 |
|
FEEDBACK  |
|
 |
|
August 2002 letters, page 2 Wonderful news for Pittsburgh Seminary August 12, 2002 Craig Barnes' appointment is wonderful news for Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and the PCUSA. This will move PTS more toward 'the ideal seminary' that Sam Calian has written about. W. Ward Gasque, President Pacific Association for Theological Studies Seattle, Wash. PCUSA is a lost cause August 12, 2002 I applaud your efforts and the "resistance movement" you represent. It is clear to me, that the PCUSA is a lost cause. It gasps along only because of the pension fund and "professional needs" of the clergy. There are indeed, many sincere, able, ministers who want to serve God and God's people. There is also a spectrum of people who are mostly looking for the lunch line. As a former minister, who grew up in the old Southern church, I can state without qualification that the current PCUSA is a political organization, an economic institution with little capacity for serving God and less interest. Robert McCaslin Van Kuiken should search Word to test conscience August 12, 2002 Thank you, Rev. Jim Coone for your reasonable and gentle words in "Van Kuiken and others should peaceably withdraw." The option to claim his opinion is a private "matter of conscience" is obviously not available to Rev. Van Kuiken in a leadership position in this denomination. If it is Rev. Van Kuiken's true conscience to support the homosexual lifestyle and especially to seek ordination of those who have chosen that lifestyle, he would serve them the "best" he can if he were to withdraw from the PCUSA. However, it is my heartfelt prayer that Rev. Van Kuiken ("and others") will, instead, set himself aside and spend dedicated and very personal time truly searching the mind of God through His Word. Rev. Van Kuiken is assuming a tremendous burden in his current efforts. Unfortunately, he is supporting an opinion which, "if" wrong, will adversely affect him and those whom he is championing for much longer than this lifetime. If it is beyond Rev. Van Kuiken's conscience to change his mind, then I agree with Rev. Coone. Rev. Van Kuiken must withdraw from his position of leadership in the PCUSA and, if he is to remain true to his convictions, from the PCUSA itself. While we are struggling, our denomination generally seems more open to the leading of God's wonderfully wise Holy Spirit in matters of conscience than is Rev. Van Kuiken ("and others") in this matter. Greg Leaman Oostburg, Wisc. Van Kuiken and others should peaceably withdraw August 9, 2002 I read Rev. A. Stephen Van Kuiken's letter with great interest. (His letter was referenced in Mr. Adams' August 6, 2002, article.) Rev. Van Kuiken claims that he cannot submit to the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA) as a matter of conscience and then asserts that because his position is a matter of conscience he is not in renunciation of jurisdiction of the church nor has he violated his ordination vows. I disagree with Rev. Van Kuiken for the following reasons:
Belfast, Tenn. So, who will enforce the PCUSA Constitution? August 9, 2002 If the Presbytery doesn't enforce G6.0106b, how can they enforce any other part of the constitution? Who would be the enforcing agent? Roy and Nancy Zubar Ordination vows should mean something August 9, 2002 Will anyone be surprised if they win their case? The PJC, presbytery and General Assembly turn their backs on these incidences and we roll merrily along. Would it not be an opportune time for a minister of the Word and Sacrament or perhaps an elder to take on a second wife (in a monogamous relationship of course)? You are right; it's not funny! We all take vows to uphold the Word and the Constitution of our church. This is done in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and most of us do to the best of our ability. Please pray for those who do not and those who condone and allow violations of sacred vows. Bob Campbell Elder Kingman Presbyterian Church Kingman, Ariz. Articles about Egypt appreciated August 9, 2002 I want to express my interest in the articles concerning the conditions that Christians experience in various parts of the world. I believe that Christians in the United States have not shown sufficient interest in the suffering of those who share their faith in other parts of the world. Although I realize that this is not the central goal of your publication, I feel that articles of the type you have published about Egypt are useful in broadening the outlook of those readers who have had no exposure to the customs, laws and practices of other cultures J. Bruce Siberts Houston, Texas Church property is not a new issue for courts August 9, 2002 This is not a new issue for even the Supreme Court: see Watson v. Jones (1871) 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 679, 728-29, 20 L. Ed. 666. While the U.S. Supreme Court discourages courts from settling purely ecclesiastical disputes, where the dispute is over the title of property, it appears to be a proper subject for civil litigation. While the Presbyterian Church would claim an "implied trust" over the property of the local congregation, not all state courts would agree. In Ohio, our Supreme Court has rejected the concept of an "implied trust." The intent must be clearly shown in the deed. Hence, in Ohio, it would appear that where the majority of the congregation wishes to separate the congregation, they would retain title to the property absent specific deed restrictions. Other states may look to the "polity" of the denomination to impose the "implied trust." Bottom line is that any church seeking to leave PCUSA should check with an attorney specializing in real property law and not believe everything the presbytery or higher church officers claim. Tom Taggart Attorney at Law Athens, Ohio It is time for action by Confessing Churches August 9, 2002 The recent article on a church retaining its property when leaving a denomination is most applicable to some of us in PCUSA. Unless something changes to end the outright defiance of the constitution, there is no hope within PCUSA. We will all need to know the details of leaving with properties, including up to the presbytery level. Is it time for CCM churches to call for exodus? Confessing Evangelical Presbyterian Church sounds like a good name to me. Sometime this winter, there should be CCM conferences, one on the West Coast, one in the Central states and one on the East Coast. It is time for action. Enough words. Roger Dennie Roslyn, Wash. Property law favors institution over churches August 9, 2002 Simply put, it is time for our denomination to allow any church that believes that for Biblical, confessional or constitutional grounds it can no longer serve in the PCUSA to leave graciously with its assets in full. To do anything less is to suggest that we are more committed to saving the PCUSA as an institution than to blessing churches that are seeking to serve Jesus Christ in a spirit of genuine integrity. Those conservatives and/or liberals who do not approve allowing such churches to leave, fearing that most such churches will be of their own mindset, are hypocritical. We must acknowledge that the decision made years ago – that all local assets belong to the denomination – was a bad decision. It needs to change and change now and not continually be forced upon us by conservatives or liberals who are concerned that they might lose a certain portion of the pie that they revere as the PCUSA. David Keazirian Skeptics are fulfilling the Scripture August 9, 2002 The Anglican and Presbyterian pastors who do not believe Christ is who he said he is should join the Jewish religion. None of this doubting should surprise any of us faithful believers. Christ died because of people who choose to live in their sins so that through Him they may be forgiven and enter the kingdom. The Bible states that the closer we get to the end times the more we will hear from antichrists (anyone who doesn't believe in Christ as the Messiah). And now we are! These people are only fulfilling the vision given to John. They are proving the Bible true. Scott Saxon Elder Danville, Pa. PCUSA should not lobby in Washington August 9, 2002 When our local ecumenical group of ministers told the city many years ago that our churches were opposed to X-rated tapes being open to view, I agreed with their objections. But I told our minister that in my opinion it was their job to teach us so that we would express our opinions to the city. He told me I was a "purist." The same principle applies to our church hierarchy. The church should not have a lobby in Washington or anywhere else. J.C.G. Wilson Coronado, Calif. There is only one God whom we worship August 9, 2002 Regarding "Pastor is a servant to his congregation," Shanna Kinser is to be saluted for defending her pastor, Rev Greg McDonell, with kind remarks and facts of his service. Three years ago, I was honored to officiate at a memorial service at Central Presbyterian Church. As is my custom, I checked with host pastor McDonell for "permission" to serve. He was very congenial, kind and most cooperative. The best I remember, he was recuperating at home from a hospital stay so our communication was via fax, phone and e-mail since I live some 200 miles away. It was indeed a privilege to have been treated so cordially. The article Kinser mentions, however, was not about Greg McDonell per se. The crux of the matter was (and still is) that the memorial service was syncretistic. The Scriptures are quite clear that God and God alone is God and we are to worship and serve Him only. The First Commandment itself would preclude any "worship" or "memorial" service including Hindu, Buddhist or any other non Christian elements. While it is politically correct these days to be inclusive, Christianity is very exclusive. Those, and only those, who place their trust in Jesus Christ alone as Lord and Savior constitute the church, which is His body. Jesus, Himself, told some "church members" (would you believe church leaders?) one day that they were not in fact included. "You are of your father, the devil," He said. We can all appreciate the willingness of any pastor to serve the homeless, to feed the hungry, to visit the sick and to be available at such significant moments as birth and death. Kinser confirms that Pastor McDonell so serves. It is important to recall, however, that "good works" are frequently the hallmarks of charitable and social organizations as well as false religions. It is high time, yea long over due, that some governing body somewhere within PCUSA , call a halt to these polytheistic services in/on Presbyterian properties. The Book of Order encourages officers to be involved ecumenically, but never syncretistically. My dictionary defines ecumenical as "promoting or tending toward worldwide Christian unity." The same dictionary defines syncretize as "to attempt to unite and harmonize without critical examination or logical unity" (emphases mine). Without significant intervention, Presbyterians will soon self-destruct. Let it not be so! Jasper McClellan San Angelo, Texas Pastoral care not only essential for ministers August 9, 2002 In regard to Shanna Kinser's August 7 letter, the Rev. Greg McDonell's work of pastoral care does not, by itself, qualify him for the office of pastor in the church of Jesus Christ. It is entirely possible for one to devote one's life to caring for others without having the exclusive devotion to the Lord Jesus Christ that the office does, in fact, require. Ms. Kinser's letter refers to Rev. McDonell's "deep Christian faith." Yet McDonell conducted a worship service that "included elements of Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism and Native American traditions." Moreover, he is the president of the "Austin Area Interreligious Ministries," whose purpose apparently is to foster mutual understanding between religions, valuing other religions as equally valid as one's own, and working together to do good deeds in the community. It is one thing to befriend non-Christians and do good deeds for them, but quite another to believe their faith to be valid in the eyes of God. McDonell, in conducting a memorial worship service that included elements of non-Christian religions, undoubtedly acted from his conviction. But that conviction was not grounded in the Christian faith. McDonell presumed that the Lord is pleased to accept non-Christian worship, when He has, in fact, declared otherwise (Lev. 18.3,24, Deut. 12.4,29-32). The God revealed through the text of Scripture, from Genesis to Revelation, is the one true God, and He is by no means identical with the gods of non-Christian religions. "Among the gods there is none like You, O Lord; nor are there any works like Your works. All nations whom You have made shall come before You, O Lord, and shall glorify Your name. For You are great, and do wondrous things; You alone are God." (Ps. 86.8-10) And the Lord Himself gave the command, "You shall have no other gods before Me." (Ex. 20.3; lit. "You shall have no other gods before My face.") The Scripture reveals a number of legitimate names for God – Yahweh, which literally means "I AM," referring to His self-existence or aseity; Adonai, which means "most exalted or highest Lord" or "Lord of all," referring to His absolute sovereignty over all creation; Elohim, the plural name for God, referring to the plurality of persons -- Father, Son, and Holy Ghost – within the Godhead; El Shaddai, which means "God Almighty," referring to His limitless power. s These names, as well as their Greek equivalents (e.g. - Theos, Kyrios, and Pantokrator) and a handful of other names revealed in Scripture are legitimate names for God, for they are rooted in the character and being of God, as He is revealed through Scripture. The names of non-Christian gods are likewise bound to their character, as is taught by the books revered as holy by non-Christians. A cross-examination of these gods with the one true God demonstrates that they cannot possibly be the one and the same God, for the gods of the non-Christians fall woefully short of awesome wisdom, power and majesty of the one true God. Indeed, the Lord stated through the Prophet Isaiah that those who do not worship the God of the Bible "pray to a god that cannot save." (Is. 45.20) The syncretic use of non-Christian elements in Christian worship, such as was employed in the worship service McDonell led, is an affront to the holiness of God. God is manifestly and supremely superior to, and separate from, the gods of non-Christians. Indeed, the God of the Bible alone is real; all other gods are the invention of men and women. As we who are Christians have been called by Him, we are obligated to worship Him alone clearly and unambiguously. Loren J. Golden Overland Park, KS Let's apply some tough love on Louisville August 7, 2002 The wagons are circled and the major emphasis of the once great PCUSA seems to be the preservation of organizational structure and financial solvency. It explains a lot. A conservative congregation seeks to exit and they are obstructed. An ultra-liberal congregation deserves expulsion for their defiance and they are ignored. The president of one of our seminaries becomes a vocal advocate of sex outside of marriage and ordination of homosexuals and there is hardly a whisper. For most organizations, the membership losses we have experienced would have long since led to reform. Yet, after so many years of liberal inbreeding, one cannot expect our leadership to engage in meaningful self-examination. Having softened the hard lessons of Scripture with a fatal dose of humanism, they are rudderless and can now only arm themselves with human solutions. One clever plan is the call to "preserve the body of Christ." We must remain no matter what they do for to leave would divide the body and thus be sinful. "Unity in Diversity" is another catchy slogan and, while food for thought, is generally a misapplication of theology. Christ did not come to bring unconditional unity but to separate the wheat from the chaff. Unity is the result of proper theology and not a thing in itself. We should know that a church simply cannot exist as a worldly human organization. It is by its founding a collection of faithful servants answering to the will of God. We are called to be the body of Christ so that we may bear fruit for Him, not just to support the agenda of a particular denomination and blindly follow its leadership. For the last 30 years, we have been bombarded with philosophical creations of the human mind masquerading as sound theology. The clear directives of Scripture have been twisted or frankly ignored to accommodate inclusion, self-affirmation and worldliness. A faithful denomination cannot be driven by these attempts to accommodate its fringe. No matter how much some of our flock may be hurting, their repentance is the only remedy and loving outreach our only obligation. Nothing in the Bible supports sexual immorality. Nothing suggests sugar coating the Gospel message to suit the taste of the listener. Nothing suggests that everyone will be saved and nothing suggests that God does not love unborn infants. Nothing suggests that bureaucrats are more important than missionaries and nothing suggests that we have any obligation to make it easier to remain a Jew, a Muslim, or a Hindu. Absolutely nothing Biblical suggests that we should sit silently by while our denomination indulges this sort of thinking. In fairness, we can point to a few good things. We have joyfully worshipped and charitably served. Many good works have been done. Yet, it is all in vain if we fail to speak a clear Biblical message in answer to the challenges before us. Our denomination is dying because we as individual members and local congregations have tolerated the foolishness of Louisville and continued to facilitate its addictions. Despite a break with our traditions of epic proportions, we have continued our historic allegiance. In the name of a shallow and misguided love, they have redefined our confessional understandings and we have responded with continued support almost as if it were a requirement for salvation. It most certainly is not. Notwithstanding the protestations of many of our pastors, who are often entrenched in the organizational structure, the proper and faithful response is to stop the flow of money. It is the organizational equivalent of tough love and our one chance to bring needed change. Giving to further the kingdom is a Christian obligation. Blind giving to a denomination run amuck borders on the sinful. John Cowan Cartersville, Ga. Elders have no right to defy their vows August 7, 2002 I have been an ordained elder in PCUS/PCUSA since 1975. Upon my ordination, I took a vow to uphold and follow the Constitution of the then PCUS. Nothing about that vow has changed since. I am tired of reading about sessions that openly defy G-6.0106b. I believe that if I as an individual elder or the session of our church should decide to defy the Constitution in another area, for example a refusal to ordain women, we could and should expect quick disciplinary action from our presbytery or, absent that, from the GA's PJC. (Let me hasten to say that our session supports the constitution of PCUSA and has no intention of defying any component of either the Book of Confessions or the Book of Order.) However, sessions and ministers seem to be able to defy G-6.0106b with impunity. Some presbytery execs refuse to bring charges against the defiant congregations and their leadership. Cases of open and obvious defiance are dismissed. It seems that presbytery and/or General Assembly leadership is dodging this hot button issue in our denomination. And then they wonder why they are continuing to lose members. In my opinion, the problem is not the defiant congregations but the leadership (or the lack of it) in many presbyteries and the General Assembly. Each minister and elder took basically the same vow I did when ordained. We were not given the freedom to follow the tenets with which we agree and reject and refuse to follow those we do not agree with. Has the leadership of our presbyteries lost touch with the people in the pews? I think in many cases the answer must be yes. To me it makes no sense to have a Book of Order, which we as Presbyterians look to for the government and discipline of the church and then simply shrug our shoulders and do little else when open defiance occurs. The issue will not just go away. I am not naïve enough to think it will. It will continue to fester unless and until it is dealt with firmly and with compassion as our Constitution says. Then we as Christians can stop spending so much time and energy on this and get about the business of spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ. William E. Ford Cornelia, Ga. Don't change Book of Order August 7, 2002 We Presbyterians have a wonderful Book of Order that is based on the Word of God. Let's not change it to comply with our human feelings. I believe that Jesus would minister to all who come to Him. I do not believe that He would honor gays and lesbians in leadership roles in the church. I am very weary of the verbal "stuff" that is going on within our church. It's pretty simple from where I sit. Churches are spiritual places where we are supposed to do the will of God and honor Him. He has told us in His Word all that we need to know. The answers are there, so if you can't comply with His Word in His Church go form your own club. I believe that the Confessing Church Movement has the right answers. I believe that if you can't go along with them you should get out of PCUSA. If that doesn't happen then the movement ought to move on. Burr Sheely Chesapeake, Va. Louisville needs house-cleaning August 7, 2002 It appears that no one is responsible for anything. I wish that I had a job where I could decide what I wanted to do or not do. It is long past time when some house-cleaning was done in Louisville. Keith Bryan Dialogue without gospel is meaningless August 7, 2002 Dialogue without the "Message?" The gospel by its nature is evangelical. If we are to dialogue with Muslims without telling of the human condition, the love of God in Christ and the solution to our condition, then it seems that we have nothing to talk about, except good works! Perhaps this is the core problem of the PCUSA. It chooses to take the "sting" out of the message, resulting in no solution, which humankind desperately needs. Our commitment to our Lord is to "go" and "tell." Let's be faithful to that promise. M. E. Johnson Scottsdale, Ariz. Pastor is a servant to his congregation August 7, 2002 In response to your recent article on the Rev. Greg McDonell, please allow me to share a few things about Greg. As a member of Central Presbyterian Church in Austin, Texas, and a seminarian, I have known Greg for several years. Greg spends nights during the winter at the church when the homeless need a hot meal and a place to sleep. He serves on the congregation's care team, helping to meet the needs of a man with a terminal illness. Greg likes to be at the hospital when a new baby is born into the congregation and considers it a sacred honor to be at a person's deathbed. He works with seminarians doing their supervised practice ministry, lending his years of experience. As a man of deep Christian faith, Greg seeks to live out that faith. He supports, encourages, and challenges members of the congregation as we travel our own faith journeys. Just thought you might like to know a little about the Rev. Greg McDonell from someone who calls him pastor and friend. Shanna L. Kinser Austin, Texas Denomination's departure from the gospel August 7, 2002 Thank you for an excellent essay on this troublesome departure of our denomination from the true gospel during the 214th General Assembly. R.H. Sharrett, MD, elder Fanwood Presbyterian Church Fanwood, N.J. Missionaries feel betrayed August 6, 2002 Having served for more than 30 years as Presbyterian missionaries, my wife and I feel betrayed by one action taken by the latest General Assembly. It seems that we prefer to support the Taco Bell workers rather than Presbyterian missionary endeavors abroad. We are not unsympathetic to labor problems that the workers at Taco Bell may face. In fact, we will readily admit that we do not know the salary or the working conditions involved in the dispute. But I do wonder if they are worse off than the slum dwellers we treated in India. What concerns us greatly is that we seem to be developing into a church more devoted to special issues than to the Great Commission. Forrest and Barbara Eggleston Mechanicsville, Pa. Accusations are a tool of the left August 6, 2002 Elliot Warner complains that he sees no "love" on the Layman site. He sees "anger and hatred" instead. This accusation is the usual tool of the radical liberal left, to describe those who disagree with immorality and infidelity as "haters." Let me suggest to Mr. Warner that what he sees is a profound dislike and disgust for those who, in the name of God, would lead us in the paths of sin and apostasy and away from the gospel. God gave all of his creation free will to choose between good and evil, righteousness and sin, truth and deception. Our objection to the abominations of the General Assembly just indicates we are paying attention when reading the Bible, not re-inventing morality to appease the sinful. Philip Pettus, elder Michillinda Presbyterian Church Pasadena, Calif. Faithful Presbyterians are loving August 6, 2002 I feel compelled to respond to Elliot Werner's letter regarding the lack of love on the Layman site. The faithful remnant of the PCUSA are filled with love:
Sometimes love requires actions which modern society believes are unloving. Geoff Robinson Haddon Heights, N.J. Christians must stand together on the gospel August 6, 2002 Although I am not a member of PCUSA, I was able to read the latest issue of The Layman. I read it with anticipation of seeing what a large body of Christ was up to these days. I am sorry to report that I will be praying for your church and the General Assembly. It was with a broken spirit that I read about the majority endorsing late-term abortion, that 3 percent of them don't believe that Jesus Christ is the only Lord and Savior. He is the only way to the Father, and salvation can only be accepted as a free gift from him. We must stand together when we teach the gospel to Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormon Church, among others. Where and when did the PCUSA turn away from the truth of the Bible? How can so many who claim to be Christians have views that directly contradict the Word of God? I hope and pray that the ministry of the PCUSA can get back on track soon. It seems some in your leadership roles are ashamed of the gospel or simply don't wholly believe it. We are to spread the gospel to all nations without shame. We have the cure for cancer, sickness, lost hope, broken marriages, etc. Let them know Jesus is the only answer. Greg R. Vezey Sacramento, Calif. Proposals to ensure better accountability August 6, 2002 I am an active member of West Side Presbyterian Church in Ridgewood, N.J. I have been following developments in the PCUSA closely, particularly the Confessing Church Movement, and applaud the efforts of both the Confessing Churches and the Presbyterian Lay Committee. One of the recurring observations made of the recent General Assembly in letters to the editor of The Layman and comments on the CCM Web site is that commissioners to the General Assembly were so easily controlled by the recommendations of the Louisville staff. I think there are two rather simple reasons for this phenomena: accountability or the lack of it by the commissioners and the desire of these ordinary, decent human beings to be socially acceptable – to get along, to not make waves and to be seen as thoughtful and intelligent as, of course, defined by the Louisville staff. Louisville staff can, apparently, bestow respectability on those conforming to its intellectual and social pressure. I think this influence and psychological intimidation can be minimized by turning around Louisville's main weapon and using it against them. All commissioners must be made to know they are accountable to the rank and file members of their respective presbyteries, not just the leadership who appointed and/or elected them, but the people in the pews. Currently, as far as I know, there is no mechanism in place to effect this. After the GA, commissioners may be invited to selected churches where it is known their views will be applauded, but they will seldom, if ever, be cross-examined about the specifics in a critical, public environment ... and they know it! Holding commissioners accountable to those whom they are representing could take place at two levels. First, prior to the next GA, post on the CCM or PLC Website and publish in The Layman a list of commissioners with their home addresses, telephone numbers and e-mail addresses along with their presbyteries. Encourage readers to let their commissioners know their views on particular issues likely to come before the GA. This information should be readily available from CCM members active in each presbytery. Second, after the GA, post on the Websites and announce as widely as possible, how each commissioner actually voted on key issues. (I have attempted, unsuccessfully, to find out whether electronically recorded votes become part of the publicly accessible record.) I respect enormously the insights the PLC and CCM have brought to the attention of the PCUSA polity. Your understanding of the underlying theological and political agendas of the liberal ideology is acute. However, I do believe there has been a shortfall in the mobilization of the church body. I think there is a weakness at the tactical level. I have attempted to address this one aspect of our tactics. Walter Lynn Ridgewood, N.J. There is no record of how individual commissioners voted on issues before the General Assembly. The best way to determine that is to ask them. The Editors Proud to be a Presbyterian until … August 6, 2002 I looked at the cover page of the August Layman and saw the reference to the article, "You may be a redneck ..." and turned right to it. What a statement; it made me proud to be a Presbyterian. But then came the embarrassment. I turned the pages and came upon a headline, "Assembly sanctions late-term abortions." Seventy-seven percent of the voting commissioners actually came out in support of killing perfectly innocent babies. The verse that God has laid on my heart as a beacon is Jeremiah 29:11. I read it over and over again during my quiet time this morning and nowhere does that verse exclude babies. The assembly interpretation indicates to me that Jeremiah 29:11 does not kick in until later in life or that our wonderful, loving God has as a part of his plan the merciless murder of innocent children. If that is the case, I now understand the meaning of "suffer the little children." Don Male |
|
| Home
· News
· PLC
Publications ·
The
Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |