 |
|
| March
2004 letters to the editor Archives of letters to the editor  |
|
| Maybe
Nicodemus and Joseph were in The Passion March 31, 2004 Dr. Metherell – Great article (about The Passion of the Christ)! Thanks very much for writing it. One small comment – You say, "We do not see anything of Nicodemus or Joseph of Arimathea ..." I think we do. Gibson shows two members of the Sanhedrin objecting to irregularities in the trial and being shoved out of the courtyard. They weren't identified, but I assumed that they were Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. It would fit – as people who wanted to protect Jesus but didn't want to risk being identified with them, the safest thing to do would be to object to the (obviously illegal) procedures of the trial. Of course, that's just my supposition, but it would be consistent. In fact, the IMDB page for the movie (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0335345/fullcredits) lists actors playing both Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, so I'll bet that Gibson intended the identification to be clear – even though Caiaphas doesn't actually say, "Will you people get Nicodemus out of here!" Just a thought ... Andrew Solovay 'Run, Bob, Run! Run, Rus, Run!' March 31, 2004 It took far less time than I thought for the nay-sayers to begin calling for one of the conservative/evangelical candidates for stated clerk to drop out. We all knew that these letters would come but really, let us examine their premise. Having two candidates ensures Mr. Kirkpatrick a win? Why? By what logic is that the case? The fact is that the winner must garner 51 percent of the vote. In the past where there have been more than two candidates, the third place finisher has withdrawn and the run-off was between the top two. That is custom, not church law. a. Who is to say that Mr. Kirkpatrick's increasingly inept leadership won't move him to third? b. What if the third place candidate doesn't drop out? That would cause a stalemate which would at the very least suspend the continued ineptitude and ideology driven actions of our current leadership. I say, "Run, Bob, Run! Run, Rus, Run!" Unless and until we affect a change in the halls of Louisville our decline will continue and accelerate to the point that we are losing a member every 10 minutes instead of every 13 as is now the case. Both Bob Davis and L. Rus Howard are committed to the Lordship of Christ and the essential tenets of our Reformed faith. They will not pander to the cultural accommodation of the NCC and WCC. Nor will they facilitate the strident but minority voice which proclaims itself progressive while systematically working to deconstruct the Presbyterian Church USA. Cliff must be defeated. Put your energies to telling about his failures and quit worrying about the two guys willing to lay it on the line for you and me. Rev. James C. Yearsley Pittsburgh, Pa. Who will fire Ivory? March 31, 2004 In the wake of Elenora Giddings Ivory's deceptive [speech in front of the U.S. Capitol] and the public outrage that has ensued, both from within and without the Presbyterian Church, who will fire her and send her packing to the Episcopal Church?! Douglas Wilkie Los Angeles Stacked deck describes Baltimore case March 31, 2004 I read The Presbyterian Outlook report on the Baltimore case on Presbyweb tonight and could never figure out exactly what took place. Then I clicked on The Layman Online's account. Thankfully, The Layman Online reported it in language I could understand. The Layman Online noted that all members of the "investigative committee" which looked into the controversy at Baltimore were contributors to "That All May Freely Serve," that the Baltimore presbytery executive signed articles of incorporation for TAMFS, and that TAMFS offices are located within the presbytery offices. "Stacked Deck" might have explained the situation even more clearly. Elsewhere on Presbyweb tonight, I see that Susan Andrews has stacked the deck for her GLBT agenda at the General Assembly in Richmond. David Howard Jacksonville, Fla. Was writer expressing superiority and exclusion? March 31, 2004 I have been reading and seeking to comprehend writings on doctrine, religious politics and moral/ethical matters for more years than I care to remember. I am having a bit of difficulty in determining the point of the letters sent in by the Rev. Sale, as they seem little more than the standard liberal "pap." What is more clear however is that he is doubtlessly right whatever the topic or circumstance. Gee, now even I feel "polarized" by his "too clever by half" expressions of superiority and exclusion. Certainly he did not intend that. That would be "vindictive." Davis R. Dalby, elder Washington Office is a cancer on the fabric of the PCUSA March 29, 2004 My wife and I are appalled to learn that Elenora Giddings Ivory and her Washington Office are backing this rally [The March for Women's Lives]. As a member of the National ProLife Religious Council, I am aware of the Silent No More campaign started by Janet Morana of Priests for Life and Georgette Forney of National Organization of Episcopalians for Life, and I believe Terry Schlossberg of Presbyterians ProLife is also promoting the Silent No More Campaign. What is it going to take to convince Ms. Ivory that what she and her staff are doing is supporting the murder of unborn children, a practice that not only kills the babies but also hurts women? In fact, it hurts women very, very badly. That is the theme that Ms. Morana and Ms. Forney are stressing: "Abortion hurts women" and "Women deserve better" and "I regret my abortion" are the signs they plan to hold. Does Ms. Ivory and her staff realize how fundamentally anti-women the promotion of abortion rights really is? And further, does she realize how basically anti-black support of abortion rights also is? It is a fact that a disproportionate number of black babies are among the over four thousand babies aborted every day. In fact, it actually amounts to a form of "black genocide." Do the moderator and stated clerk of our General Assembly know that the Washington Office is consistently taking these radical positions? Why is this permitted? We are both praying that God will close this Washington Office, which is a cancer on the fabric of the PCUSA. Rev. Ben Sheldon, (H.R.) and Mrs. Amy Sheldon Elverson, Pa. No chance of new stated clerk unless someone drops out of race March 29, 2004 I totally agree that at some point one of these gentlemen should drop out of the race for stated clerk. If both of these gentlemen stay in this race there is no chance that we will get a new stated clerk and Lord knows we need one. Ed McLean Maitland, Fla. The person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ is the entire basis for our faith March 29, 2004 The information contained in Presbyterians Today never ceases to amaze me. A couple of months ago we were treated to a summary of the "solid theology" in the television show Joan of Arcadia, which made my wife and I convulse with laughter at such an absurd claim. This month's offering contains an article about evangelicals by John Filiatreau. Filiatreau writes as though the concepts of an inerrant Bible, personal responsibility for evangelism, and a commitment to a life of holiness are a brand new phenomenon rather than the norms of the Church for over a thousand years. However, it is his surprise observation that "a conviction that Christ's death on the cross is the key to forgiveness of sin and eternal salvation" that concerns me the most. Does Filiatreau think that only "evangelicals" believe this? Shouldn't ALL Christians believe this? Does Filiatreau himself not share this conviction? Why does he write as though he has heard it for the very first time? I can't believe I actually have to state this among professing Christians, but the person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ is the entire basis for our faith. So much so that the apostle Paul says that if Christ be not raised, then our faith is in vain (1 Corinthians 15). Indeed, the apostle just might be on to something. Another ridiculous statement from the article quoted by Filiatreau is, "In the words of Princeton historian Robert Wuthnow: Mainline Protestants say, 'That's not really my role, to get out there. I can live as a good Christian; hopefully they'll see something in my lifestyle; or perhaps, if they're really in need, they'll come to me. But I'm not going to go out of my way. That would be an intrusion on their rights. That would be a lack of respect. So all I can do is be an example, and leave it at that.'" Why do professing Presbyterians act as though they have never heard of sharing the gospel before? Looking at the Scriptures, we find that Jesus sent out the 12, then later sent out the 70. They were specifically sent out to stomp all over the rights of folks by sharing the good news of the Kingdom. They also committed such acts of disrespect as healing sicknesses and driving out demons. Paul went out of his way not once, but three times, across most of the known world to provide people with much more than an just an example of a lifestyle choice. He went where the Holy Spirit led him to preach the gospel as the apostle to the Gentiles, and I count myself as one Gentile who is now a child of Abraham by faith, for which I will be forever grateful. God forbid that I should ever consider it a lack of respect to not go out of my way to share the gospel, and therefore deny someone the knowledge that would save his/her eternal soul. Paul C. von Wedel Fountain Inn, S.C. Thanks for confirming my perceptions about The Layman March 29, 2004 Thank you for your return comment which does confirm my perceptions that The Layman and The Layman Online is not claiming to be a voice uniquely within the Presbyterian Church (USA), and by your return comment seems glad to point that out publically. I presume therefore that the publishing organization "The Presbyterian Lay Committee" is moving in this same direction. Thank you for the correction and confirmation of my suggestion. Rev. M. Anderson Sale Lynchburg, Va. 'Presbyterian Layman' does appear online March 29, 2004 Rev. M. Anderson Sale says you should drop Presbyterian from your name. You note "We're not sure which publications Rev. Sale is reading, but the word 'Presbyterian' doesn't appear in the name of either The Layman or The Layman Online." I suggest you look at the top of the browser window (I use Internet Explorer) when viewing your site. It does say "Presbyterian Layman." And on your home page near the bottom you note "Foundations of the Faith The Lord's Prayer studies from The Presbyterian Layman are online" and "Theology that Matters, a regular feature of The Presbyterian Layman, is now online." So I might ask which publications (or web sites) are your reading? Earl Apel, member Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church Cincinnati, Ohio The Presbyterian Lay Committee decided to change the names of its print and online publications to The Layman and The Layman Online more than two years ago. But the writer makes a good point. There are still some Web pages that are years old that refer to The Presbyterian Layman and the Layman Online. But the mast heads for both the print and online publications do not include the word Presbyterian. The Editors 'Presbyterian' does appear throughout Web site March 29, 2004 I couldn't help but notice your "Editors' Note" in response to a March 26 letter written by the Rev. M. Anderson Sale. In that letter, the Rev. Sale suggested that you drop the word "Presbyterian" from the names of your publications. Your note pointed out that the word "Presbyterian" does not appear in the name of either "The Layman" or "The Layman Online." I grant you that "Presbyterian" does not appear in those two names, but it does appear in headings throughout your web site. The name "The Presbyterian Layman" also appears on your archive pages. Even the link at the bottom of that page is "The Presbyterian Layman." The link is set off in italics, suggesting a proper title. Perhaps your "Editors' Note" was unfair, even rude, to the Rev. Sale and to other readers who visit your web site and have come to know you as "The Presbyterian Layman." David J. Hunley See comment on letter above. And, indeed, many readers continue to refer to "The Presbyterian Layman." The editors 'May we truly believe 1 Peter 3:15' March 29, 2004 With the People of the Word conference convening June 17-20 at Grove City College, let the body of Christ pray for the Holy Spirit to move in all of our hearts. Unless the Holy Bible is the Word of God and our final authority, we will continually witness the decline of Christian influence in our nation. May we truly believe 1 Peter 3:15, believing that Christ is Lord and every thought captive to the Lordship of Christ. Lou. S. Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. Open letter to the Presbytery of Western North Carolina March 26, 2004 We were shocked, but not surprised, to read of how the Rev. Parker Williamson has been treated by his own presbytery. We do not, of course, know all the facts but it certainly appears as if he has been judged on the basis of his Biblical theology and courage to stand for these truths in a church whose leadership seems bent on division. Is it really the case that liberals are the new dogmatists? Is it really the case that today's prime virtue – tolerance – specifically excludes only those who want to uphold the orthodox truths of the Scriptures as expressed in our historic ecumenical and Reformed confessions? Would it not be a bold and welcome step from the Presbytery of Western North Carolina to admit to error in this case and retract its judgment immediately, releasing a man whose ministry it has over the years recognized, to continue that ministry, however much he may be perceived as "a thorn in the flesh" of the denominational leadership? Is there no room for Biblical conservative views, freely expressed, in the PCUSA? We who seek to maintain Biblical orthodox values within the historic Church of Scotland in days of undoubted culturally pluralist challenges and, sometimes, ill thought-out responses to them in our denomination, want to assure Mr. Williamson of our prayers and warm support. Rev. Dr Norman Maciver, chairman Forward Together Church of Scotland.
Divided evangelicals and spilt votes don't bode well for stated clerk election March 26, 2004 Bob Davis, the leader of the Presbyterian Forum, now stands not only against [Clifton] Kirkpatrick, but also against L. Rus Howard in the run for stated clerk. This does not bode well for evangelicals because all the liberals have to do is wait it out. Liberals will strike their well-practiced, superior poses and belittle any who criticize Kirkpatrick, drawing moderates toward the status quo as the other two candidates split the evangelical vote. Either Davis or Howard are preferable to Kirkpatrick, but neither has a chance with divided evangelical loyalties and a split vote. Is it impossible to coordinate this coup? After much support has been generated for both Davis and Howard, can't they agree that one of the two should drop the nomination and throw all support behind the other? Should it work, we make one man stated clerk; the other we should name "Presbyterian of the Year." The alternative seems to be that the flabby status quo prevails. Noel K. Anderson, executive pastor First Presbyterian Church Bakersfield, Calif. How sad that a mainline denomination is co-sponsor of pro-abortion march March 26, 2004 Sad to say, but I have never agreed with one position taken by the Washington Office over many years. And now they are having the march on Washington to oppose any type of restriction on abortions. How sad that a mainline denomination is even involved, let alone a co-sponsor of this issue. This is another nail in the coffin as 700 members are removed this and every week from the rolls of a once-proud and God-fearing denomination. Chuck Larsen Change the name: Please drop 'Presbyterian' March 26, 2004 From the recent content and scope of the "Presbyterian Layman" online, I would suggest that a name change would be appropriate. What about the "Ecumenical Naysayers Everywhere Movement, Y'all?" This might be too long, but could be known by a shortened use of just the first letters. Just a few questions of mission clarity in this proposed name change ... When does the pursuit of purity become a vindictive crusade against all who don't agree? How is the peace of Christ manifested in polarizing attacks? Is unity within the church measured by the strength of its coordinated critique? And finally, what is a validated ministry anyway, and who determines this in a connectional ecclesiastical system? Well, maybe a name change is not good marketing these days, but please at least drop "Presbyterian." Rev. M. Anderson Sale Lynchburg, Va. Editors' Note: We're not sure which publications Rev. Sale is reading, but the word "Presbyterian" doesn't appear in the name of either The Layman or The Layman Online. Why wonder about trust? March 26, 2004 And Louisville wonders why more and more members don't put much trust in them? Craig Kozak Howard ready for stated clerk's debate March 26, 2004 For the record ... and for publication. I am willing to join Bob Davis and Cliff Kirkpatrick for a debate between the candidates for stated clerk at any time, in any place, in order to answer any and all questions asked of us by whoever asks. I have nothing to hide. I think it would be great for The Layman, The Presbyterian Outlook, the Presbyterian News Service and Presbyweb to work together to arrange for this debate/forum to be held before the meeting of the General Assembly. Dr. Rus Howard Let's do evangelism right March 26, 2004 As a Washingtonian for most of my life (until I started being a Presbyterian instead), I'm always glad to see someone from my old home state pop up; but I appreciated the Rev. John Haberlin's letter a lot more for its content than for its return address. I'll confess that I hadn't read the overture to which he referred (maybe I'm just a little cynical about that sort of thing, I don't know) until I began reading his letter, but when I did I was somewhat startled to realize how little there was to it. I think Rev. Haberlin has made an excellent beginning in responding to this overture, and I'd be very interested indeed to read a fuller development of his thoughts. As such, I would encourage two things: one, that he take the time to write a full-length article on the subject for submission here and/or elsewhere; and two, that he draft an overture for his own presbytery which would do what Overture 04-13 doesn't. I agree, "let's do it right!" – and since he clearly has a good idea how to do so, I very much hope he will be willing and able to take the lead. Rev. Rob Harrison Grand Lake, Colo. Neither presbytery or Williamson quite 'Christ-like' March 26, 2004 Today I received Rev. Williamson's booklet [Contending For The Faith] and found it interesting, so I must make a number of comments. The actions taken against him seem unfair, and not Christ-like. His reactions are quite human, but not quite Christ-like either. His long-term criticism of the church bureaucracy has been warranted, and obviously resented by the bureaucracy. Their resistance to actions of the General Assembly should have caused a house cleaning. It has been said that the U.S. government was modeled on the organization of the Presbyterian Church, and reflects many of its failings. Thus, when income decreased, the cuts in expenditures were taken from the field while the bureaucrats protected their jobs. When my command was told to cut personnel, I found that it was the blue-collar workers who were cut – not the planners, etc. When I cut my forms analyst and industrial relations director, I found that, at the next administrative check by my superiors, the members of those shops were critical of my actions. When the payment to the councils of the church were shifted to per capita, my wife talked me out of resigning from the church. It is fine to see my local church doing its giving directly instead of to the World Church Service, which is supporting an unnecessary overhead. It bothers me to see our synod staff loaded with high-paid officers when churches have such a problem paying their ministers. As a delegate to the '70 General Assembly, there was a study of human sexuality presented, which today would seem rather innocuous. There were a couple of statements in it that could have been eliminated, and it would have been unobjectionable, but there was a reactionary group that preferred to keep our heads in the sand and avoid the subject. One delegate to whom I said as much said, "Have you read your Bible?" I thought he should have thought of Christ's comments about saying "Raca." It is odd that all objections to the "chastity amendment" has come from the homosexuals. We've heard nothing from the adulterers, the sexually promiscuous, or those heterosexuals living together without marriage. After all it applies to them, and they are most likely more numerous. Raised as a Campbellite, I believe today in no creed but Christ. He would not be happy with any of the three faiths derived from the prophets and teachers of the Old Testament. Calling the extremists of any of the three "fundamentalist" is a twisting of the term. All three tend to ignore the fundamentals and spend their efforts on their particular interpretations. J.C.G. Wilson Coronado, Calif. What is GA position on Christ as the only way? March 26, 2004 What is the General Assembly's final decision on "I am the way, the, truth and the Life" (only). I have an old report that has a quote from The Dallas Morning News which says, "A majority of more than 500 delegates, called commissioners, rejected a proposal that said that Jesus was the lone path to salvation." A substitute proposal was later amended stating that "assurance of salvation is found only in confessing Christ and trusting him alone. The statement, however, didn't exclude other roads to salvation." I am a Presbyterian elder in Litchfield, Minn., and getting sick and tired in not getting straight answers. I pray to God for blessings on you people for being "conservative." I hate that word. To me, a conservative means a Bible-believing, born-again Christian. The liberals, I believe, are nominal Christians that have drawn lines in the sand. Charles B. Lindvall Litchfield, MN. Editors' Note: The report refers to action taken by the 213th General Assembly. Later that year, on Sept. 29, 2001, the General Assembly Council voted overwhelmingly to "affirm and commend" a statement that says Jesus Christ is the only Lord and Savior for the world. Evangelism overture: appropriately concerned – deeply flawed March 24, 2004 Annually the funeral bell tolls over Presbyterian membership statistics. Rightfully, the sound of that bell should call us to arms, to action – but not reaction. Frankly, the statistics are embarrassing and like everything that embarrasses us, we want to eradicate the cause. However, if someone has a fever you don't correct it by having them drink ice water just prior to the next temperature check. You look for the cause. The proposal offered by the Presbytery of the Trinity springs from appropriate concern but is, I believe, deeply flawed and ultimately extremely dangerous. In this response I can only briefly, address various flaws and give sketches of what might be a potential correction. Space simply prohibits the necessary amplification crucial to design a true growth strategy. Flaw #1: The focus on membership is misleading and can only lead to failure and discouragement. The sheer mathematical improbability prohibits its successful attainment. The average Sunday morning attendance in the PCUSA is about 47 percent of the membership. If every church were to suddenly double its attendance (which is not going to happen) it would still not account for all the "members." I love it when people seriously and defensively suggest we can't neglect our shut-ins – 53 percent shut-ins? Come on! Recommendation #1: We stop obsessing over membership and take into consideration attendance. We either ignore membership statistics totally as we refocus on attendance or at least we begin to observe the significance in the gap between membership and attendance and work toward reducing that percentage. (I imagine I just caused heart failure in those who stress over per capita.) Actually, I believe there is a plan that could actually make this happen – but no space to present it here. By the way, the Saxe Gotha Church in Lexington, S.C., is a spectacular illustration of a growing Presbyterian Church but even they will have to watch out for a setup as their membership has tripled over the past 10 years while their attendance has "only" doubled in that same period – wish we could all have that same problem. Flaw #2: Setting a goal of 3 percent membership growth for the next five years has two problems. First, it will not encourage us to address the dead wood (yes, I used the word – let's face the reality!) It would be possible to see this increase - just leave those that die on the rolls. Second, the reality of every congregation is that we will lose an average of 7 percent per year simply through death, moving, becoming infirmed and those disillusioned that depart. That is just the way church life is. So, the reality is that a 3 percent increase is really more like a 10 percent increase. The assumption of a 3 percent growth is based on a misconception that everything present will remain the same – no one will leave, die or become infirmed. Recommendation #2: Acknowledge the true nature of the challenge and prepare ourselves to meet it – all 10 percent of it. Flaw #3: Now we deal with the most serious flaw: The underlying assumption is that of "institutional evangelism." The concern is with the growth/decline of the institution which is measured by membership, the number of people "joining." It promotes the idea that we invite people to "come to church" rather than introducing them to Christ as both savior and Lord so they can "become the church." Recommendation #3: There must be a total reorientation of the direction of the church. We are privileged to invite people into a discipleship relationship with Christ so as they become the church, and then they go out from the congregation "as the church" with a contagious faith. We must recapture an adequate theology of the "Church" and live it out. Flaw #4: (Equally serious as Flaw #3) We are presuming that those who come into our fellowship will be like us, look like us, sing like us, think like us for … "this is who we are and the way we have been for decades!" The proposal does not take seriously the necessity of the ongoing "transformation" of God's people. Recommendation #4: If we are to see the growth of the church, both liberals and conservatives will have to genuinely open ourselves to God's transforming power – we will all have to change ("We are Reformed and always being reformed by the Word of God" – the actual historic quote). Even more important, the "silent majority" can no longer remain silent. There too transformation must happen. How can anyone be silent about the most amazing, powerful, life transforming gift even given to this world – God's Love in Christ? Flaw #5: The assumption that people know what evangelism is and how evangelism happens. Recommendation #5: Since, evangelism is about God's Good News for all humankind, every pulpit, every week must announce over and over the transforming goodness that cannot leave people unchanged. It is about Christ's death as a cure for our constant "missing the mark" and of God's power to bring new life through the resurrected Christ. There are some more flaws and recommendation but no time here to delineate them. The motive and concern behind the overture is most appropriate – but let's do it right! John Haberlin, pastor First Presbyterian Church Centralia, Wash. The writer is a former associate for Church Growth and New Church Development during the time of the Church Growth Strategy Paper. How can evangelism be effective if there is nothing to offer? March 24, 2004 If we can only offer the unbeliever a membership in a social club with only a social agenda, who would come? It only makes sense that our denomination is rife with defections. There is only one thing that saves the lost and that is the belief in Jesus Christ as the only way to salvation. Until we preach it convincingly the lost will remain lost and our denomination will continue to lose members. People are attracted to the power of the Word of God, not in a gospel that is made in the image of man. Gene Loudon Wenatchee, Wash. Crucifixion description gives deeper insights into Scriptures March 24, 2004 Thank you for Dr. Alex F. Metherell's factual description of the crucifixion. Some of it I had gathered over the years from various sources and my own deductions. The value of this description is that it is factual and gives deeper insights into the Scriptures. Thank you for taking the time to make this available to us. Rev. J. D. Freudenberg Open dialogue for stated clerk candidates? March 24, 2004 We now have a field of three candidates contending for the office of Stated Clerk (Davis, Howard and Kirkpatrick.) Would it not seem appropriate for the three to engage in an open dialogue? I know that Mr. Howard has already made an overture to Mr. Kirkpatrick to do just that but without any success. The fundamental theological divides which are killing this denomination are nowhere more evident than in the leadership failures of Mr. Kirkpatrick and the current Louisville "elite." In Davis and Howard, we have two candidates who are passionate about the absolute Lordship of Christ, the authority of Scripture and our call to lives of holiness. Moreover, they are committed to the essential tenets of our Reformed heritage and prepared to model these commitments for the church. There has been far too little of this type of leadership over the past 6-8 years. Instead of playing to his incumbent status, Mr. Kirkpatrick (and relying on the inherent advantage of his hundreds of partisan staff campaigning in Richmond for him) should allow the church as a whole to hear his voice on issues that matter. The reality that we lose one member every 13 minutes is far more critical than the price of tomatoes and whatever inane issue the NCC is wasting money on now. Rev. Jim Yearsley Pittsburgh, Pa. Time to change PCUSA leadership March 24, 2004 How refreshing it is to have two excellent candidates in the running for the office of stated clerk. Rus Howard and Bob Davis represent some of the finest leaders in the PCUSA. We desperately need spiritual leaders who will turn the tide of destructive politics and massive losses to a Biblical agenda that draws us into Christ-centered concerns. It is time for a big change from the petty, issue oriented politics of our present stated clerk of the General Assembly and his entire staff. The leadership which has been displayed on a national level in the PCUSA is fundamentally ruinous and an unmitigated disgrace to the cause of Christ. It is time for bold action. It is time to support leaders such as Rus Howard and Bob Davis who will help us to understand and realize the great ends of the Church. Cliff Mansley Jr., senior pastor Brookdale Presbyterian Church St. Joseph, Mo. PCUSA not upholding the standards of the church March 24, 2004 Doesn't it just twist your gut to read, again, that the PCUSA is not upholding the standards of the church week after week, month after month, year after year? I had to remove my family from the PCUSA. I feel I have stepped into the light going into a denomination grounded in the Westminster Confession, covenant theology and Biblical inerrancy. Make your own choice, but I pray you don't wait too long. Sam McKelvey Franklin, N.C. Overture will lead to chaos and anarchy in our churches March 22, 2004 Once again, our church is asked to allow an individual's conscience to guide their theological thinking. I would question those who claim to be Presbyterian and pose such a statement. I have always been instructed by theological professors that our denomination believes in the sanctity of decisions prayerfully made by groups of commissioners in judicatories led by the Holy Spirit to be the proper method to discern the will of God. This overture asks our commissioners to vote against their reason to be assembled in the first place. If every individual is allowed to do as he pleases, then we will revert back to the days of the Judges in the Old Testament – "And everyone did what was right in their own eyes." My prayer is that our commissioners will prayerfully discern the will of God and throw out this anti-Presbyterian overture. It can only lead to chaos and anarchy in our churches. Rev. Terry Blevins Halifax and Berry Hill Presbyterian Churches Halifax, Va. Wishy-washy stand could destroy PCUSA March 22, 2004 If we really believe the Bible teaches what [Chris Glaser] is spreading is not truth, then why give this guy another platform to promote his lies? And especially this platform! Are we not sure what the Bible really says on the subject? Are we looking for this guy to clear things up for us? Why can't our denomination take the proper stand (against homosexuality and especially against homosexual leaders in our churches) and live or die by it? Do we think the denomination will be completely destroyed by taking a firm stand against this stuff? I think what could destroy the Presbyterian Church is the wishy-washy stand we are taking now. Gene May It is time for Ivory to leave March 22, 2004 Ms. Ivory should be asked to leave my beloved Presbyterian Church (USA) now! Ed Mooney, elder Have Presbyterians been victims of 'salting?' March 22, 2004 1 Cor. 1:1-3 & 10-13 Even today, we are faced with problems in our church. You can be assured that since we will be going to biennial General Assembly meetings, certain people who do not believe in the sole Lordship of Jesus Christ, authority of Scripture and purity in ordination standards within our denomination will be making a major move this year. Once again, they will push for the destruction of G-6.0106b and for the rewriting of G-6.0106a. They will also want to re-appoint (our?) their current stated clerk. I have reviewed the voting records of our presbyteries and have found an amazing fact. You may have been sending G.A. commissioners who did not vote as representatives of the majority of your presbytery. In other words, they voted with those who would diminish our ordination standards while your presbytery voted the opposite way. While our denomination has us send commissioners to G.A. who we hope will be moved by the Spirit, dear brothers and sisters, you may have been hoodwinked. It's possible you have been victims of "salting," which is an old "political" term meaning that the other group(s) were stacking certain committees. Might I mention the committee that selects your G.A. commissioners? No, I am not being nasty. I realize, however, that pastors are wonderful people and I consider quite a few to be friends of mine. But, when it comes to things of a political nature, they tend to be quite naive, as well as many of my sister and brother elders. The last time the presbyteries voted on A, it was nearly 3 to 1 in opposition to the G.A. vote! So, if your presbytery wishes to take action at, rather than after the next G.A. meeting, please take some advice. You must find a way to ensure that your G.A. commissioners represent the majority thinking of your presbytery. Think about and review your selection committee, question your candidates or present acceptable nominations from the floor. We cannot afford a casual attitude. This may not sound Christian or conciliatory, but our denomination's future is at stake. We must preserve G-6.0106a and b, the sanctity of the Book of Order, and, also select a stated clerk who meets the true criteria of this denomination and speaks for the majority of Presbyterians. Remember, nine (9) presbyteries have already started action to do just the opposite. WWJD and what will you do? William J. Shields, elder Mount Laurel, N.J. PCUSA leaders have 'addressed' situation with Ivory March 19, 2004 I was quite disturbed at [Elenora Giddings Ivory's] speech. I saw a rerun of it on C-Span. I wrote to both [General Assembly Council Executive Director John] Detterick and [Stated Clerk Clifton] Kirkpatrick saying that she should be severely reprimanded or fired for lying to the nation about the position of the PCUSA but noting that the possibility of firing for cause in our politically correct atmosphere would probably not happen. I did get an e-mail from Detterick saying that they had "addressed" the situation. Thanks for the brief and clear piece about where she went off the rails. Walter Funk Make use of Washington Office's system to affirm marriage March 19, 2004 [Elenora Giddings Ivory's] press conference upset me so much that I immediately e-mailed President Bush, my two state senators and my representative to state that I was a member of the PCUSA who wholeheartedly supported a marriage amendment. I used the PCUSA Washington Office system to e-mail them. Members are paying for it; might as well make use of it! Mary Holcomb, elder Houston, Texas Ivory responds to writer March 19, 2004 Just for your information. I also wrote Elenora Giddings Ivory's about her comments and this is what she wrote back:
If she made a mistake, she should admit it March 19, 2004 Attached is the text of a conversation that I have been having with the Washington office. Ms. Ivory has obviously now realized her mistake. I would forgive her transgression and give her the benefit of the doubt on exactly how purposeful this omission was, contingent upon a statement of clarification. If she truly just simply made a mistake, then it would be best for her to just admit it. We will see how much wisdom she shows.
Gateway Presbyterian Church The Dalles, Ore. Eliminate The Book of Confessions? March 19, 2004 Having one's conscience as highest authority -- that's one better than having Romish church tradition as co-equal with Scripture. Why don't we just eliminate The Book of Confessions? Ken Swanson Leonardo, N.J. Rogers exposes his theological poverty March 18, 2004 Jack Rogers is to be commended for so clearly exposing the intellectual and theological poverty of his position. He has laid bare the fundamental principle upon which he and his compatriots build their argument – steadfast refusal to comprehend what the Bible consistently, frequently, and unequivocally states. He makes a persuasive case against the straw men of his own creation but seems to stand powerless before the Biblical evidence provided by Professor Gagnon. In reality, Rogers' theology of sexual urges has nothing more to offer than does Overture 04-52, an appeal to elevate fallen human conscience and desire above the revealed will of God. Steve Jones, elder Kokomo, Indiana Help for believers on homosexual behavior March 18, 2004 After reading the arguments by Rogers and Gagnon, please let everyone know that there is an easy-to-read book that will help to shed some light and, hopefully, clarify how and why some of Christian world has embraced homosexual behavior. It does not condemn those, but helps us as true followers of the risen Christ to communicate and address those who have embraced pro gay (behavior) theology. Please pass this along to those dealing with this issue. The book is titled A Strong Delusion, Confronting the 'Gay Christian' Movement by Joe Dallas. The book is available through Christian Research Institute. (The writer used to be homosexual and is now married and has a family.) Keep up your wonderful ministry! T.J. Tellier Calvary Presbyterian Church San Francisco, Calif. When did GA affirm same-sex marriages? March 18, 2004 In the article "PCUSA official urges U.S. legislators to reject Federal Marriage Amendment," the Rev. Giddings Ivory makes the following statement. "Notably, while the Presbyterian Church General Assemblies have affirmed the civil right of same sex couples to civil marriage, it retains its religious practice and view that 'Marriage is a gift God has given to all humankind for the well-being of the entire human family. For Christians, marriage is a covenant through which a man and a woman are called to live out together before God their lives of discipleship. In a service of Christian marriage a lifelong commitment is made by a woman and a man to each other, publicly witnessed and acknowledged by the community of faith." Is the first sentence correct? Did the GA affirm the right of same-sex couples to civil marriage? With respect to Ivory opposing the president's call for a constitutional amendment, I am disturbed by PCUSA leaders making statements as if they speak for the 2.4 million members, the majority of whom are not in agreement with the statement. I received an e-mail from Giddings Ivory sometime back in which she said that the Washington Lobby Office only lobbies for the decisions of the General Assembly. Did the GA make a decision to reject the president's proposal or is Giddings Ivory going it on her own with Stated Clerk Cliff Kirkpatrick's blessing? The PCUSA is a sick denomination, a large part of which can be blamed on sick Louisville leadership. Cliff rails against Taco Bell, funds the apostate NCC and WCC and then says it is not his job to uphold the constitution of the denomination with respect to rogue churches. What is his job and do we need a clerk who is unwilling to take action? A final question: Do we need a Washington Lobby Office that seems to lobby for evil rather than for good? William Arthur See "Just what did Ivory say?" The Editors Pluralism overture is a waste of time March 18, 2004 May I say, I find this overture to address global religious pluralism a complete waste of time. What are we doing discussing this when we should be about the business of the good news? I have nothing against people of other religions, but if you think I am going to endorse "informing our religious educational system, enlightening our liturgical practices (what is this?), and enlarge our ecumenical efforts" (Aghhhhh!), you can stone me before I compromise my Lord and Savior. What is this garbage, that we should draft a denominational policy consistent with the religious pluralism reality in the U.S.? Here is the reality, Christ died for all of us! May I restate number 1 for them. Whereas, Contending Religious forces are certainly not the source of hatred and war in this world, but the sinfulness of man's heart is, it is a self-evident truth that: there will be no peace between nations until Christ returns again and establishes a new heaven and new earth. Can we get on with worshiping our Lord and Savior and in gratitude share the good news with the religious pluralists? Dave Anderson Allison Park, Pa. Review informative, educational … but March 18, 2004 I just read Alex Metherell's review and reflection on The Passion of the Christ. I found it informative and educational concerning the crucifixion. However, I was taken aback by his final sentence expressing contempt for those who hold a different view of the movie's presentation and its heavy reliance on the 19th century French mystic, St. Anne Catherine Emmerich. I found this final sentence expressing arrogantly that Dr. Metherell's view is the only valid one. In the face of Christ's ultimate sacrifice a little more humility would appear to be in order. What I want to know is, is this the real Dr. Metherell, or did he just get carried away at the end? John Pehrson Salina, Kan. PCUSA needs news source not filtered by denominational propaganda machine March 17, 2004 In response to Ben Sparks tirade against The Layman in The Presbyterian Outlook, I would argue that The Layman was correct in its assessment of former moderator Syngman Rhee. As far as I am concerned The Layman tells it like it is, unlike either the Presbyterian News Service or The Outlook. It is regretable that The Outlook now has someone from the left fringe of the denomination setting its editorial policy. It is more important than ever that The Layman and Presbyweb offer an alternative source of news about the denomination that is not filtered through the denominational propaganda machine. While I would be surprised to see this letter posted in The Outlook, hopefully it will be posted by The Layman and Presbyweb. With the Internet, it is getting ever harder for denominational bureaucrats to control the free flow of information. Charles P Preston Jr., former member Tappahannock Presbyterian Chapel Tappahannock, Va. It's good that GA will discuss Christian Zionism March 17, 2004 This may be a surprise to some, but recently I heard the term Christian Zionism referred to the State of Israel. I was schooled in the dispensational/premillennial tradition, and never hear the term, "Christian Zionism." What troubled me over the years is dispensationalists and premillenialists ignoring Palestinian believers in Christ. What is more remarkable is prior to the releasing of the 1967 Scofield Bible, Ishmael is mentioned in the Scofield notes in the Gen. 12 to Gen. 17 account as a son of Abraham, and half brother to Isaac, thus having land rights. The Old Scofield Bible teaches this clearly, but not the 1967 Scofield Bible. I would like to know why? I would like to see more articles published on the topic, "Christian Zionism," because as I view Reformed thought, there is only one people of God, the elect, thus the elect are the true chosen people of God (Romans 4). Israel was to be the covenant bearers of the Gospel of Christ, but Israel rejected Christ, and continues to do so, so who are the true chosen people of God? Would that not be the elect? It is very good the 216 General Assembly will discuss the issue, and I trust scholarly presentations on Christian Zionism will challenge those bearing the name of Christian Zionism. Lou. S. Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. Some believe we're meant to pair up with opposites March 17, 2004 Regarding the letter from the woman who wrote she and her husband were "floored" that a Presbyterian would object to the marriage of two people who happened to be gay, allow me to offer her some insight. First, no one "happens" to be gay. You can happen to be male or female, you can happen to be white, yellow, black or brown. You can happen to be tall or short. But when you are gay, it is manifested in your behavior and nowhere else. Many people, who are perhaps more selective about whom they count among their friends, believe homosexual behavior to be perverted, psychopathic, immoral, unrepentently sinful or a combination of those descriptions. Those who disagree with that generally show they are unwilling to address those provocative suggestions by claiming that the people who make them are hate-filled and homophobic. That's not productive or thoughtful. Second, there is no such thing as the "marriage" of gay and lesbian couples. There are no square wheels, no steel windows and no bottomless pits. They're all fantasy. And the reason they don't exist is because square won't roll, steel won't transmit light and physics also pretty much rules out bottomless pits. Now, there's also this thing called common sense that says – to most people – that the function of things follows their form. Some people believe that we're obviously meant, by the Creator's hand, to be paired-up in teams of opposites. Is that just too obvious for some people to see? Jack O'Brien Pittsburgh, Pa. Add one to Confessing Churches total March 15, 2004 First Presbyterian in Angleton, Texas was listed as one of the 400 fastest growing congregations. However, you did not list us as a Confessing Church, which we are. Thought you would like to know that the number of confessing churches was 49! Thank you for your ministry. Rev. Steve Floeck, pastor First Presbyterian Church Angleton, Texas We thank Rev. Floeck for finding the missing lamb. The Editors |
|
| March
2004 letters, page 2 Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |