 |
|
FEEDBACK  |
|
 |
|
January 2003 letters, page 2 Kudos to the Westminster session I commend the Westminster session on their action. I hope that all these attempts at intimidation and control are publicized and shown for what they truly are, i.e., blatant attempts by bureaucrats to preserve their power and to continue the erosion of God's church from within. Quoting from the article: Seeley said, "We talked about that, and we felt that in our initial meeting, we just wanted to talk with Bill. Meeting with the session would be great, but we just wanted to hear him, how he feels about the connectional nature of the church … There is absolutely no coercion involved here. That never came up in our discussion." What a bunch of hooey! This article sheds a little light of truth on the ugliness of denominational politics – read that, dominance and control. How could this collection of supervisors not understand the power of their coercion? Is there no presbytery that is not corrupted by the stain of the GAO? Where is the presbytery and synod-level outrage at the actions of the moderator and clerk? The moderator and clerk have now been revealed to be men of no count. How do we rid ourselves of them? Daniel E. McConnell, elder Canal Street Presbyterian Church Presbytery of South Louisiana New Orleans, La. Speaker needs lesson from Reformed history James Noel, who teaches at the San Francisco Theological Seminary demonstrates why his behavior is unacceptable. To refute and rebuke Reformed theology, which has done so much for the world via missionary work, is diabolical. If Noel would really see Church history as it should be seen, Noel would be in awe of God, who has used Reformed theology to help deliver those in bondage, from what Noel thinks, has put them in bondage. The results of the Reformation speak of themselves, which Noel fails to see. Lou. S. Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. Special assembly not worth $500,000 Though I do not believe those having extramarital or premarital sex should be ordained, I am one of many who do NOT believe it is worth $500,000 to pursue the few disobeying the constitution. Let us give time to let the judicial process, though imperfect, work (and when it doesn't, deal with it on a broad level). Personally, I'd rather send half a million dollars worth of food to hungry children in South Africa then waste it on trials. Rev. Kent Clayton Monument Community Presbyterian Church Monument, Col. Maybe the IRS ought to take a look Okay, so no recalled 214th GA. Okay, coercive force has allegedly been applied. Okay, let us see what the Internal Revenue Service has to say about denomination finances. Karl M. Everett Norman, OK Stand with us in supporting the constitution January 27, 2003 I am the pastor of Westminster Church in Canton, Ohio, and the moderator of the session that recently filed a remedial complaint in the matter of the failure of our Stated Clerk and Moderator to fulfill the requirements of their office. Over the last few days, I have been interviewed by members of the press and articles about our action have appeared in the local paper and on various internet Web sites. I have found this whole matter to be a new and interesting experience. The reporters who interviewed me did so in a very professional manner and seemed to me to understand the reason the session filed the complaint. I thought I had made it clear that the remedial case concerned the failure to issue the call to reconvene the General Assembly on the part of the Moderator and Stated Clerk. Their articles, however, made it appear that the focus of the complaint was on the issue of the PCUSA's ongoing struggle over the issue of homosexual ordination and so-called holy unions of homosexual couples. As a friend said to me, never count on the secular media to get it right. But I thank them for their coverage, nonetheless. One of the questions the reporters asked me was why our session felt we should take the lead in filing a complaint. I had to answer that we did not approach it that way. It did not strike us that we would be the first or perhaps even the only session to deal in this manner with the unconstitutional, rebellious and outrageous delaying tactics of our leaders. We had no sense of "taking the lead." Rather, we were responding in the only way constitutionally open to us to a violation of the constitution by the Moderator and Stated Clerk in failing to call the General Assembly back into session. More than the press not quite getting it right, what I've found most dismaying over the last few days has been the mean-spirited, hate-filled, intolerant e-mails and phone calls accusing the session of Westminster Church of being mean-spirited, hate-filled and intolerant. The only response I have to these messages is that as a Confessing Church we will abide by the standards of our constitution and the Word of God. If you disagree with our decision and our commitment to God's Word and the Constitution of the PCUSA we invite you to take it up with God. We do, of course, appreciate all the notes and calls of encouragement we've received from those who support and uphold the standards of our constitution and the Word of God. We thank you for your support and prayers. One pastor wrote to say she was "surprised to see that you have filed charges! I was wondering who was going to do that and when…" After thinking about it, I replied that I was surprised that she was surprised – but what surprises me the most is that 11,500 other sessions had not also already filed charges. In the face of the unconstitutional delaying tactics and procedural antics of the Moderator and Stated Clerk, I extend to all sessions the invitation to stand with us publicly and to consider filing a remedial complaint. Such a stand is morally necessary. The rule of law is that silence means consent. And as someone has said, "For evil to flourish good people need only do nothing." To remain silent spectators during this season of constitutional crisis is to permit the rebellious and defiant to succeed by default. Such appeasement and acquiescence should not be named among God's people. Perhaps if enough sessions do complain, maybe (but just maybe) our top elected leaders will get the idea that the people in the pews expect them to fulfill the duties of their office, even if they are opposed to the action their office requires them to take. The bottom line for all of us is just this: do we have a constitution that is worth the paper it is written on? Rev. Bill Pawson Westminster Church Canton, Ohio Compared to NCC, special GA will be cheap January 24, 2003 I laugh and cry about the whimpering at Louisville headquarters over the "costs" of a special called assembly. How many multiple millions of Presbyterian dollars have been wasted on the National Council of Churches in recent years? The NCC continues in debt and disarray, yet our national Presbyterian leaders continue to encourage sending hundreds of thousands of dollars yearly to the NCC. We and the Methodists are the primary supporters of the NCC. Meanwhile our own household of a denomination is in a huge intrarelational dispute, much like a marriage in deep trouble. A special "self-examination counseling" session, costing about 25 cents per member, is well worth the cost to clearly lay out the issues of dispute and seek some resolution. My prayers are with those courageous commissioners who signed those petitions. Rev. Dennis Witt First Presbyterian Church Pataskala, Ohio 60-day notice is minimum to call special GA January 24, 2003 I have noticed that some persons are complaining about the stated clerk's interpretation that the called meeting must wait 120 days and claiming that the meeting should be called within 60 days from the time Alex Metherell presented the signed petitions. While I agree that the stated clerk's interpretation is wrong, I must point out that the demand for having the meeting within sixty days is wrong, too. The Book of Order in G-13.0104 states in part: "Notice of a special meeting shall be sent not less than sixty days in advance to each commissioner elected to the last preceding stated meeting of the General Assembly and to the stated clerk of each presbytery." The 60-day requirement is for a minimum amount of time to announce the meeting; it is not a maximum limit of time. The moderator cannot call the meeting sooner than sixty days. The Book of Order does not specify how long the time could be for announcing the meeting. The only maximum limit of time seems to be the convening of the next General Assembly (215th). Of course, he could call the meeting on the sixtieth day from the day he received the petitions. He should not, unless he were to have a good reason to, postpone the meeting far beyond the sixty-day minimum. However, the letter of the law does not specify how soon the meeting must take place, but only how long the meeting must wait. Glen T. Eason Commissioner to the 214th GA and signer of the petition for a Called Meeting of the GA Open letter to Moderator Fahed Abu-Akel January 24, 2003 In your most recent letter to the commissioner/petitioners you made the following statement regarding their request for a called meeting of the General Assembly: "This Special General Assembly would expend valuable resources of time, energy, and money that are desperately needed for the mission of Christ." I am troubled by your implication that this Special General Assembly falls outside the mission of Christ. Rev. Dr. Robert W. Coleman Major changes needed in PCUSA January 24, 2003 It is now time to make some major changes in the General Assembly organization of the Presbyterian Church. It appears to me that no one has any authority or responsibility to do anything, except what they want to do. We as a church need to set our goals and standards (not those of the minority, but those of the majority) and get people who will not only believe in them but will enforce them. It is past time to clean house … but not too late. The special session of General Assembly must be called without delay. Anything else is abomination of the Book of Order and common logic. It matters not which position you take. Right is right. Wrong is wrong. Keith Bryan Wolf Point, Montana Decision against lesbian pastor applauded January 24, 2003 I thank our God and the 35 percent who opposed calling a lesbian as pastor in the Rockville, Md., Presbyterian Church! And I thank Him for His intervention with the presbytery to reverse its support of the call. Greg Leaman Oostburg, Wisc. Ruling liberals cannot perform their duties January 24, 2003 It is plain to see that the ruling liberals are beyond any reasonable ability to perform their constitutional duties. They do understand money. Cut off their money supply and they are out of business. That is the only solution. Dick Lewis, elder Loves Park, Ill. Let 'special' commissioners pay their own way January 24, 2003 How can I put forth a resolution that the members being recalled to this recall meeting be requested to provide their own accommodations and expenses or that they be paid by the 57 members who have requested this recall? Truman Hunter Oxford, Ohio PCUSA protestations sound like delaying tactics January 24, 2003 From OGA's response, one would think all the best minds of the PCUSA organizational structure were busily attending to Dr. Metherell's call for a special General Assembly to account for flagging leadership resolve to uphold the church's constitution and charge to comply with G-6.0106.b. From OGA's viewpoint, Mr. Jensen is "premature" in bringing his complaint. But let's remember that it took this "extreme" and well-placed "shot across the bow" of listing Good Ship PCUSA by one courageous commissioner, Dr. Metherell, to call the vessel into action at all! Mr. Jensen's legal challenge to certain presbyteries to take responsibility for non-compliance within their jurisdiction where defiance against G-6.0106.b exists has been rejected or ignored. OGA's protestations that "Many conversations are taking place across the denomination regarding the possibility of a called special assembly" and "With opinions flying around the church about an unprecedented special meeting of the 214th General Assembly" … could be construed as more delaying tactics. Might not Paul Jensen be excused for putting legal "teeth" into the long-traveled and meandering course adopted by those in unabashedly arrogant non-compliance? Perhaps had the commissioners not had hand-delivered letters from the moderator asking them to withdraw our names (I have it on the best of authority) there would not be a question of "conspiracy" raised. Joan Archibald |
|
| January
letters, page 3 Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |