Warning: Illegal string offset 'itemurl' in /home/lutheran/www/www/admin/global_functions.inc on line 257
The Presbyterian Fallacy
Abstract: Right decision for the wrong reason.
On October 2, the nine-member Permanent Judicial Commission (PJC) of the Pittsburgh Presbytery unanimously ruled that the Rev. Janet Edwards, a Presbyterian minister in Pittsburgh, had violated neither Scripture nor the constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) when she presided at the marriage of two women.
The PJC rule unanimously that the constitutions of the PC (USA) and the state of Pennsylvania define marriage as an act between a man and a woman, and consequently, the rite Edwards performed could not possibly have been a wedding ceremony.
In April of this year, the Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly (GAPJC), the PC (USA)’s highest court, issued a similar ruling in the case of the Rev. Jane Adams Spahr. The GAPJC ruled that Spahr had not violated denominational law when she officiated at weddings of lesbian couples in 2004 and 2005. The GAPJC ruled that the ceremonies Spahr performed were not marriages.
As reported by the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, the decision as read by PJC Chairman Rev. Stewart Pollock declares:
It can’t be an offense to the constitution to attempt to do the impossible.
(This is an interesting point on which the Presbyterian Church and the Vatican disagree: see General Decree Regarding the Delict of Attempted Sacred Ordination of a Woman which imposes excommunication for attempting something which the Roman Catholic church believes impossible.)
Frankly, we feel that Pr. Edwards was exonerated for the wrong reason. We are more readily persuaded by her argument that PC (USA) has not prohibited same-sex wedding ceremonies and that the church's statement that pastors "should not" perform same-sex marriages are advisory and not binding.
The PJC's reasoning that the definition of marriage is inviolable looks to us like a variation on the Fallacy of Necessity, but there's no need to take our word for it, you can check the list of fallacies and decide for yourself.
