Today’s Sacramento Bee has an article on a theological crisis that has affected several local churches. Because of a decision by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to allow homosexual ministers, seven of Sacramento’s congregations have decided to divorce themselves from that organization and join a smaller one, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC).
But many local church members said they are unclear about where the EPC stands on several issues – from divorce to women serving in the church. They worry the group adheres to a narrow theology and say they don’t know enough about the denomination their faith leaders asked them to join.
The article itself answers at least some of these questions.
The EPC believes in the infallibility of the Bible, that homosexuals should not serve in ministry and that those who are divorced should meet with congregational leaders before serving in the church.
That sounds simple enough. There ya go – that’s what the new organization believes. But hold on. What does it mean to say that the church believes those things? The EPC is an organization. Organizations are not conscious agents. They don’t have thoughts, opinions, or beliefs.
But they can promulgate an official doctrine, and of course that’s what it means in this case. When the Bee says that the Evangelical Presbyterian Church believes a certain thing, all they mean is that the church says that thing. There is a message that the church promotes.
A church can’t have beliefs. What it has is slogans.
I think that uritilatians want to look at all available information. So certainly a decision can be proven by time to have been utility-maximising. However, I think that inasmuch as it is a moral theory, meant to help us make the best decisions, it has to be committed to something like: you should do what is best given the information that is available to you at the time. You are deciding whether to shoot a man in Reno just to watch him die. Unbeknownst to you, he is a terrorist planning an attack on innocent civilians. I think it’s hard for a utilitarian to praise you, exactly, if you pull the trigger. However, if you have an honest, reasonable belief that a given course of action will maximise happiness in time, then I think you have every right to claim vindication if time proves you right.