 |
|
| June
2003 letters Archives of letters to the editor  |
|
| PCUSA
is selling one lemon after another June 27, 2003 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. Matthew 23:27 Loyalty to petrified opinion never broke a chain or freed a human soul. Mark Twain. I bought my first new car from Bob in 1966. I wish you all could know Bob; he is such a nice man, polite, helpful, and my concerns are always his top priority. Unfortunately, the car was a lemon. Bob was very upset about that. He urged me to trade it in on the 1967 model, which he assured me would be much better. "Unfortunately," he apologized, "I can't give you much for your trade; after all, it is a lemon." After driving the 1967 model for a year, I told Bob that it was worse than the 1966. Bob was very upset; he had been hearing that from other customers, too. He said he would make me a "real good deal" on a 1968, but, unfortunately, the trade wouldn't bring in much, since no one wanted the '67s. I feel so sorry for poor Bob. I have had to trade in my car every year because each one was worse than the year before. Bob is so embarrassed. He says he complained to his superiors and they have promised to make changes. But each change just makes things worse. Bob doesn't know what else he can do; but he promises to keep trying. I trust Bob. He is a good man. I believe him when he says my concerns are his top priority. So I will keep buying my cars from Bod. Wouldn't you? I met with a new pastor in our presbytery recently. In the course of our conversation, I observed that Presbyterian ministers were intelligent, capable people, so I had to wonder about how committed they were to renewal in our denomination if, after nearly 40 years, everything was worse than it had been before. I suggested that maybe they weren't really committed to succeeding. The pastor rankled at that notion. He assured me that he knew many of the people in the renewal movement personally; you couldn't find nicer folks, polite, helpful, with the concerns of the church always their top priority. (Something about the way he described these renewal people sounded familiar. Why, they sounded just like Bob!) For nearly four decades, we have been sold one lemon after another. Always with the assurance that our leaders were real sorry about how things had gone last year, but trust them to make next year better. And we have – except for those 2,000,000 who got fed up with the lame excuses and left – because they are such nice people. Of course this is an exercise in the theology of accommodation. Instead of demanding concrete results based on sound Biblically doctrine, we make excuses for them and accept failure because we don't want to offend anyone. (Interestingly, this pastor did not attend a denominational seminary, and does not use denominational Christian Educational materials.) There can be no healing until we confront the root causes of our problems. Just being nice and sincere has accomplished nothing but a mass hoodwinking of the church members who remain. The Bible teaches us that we are trustees of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We do not have the luxury of allowing, as we have been doing, those in leadership positions to dilute and pollute this message, even if they are nice, polite, helpful, and have the interests of the church as their top priority. Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me! Well, enough about church; I need to go see Bob. He assured me the '04s were going to be much better! The Old Gray Dog Jim Tuckett Research sheds light on PCUSA's problems June 27, 2003 The Research Services Office of the Presbyterian Church (USA) recently conducted a survey of over 3,600 randomly chosen Presbyterians – 1,102 members, 1,145 elders and 1,435 ordained ministers. Some of the results may shed some light on the difficulties that our denomination currently faces. 70 percent of members, 75 percent of elders, 71 percent of pastors and 55 percent of specialized clergy said they agree or strongly agree that "the only absolute Truth for humankind is in Jesus Christ." (This means that 29% of pastors think that there is some Truth (with a capital "T") that is not contained in Jesus Christ) 43 percent of members, 50 percent of elders, 39 percent of pastors and 24 percent of other clergy said they agree or strongly agree that "only followers of Jesus Christ can be saved." (Over six out of ten pastors and an even greater number of the total number of ordained ministers think that there is another way to salvation than through faith in Christ) Two-thirds of members and specialized clergy and 80 percent of pastors and elders said they agree that "Jesus will return to earth some day." (One out of five Presbyterian ministers do not believe that Jesus is returning) Our seminaries are obviously not teaching the essential tenets of the faith. Unless the ordained clergy understand and teach scriptural truth, the flocks which they minister to will be lost. It is very dangerous for a minister to make statements contrary to the Word of God. (James 3:1 – "Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.") (Mark 9:42 – "And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck.") The efforts of the Presbytery of San Diego to ensure that candidates for the ministry of Word and sacrament will be examined and prepared is a vital first step, and I would pray that other presbyteries would follow suit. We also need to make sure the seminaries we support are teaching the Word of God. I have been privileged to have been taught and mentored by men of sound theology with a clear conscience. It would appear that many in our denomination have not been so fortunate. Brian Ahier, deacon Gateway Presbyterian Church The Dalles, Ore. Transgendered minister should leave ministry June 27, 2003 Romans chapters 1 to 3 could not be any clearer on man's condemnation, yet the gay agenda seeks, not only to Re-Imagine the PCUSA, but to call for the repeal of G-6.0106b, which is no surprise. If Erin Swenson wants to be a woman, who once was Eric Swenson, that is her business, but to be a minister in the PCUSA, and violating G-6.0106b is so wicked. Erin Swenson would be better off leaving the ministry, preserving what honor and respect she has for herself, which is not much on the scale of 1 to 10. Homosexuality, lesbianism and transgendering all violate the Holy Bible's teaching on ethics and morality. How ironic for Erin Swenson to state, "Church is not the place to hide from the truth," while at the same time Erin Swenson violates the very same truth she wants the church not to hide. The Church preserves, preaches and defends the truth, but for the Church to validate her behavior and others' betrays the very same truth Christ commissioned the body of Christ to preach and the Apostle Paul's instructions on man's condemnation (Rom. 1-3). Erin Swenson is not only violating Scripture, but in her behavior, Erin Swenson and others reject the Holy Scripture as the Word of God. Lou. S. Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. Moderator's communion was low point for YAD June 26, 2003 As a YAD to the 215th General Assembly, I was present at the evening caucus where Erin Swenson related his/her story to the YADs. While I listened to the story respectfully there, and when he/she spoke during the open hearing for the Church Orders and Ministry Committee, on which I served, I could not help but be moved by some of the statements made. As a college student I have taken several courses on "gender issues" and have studied transgendered experiences in a limited setting. I was saddened to hear this story and could not help but think that Erin Swenson, who had so firmly stated his/her commitment to the church and to faith in Jesus Christ, could not rely on God to solve a perceived problem of gender. Instead he took matters into his own hands and violated God's law. As a related note of interest, the YADs had opportunity to view presentations made by different groups each night during the caucus time. Several renewal groups showed up, but night after night it was the "liberal" groups who consistently showed up to spread their vitriol. I would just like to encourage the renewal groups to do a better job of reaching the young people of the church. Do not write us off as a lost generation, with no hope! I will close with this story. At the last caucus, Friday evening, the moderator, the Rev. Dr. Susan Andrews, brought the YADs greetings and spoke with us for a brief while. Later she presided at holy communion. During the invitation, when stating the words of institution, she was following a liturgy that included praises to God for creating all people "... short and tall, dark and light, gay and straight ... etc." I was horrified by this statement, and seriously considered not partaking of the sacrament. But I did for the sake of unity, and that is the one time since being confirmed in 1995, that I have regretted taking communion in the Presbyterian Church, even though it was rightly administered and the moderator was rightly ordained. Just two nights before I had the pleasure of serving Communion with the past moderator, Fahed Abu-Akel, a true man of God! Just an interesting thought on how our new moderator will probably operate this coming year. May God help our church! A.D. Lorenz, elder First Presbyterian Church Warsaw, Ohio Lucifer, also, wanted to be like God June 26, 2003 Rita Nakashima Brock and her gang admit Christ did not die for the elect. If that be true, how can one attain perfection? Brock admits working to be like God. Isaiah 14:28 teaches that Lucifer's strategy is to be like the Most High. Lucifer seeks to dethrone our triune God and be worshipped as the true God. Lou. S. Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. Amen to Parker's self-therapy June 26, 2003 As one of the previous letter writers stated, "Your comments on the re-imagining gathering seemed 'the sort of breathless chatter better suited for the National Enquirer than a publication claiming a Christian imprimatur." I agree. Your line "Two feminist theologians, considered leading lights in the Re-Imagining movement, told their fellow travelers," was clearly beyond the limits of responsible journalism. Definition: fellow traveler-noun: a communist sympathizer (but not a member of the Communist Party.) Editor's note: Fellow traveler, "One who sympathizes with or supports the tenets and program of an organized group", American Heritage Dictionary. The line: "Both unmarried, they work together and travel together," was addressed by Pastor W. Patterson Lyles, I'm surprised you failed to mention their butch haircuts. Until now, I've never heard greetings for a speaker referred to as a ritual, "While some of the participants claim that they do not worship a goddess named Sophia – after the Greek word for wisdom – their rituals unquestionably leave that impression. The wave and chant were standard greetings for speakers at the conference." Also, "One called Bush a fascist" is not too far off target. Definition: fascist [n.] An adherent of fascism or other right-wing authoritarian views. Considering the multitude of children who have been abused, and suffer into adulthood, I was impressed with Professor Parker's self-therapy "Saying she was abused as a child, Parker told of retreating to a Hindu community and living for a while in silence. She described one of her paintings in which she portrayed her body as having been penetrated "by an old gray penis." With her paints, she said she surgically removed it, sutured up that area of her body and concluded, Surely, goodness and mercy will follow me all the days of my life." I say amen, and amen! Dick Blanton Owensboro, Ky. It's time to consider separation from PCUSA June 26, 2003 Have you considered separating yourselves completely from the PCUSA altogether. It looks like it is going to get worse in the PCUSA, as well as other mainline denominations, based upon what I am reading. Ron Bowling Jr. Why waste time attending women's conference June 26, 2003 Why would any woman waste her time to attend the women's conference August 9-12 at Montreat? Of course, I really wonder why the denomination invites such speakers to the conference. It is hard to financially support such strange themes and events. Steve Wilson PCUSA has enough heretics without Unitarian speaker June 26, 2003 It saddens me to no great end the current round of charges being fired off around our church. We have enough heretics of our own denomination without needing to bring others in, such as Rita Nakashima Brock of the Unitarian "church." I heard a series of three lectures delivered by Ms. Brock several years ago as a part of an ongoing lecture series sponsored by the religion department at the college I attend (a Presbyterian College in Ohio). I was dismayed at her less-than-orthodox beliefs then and continue to be disappointed that she persists in spreading aberrant theology. It was very difficult to repair the fissure her lectures caused within the Christian community on our campus. I was offended by her statements but managed to keep a level head about the situation and realize that she was very far out in "left field." Unfortunately many of the less theologically astute students had a difficulty in making the separation and were either unduly influenced by her theology or became virulently opposed to what she was saying and refused to remain as a part of the dialogue, which I found to be the most important aspect of her lecture series. I could continue writing about all of the heterodox theology Ms. Brock tried to use on some simple college students, but I imagine that most readers, from what they have already read, know what I would write about. A.D. Lorenz, elder Warsaw Ohio Why don't some Presbyterians become Unitarians? June 25, 2003 I was sad to read about the re-imagining conference recently celebrated in Minneapolis. I was sad to read of the two Unitarian theologians who spoke and cannot understand why those in the PCUSA who agree with these two heretical teachers do not just go to the Unitarian church? Some folks speak about keeping the unity and peace of the church but in practice do just the opposite! We of the PCUSA are a confessional church, which means we stand for certain basic fundamental theological and ethical truths. If this is so hard for some folks to understand, why do they remain within the PCUSA? I think they will be more respected if they honestly left and not stayed around to cause our PCUSA to be at war. I understand that some will not leave because they consider themselves to be Presbyterian. But having denied basic truths we have affirmed as a body, they are not really Presbyterian; even though they may believe in our form of church government. (There is a tendency to even deny the basics of our church government wherein presbyteries can make up their own mind as to who is capable of being ordained even if they do not meet up to our doctrinal and ethical requirements). It is true that we can stay and try to change what we have believed and practiced, but the flagrant violation of what is presently accepted just goes to show that these folks really do not respect our decisions as a body of Christian believers – "our way or no way" seems to be their motto. When things are voted their way everything is OK and should be obeyed to the letter, but when things are not voted their way then violation of our standards as a body do not matter. God help us! Rev. Eddie Soto Faith Presbyterian Church Tallahassee, Fla. The inconsistency: Anti-violence, pro-abortion June 25, 2003 I have never understood why the feminists are not able to see that the destruction of unborn babies is an act of violence, especially when the baby's brain is sucked out of its head. Brock and Parker seem to be against violence in general, but condone the violence done to aborted unborn babies. Let's have some consistency. Dale Parker Analomink, Pa. Re-imaginers' thinking is confused June 25, 2003 I found the article by The Layman Online difficult to understand. Not that the reporting was not good. Rather, the sayings of Brock and Parker are ramblings and all based on false premises. Nothing seemed realistic or logical in their apologetics. As such, it is wise to dismiss it as the confused, subtle hate-talk of desperate revisionists who hope that if they repeat their thinking often enough someone will think it must be true. Unfortunately, there will some confused souls who will accept confused thinking. R.A. Halsted Re-imaginers are 'Devil's Disciples' June 25, 2003 The re-imaginers do not believe that Jesus Christ died for them because they don't belong to Christianity any more. They are "Devil's Disciples." I know, and so does the Holy Bible tell me, that the Lord Jesus Christ did die for my sins and delivered me from darkness of Devil's kingdom. Now I am sure I live in glittering hope of eternal life. I really don't care what these women say. Yet I do care about the reaction of the church on such blasphemous statements. I wrote earlier that such people who have altogether different "theology" (pagan theology) must be excommunicated from the church, the body of Christ should not have such scares like the re-imaginers and all who disobey the Word of God. Rev. Timotheus Nasir Pakistan Does paper lack mention of resurrection? June 25, 2003 In reading "Essential Tenets and Reformed Distinctives" set forth by the San Diego Presbytery, I do not see direct mention to the resurrection of the body, where, as believers in Christ through God's grace, we may have life after death? Is this an oversight on my part? Gary Bligh Calvary Presbyterian Church San Francisco, Calif. We did a quick digital scan of the presbytery's paper and found it contained a number of references to the resurrection of Christ, with emphasis on the bodily resurrection. Furthermore, in its proposed questions to candidates for ordination, the paper asked them to comment on heaven and hell. Readers may wish to suggest further commentary on those questions to the Presbytery of San Diego. E-mail may be addressed to execpresbyter@presbyterysd.org. The editors Encouraging sinfulness is cruelty June 25, 2003 I would like to concur with Rev. Rob Harrison's comments. I consider myself a sinner, both in the sense of falling short of ideals and in the sense of sometimes behaving in a way that I know is wrong. I also understand that it is as much the denial of my own sins as the act of committing them that separates me from the love of God. Therefore, in the context of "loving my neighbor," for the church to support and encourage me in my sinfulness would be one of the most cruel and unfeeling things it could do to me. It is rather like organizing a chapter of Alcoholics Anonymous and then providing an open bar at the meetings God's response to us in love, as expressed in the prophetic tradition, of which Jesus is certainly a part, is both a "yes" and a "no" – yes to us as people, often no to our behavior. To fail to recognize this is to no longer be a real part of the body of Christ, God's witnesses to the world. Bruce M. Williams San Francisco, Calif. Why bother to publicize re-imaginers? June 24, 2003 These people [re-imaginers] are not Christians. They are heretics and exhibitionists. Why do you bother to publicize them and their ranting? They are not a threat to any intelligent Christian. I will not waste my time reading the drivel these people produce. Richard Carter Palm Bay, Fla. Speakers are from official Unitarian seminary June 24, 2003 It would have been even more revealing as to where Brock and Parker are coming from, theologically, if you had pointed out that the Starr King School of Theology is an official Unitarian seminary. Ron Scates, senior pastor Highland Park Church Dallas, Texas One-word commentary on re-imaginers June 24, 2003 Weird! Even for heretics and blashemers. Rabun B. Harper, elder Chatsworth, Calif. Article used veiled intimation June 24, 2003 Whatever the faults of the Re-Imagining movement may be, the use of veiled intimation directed at its leaders is both uncalled for and un-Christian. To quote from your article, "Re-Imaginers: Christians wrong to believe Jesus died for their sins: "Both unmarried, they work together and travel together." That statement applies to countless women and men. What does it add to the article? Nothing. So why include it? The answer to that seems obvious and odious, the sort of breathless chatter better suited for the National Enquirer than a publication claiming a Christian imprimatur. You do yourselves and your readers a disservice by resorting to such tactics. John Calvin warns us against this very thing in II.8-49 of the Institutes: "Therefore, if there is any true fear and love of God in us, let us take care, as far as is possible and expedient as love requires, not to yield our tongues or our ears to evil speaking and caustic wit, and not to give our minds without casue to sly suspicion." Pastor W. Patterson Lyles First Presbyterian Tullahoma, Tenn. During the conference, the speakers made a point of saying they travel together. The editors Response to writer of story about Mount Auburn June 24, 2003 The attached e-mail was sent as a response to Erica Solvig, the reporter who wrote the largely sympathetic and incorrect Cincinnati Enquirer article on the Mount Auburn situation. While I have no hope that it will do any good, at least she and the Enquirer stand corrected. Mike Schrowang, elder Londonderry Presbyterian Church Londonderry, N.H.
The issue is not about the color of one's eyes June 24, 2003 It irritates me to see people continuing to push the equation of persons of homosexual desires with those who are "brown-eyed, female, dark-skinned, short," etc., an equation which is not only fallacious, it is actively disingenuous. As Mr. Jim Nedelka and everyone else knows full well, active homosexuals are a group defined by their behavior, which they can choose to exercise or not exercise, while those who are "brown-eyed, female, dark-skinned, short," etc., are defined by physical characteristics which cannot be altered by any reasonable effort of will. What is more, behaviors carry moral freight, where physical characteristics don't, which is why homosexual activity may legitimately be considered a moral issue while being brown-eyed or short may not. Now, I imagine Mr. Nedelka would fire back that homosexuality is also an unchosen characteristic which cannot be altered by any reasonable effort of will. Those who have in fact altered it through the ministry of Exodus and others provide an effective rebuttal to that position, but let us for the moment stipulate that their rebuttal is incomplete. There are some who are unable to change their homosexual desires; this still leaves the real flaw in this argument, which is the acceptance of the contemporary American assumption that we should "do what feels good," as the Diet Coke ad says. The truth is that desire does not automatically equal action, nor does desire justify action, as we still understand in many cases (the desire to get drunk and then drive, for instance). The question then becomes, why should we privilege those whose desires are homosexual in nature over others whose desires are equally proscribed by Scripture, such as alcoholics? We understand, or we used to, that there are many who have powerful desires to sin, desires of which they are unable to get free. This is why Scripture consistently describes sin in terms of bondage/slavery. But it also says they are expected to live holy lives, and are given the presence and power of the Holy Spirit to enable them to be "overcomers," as Revelation says, or "more than conquerors," to use Paul's language. We understand that this is hard, which is why we have 12-step groups to provide critically important support for the struggle. Why some are left to struggle with such desires their whole lives while others are delivered, I don't know. This is a mystery which troubles me, but it seems to me deeply unfair to let homosexuals off the hook because their desires are powerful and yet leave alcoholics, pornography addicts, and others who struggle with equally powerful desires still on that hook. Regarding Mr. Nedelka's comment about "loving thy neighbor as thyself" (which isn't, by the way, "the most important Biblical passage" – that would be the one before it, the one about "loving the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind and strength," which controls how we are to love our neighbor): telling active homosexuals that they have a sin issue to deal with isn't necessarily being unloving, because the central message is a loving one. Anyone who fails to confront me for my sinfulness if I am unrepentant is failing to show me the love of God. Part of loving me is challenging me with God's holiness and part of loving myself is addressing my sin, repenting of it, confessing it and seeking to change. Allowing those who are defying God's holiness to carry on unchallenged is no more an act of love than allowing a drowning man to drown unrescued. Rev. Rob Harrison Grand Lake, Col. It shouldn't have taken so long June 23, 2003 I agree that A. Stephen Van Kuiken essentially removed himself with his open defiance toward the church. I only wish it wouldn't take so long to get the required action. It hurts our church when this continues to be a thorn in our side. Either abide by the rules or start your own church. Randy Huggins, elder Dunbar, W.Va. Van Kuiken upheld the most important Biblical passage June 23, 2003 I can't help but wonder what position The Layman would take in the current Van Kuiken situation if the words gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgender were replaced by the words brown-eyed, female, dark-skinned, short? If the bottom line argument against Van Kuiken is that he defiled Biblical passages, then I would suggest that his actions did just the opposite! He upheld the most important Biblical passage, the one where Jesus says "and a second is like it – you shall love thy neighbor as thyself." Modern Presbyterians seemingly have short memories. Many probably know that, within the past 15 years, this denomination reunited. But many probably don't know why there had been a split. The split came in the mid 1800s because many Presbyterians abhorred the acceptance in too many quarters that African-Americans were nothing more than slaves. This denomination decried communism and the USSR, where the stated rule was "everyone is equal" but the reality was "some people are more equal than others." Presbyterians need to remember that there was a great hue and cry some 40 years or so ago when this denomination first opened its doors to ordained ministry for women, first as deacons, then as elders, then as ministers of the Word and sacrament. If the Book of Order's primary question to prospective PCUSA members is whether they accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and will follow his teachings, then why shouldn't the denomination use Jesus' admonition about loving "thy neighbor as thyself" as its prime directive? Unless I'm mistaken, aren't we humans made in God's image and likeness? If so, wouldn't we be better Christians – better Presbyterians – if we stopped playing God and let God decide if someone's call to service is genuine? I'm sure we can all agree that, in a denomination whose numbers are drastically dwindling, we should be welcoming – not shunning – those willing to accept the rigors of God's work through congregational, presbytery, synod and GA service, as well as those who take on the mantle of seminary study ... no matter if they happen to be gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgendered, brown-eyed, female, dark-skinned or short. Jim Nedelka, elder West-Park Presbyterian Church New York Renewal groups can work together, within the boundaries of their differences June 23, 2003 Miss Candice Pillion is absolutely correct in her assertion that renewal groups within the PCUSA need to put aside their differences and find ways to work together to promote their common causes. PFR has done a wonderful job of building bridges between disparate groups, and I believe that they may fear that association with more conservative groups like the Presbyterian Lay Committee would make them less attractive to more moderate groups. The Presbyterian Lay Committee has worked mightily to maintain our Scriptural and confessional foundation, and The Layman has done a fantastic job of delivering timely and important information that may not be available from other news sources, while providing editorial content that provides a much needed balance to the liberal news media. Overall, both of these groups serve huge functions for the Body of Christ. Do not expect the hand to act as a foot, or the ear to perform the work of an eye. But these parts can work together, within the boundaries of their differences, for the building up of the whole Body. A revival IS going to begin sweeping across this land and we need to all work together, talk together, and most of all pray together for the renewal of his Church and especially that portion of it represented by the PCUSA. Brian Ahier, deacon Gateway Presbyterian Church The Dalles, Ore. Doing the right thing should be normal June 23, 2003 So now we're reduced to cheering when a presbytery does something right? That's incredible. Doing the right thing should be normal. Forty-five people who vote in that presbytery still don't get it. It just goes to show you the degree to which our standards have been turned upside down. Jack O'Brien Pittsburgh, Pa. Ministers should speak from the pulpit about the controversies in the PCUSA June 23, 2003 We supposedly live in the world's wealthiest nation. Has preoccupation with material wealth skewed the good stewardship of our church? In view of all the controversies swirling in the PCUSA, have many members become complacent? I travel a great deal and attend whatever Presbyterian church I can find on Sunday mornings; churches in big cities or small towns. The congregations arrive and find the lights are on, they hear the choir sing and the preacher preach. After services they visit with friends and then go on to enjoy the day. There is nothing wrong with any of that … except, is there complacency to what's happening behind the scenes? Individual churches seem to address the denominational controversies of gay ordination, same-sex marriage, and non-compliance to church laws in different ways. In a few large city churches some minister's mention "inclusiveness" and other buzzwords that give a tone of acceptance to those issues and, possibly, they consider noncompliance as acceptable. I believe they are trying to "prepare" their congregations for changes. If that is true, they are being disingenuous in not simply stating their positions. However, in most churches services seem to roll along with no reference to the controversies. The Anglican Church is having similar controversies with some dioceses working to justify gay ordination and same-sex marriages. After last September's Anglican Consultative Council meeting in Hong Kong, Archbishop Peter Akinola of the Anglican Church of Nigeria, the largest Anglican Province (17 million members), issued a statement, which included: "It is significant that those diocese most tempted to indulge themselves with unilateral actions, taken without consulting the wider Communion, seem so often to be among those materially most advantaged and to be in the global north … Do we not see here, in the ready assertion of superior wisdom, a new imperialism?" Last May 28, Bishop Michael Ingham of the Diocese of New Westminster, Vancouver, BC, Canada went against the grain and conducted an officially sanctioned same-sex marriage. The reaction from Archbishop Akinola was swift and decisive. On May 30, his Province severed communion with Bishop Ingham and the Diocese of New Westminster and issued a statement declaring: "… the much desired reflection that will ease the strain on our Communion has been jettisoned. Furthermore, failure to ensure strict compliance with resolutions duly passed at our meetings clearly shows that Bishop Ingham and his diocese see no value in being accountable to anybody." Most trendy "New Age" people are found in large metro areas where most of the controversies in our denomination are centered. They appear as elitists "asserting a superior wisdom" - to paraphrase Archbishop Akinola. But after 2,000 years, does Christianity in general and the PCUSA in particular need their "superior wisdom?" It would be good for PCUSA ministers to speak from the pulpit about the controversies tearing at the denomination. They should be straightforward and give both sides of the issues. Enlightening their congregations is part of their duty and they need not fear – the people can handle it. By making their congregations aware, it is likely that any complacency will quickly melt away. The elitists probably do not relish the idea of well-informed congregations since complacency allows for fertile ground in which "superior wisdom" can grow an agenda. It is arrogant for a small group to think it can subtlety "prepare" good people because good people – especially when well informed – will not be led to where they would not normally go. The PCUSA needs members who are alert to controversies, and the denomination needs decisiveness. The PCUSA must brush aside complacency. David O. Chumbley, elder Minneapolis, Minn. Christians have the only answer to the sin problem of the world June 23, 2003 The furor over Elder Cave's recent proclamation of the new age gospel would be funny if it were not so tragic. Here we see an elder who denies the vows he made when he was ordained and, when we look at the statistics of the church he serves, we see the result. The disastrous loss of members and even more drastic drop in church school attendance tells me that they are not having a Pentecost experience. It almost parallels the drop in members in the PCUSA since it began to devote most of its energy to the subject of sex. As a business owner, I have always wanted to achieve a monopoly situation, but have always been disappointed. As a Christian we are given a monopoly - we have the only answer to the sin problem of the world! Why are we not pushing our product and ignoring the mouse that roared? Mr. Cave, and the rest of the pitiful followers of Progressive Theology, will one day learn that when God says it is sin IT IS SIN! Arnold Taylor, elder Colonial Presbyterian Church Presbytery decision honors Word of God June 19, 2003 I am not alone in welcoming the decision on Van Kuiken, made by the Cincinnati Presbytery. It was a good decision. It was the right decision. It honors the Word of God. Our whole denomination is in need of Revival, and this decision is a step in the right direction. The most recent General Assembly is a sobering reminder that much work needs to be done. Any assembly that elects a moderator with a pro-gay agenda, is, by definition lacking discernment. The grass roots of our denomination needs to rediscover Jesus, and the transforming power of the Holy Spirit. As we abhor sin in our own lives, and experience victory over "human inclinations," it is then, and only then, that our corporate body has anything of substance to offer to a lost and hurting society. Pastor Jerry J. Voss Millbrook Church Fresno, Calif. A glimmer of hope June 19, 2003 Thank you Lord for this glimmer of hope for the PCUSA. Burr Sheely Great Bridge Presbyterian Church Chesapeake, Va. It's time to bite the bullet and get along June 19, 2003 In response to the letter from Keith Hill and the events that prompted it: Here's what I don't understand – why two fantastic, hard-working, Godly organizations within the PCUSA, working for the same thing, can't bite the bullet and get along. Yes, The Layman likes to use strong language, occasionally verging on the hyperbolic. Yes, PFR likes to appeal to a broad base of people by using less inflammatory language and perhaps weakening the message (I can hear both groups shouting at me as we speak). They are organizations of very different approaches, and the fault is not on just one side, as far as I can see. However, how is the Kingdom of God being furthered by the two groups fighting with each other? How are we working to better the PCUSA when we are pointing out faults in each other? How much more powerful would the renewal movement be if the two foremost organizations worked together instead of disparaging one another (think Galatians 5:15)? This is a bad witness, folks. It's about time you found a way of moving past your differences and helped one another to organize and further a revival in this quickly dying "beloved denomination" of ours. Candice Pillion YAD at 215th GA La Jolla Presbyterian Church Impressed with Van Kuiken's honesty, integrity June 19, 2003 I congratulate the Presbytery of Cincinnati on the wisdom of their decision concerning the obvious renunciation of the jurisdiction of the Presbyterian Church (USA) by A. Stephen Van Kuiken. Tom Sweets, pastor of Madeira-Silverwood Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati is correct that Mr. Van Kuiken is "man of principle and a man of his word." I am very impressed with Mr. Van Kuiken's honesty and integrity. As much as I disagree with his theology, I also respect the strength of his convictions and his willingness to stand by them. If more people on both sides of this issue showed his sense of honor, we would truly be working for peace, purity and unity within our church. I pray that Mr. Van Kuiken, and those members of Mount Auburn church that believe as he does, will find a denomination that more accurately reflects their understanding of the Word of God. Brian Ahier The Dalles, Ore. No respect for inspiration and authority of Scripture June 19, 2003 In his letter of June 12, 2003, the Rev. Mr. L. Rus Howard asks, "Has respect for the inspiration and authority of Scripture fallen so much that Presbyterians no longer feel obligated to base their arguments on the Word of God?" I wonder where Mr. Howard has been these last umpteen years! The answer, at least for a significant number of the "leaders" of the PCUSA, is a resounding YES! Robert C. Oates |
|
| June
2003 letters, page 2 Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |