Ministers, Members and Councils of the Church
August 25 2003

Dear colleagues in ministry,

Over the last six weeks I have shared with you in ministering to a church experiencing confusion, anger and pain. It has not been easy. Last weekend the Assembly Standing Committee, with Moderators and Synod Secretaries, heard and were in touch with the feelings of the Church. I believe that the Assembly Standing Committee has made some decisions that evidence a deep listening and concern for the Church, and will be of great assistance to us all.

In the attached document are the decisions of the Standing Committee. It commences with some affirmations of our shared faith and a statement of apology and regret. The second component to the decisions is a clarification of Proposal 84. There are three areas where the need for clarification was seen as urgent.

• Re 84.2 - questions have been asked about whether the Uniting Church adopted “Right Relationships” and “Celibacy in Singleness and Faithfulness in Marriage”, and what the standards are for ministers in this area. Part three of the enclosed ASC decision states strongly that neither has ever been endorsed by the Assembly. Part 3 (b) draws the attention of the Church to the very high standards that have been set by the Assembly in this area of Christian behaviour.
• Re 84.3 – it has been asked whether the requirement to consider candidates for ministry and placements on a case by case basis prevents a congregation, presbytery or synod from having a stated position about sexual ethics. Congregations and Councils who wish to state a sexual ethic may do so after prayerful consideration and study of the Scriptures. Also there have been many claims that the 10th Assembly did a new thing. Standing Committee draws the attention of the Church to the fact that in part three of Proposal 84 the reminder to presbyteries is based on specific decisions of previous Assemblies.

It is apparent that the meaning of the Assembly resolution was not effectively communicated by the wording of Proposal 84. The Standing Committee has responsibility to make clear the meaning of Assembly decisions and it has powers under the Constitution and Regulations to do so. The Standing Committee in fulfilling this responsibility has determined to vary the wording of Proposal 84 and the text of that wording is provided. The varied wording of proposal 84 is the version upon which discussion in the Church must be based from this time. I stress that the purpose of the variation is to clarify the meaning according to the rationale of the original Assembly resolution. The meaning of the varied Proposal 84 is entirely consistent with the meaning of Proposal 84 that has been communicated by the Assembly Officers since the 10th Assembly.

I trust that this clarification from the Assembly Standing Committee will remove the confusion that has existed in the Church since the 10th Assembly. The Uniting Church has very high ethical standards for its ministers, and certainly does not hold two mutually exclusive standards. We are a church within which there are differing opinions on same gender relationships and where councils, ministers and members are able to give voice to those different opinions and make decisions about what that means for ministry in their place. We work together through a series of inter related Councils that since the time the Uniting Church was established has given significant responsibilities to congregations and presbyteries – and those responsibilities continue to this day.

As partners in the service of the Gospel I am thankful to be united with you through our common faith in the reconciling work of Jesus Christ. I rejoice in the gifts that you bring to the service of the Church, and pray that we will know the peace of Christ and the unity of the Spirit made possible through our common faith in God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit

Dean Drayton