c. 1999 Religion News Service

HAMDEN, Conn. _ A Presbyterian Church (U.S.A) judicial panel is pondering whether a Presbyterian congregation defied church law when it elected an openly gay Presbyterian elder to its governing board last spring.

At issue is a controversial 1997 amendment to the denomination’s constitution, or Book of Order, that says”fidelity in marriage or chastity in singleness”is the standard required of people ordained to leadership positions.

The First Presbyterian Church of Stamford, Conn., is accused of violating the amendment when it elected Wayne Osborne to its 30-member session, or governing body.

The five members of the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Southern New England Presbytery that heard the case in an all-day trial Feb. 26 are not expected to announce a decision before Thursday (March 4) or Friday.

Witnesses for the church admitted at the trial they were aware Osborne, 38, was in a “loving, committed relationship” with another man.

But they said they had no personal knowledge of whether he was celibate or not and thus thought he should not be barred from serving on the session.

When he was asked by the session whether he engaged in homosexual practices, he declined to answer, the Rev. Blair Moffett, co-pastor of the Stamford church, and other witnesses testified.

Moffett said the congregation thought Osborne’s answer “was sufficient” because “governing bodies should act gently when dealing with people’s lives.”Candidates have a choice of what is put on the table,”Moffett said.”I did not understand the role of the session was to be a DA whose role was to prosecute.”

Osborne, who works in investments but has a 1986 master of divinity degree from Princeton Theological Seminary, was first ordained an elder at the Stamford church in 1994, before he revealed publicly he was gay.

When he was elected to serve again, two members of the congregation complained to the presbytery and his installation was held up. Their representatives at the trial contended the congregation deliberately violated church law by electing Osborne. They presented letters to the congregation, church bulletins, minutes of meetings and other documents which they said proved their case.

Several of the documents warned that Osborne’s election would violate the Book of Order. A letter to the congregation described Osborne as “non-celibate.”

“Who would send a letter like that to a congregation of 700 persons unless they were sure of their facts?” Walter E. Baker, a Greenwich investment banker who represented the complainants, argued.

Moffett testified on cross-examination that he and other members of the church went through a months-long “discernment process” during which their views on the issues changed.

He said language used in some of the minutes and other documents were “not precise.”

“No one had evidence of Wayne’s sexual practices,” Moffett said.

Joyce Mitchell, an elder who took the minutes at nominating committee and session meetings, testified that Osborne called some of the standards in the Book of Order and Presbyterian confessions”outdated and out of step.” But, she said, he was not the only one who thought the standards need revision. For instance, she said, some of the candidates for ordination said they were unrepentant about shopping on Sunday, attending football games or buying lottery tickets, which they said were contrary to the church’s moral code.

“I’m getting answers that trivialize the Book of Order,” Baker complained. The 11-hour trial was mostly sober and testimony understated. But one witness, Elder Louise Winter, who had examined the nominees, drew a big laugh when Baker asked, “You have no personal knowledge (Osborne) was non-celibate?”

“Absolutely. None of the nominees!” she responded spiritedly.

Sam Hamilton, a member of the First Presbyterian Church, Hartford, Conn., presided over the panel hearing the case.

Gay rights activists from New York and New England were among the 100 or so persons in the courtroom. There were no demonstrations but several stood silently in the corridor outside the courtroom during recesses holding such signs as “I am a lesbian Presbyterian minister” and “Who Is Next?” They argued the church was engaging in a “witchhunt.”

During recesses some in the audience made jesting remarks comparing the church trial to the impeachment trial of President Clinton. “But there’s no stained dress here,” a lawyer remarked.

Osborne was in the courtroom thoughout the trial but was not called as a witness. He declined to speak to reporters but said he might have a statement later.

DEA END RENNER