 |
|
FEEDBACK  |
|
 |
|
July letters Micro-managing leaders ready for purging July 29, 2002 If it were not so tragically serious, it would be almost comical to hear the stated clerk and various denominational entities, who have watched in relative satisfaction as the Book of Order was expanded and micro-managed to achieve liberal purposes, now seeking a Book of Order-lite so that they can purge it of recent entries that seek to uphold traditional interpretations of Scripture with regard to ordination standards or the voluntary nature of per-capita giving. The Book of Order has undergone its transformation from a small, pamphlet-like document to a thick book of laws as the theological unity and profundity of the denomination has melted away into a theological pluralism which must seek ambiguity in faith-language and coercive power in polity language to ensure that the beliefs of a few are, if not enforced upon the whole then are at least kept from accountability by others. There is no question that the increased size of the Book of Order is a display of the lack of trust in the power of the Spirit. Many of the additions to the Book of Order come from well-intentioned ideas, but they display a certain affinity with cultural assumption. For example, do we truly trust that the Spirit has led us to the conviction that women should be ordained as elders and ministers of the Word and Sacrament? If so, why does the Book of Order compel sessions to have women elders and PNC's to demonstrate that they considered women ministers? Where is the freedom to follow the Spirit in selecting elders and pastors? Could the need to "enforce" the ordination of women be a cultural response to feminist notions of exclusion, and could the enforcement be desired because too many women were not truly answering God's call to be servants and leaders in the church, but a cultural calling to "boldly go where no woman has gone before," regardless of fidelity to God's Word and to traditional theological doctrines? Don't get me wrong, I believe God calls women to serve and to lead, though I believe He holds them to the same high standards of faithfulness to the Word and to the teachings of the Church as He did men in the past and still does in the present. There should be nothing wrong, in principle, with having sessions that are comprised of all women or all men at any given time. The key is how the congregation determines its leaders and what freedom shall be given to the Spirit. The need for committees of representation and the convoluted motions required of nominating committees in balancing various criteria from geography to sex to ethnicity to theological positions (though this one gets less support!) for selecting persons for committee work or as commissioners for meetings of governing bodies speaks of a restriction of freedom based on a cultural model. Sure, human sinfulness sometimes requires oversight and a means of ensuring accountability. The question, however, is whether culturally motivated structures and methods are the best means for overcoming said sinfulness. And such sinfulness can corrupt methods too. Could much of the lack of accountability by our current leadership be aided and abetted by the many rules changes and additions to the Book of Order that make such a confusion out of selecting commissioners to various governing body meetings and restrict the number of well-experienced and polity-wise commissioners who might otherwise have been present to prevent the institutionalization of various bureaucratic leadership entities and wisely disregard the counsel of self-interest proffered by such entities? The irony is that now a position that is not to the liking of theological pluralists and cultural accommodationists has also be placed into the Book of Order, with all the coercive language of past liberal mandates. Suddenly, the leadership finds that "enforcement" is not within their power. If the leadership is so powerless, then indeed, let us welcome back separated brethren from the PCA and the EPC and simply refuse to enforce the provisions of a now useless constitution upon them. Of course such a suggestion is ridiculous, for the leadership apparatus of the PCUSA would rise to prodigious heights to prevent such a thing. The secular courts would be brought in to assist where purely ecclesiastical powers proved insufficient, regardless of what that might ultimately mean for the future of government-church relations and the freedom of the church to be the church. Were a future General Assembly to foolishly alter the Book of Order to make the per-capita a true tax and involuntary, you can bet that the stated clerk's office and the various committees of the General Assembly would find the will and the way to enforce that decision, again including using the secular courts if necessary. What is now lacking among the leadership is the will to enforce something that violates their commitment to theological pluralism and punishes their friends in that movement. If a formal schism is coming to the Presbyterian Church, it will only be because there has already been an informal schism. The selectiveness of the will to enforce the constitution demonstrates that one group within the Presbyterian Church is no longer bound to the rest of the church. As a conservative, I wonder why those who wish to disregard the ordination standards or the traditional doctrines of the church do not just leave the PCUSA and proclaim their own "gospel" without hindrance or shame? Could it be that the faithful remnant remaining would be a reproach to them? Could it be that they do not have the courage to seek to raise the money and create the infrastructures that would be required if they started their own new denomination? Though we use the same words, we do not have the same meaning for them. Though we claim to follow the same God and to follow the same Lord Jesus Christ, the nature of that God and Christ and the directions they lead are not the same. Every attempt to bring clarity to such language and to what constitutes "essential tenets" of the Reformed faith are resisted as being exclusionary and a violation of either a revised "history" or a presumption of inclusiveness required by one interpretation of the doctrine of grace. Whither shall it all lead? I don't know. But for now it is a sad spectacle. Rev. Scott R. Mackey Ft. Worth, Texas PCUSA has many non-believers July 29, 2002 I belong to the Presbyterian Church because of an excellent minister who apparently is one of the few who still believe in the standards of the professing church. I was appalled to read The Layman for the first time and find that I belong to a church body of too many non-believers and conformists. Thank you, Mr. Williamson, for your editorial entitled "Death Wish" letting me know that all the "leaders" are not turning from God and his Word to the popular public opinion of the world in general. ("We are to be in the world, but not of the world.") I hope that many Presbyterian members write in and let the "70-percent General Assembly" know that the 30-percent do not agree or condone their votes for late-term abortions, against enforcing the constitution of the church, against restoring cuts in mission, for spending more money on boycotting Taco Bell (what are they thinking), and for "dialogue" with Muslims that diminishes or excludes the urgency of the gospel. The church needs a firm and separate stance from the world in general. The Bible and Jesus are the Way, the Truth and the only Life! If these are the truths believed by the church that I belong to, I need to find a new denomination, even though the church I belong to does not teach these non-Christian ideas. (And I'm a liberal.) Gordon Pascott PCUSA allows what Congress prohibits July 29, 2002 I find it tragically ironic that an organization purporting to be Christian (the General Assembly) has just approved partial birth/late term abortions at a time when the Congress of the United States (a political organization) has just passed legislation prohibiting it. Doesn't this action send a message about the character of the majority of the representatives to the General Assembly? Jack Kime Gun death numbers don't add up July 29, 2002 I must comment on the article in the August Layman by John H. Adams. The quote from Marian Edelman is so typical of the anti-gun people. If you do the math on her figure: "...lost over 87,000 children to gunfire since 1979," you will find a ridiculous number. That would be 3,782 deaths per year or 315 per month. Actually the whole article seems to be pointless. The space could have been used better. Pete Simpson Bloomington, Minn. Christian love missing on Layman site July 29, 2002 I spent the better part of this evening reading the editorials and reports on your Web site. It is the first time I have looked through your material. What I find is an overwhelming anger and hatred. What I don't find is love, Christian love. As St. Paul taught us, without love, nothing else really matters. I feel an overwhelming sadness for you. I will pray very hard that the Holy Spirit will change your hearts to reflect the love that God has for all His creation (Psalm 145). Elliot Werner Wynnewood, Pa. How are other constitutions enforced? July 29, 2002 How is enforcement done in other denominations? Does Robert's Rules provide any guidance? It has been my understanding that the clerk is there to see that the constitution is followed. If there is a question, the judicial body decides it, but the clerk sees that the decision of the judicial body is carried out. What method is used in most organizations? Evelyn M. Thom Baton Rouge, La. Indeed, the stated clerk took an oath to preserve and defend the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA), which requires enforcement lest the constitution become meaningless. He has chosen not to do so. Enforcement of constitutional requirements in other denominations varies. Congregational churches such as Baptists (the PCUSA is connectional) enforce discipline by their congregational votes. Episcopal denominations (Episcopalians, Methodists, Lutherans) generally involve bishops and/or their councils in the enforcement of constitutional provisions. Besides the clerk, the PCUSA system calls for enforcement through a series of courts, beginning with the session and continuing through the presbytery, synod and general assembly. Editor's note Pledge is an issue for the politicians July 29, 2002 I find it sad that you took the time to castigate the leadership of the Presbyterian Church (USA) for not hurrying forward to join with politicians in their protest of the 9th Circuit's ruling regarding the Pledge of Allegiance. Frankly, we have better things to do with our time than to try to outdo politicians on a trivial issue. We know that this nation is "under God" because our Reformed theology tells us that, and, frankly, we are too busy trying to proclaim the gospel for the salvation of humankind than to join with the hypocritical herd of politicians who stumble all over each other at the so-called "outrage." When bombs are dropping and children are dying, why should we waste our time with the trivialities of politics and politicians who say "Lord, Lord" but fail to do the things are pleasing to God, namely, do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with God. They are eager to spout their prayers in public but wink at the exploiters of cheap labor. It took them less than a day to react to the Pledge flap. It took them months to react to the Enron scandal. You guys dare to wonder about the priorities of our leadership. I dare to wonder about yours. Neil D. Cowling Pastor Kirk of Our Savior Westland, Mich. Biennial Confessing Church 'assembly' July 26, 2002 When the General Assembly voted to have meetings every other year, it struck me as one more attempt to hush debate and discussion within the denomination, giving the bureaucrats in Louisville free reign for 24 months rather than 12. However, it strikes me now that this may be an opportunity for Confessing Churches to schedule our own "National Assemblies" between, say, June 10th and July 20th every summer that the assembly does not meet. (I must give Gary Miller credit for his letter, steering me in this direction.) We would get plenty of attention from the denominational press as possible schismatics (statements affirming our intention to remain and reform the denomination by God's grace would be needed each time we met), and this would give us, as Mr. Miller says, an opportunity to showcase for the PCUSA how a Biblically Reformed group can function. Such a stand could only serve to strengthen our renewal efforts as undeclared Confessing Churches and undecided members of other congregations realize that they do want to be associated with us. Powell Sykes Pastor Westminster Presbyterian Church Burlington, N.C. General Assembly is important July 26, 2002 First, I would like to thank The Layman for all it does for us to keep us informed. As one of the 30 percent from the 214th General Assembly I am grateful for the help. We fought a good fight but we didn't have the numbers to back us up. Hopefully, in time, this will change. As I see it, one of the reasons we don't have the numbers is that some people think the General Assembly isn't important. Important? My friends, without the General Assembly we are not part of the Reformed tradition. It is our choice. Are we Reformed or not? Jillene Simms Elder commissioner 214th General Assembly 'You sound like Pharisees' July 26, 2002 Gee, you do sound like Pharisees, wanting to enforce the letter of the law and not the spirit. Is the teaching of Jesus about the Sabbath just something you ignore? Mike Wells Denver, Col. Late-term abortion policy July 26, 2002 The Layman has correctly reported the essence of the medical testimony on late-term abortions, but I need to make a couple of technical clarifications: 1. Dr. Metherell and I both said that "late-term (post-viability) abortion" (not just "partial-birth abortion") poses a greater risk to the life of a mother than delivery of the child. (The maternal mortality rate is 2.1 times greater with abortions done at or after 21 weeks than is the maternal mortality rate from childbirth. This data is based on very short-term mortality rates. A Finnish study following all women in Finland found that women who had abortions were over three times more likely to die in the year following the abortion than were women in the year following childbirth – and this study included early abortions as well as late ones, so it is a reasonable assumption that the increase in mortality following late-term abortions would have been even higher, though this assumption was not mentioned at the assembly in order to understate rather than to give the appearance of overstating any risks.) 2. "Abortion is never medically indicated." Actually I said that "with modern medicine, post-viability abortion is never medically indicated." (In the remotest parts of the world where Caesarian sections are not available, the extremely high-risk, post-viability abortion may be the only chance to save the life of a mother if the baby was too large to deliver vaginally. Prior to embryonic or fetal viability, even with modern medicine, there are a few instances where abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother – the most common one being when an unruptured ectopic pregnancy.) In the context of post-viability abortions in the modern world, the statement "abortion is never medically indicated" is correct. At first glance, the exceptions given by the assembly appear quite restricted, and literally speaking, they amount to the same thing as the minority report because, of course, abortion after fetal viability is never necessary to preserve the woman's health, to avoid fetal suffering or in cases of rape and incest. However, discussion in the committee made it clear that ACSWP and the Advisory Coimmittee on Litigation do not intend to interpret this statement literally. When asked if it included mental health, they answered, "We didn't want to define health – that is your decision" (despite evidence that abortion increases mental health problems rather than alleviating them, and that the incidence of suicide is several times higher in the years following abortion than following childbirth). When asked if "untreatable life-threatening medical anomalies" included conditions compatible with living into the mid-thirties like cystic fibrosis, again the answer was "We did not want to define it." Thus it is clear that The Layman's take on the assembly action as opening the barn door wide for post-viability abortions is the way the Louisville bureaucracy will interpret it. Patricia Lee June, M.D. 10 13th Ave SE Moultrie, Ga. 31768 'Redneck' has a pejorative meaning July 26, 2002 Just read Frank Buhrman's article concerning Vic Pentz's speech on June 18th last at a breakfast sponsored by the Presbyterian Coalition: "Presbyterian? You could be a redneck – and that's good." Well, now there's a statement that ought to have African-Americans, Hispanics and other minority peoples of color and ethnicity battering down our church doors trying to get in. No matter how Rev. Pentz tries to clean up the term, "redneck" for most minority Americans of color and ethnicity that term, and those who claim a self-descriptive affinity for it – will never escape its pejorative meaning. Surely someone as esteemed and educated as Rev. Pentz must be – given his position as senior pastor of the Peachtree Church – could have come up with a more suitable way of encouraging the church to reconsider and reclaim its evangelical heritage. Not being the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, perhaps I missed something in the reporting. If so, perhaps Rev. Pentz or Mr. Buhrman would take the opportunity to clarify the premise further. You should be able to locate me here in the Pittsburgh area chasing after any African-American and minority Presybterians who may be running away at breakneck speeds trying to become Baptists or Methodists after reading that article. Rev. Lee Clark Carnegie, Pa. Reformed Church statement is helpful July 26, 2002 Much has been written recently about the "Hope in the Lord Jesus Christ" document approved by the General Assembly. Perhaps you should bring to the attention of your readership the document "The Crucified One is Lord," prepared by the Commission on Theology, Reformed Church in America. I found this document on the PCUSA's Web site listing statements of faith, which included the "Hope in the Lord Jesus Christ" document. I found it to be much more to the point and helpful in understanding the Lordship of Jesus Christ and how we should confess our belief in our pluralistic society. Scott Henderson PCUSA invaded by theological cancer July 26, 2002 I have watched a cancer invade the body of the PCUSA over the last several years. It is now time for the victim to decide to either pull the plug or try the experimental drugs to survive. With the PCUSA losing many members to other faiths that support the Bible and PCUSA congregations starting to leave the fold, I think that it is time to put aside the diplomatic approach and go for the cancer in a more direct way. 1. Congregations should purge themselves of members who do not follow the rules. 2. Congregations should withhold all apportionments until significant changes occur. 3. Presbyteries should be forced to elect commissioners that reflect the attitudes of their member congregations. 4. The bureaucracy of the PCUSA must be purged of leaders who will not follow the written laws of the denomination. 5. Any leaders of the denomination, both present and future, must be required to sign agreements requiring their adherence to the written laws and be subject to immediate removal if they violate the terms of the agreements. If the PCUSA is truly worth saving, something must be done immediately.If not, the PCUSA will become another denomination where anything goes. In the words of James Russell Lowell in the hymn Ebenezer, "Once to every man and nation, Comes the moment to decide." (Read the entire hymn!) Jim Roberts Harrah, Okla. |
|
Page 2 of July 2002 letters Home · News · PLC Publications · The Presbyterian Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |