 |
|
FEEDBACK  |
|
 |
|
February 2003 letters, page 2 Come on, Andy Sale, give us your plan February 26, 2003 The Layman recently took some hollow knocks from M. Anderson "Andy" Sale, general presbyter, Presbytery of the Peaks, Lynchburg, Va., who chastised The Layman and its leadership for ostensibly not making "positive, specific and constitutionally appropriate suggestions" to solve the issues joined in the PCUSA today. Sale attacks The Layman for being disruptive via "hysterical and generalized condemnations" which "often generate more heat than light." This amounts to just so much posturing and whining and not much substance. The real question ought to be: what actions are Mr. Sale and other general presbyters in this church doing to solve the problems pointed out by The Layman and the laity. Personally, I am very delighted that The Layman and Layman Online are doing the job of sounding the alarm and disrupting the lethargic and ineffective presbyters and other who have allowed the PCUSA to come into such disarray. I look forward to reading the Layman Online every day. This denomination is being lifted up by The Layman. It's those who are sitting on their hands and letting the revisionists redefine sin that are failing. What will you recommend, Mr. Sale? The sessions, presbyteries and synods of the church are awaiting your ideas and your plan to restore this denomination. Philip Pettus Elder Michillinda Presbyterian Church Pasadena, Calif. Defining our identity in Christ February 26, 2003 According to John Adams' article, "Professors have different views of homosexual practice, but reach a shared conclusion," Dr. Frances Gench of Union Seminary in Virginia said, "When I read (the Bible), as a Southern feminist, dyed-in-the-wool Democrat, I cannot jump out of my own skin." Implicit in this statement is that Dr. Gench defines herself first as a feminist and a Democrat, and secondly as a Christian. Yet our Lord said, "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be loyal to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon." (Mt. 6.24) Likewise, when God spoke from Sinai, He said, "You shall have no other gods before Me." (Ex. 20.3) Jesus Christ is the sovereign Lord of all creation, and His call is absolute. Our allegiance must necessarily be first and foremost to Him, and not to any secondary cause. Our identity must therefore be found principally in Him. To claim to be a Christian when our first loyalty is to a political party or to a cause such as feminism or pro-life activism is disingenuous, for a Christian is defined as a person whose first loyalty is to Jesus Christ alone, as He is revealed to us in the Scripture. Thus, we must first open our hearts and minds to Scripture without any preconceptions, that God the Holy Spirit might use them to mold us and shape us according to the image of Jesus Christ, rather than insisting on defining ourselves according to the ways of this world and reading Scripture in the context of that self-definition. After all, the Lord said, "If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me." (Mt. 16.24) Loren Golden Overland Park, Kan. About J. Gresham Machen February 26, 2003 In regard to the letter from Robert O. Wildrick, one of our PCA brothers, one slight clarification should be made. J. Gresham Machen was not removed from Princeton Theological Seminary during its reorganization; rather, he voluntarily left to form Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, along with several other Princeton professors. While I realize this may seem to be a little trivial, it is important to always keep the facts straight in dealing with these cases. No one has a monopoly on the "truth" except for Jesus Christ, who is "the way, the truth, and the life." I would encourage everyone on all sides of these debates to make sure their facts are correct before making wild and outlandish speculations. There is always more than one side to each case. A.D. Lorenz First Presbyterian Church Warsaw, Ohio You can't pick and choose what you will believe in Scripture February 26, 2003 In response to the article, "Professors have different views of homosexual practice, but reach a shared conclusion," I find it interesting that their conclusion is "that Scripture clearly condemns homosexual practice," and then the next sentence begins with "But." That is precisely the problem. My Tuesday morning Bible reading included Leviticus 18:22-25, which begins: "Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin ... Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the people I am expelling from the Promised Land have defiled themselves. As a result, the entire land has become defiled. That is why I am punishing the people who live there, and the land will soon vomit them out." The chapter focuses particularly on sexual behavior the Lord considers "detestable activities" (see verse 27) in opposition to what the Canaan people found culturally acceptable. His words do not require interpretation by professors. He clearly says, "Do not defile yourselves by doing any of them, for I, the Lord am your God." The question we need to all ask is, "Is He our God?" Our God clearly condemns homosexual practice as He does any sin. But sexual sin is of particular abhorrence to Him. So, when we ordain a leader who continues to openly practice a sin such as this, we are, in essence, saying to God and to the leader, as well as to those under his/her leadership, that it does not matter, do whatever you want, that we know what is best, not God. We are also denying the power of God to work in our lives to overcome the practice of sin. Our Lord has set higher standards for leadership because our leaders are to train us in God's way. They are to set examples for us to follow. And, clearly, we are each told to repent from our sins. In a sermon on Joshua 13-22, it was noted that the reason the Israelites had to conquer Canaan and take the land was to have a place to be a kingdom for God. This was necessary because the people who controlled the land controlled the worship within the land. Our leaders, in essence, control the church and control the worship of God within the church. If the God of Scripture is not their God as seen in their life (what they say and do), what will be the result? I think we can clearly see the result. If you can pick and choose what you believe from Scripture, as William Placher evidently does, then what more is Scripture than just another book on the shelf? If you can read the words, written by the inspiration of God, and say they are not relevant, then why bother? If you can personally interpret Scripture, as Dr. Gench seems to believe, then we can all agree to disagree and go about our merry ways. But, are we not supposed to be going God's way? The problem with our denomination and many others today is the desire to please people, be politically and culturally correct, be acceptable. Isn't that just what Lot was doing when he offered his daughters to the crowd who demanded he give them the two "men" (angels) for their abuse? He forgot, it seems at that moment, just who God is – but the angels didn't. They did what they were sent to do. The people who chose to live in darkness were blinded and then were destroyed in their sins. Unrepentant sin in our lives and in our church body is like leprosy – it eats away and eventually destroys. If we want to survive, we have to quit sidestepping the issue of sin within the church in preference for our own desires of unity. True unity will come when we decide to all get behind God's true and living Word with the courage to obey and love the Lord our God in spite of what the world around us says and does. Debi Grenseman Walla Walla, Wash. Controversy is the symptom, not the problem February 26, 2003 On the surface, it appears that homosexuality is the issue which is dividing the PCUSA. In actuality, I submit that the controversy over homosexuality, and that over the faith and chastity provisions of the constitution, are the surface symptoms of the actual problem, which is illustrated most clearly in these citations from the article on professorial approaches to homosexual behavior: "Dr. John Wilkson, pastor of Third Presbyterian Church in Rochester, N.Y.: 'In the various circles that we travel, we all form canons within canons. Who among us has not pitted the gospel against Paul?'" And another quote from the same source: "Wilkinson: 'Placher has written how the academic enterprise has distanced itself from the life of the church.'" The first citation reveals not a hermeneutical approach, but an unorthodox view of the doctrine of Scripture. Certainly, to fallen readers it sometimes seems that Paul and the gospel are at odds, but if the same spirit of God is not the author of both and in agreement with Himself, then what we have in Scripture is a collection of human ideas. The doctrine of Scripture – its divine origin, its unanimity and its authority – is the issue here. An investigation of the PCUSA's history sees a departure from orthodoxy on precisely this point in the Auburn Affirmation of 1923. The current controversy is only the latest bump of an ecclesiastical ship that cut its anchor line 80 years ago. This is not a problem of hermeneutic, but of theology. The controversies, including the current one, are but the visible manifestation of the real problem. Until and unless the latter is addressed, only more controversy can be expected. Robinson Mitchell Bartlett, Tenn. Another great book to read February 26, 2003 Robert O. Wildrick didn't mention it in his letter of 2-24-03, but another book I have read and recommend is Dr. J. Gresham Machen's Christianity And Liberalism. Dr. Machen was a prophet and, as is normal, not recognized in his own land (denomination?). Robert Demarest Cuminale Charlotte, N.C. About 'conservative evangelicalism' February 26, 2003 I am new to the Presbyterian Church by most standards(5 years) and had never read a "Layman." I come from a quite conservative Christian background, but your newsletter is beyond anything I ever experienced within "Conservative Evangelicalism." I expected some reactionary and negative material, but your publication had so much hate and arrogant bitterness seething from its pages that it actually hurt me just to get through that one issue. Are they all this full of pharisaical rhetoric or was this just a special "venting" issue? My advice to all of you who think that for some reason you are closer to God than those "liberals," guess what? You are just as far, maybe even farther, from understanding the kingdom as they are because you have put yourselves into the place of God. And those are plenty big shoes to fill, you know what I mean? Gary McAlpin Dubuque, Iowa PFR's 'Setting the Record Straight' is gobbledygook February 25, 2003 My response to PFR's "Setting the Record Straight:" Gobbledygook and poppycock. PFR is trying to play the role of a centrist when the issue is will this church live by its own law of the church and the Word of God, or die because it failed to do so. You – and ostensibly PFR – want to be somewhere in the middle, which is not renewal and certainly not where God calls us to be. The middle is where our church's big failing lies: the can't-we-all-just-get-along crowd. In the future, I will not take the name PFR nor the organization seriously. Perhaps there will be another renewal ministry for those who want true renewal and not just collegiality with the in-crowd. Philip A. Pettus Elder Michillinda Presbyterian Church Pasadena, Calif. PCUSA's denominational leaders are schismatic February 25, 2003 Schism has always been a serious charge in church history. It is that which creates disharmony and ultimately formal division and separation within the church. That is exactly what our denominational leadership has done with their flagrant disregard, abuse and manipulation of our constitution. The G.A. stated clerk, moderator and others have indeed broken the sacred covenant that holds us together as a denomination – that makes them schismatic. If the PCUSA is to recover any sense of unity in the future, we must remove these impostors who masquerade as spiritual leaders. Tragically, the most significant hurdle which we face in finding justice are denominational courts which are complicitous in their actions with our so-called denominational leaders. It is time for our denomination to find new leaders. Leaders who will champion the cause of the gospel of Jesus Christ instead of their own personal opinions and worldly views. It's time to find leaders who will lead with integrity – not cutting corners and shading the truth to protect those who defy the Scripture and our constitution. Perhaps then we would find the members of our denomination feeling less jaded and more prepared to bring the good news of our Lord to a hurting world. Perhaps then we would find more people joining our denomination than leaving it. Rev. Cliff Mansley Jr. Senior Pastor Brookdale Presbyterian Church St. Joseph, Mo. A nation at war and the PCUSA February 25, 2003 I watched a dynamite sermon by Charles Stanley of In Touch Ministries this morning while getting dressed for church. The sermon is entitled a "Nation at War." Unfortunately, the sermon's message will be heard in too few PCUSA pulpits. A synopsis of the message is pasted below. I have ordered two tapes of the sermon. One copy I hope to show in our Sunday school class and the other I am giving to my son who is serving in the Marine Corps. The sermon should be required viewing by every single one of our denominational leaders who are busy turning the PCUSA into the "Out of Touch Ministries." Charles P. Preston Jr. Tappahannock Presbyterian Chapel Tappahannock, Va.
|
|
| February
2003 letters, page 3 Index: letters to the editor Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |