 |
|
FEEDBACK  |
|
 |
|
Norcrest Church Local congregations should own property February 12, 2002 The unfortunate situation that occurred at the Norcrest Church illustrates exactly why local congregations, not presbyteries, should have the full ownership rights to their property. In my view, depriving the Norcrest congregation of their property to respectfully withdraw and transfer to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church is tantamount to stealing. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but even though it may be legal under church law, I don't think that makes it right. There are plenty of ways to discipline a wayward congregation without seizing property. Just ask our friends in the PCA. Of course, in the PCUSA, it seems only conservative congregations are picked on in this manner. I imagine there are dozens of liberal congregations that actually deserve to be dissolved due to their rejection of core Biblical teachings and indifference toward the confessions of the church. But why hold property over their heads like blackmail? Any church, liberal or conservative, that desires to withdraw (by a two-thirds majority) should be allowed to separate with its property. I am especially eager for liberals to have an easy escape hatch. God bless the brave (former) Norcrest congregation. We stand with you in Christ as you embark on your new journey as the Findlay Evangelical Presbyterian Church. Michael Montgomery Atlanta, Ga. Some last thoughts on Norcrest Church February 8, 2002 As an attendee of the new Findlay Evangelical Presbyterian Church, I am happy that this incident has drawn almost to complete closure. I can't help adding just a few last comments to Rev. Dr. Nagle's letter, however. It saddens me that he sees some sort of Enron-like plot by the former Norcrest congregation in this separation. We are just regular people who have decided that we can no longer belong to this section of our denomination that has changed its beliefs to be different from the ones we have always held. If the commission had bothered to contact anyone with their issues of deleted computer records and shredded records, they could have been informed where back-up information could be located and asked how important moldy checking account statements really were. Church membership has declined since we finally did a cleaning of our rolls, but attendance is up, Praise the Lord! Many attendees were waiting for us to resolve our issues with the presbytery before joining. The session of the Findlay EPC has cooperated fully with the commission. My husband, the financial secretary, has promptly returned all calls and has met with the financial representative of the commission at times that were inconvenient to him to make sure that everything went as smoothly as possible. It has been a difficult time for everyone, but God is in control. For our new congregation, it has brought us even closer to him. This movement has shaken many of us out of our complacency and comfort, and made us finally decide what we truly believe. Jesus answered, "I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." John 14:6. This is the truth to which we hold. There can be no wavering, there can be no earthly body that decides for me that this is not true. God bless everyone who has prayed for us. We have moved on in his love. Robin Love Thanks for coverage of Norcrest Church case February 8, 2002 Thank you for including the full text of Doug Nagel's detailed letter. While I profess no inside knowledge of the events in Norcrest and Maumee Valley Presbytery, I do know and have deep respect for both Ben Borsay and Doug Nagel. Both are solidly evangelical, and are outstandingly gifted pastors. Perhaps they represent well the poles in terms of strategy among evangelicals in the PCUSA. Amy and Bill Hoffman Reader takes issue with defense of Maumee Valley Presbytery February 6, 2002 In response to Rev. Nagel's defense of the Maumee Valley Presbytery, I have to take issue with at least four of his comments.
I think most of the 19 who voted against the motion would not have left. To interpret a vote of 209 to 19 with 2 abstentions as 50% is absurd. In Presbyterian terms, it is as close to unanimous as humanly possible. John Murray Elder Naperville, Ill. Reader upset by letters about Norcrest Church situation February 6, 2002 I can no longer keep silent after reading so many nasty responses to your 1/24/02 article about the pastor in Findlay, Ohio. I have been especially upset by the response written by Adam Borsay, son of the subject and "victim" of the story. The problem with the original article and all of the responses is that only one side has been reported – Pastor Borsay's side. He is far from being the victim. My father is a Bible believing, Bible preaching, lifelong Presbyterian, evangelical, Presbyterian pastor. He was one of the main speakers at the local Men of Integrity Conference and was on the planning board for that same conference for two years. He was the first member of our now large, active Emmaus group. We have had several spiritual renewal weekends with Presbyterian Renewal Ministries International. Our church was one of the first in the presbytery to become a member of the Confessing Church Movement. He is a wonderful caring man, well loved by our congregation and community. He takes his ordination vows seriously, including his responsibility to take part in the larger church. He just finished his term as moderator of Maumee Valley Presbytery. He also accepted the unpleasant duty of serving on the Norcrest Administrative Commission. He is not perfect (just forgiven in Christ), but by no stretch of the imagination an "evil" representative of presbytery as alleged. Pastor Borsay does have an interesting building campaign idea that would work really well in any community. In Fremont, there is a very large Methodist church on the way into town. Great location, large property, lots of parking. Just what we would love to have for the Presbyterian church. If I and other Presbyterians would join that Methodist church, we could hire a Methodist pastor that has deep Presbyterian leanings and insist that the Methodist church begin to run itself in more Presbyterian ways. Over the years, we could encourage more non-Methodists to join and eventually we could call the Methodist conference and tell them that we have voted to change the name to First Presbyterian. There is only one flaw with this plan and that is that it is wrong. Why? Because it is a Methodist church. This is what Pastor Borsay and followers wanted to do to Norcrest Presbyterian Church. I, for one, am proud of my father. He stood up for the part of the congregation that wanted to remain as Presbyterians in their own church. Mrs. Elizabeth Nagel Aldridge Gibsonburg, Ohio Norcrest Presbyterian Church is sadder, but not wiser February 6, 2002 The PCUSA came down upon the denomination as a body when they refused to act in charity and love toward the members of Norcrest Presbyterian Church. The now Findlay EPC Church has been faithful and courageous in choosing to stand with their pastor in separating themselves from the church body that has been 'experimenting' with being all things to all people. In the process, the Word has been watered down or ignored. The resultant growth of the newly formed Findlay EPC Church, I believe, has shown how God blesses his people when they stand firm on the testimony of the Word. Presbyteries are empowered to release congregations with their property, but in Norcrest's case it chose not to do so. Instead, they have flexed their muscles and refused to speak peace and act charitably to the newly formed Findlay Church. In so doing, the PCUSA has proclaimed to the world that money is more important to them than fellowship with other Presbyterian bodies. A sad statement to be given to the world – that the love of money supercedes the love of the brethren. Joan Archibald Thank you for 'Open Letter' about Norcrest Church February 6, 2002 Thank you for printing "An Open Letter on the Norcrest Church Situation: a viewpoint by Dr. Douglas Nagel." Doug's letter was lengthy and involved, and I appreciate that it was printed in its entirety. Rev. David Aber First Presbyterian Church, Huron Maumee Valley Presbytery Responding to Rev. Nagel's 'Open Letter' February 6, 2002 I appreciated the opportunity to read the Rev. Dr. Douglas E. Nagel's open letter giving a point of view on the Norcrest Church situation from someone from the Maumee Valley Presbytery who was actually involved in this sad situation. While his letter was enlightening and informative, I am still left of the opinion that the presbytery – through its Committee on Ministry – acted in a precipitous, mean-spirited and ham-handed manner. All the self-justifying hype, spin and damage control aside, nowhere in anything I have read does it say that Rev. Borsay, the Session or the majority of the congregation who cared enough to bother voting had actually left the PCUSA, renounced jurisdiction, or attempted to alienate the property from the denomination. Rather, as I read it, they were attempting to abide by and initiate an orderly constitutional process. By all reports, they merely voted to request that the presbytery consider permitting them to leave with the property and to vote upon this request. Had this request come properly before the presbytery as a whole for discussion and vote, the matter might have ended with a great deal less acrimony and scandal, no matter who ended up with the property. Instead, the COM escalated the situation to Level 4 Conflict. It appears they chose instead to short-circuit the process, launching a pre-emptive strike to remove Rev. Borsay for "just cause." And this was done by ambush – inviting Rev. Borsay to a meeting "of a serious nature relating to the congregation's vote to leave the denomination with property." I wonder if Rev. Borsay knew this meant that the Administrative Commission and the COM had already determined that he was to be removed when he agreed to the meeting? Since the people who met with Rev. Borsay had already decided to take this action, I wonder why they even bothered to engage him in conversation for an hour prior to dropping the bomb? Is this really how the COM is supposed to "mediate differences and reconcile persons?" To hear Rev. Nagel tell it, after refusing the "opportunity" to resign, the COM suspended Rev. Borsay "pending further action by the presbytery." Said presbytery action was apparently predetermined – how I don't know, but the COM or at least Rev. Nagel seemed to know it would be "to dissolve the pastoral relationship existing between the Norcrest congregation and the Rev. Ben Borsay." Yet, constitutionally, the further action by the presbytery could only have been to consider the recommendation of the COM that the relationship be dissolved, and then to vote on it. Since the vote never took place, we'll never know if the presbytery as a whole would have supported the COM's recommendation. Nor will we ever know if the presbytery as a whole would have agreed to permit the congregation to depart with the property. What we do know, from the evidence of Rev. Nagel's report, is that this COM apparently accrued to itself a right and power reserved only to the presbytery. After all, the COM is a committee not a commission, with a responsibility to report back to the presbytery with recommendations. The presbytery alone is responsible for establishing or dissolving pastoral relationships. Rev. Nagel concludes his open letter protesting that they followed the Book of Order throughout this distasteful process that was forced upon them . . . yada, yada, yada. But I don't buy it for a moment. And especially not on the basis of the "evidence" he himself has offered. Rev. Bill Pawson Minister in Other Service Presbytery of Tropical Florida Pembroke Pines, Fla. Norcrest case reminds me of Nazi Germany, reader says January 31, 2002 In my 15 years of ordained ministry in the PCUSA, I have never heard anything as chilling as what has just happened to Norcrest Presbyterian Church in Ohio. The story was chilling because I believe it is prophetic of what the future holds for many evangelical churches in our denomination unless serious change takes place. When I read the story, I felt as though I was reading something from Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Do we belong to a denomination in the Reformed tradition that is trying to heal a broken world with the Gospel or do we belong to a totalitarian state? When "presbyters" show up with secret agendas and threaten to use the power of the legal system against unsuspecting pastors, elders and members of our denomination, we have departed from the faith plain and simple. Our Lord Jesus never did anything in the dark, but always in the light. Let's be frank, the actions taken by the Maumee Valley Presbytery were evil and have no part of anything deserving the name "Christian," liberal or conservative. I encourage every Presbyterian to pick up a copy of a book on Church history and read it. We have apparently returned to pre-Reformation Europe when the Roman Catholic Church used its power to manipulate and control local congregations when they didn't "pay up." It is clear in the case of the Norcrest Presbyterian Church that money was an issue to the presbytery. No longer are congregations free in Christ to do with their money as they are led by the Lord. Instead, it appears that secret manipulation is the order of the day in order to extract modern day "indulgence money" from people who end up with no clear right to dissert or disagree in a Christlike way. As the pastor of a Confessing Church in the PCUSA, I had hoped that all of us could work together for change within the denomination. The case of the Norcrest Presbyterian Church challenges my hope for that positive agenda. If presbyteries can "pick off" churches like the Norcrest Church one by one, what hope do I have to offer my own congregation for reformation and renewal of the denomination? Quite frankly, I wonder if I can say anything these days in my own local presbytery without expecting someone to show up with a moving truck and ask me to leave. If we don't do something now to stop this evil, we will lose our chance for reform, one Norcrest Church at a time. We desperately need leadership at the national level. I hope it comes forth, lest the Confessing Church movement starts with a bang, but ends with a whimper! Jeff Carlson, Pastor Oakhill Presbyterian Church Grand Rapids, Michigan Thank you for 'Open Letter' about Norcrest Church February 6, 2002 I want to thank the author for an excellent letter, which certainly explains much that was confusing. As much as the information was helpful, I couldn't miss the love in his writing and the hurt in his heart. Walter H Stewart Moraine, Ohio Who is misleading whom over Norcrest Church situation? February 5, 2002 Regarding Moderator Doug Nagel's assertion in your article "Findlay church draws 517....." that Rev. Borsay's voting percentages are "misleading," I wonder who is misleading whom. In Mr. Nagel's analysis, he evidently believes all the non-voting numbers should be included in calculating percentages. As it pertains to figuring percentages for, or against, an issue, whenever have the non-voting numbers counted? It is somewhat presumptuous to guess how non-votes would affect a vote. Rev. Steven L. Seng First Presbyterian Church Wellsburg, W.V. Maumee Valley Presbytery sends out misleading spin February 5, 2002 I detect a misleading spin in the statement made by Rev. Doug Nagel relative to the actions of Maumee Valley Presbytery against the Norcrest Presbyterian Church. It seems to me that the 90 % of the votes cast by those voting at the congregational meeting represents a truer reflection of the will of the congregation than assuming that those who did not show up for the congregational meeting, or who did not vote, are opposed to leaving the PCUSA. Rev. Nagel appears to be attempting to defend the indefensible. Actions such as that of Maumee Valley Presbytery do nothing to engender trust between those in the pews and those in the denominational hierarchy. Charles P Preston Jr. Tappahannock Presbyterian Chapel Tappahannock, Va. |
|
Home · News · PLC Publications · The Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |