s faith is in the triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and that the Church’s work and unity are built upon the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ;
(b) we affirm the authority of the Scriptures as defined in the Basis of Union, acknowledging that within the Church there is a range of views on questions of Biblical interpretation on various matters of Christian faith and practice;
(c) we affirm we are bound together by Christ, and because we love the Uniting Church as part of the one holy catholic and apostolic church we will continue to work together in our diversity as servants of the living God."[03.12.04.1 (a)-(c)]

The decision of the Assembly is then made in light of  this note, being cognisant of church doctrines concerning faith in the triune God, the authority of the Scriptures, and the way in which we understand Christ and the Church.  To interpret what the Church is saying at this point, it will serve us well to consider each of the theological references and their implications.

The first statement is foundational, that "we celebrate that the Church’s faith is in the triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and that the Church’s work and unity are built upon the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ."  Now matter what else one may believe, to be of the Uniting Church in Australia is summed up in this statement.  It is an orthodox confession of the Church’s faith.  It serves to remind us of our faith in God and the working out of that faith in unity, building on "the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ."  It is our faith and Christ’s "person and work" that we celebrate.  It is our faith and Christ’s "person and work" that builds unity.  This does not say that we have no work to do, and an understanding of what we must do or how we must act to build unity, is given in the third statement.  We will consider this point later.  At this point it is essential to note that, as Christians, our living in faith builds upon the work of Christ.  We do that by making Christ known in the world through faith, hope and love.

The second statement is two fold and lists authoritative reasons for our understanding of how we interpret faith through received traditions.  It states that "we affirm the authority of the Scriptures as defined in the Basis of Union, acknowledging that within the Church there is a range of views on questions of Biblical interpretation on various matters of Christian faith and practice".  Reference to the Basis of Union defines how we are to interpret Scripture in faith and practice.

"The Uniting Church continues to learn of the teaching of the Holy Scriptures in the obedience and freedom of faith, and in the power of the promised gift of the Holy Spirit, from the witness of the Reformers as expressed in various ways in the Scots Confession of Faith (1560), the Heidelberg Catechism (1563), the Westminster Confession of Faith (1647), and the Savoy Declaration (1658). In like manner the Uniting Church will listen to the preaching of John Wesley in his Forty-Four Sermons (1793)."  [Basis of Union, para. 10] 

In so doing, the Uniting Church recognises that our received traditions are diverse.  In fact, they are even theologically disparate, for the theological content of the five, received witnesses does not represent a harmonised faith.  Each belongs to a particular community of faith, at points in our history spanning the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. These witnesses are received in diversity, so that "Christ’s people may again and again be reminded of the grace which justifies them through faith, of the centrality of the person and work of Christ the justifier, and of the need for a constant appeal to Holy Scripture." [Basis of Union, Para. 10]  In this is the Protestant principle of justification through faith, alone, which is to be our guide in appeal to Scripture. The Basis of Union does not point us to the letter of the received traditions but to the processes that gave them birth: sola scriptura- by Scripture alone is revealed the solus Christus, the sole saviour Christ.  Other parts of the Basis of Union give guidance as to how we are the make appeal to Scripture. 

"The Uniting Church acknowledges that God has never left the Church without faithful and scholarly interpreters of Scripture, or without those who have reflected deeply upon, and acted trustingly in obedience to, God's living Word. In particular the Uniting Church enters into the inheritance of literary, historical and scientific enquiry which has characterised recent centuries, and gives thanks for the knowledge of God's ways with humanity which are open to an informed faith." (Basis of Union Para 11)

Trusting obedience to God’s living Word as recorded in Scripture is a distinct, twentieth century approach that derives from the dialectical theology of Karl Barth, Brunner, Thurneysen and Gogarten and guards against extremes of individualism, imperialism, militarism and contempt for foreigners and strangers that emerged in modern, post-liberal European communities.  In particular, it represents "Christ against culture", especially the cultural particularities of a "Christ of culture" represented in fascism and Nazi Germany and xenophobic ideologies of racial purity, anti-Semitism and homophobia that sought to deny human diversity or to conform it to their own image.  The Scriptures convey a voice of judgment from outside of culture.  However, the Basis of Union does not leave us there, it also acknowledges the tradition of "literary, historical and scientific enquiry which has characterised recent centuries, and gives thanks for the knowledge of God's ways with humanity which are open to an informed faith." (Basis of Union Para 11)  This introduces a paradox, in that literary, historical and scientific enquiry has also revealed Scripture to be culturally determined,  in that they have a cultural context both within the texts and outside of it.  Again, the Basis of Union does not point us to the letter of the received traditions but to the processes that gave them birth.  Deep reflection and reason play a part, oriented on Scripture from which the living Word of God is made known.  

The third theological statement to be considered, is that "we affirm we are bound together by Christ, and because we love the Uniting Church as part of the one holy catholic and apostolic church we will continue to work together in our diversity as servants of the living God."  Unity is defined as being "bound by Christ" and the language of ‘love’ and ‘service’ recalls the words of the Basis of Union, which states that "Baptism into Christ’s body initiates people into Christ’s life and mission in the world, so that they are united in one fellowship of love, service, suffering and joy, in one family of the Father of all in heaven and earth, and in the power of the one Spirit." [Basis of Union, para. 7]  As noted above, this interprets Christian action or practice in terms of love and service.  Further, drawing on the Basis of Union, paragraph 7, it is the "power of the one Spirit" active in our lives through faith and baptism that defines membership, participation and unity.  The Uniting Church recognises no distinctions of action or person other than to have faith such that we work together in love and service as one Body.  

The Essential Decision
The second part of R84 states the following:

"2.  Noting that
(i) within the Church people of faith have wrestled with integrity to interpret Scripture in relation to the issue of Christian sexual ethics and have on some issues come to mutually exclusive positions;
(ii) membership of the Uniting Church is open to all persons subject only to the guidance of the Basis of Union, the Constitution, the Regulations and policies of the Assembly,
call upon members of the Church to seek to live together in peace as people of faith, notwithstanding differing views in the matter of same gender relationships." [03.12.04.2 (i)-(ii)]

R84 is not a compromise position, it is the "bottom line" for the Church, in accord with principles of justification through faith.  Those who struggle to live with diversity truly struggle to be Christian in the same way that we all do.  Christ confronts our very selves, confronting even our prejudices, differences and cultural restraints, as we try to embrace others in love, with mercy and wisdom.  We are all "sinners", all called into judgment yet redeemed through Christ.  He is the one who stands outside our safe-places,  outside our barriers of distinction, calling us to him in solidarity.  As "one in Christ" we are a diverse people.  It cannot be any other way without denying human diversity.  The very fact that the drafting of R84 involved a lengthy period of consultation with Congress, migrant ethnic churches, presbyteries, Evangelical Members of the Uniting Church and Uniting Network, testifies to that diversity. 

Through R84, the Church upholds the Gospel and maintains its position, testifying to inclusive teaching and to an inclusive Christ. Changing any doctrine to bar or proscribe gay and lesbian membership and participation (and let us not disguise the fact, this is what some, reactionary, evangelical factions want to do) impacts upon other doctrines of the Church, especially those pertaining to faith in the triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the Word of God, the person and work of Jesus Christ, Creation, human nature, the nature of the Church and ministry (mission), fellowship, "justification by faith alone", and the sacraments of  Baptism and Communion.  If the Church decided to erect barriers of distinction based on sexuality, such that heterosexual love is standardised, as in the moral formula "celibacy in singleness and fidelity in marriage (cisafim)" or that it is a sin to love a person of the same gender, we would have ceased to be the Church brought into being at Union, hearing Christ as the one Word of God through faith.

The Assembly Standing Committee Resolution
In upholding the tenor of Assembly minute 03.12.04, The Assembly Standing Committee decision to amend some parts of R84 (ASC minute 03.96), began by noting the following from the Basis of Union:-

"The Assembly Standing Committee joyfully acknowledges that:
"The Church as the fellowship of the Holy Spirit confesses Jesus as Lord over its own life; it also confesses that Jesus is Head over all things, the beginning of a new creation, of a new humanity." (Basis of Union, para. 3)
We further gratefully acknowledge that:
"in his own strange way Christ constitutes, rules and renews [us] as his Church."
(Basis of Union, para. 4)

In these statements the ASC stresses the centrality of Christ as the one who brings Christian fellowship into being and it defines that fellowship as a "new creation", in fact, as a "new humanity" over which Christ "rules". (Basis of Union, paras. 3 & 4)  Notably, the Basis of Union describes the new creation as "a new order of righteousness and love." Further reading of Paragraph 3 of the Basis of Union reveals the following  words:


It seems incongruous to believe that the Church is one in Christ Jesus through faith and yet seek to erect barriers of distinction based on sexuality and gender relationships.  It is as much out of place as attempts in earlier times to erect barriers of distinction based on race, ethnicity, social status or gender.  The Church is wise in not deciding to erect barriers of distinction, for such an action would reduce the reign of God through Christ by erecting a superior rule: that heterosexual gender relationships determine membership, participation and right to leadership.  That would negate the belief in a new humanity, a new creation ruled by Christ, and divide the Body of Christ on a false dichotomy of heterosexual - homosexual relationships and practice.  Indeed, it does more than that, it limits the power and grace of God, by subordinating it to a moral principle.  In so doing, it diminishes God. 

In summary, R84 is theologically consistent with the Basis of Union and its stated theologies of grace.  Barriers of distinction are not erected to limit or proscribe the membership and participation of homosexual persons, as that act would negate or contradict the Church’s witness to universal grace and a fellowship of reconciliation. 

Holding Strongly to an Inclusive Church
The decisions of the 10th Assembly in relation to Membership and Ministry (Assembly minute 03.12.04), are inclusive, leaving no one out.  There are no barriers of distinction imposed on membership and no barriers to participation are impose except those that apply under guidance of the Basis of Union, the Constitution, the Regulations and the policies of the Assembly.  There are no changes made in Church  policy or polity.  The situation is exactly the same as it was before we went into the Assembly.  The status quo was upheld by a great majority.  There are no grounds to exclude people on the basis of sexual orientation or practice.  In fact, it is significant that the Church no longer speaks within its resolutions in terms of ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘practice’ but speaks in holistic terms of human sexuality. The change in language makes a decisive step forward in the way in which the Church speaks of sexuality.  It speaks in terms of grace and faith and of a of Christ the justifier, and of the need for a constant appeal to Holy Scripture guided by the Protestant principle of justification through faith, alone.  No wedge is driven between the person and sexual practice.  Presbyteries still have to consider every applicant and placement on an individual basis, and must take into account a wide variety of factors including how a person expresses their sexuality.  This decision is wholly consistent with previous determinations, dating from 1982, namely those of the Assembly Standing Committee recorded as minutes 82.12, 87.46 and 94.78.3.   These decisions were later ratified by the 8th Assembly, in resolution 97.31.15(e).

· to affirm the joys and responsibilities of God's good gift of sexuality;
· to reject judgmental attitudes in sexual ethics and witness to the renewing grace of  God in this as in all areas of human behaviour;
· to recognise the importance of responsible sexual behaviour and that all practices of sexuality which are exploitative and demeaning are unacceptable and contradict
     God’s purposes for us;
· to acknowledge the diversity of human relationships in which Uniting Church members are involved and the different Biblical, theological, ethnic and cultural responses of groups within the Church to these relationships;
[Assembly minute 97.31.5 - 97.31.08(b)]

Where some people have previously sought to wall themselves inside protective barriers of discrimination, to bar participation of homosexual persons and to censure those who welcome them, the Assembly has not permitted those actions to proceed into Church policy.

Where some parts of the church have previously decided to erect barriers based on sexuality, in an attempt to restrict membership and / or ordination, placement, practice and participation, those decisions are now at variance with the Assembly decision.  Any prior attempts to restrict membership and ministry are invalid, as the Assembly decisions have authority in those areas.  Presbyteries are still free to decide on matters of candidature, ordination and placement on a case by case basis, however.

The Church has no doctrinal position with respect to restricting membership and participation of homosexual persons in the Church. By providing for guidance in how to conduct discussions on contentious issues, the Church is seeking compliance with its policies on vilification and harassment.  Again, previous decisions of the Church are being implemented with care.  Where it seeks legal advice prior to advising the councils of the Church on matters of  law relating to anti discrimination and anti vilification legislation, the Church is exercising appropriate pastoral care. 

Since the 8th Assembly (Perth 1997), questions of membership, participation and leadership have been continually raised by some evangelical members of the Church.  Few of our churches are experienced as safe places for homosexual persons.  Gay and lesbian ministers and those who support them have experienced threats of restriction, serial harassment and even vilification.  Misleading information has been promoted and doubt has been cast upon what the Church has said or resolved.  The position is now made clearer: the Church will address discrimination, denial of equal opportunity, and acts of vilification and harassment  The role of presbyteries in relation to selection of candidates for ministry or in the placement of ministers will be defined.  People will be given guidance on how to discuss contentious issues so that discrimination, vilification and harassment does not occur.  The status quo will be well defined, hopefully.  Setting guidelines for discussing contentious issues may mean that new or revived discussion may take place.  Those who have resisted consideration of contentious issues or those who were not given an opportunity to discuss contentious issues, may begin to do so.  In fact, the process of consultation that lead to the drafting of the proposals ,brought to the Tenth Assembly, and the consultations that took place during December 2003 and January 2004, have begun the process of discussion again. 

A few problems exist, however, and careful planing will be needed to avoid those.  In holding to the status quo we are still using the language of  former resolutions, even that which has proven to be problematic previously.  A case in point is resolution 98.78.3, where it speaks of the manner in which a person's "sexuality is expressed" as a possible consideration to be taken into account during the process of deciding the suitability or otherwise of approving an applicant or candidate for ordination.  This language dates from the time of the ASC resolution in 1982, that attempted to have abusive and self destructive behaviours considered, that is, how a person’s "sexuality is expressed", with concern being for due regard for the quality of relationships that a person holds. 

Others have interpreted these words to mean something quite differently.  For some, the phrase, "the manner in which an applicant's or candidate's sexuality is expressed" has become an euphemism under which prejudices against homosexual persons, single persons and women are subsumed. The concern has been, "is homosexuality expressed?"  It is unfortunate that where the concern is for ethical standards in sexual and personal relationships, the wording can be applied prejudicially to homosexual persons per se.  The original intent is not necessarily carried by the wording and is so broad that it raises wide scope for prejudicial treatment, for example, where, stereotypes are applied to what constitutes appropriate "expression" of sexuality.  It would have suited the Church far better if the collective wisdom of the Assembly or the ASC had steered as around this obstacle by improving the wording.  Of course presbyteries have the right to apply what ever standards they wish, provided that it is done on a "case by case" basis, with no rules being set that counter the Assemblies policies on membership. 

The remaining contentious issues are now, as they were immediately following the 8th Assembly, those that relate to faith, sexuality and same sex relationships.  Gone is confusion about what the Church says about membership, for now it is reiterated clearly that homosexual members have the same status, function and responsibilities as heterosexual members.  Sexuality is named as God’s good gift; judgmentalism stands rejected; sexual ethics are spoken of in terms of grace, joys and responsibilities, and human relationships that are not exploitative or demeaning.  There is a commitment to diversity in human relationships, with different Biblical, theological, ethical and cultural responses to those relationships being acknowledged.  It remains now for the Church to find a way of celebrating all human relationships without subsuming them all to a presumed heterosexuality, so that the theological diversity that admits people into fellowship through faith, also expresses itself in diverse forms of celebration.  Gay and lesbian members of the Church need to have their relationships celebrated in love, equally as their heterosexual brothers and sisters enjoy. 

The Assembly has adopted ethical standards in determining "how a person expresses their sexuality", especially those of the 8th Assembly (Assembly minute 97.31.05 - 97.31.08(b)) which are mentioned above.  When taken with the theological affirmations made in 03.12.04.1 (a)-(c), we have sufficient basis for building an inclusive church: "a body in which the diverse gifts of all its members are used for the building up of the whole, an instrument through which Christ may work and bear witness to himself.." (Basis of Union, para. 3)  This information ought to be given to presbyteries lest they lose the way.

©  Welwood L. Anderson
Friends of Unity
24 February, 2004.
Notes: 
1. In discussions immediately after the 10th Assembly, before minutes had been published, the decision on proposal 84 was commonly referred to as "resolution 84" in order to refer to the decision and not the proposal.  That decison was minuted as Assembly minute 03.12.04.  Eventually the Assembly Standing Comittee amended that decision for the sake of clarity [see ASC minute 03.69] and the Assembly minute is properly identified as Assembly minute 03.12.04 as varied by ASC minute 03.69.  In this article, R84 is maintained as a shorthand reference to the latter decision.