The comments attached to this post hint at something that needs to be stated outright: We need (and the PUP report really didn't supply us with one) a well-articulated theology of ordination that enables us to faithfully reform our present process. The key examination now is not for ordination; it is for candidacy. Once a candidate, the rest of the process is more or less a rubber stamping procedure for the individual in question. Yet, the floor examination of an inquirer for candidacy is surficial at best, precisely because the individual is, as yet, only an inquirer. When I was certified ready to receive a call, I was told by the Exams committee of the Presbytery into which I was going that the examination of the floor of the Presbytery is simply for us to keep alive a venue for common theological discussion! Not to see if the candidate is fit for ordination. Not to see if the match between minister and congregation is a good one. Not to see if the candidate holds to Reformed theology and polity. Common theological discussion. I fear my anecdotal experience is the rule, not the exception. Ordination for Elders is a corollary problem. Many churches ordain as Elders those who will show up to the stated meetings and chair a committee, as opposed to those who are spiritually fit for office. It is no wonder, then, that ordained office is perceived as something to which anyone can aspire.

Part of the gay ordination debate results from confusion over being and behavior; some the debate, however, is the result of an ordination process that is so watered down, that one caucus can hardly be faulted for asking, "Why not us, too?" The Epistle lesson for this Sunday from the Lectionary is from James (3:1): "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers [and sisters], for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness." When ordination is seen as a responsibility to be taken seriously instead of a right to be administered commonly, we will see our parishes flourish, and we will see the end of many of our most vitriolic debates. When Christ was crucified, the disciples were downcast and thought the crucifixion to be the end; what appeared to the human eye to be defeat, however, was in truth our Father's plan to garner victory over sin and death. The General Assembly AI--and all of this subsequent confusion and wrangling--appears to be a defeat. I am confident, however, that our Father means it for a victory we cannot as yet see. A thorough theologizing and reformation of our ordination process may be just that type of victory.