October 2004 letters, page 2 Archives of letters to the editor

Presbyterian embarrassed by story on Stone's praise for terrorist group October 22, 2004 There, on our reception desk as I entered my office, was today's [Oct. 21] Pittsburgh Tribune Review. Its banner headline – right below the masthead – reads, "Presbyterian's praise of Hezbollah raises ire." How embarrassing. How tragically embarrassing for those of us in the pitiable Pittsburgh Presbytery. The shame, or should I say shameful, part of this incident is that elder Ron Stone's 15-minutes as a big-shot no doubt reveals what he's been hearing in the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy. Of course, Jerry Van Marter, the Lockhart of Louisville, is quick to put distance between the Ivory Tower and Stone's statement. The irony of Louisville casting the first stone is magnificent. You want this Presbyterian's take on Hezbollah? Here goes. As far as Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, PLO, or any of the cowardly fascist-Islamic murderers or their so-called political wings are concerned, I am not a lukewarm Presbyterian. I am Sharon, I am Netanyahu, I am Foxman, I am a Jew. Jack O'Brien Pittsburgh, Pa. 'Humanitarian' projects do not excuse terrorist actions October 22, 2004 Tyler Ward asked in his letter of Oct. 21, "What else would be more Biblical to do than to go and pray and love our [Islamic Terrorist] enemies?" Hmm ... I wonder why President Roosevelt and Congress didn't think of that on Dec. 8, 1941? As for the "humanitarian" projects of the Hezbollah being a good reason to ignore their terrorist activities, well, I suppose it isn't a very good analogy, but that makes about as much sense to me as suggesting that a PCUSA delegation should visit Mafia Dons, like Marlon Brando portrayed in The Godfather, and overlook the crime and murder and suffering they are responsible for, commend them for their "humanitarian" favors performed for those under their protection. Maybe a better Biblical approach with the Hezbollah would be to go and proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ to them. Perhaps that might both bring them the inestimable gift of salvation, and incline them to give up their terrorist activities and devote themselves to solely humanitarian works. But then as Islamic fundamentalists they would be compelled to kill our delegates when they declared Jesus is the Son of God and that God is not Allah of the Koran, but the Holy One of Israel, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit of the Bible. Jim Wilken Marion, N.C. It's not the inability to act, but the failure of moral courage October 22, 2004 Elder Purdom ["Majority may support G-6.0106b, but they can't enforce it" letter to editor posted on October 20, 2004 ] makes a fine point that all of us need to hear. His/her contention is that there is no social system which can enforce standards being violated by a minority of members. Elder Purdom is wrong. The PCUSA is not a mere "social system." It is the Body of Christ called out to fulfill the imperative of the Gospel. The truth is that in our current atmosphere of apostasy at the highest levels of church leadership, the PCUSA chooses not to enforce standards. It is not an inability to behave in a Scripturally faithful manner, it is a failure of moral courage. The actions of correction are simple and clear. I would refer you to Matthew 18:15-17, particularly noting verse 17. Those who insist on defiance, after having been shown their fault, and refusing to listen to the church (eg compliance with G-6.0106b), then need to be shown the door. Elder Purdom, it is not an inability to act: it is a failure of courage. Rev. Jim Yearsley Pittsburgh, Pa. Its message indicates that PCUSA is an idolatrous, apostate organization October 22, 2004 In a letter to The Layman Online, John W. Blaikie errs. ["Faithful Christians do not stand by while their deepest beliefs are trashed" letter to editor posted on October 18, 2004] He correctly notes, "Remember that there is nothing special about the PCUSA." But then he makes, in my opinion, what is a false statement: "It is just one small part of Christ's Church, made up of all believers." If its message and fruit are any indicator, the PCUSA has long since ceased to be part of the body of Christ. It has become an idolatrous, apostate organization which is one of the many antichrists that are in the world. This is not to say there are no Christians still in the PCUSA, but it is an incorrigible, corrupt organization. I can see no reason for Christians to remain therein, unless they have received a specific calling from God to be a missionary. I implore my brothers and sisters in Christ to consider how much time, effort and toil they are wasting trying to reform this corrupt denomination, and how much more effective they could be if they spent that same time and effort advancing the Kingdom among the lost. The leadership of the PCUSA should be left to God, as they are already well down the path so clearly outlined by Paul in Romans 1. Let them drink the full cup of their iniquity for all to see. PCUSA leaders already openly embrace abortion, homosexuality and Hezbollah. Can we expect them next to send a delegation to pray with Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi? As for you, Christian, unite yourself with a church that is still Christian. Worship no longer in the temple of Baal that is the PCUSA. Robinson W. Mitchell Bartlett, Tenn. Israel's foreign minister will not meet with PCUSA delegation October 22, 2004 Based upon new information, I need to revise my earlier letter. In that letter I was not aware this junket was a two-week tour of the Mid East. Therefore, this Junket by 24 Presbyterians to visit Hezbollah leaders must have cost the people in the pews about $100,000 instead of the $50,000 in my earlier letter. I have also learned that the Israel Foreign Ministry has now refused to meet the ACSWP delegation. Gadi Golan made this statement in canceling the slated meeting: "They called this a mission of peace, but if so, why did they meet Hezbullah?" Golan said. "There is no reason for us now to meet them." I want to remind readers that a petition calling for a special session to rescind the Israel Divestment Resolution is available on the Internet. Additionally, I want to say to those who are concerned about the cost of conducting a special GA session that funding can come from a total dismantlement of the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy. Larry Rued, elder First Presbyterian Church Bradenton, Fla. Homosexual issue distracts from efforts to carry out Great Commission October 22, 2004 While I can agree with most of what John Judson ["Conclusion of task force will be irrelevant because PCUSA has made its choice," letter to editor posted on October 18, 2004] says, it's just possible that the numbers that protected us in the past may not be as strong in the future. More and more conservative members are leaving the church, and they are being heard less and less by their presbyteries. The real problem is that we are wasting precious time on this issue, when we should be able to concentrate our efforts on carrying out the Great Commission of Christ. This effort to move our church away from the Truth of God is taking all our effort and attention, because it must be our top priority. Otherwise, the PCUSA (as we have known it) will cease to exist. As long as we continue to allow this to be an issue, we are chained to it. God help us all. Kay Brooks How Presbyterians should respond October 21, 2004 Re: Presbyterians meeting with Hezbollah We must show the positive options that our many fine, concerned Presbyterian people have. When they read the actions of our out-of-control denominational leaders, they may react by leaving altogether. To preserve the peace and unity of our denomination we must publicize how members and churches can dollar-vote by redirecting per capita. Those who continue to send per capita are paying for such policies and saying go ahead do more! Please get the ball rolling before our witness, relationships and denomination are destroyed! What makes this issue important to many (besides the obvious double standard in regard to Hezbollah atrocities) is that the ACSWP is funded partly through "per-capita funds" from many Presbyterian churches throughout the national denomination. I wonder how many of your readers know that unless their church deliberately redirects per-capita funds, their offerings go to support such missions and policies? Churches in Pittsburgh, Florida and Kansas are refusing to forward these funds to the denomination because of just such abuses. Anyone offended should ask their pastors if their churches send per-capita and why? Unfortunately, despite statements saying otherwise, Stone's ACSWP committee reflects the majority of the leadership of our denomination but not the majority of its people. Thus, a great battle for the heart and voice of our body is ongoing. Kirk Johnston, pastor First Presbyterian Church Paoloa, Kan. PCUSA leadership needs to answer questions about Hezbollah trip October 21, 2004 Regarding the recent revelations of a 24-person delegation from the Presbyterian Church to Hizbollah (Presbyterian delegation meets with leader of group blamed for strikes against U.S.) our leadership in Louisville owes us prompt and forthright answers to at least the following questions: Specifically, who authorized sending the delegation, and why? What was the delegation's official charge? Why did it take 24 people to get the job done, and how/why were these particular delegates chosen? What standards of fair representation were employed in their selection? How did the delegation represent itself to Hezbollah, and what commitments, if any, did it make in the name of our denomination? Who paid for the junket (and if it was the PCUSA, from what line item of the budget were the costs taken?) What kind of official report can we expect from the delegation? Why did we have first to find out about the junket from the secular press? There may be other questions that also need answers, but these will do for a start. Robert D. Dooling, moderator The Presbyterian Forum PCUSA 'peace activists' are giving aid and comfort to the enemy October 21, 2004 That a delegation from the Presbyterian Church (USA) met with representatives of Hezbollah is unconscionable, immoral and despicable. This only confirms my conviction that religious liberalism is a disease, a form of dementia. According to an April 2004 Congressional Research Service document titled, "Foreign Terrorist Organizations," Hezbollah (AKA "the Party of God" and "Islamic Jihad") is allied with al Qaeda, with whom we are at war. Syria, where this meeting between PCUSA peaceniks and Hezbollah took place, provides diplomatic and logistical support to Hezbollah. Iran, according to no-less a liberal persona than Bill Clinton's first Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, was providing $100 million a year in aid to Hezbollah back in 1996 … a figure that has increased exponentially over the past eight years. While these pathetic peace activists are so blithely chatting away with their terrorists compadres, Hezbollah terrorist fighters, funded by Iran and trained by the Iranian Army, are allied with remnants of the Iraqi Republican Guard and the Saddam Fedayeen, killing American soldiers and Marines fighting around Fallujah and Sadr City. Maybe upon returning, these peace loving Presbyterians might show up at a funeral ceremony conducted in a PCUSA church for a young man or woman killed in Iraq and explain to the grieving parents, or spouse and children how Hezbollah is merely a bunch of misunderstood Moslems simply want to be our friends. In a tradition that dates back to William Sloan Coffin and the Vietnam War era, these delegates are, in effect, giving aid and comfort to the enemy. They deserve all the disdain and disgust we can heap upon them. In short, they are beyond pathetic. Is denial a symptom of dementia? If so, perhaps that explains why PCUSA delegates believe Hezbollah representatives who claim they had nothing to do with the October 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 220 US Marines, 18 Navy and three US Army personnel. Did the Hezbollah public affairs mullah also deny the earlier April 1983 truck bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut? What about the April 1984 bombing of a night club in Torrejon, Spain that claimed the lives of 18 US servicemen? According to the Congressional Research Service, Hezbollah also detained 18 American hostages in Lebanon during the 1980s and early 1990s. (Hmmmm, how one longs that they would see opportunities currently so close at hand.) Did the Hezbollah PA mullah also deny that they hijacked TWA Flight 87 in 1985 and brutally murdered an American sailor who happened to be on board? What about the March 1993 bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Argentina and the bombing of the Jewish Mutual Association Building in Buenos Aires in July 1994? Did our peace loving delegates fail to note that their hosts are committed to the destruction of Israel and the establishment of a Palestinian Islamic state from Gaza in the south through Haifa in the north and then on throughout Lebanon? Did they tell you that the "liberation" of Jerusalem is a stated goal of Hezbollah? Presbyterian liberals, whose rich foreign policy tradition includes embracing North Vietnamese and Viet Cong communists and Nicaragua's Sandinistas, can now add Hezbollah to their list of spiritual others. Since there is no formal declaration of war, these bozos cannot be charged with treason and put in jail when they return. While what they have done is not technically treasonous; their actions, nonetheless, are despicable. What is it about religious liberalism that leads to dementia? Is it the supplanting of the eternal truth of the Gospel with secular social theories? Do liberals like the former moderator who met with and prayed with Yasir Arafat think embracing terrorists thugs and murders like Arafat can be justified by quoting a few verses of Scripture about loving your neighbor and doing good to those who would harm you? The only proper turning of the cheek when it comes to Hezbollah, Hamas and al Qaeda is to find your next target. Amen. Earl H. Tilford, Jr., Ph.D. Professor of History Grove City College Stone shouldn't drag the rest of the PCUSA into his praise of terrorist group October 21, 2004 I don't fault elder Ron Stone for his personal views on the situation in the Middle East, each of us is allowed to see the world in whatever fashion we like, but to drag the rest of the Presbyterian Church into his convoluted world where the terrorists – those bent on the destruction of the sovereign nation of Israel – are praised is ignorance and stupidity at its highest level. How is it possible that those with views such as Stone's continue to rise to positions of prominence within our denomination? We have endured more than 30 years of these types of headlines and comments from those in the hierarchy of the PCUSA, it is time for a change. It is time to wake up and realize that the trends of the last 30-plus years are not an anomaly but are a direct result of allowing those with bad theology, terrible views of Scripture, and the "gift" of bureaucracy to run the denomination. It is time we got back to what only the Church can do – present the Gospel, make disciples, and worship in spirit and in truth. Randy Jenkins Central Presbyterian Church Huntsville, Ala. What is more Biblical than meeting and praying with terrorists? October 21, 2004 At first, it shocked me to see that there was a delegation from the PCUSA that was visiting with Hizbollah on their much wider trip to the mid-east. Then as I was reading the Luke's Gospel something struck me, straight from the mouth of our Lord. "But I say to you that listen, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those that abuse you." (Luke 6:27-28) Is this not in effect what the delegation is doing? The delegation is making an effort to love these people with whom they are visiting. Now the U.S. State Department tells us they are terrorists, and if they are responsible for the various attacks on civilians, then what else would be more Biblical to do than to go and pray and love our enemies? The answer isn't to sit back and make blanket condemnations. Do we heed the instructions of our Lord, or do we follow what is politically correct at the moment? We cannot over look the humanitarian services that Hizbollah provides to the people of that region as well, regardless of their other activities. Could the delegation from the PCUSA foster better feelings toward the U.S. in the Muslim world? Maybe the Islamic world might have a change of heart toward America? Could our church really be bringing about peace? About The Layman's reports on criticism from Jewish and secular media, "Blessed are you when people hate you, and when they exclude you, revile you and defame you on account of the Son of Man." (Luke 6:22) The General Assembly overwhelmingly believed as voiced in their vote that they were doing the work of the Son of Man. What does this quote from Scripture tell us? Maybe that we are blessed when we are criticized by Jewish and secular media? For our Savior foretold these things while he was incarnate upon this earth. Let us love our enemy as Jesus commanded and heed his blessings when we are criticized by any form of media, whether secular or Jewish. Tyler Ward The 'girlymen' of the PCUSA continue to demonstrate apostasy October 21, 2004 Nothing new for those Peaceniks of the 1960's, seeking peace when there is no peace as the Holy Bible teaches, along with Psalm 1. To speak and associate with murderers, Hezbollah, by so called Presbyterian leaders is a disgrace, and offends those of us who support Israel. Genesis chapters 12 to 17 mean nothing to those seeking harm to Israel, because they view not the Holy Bible as the Word of God. Genesis 12:4 teaches, "I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curses thee: and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed."(KJV). For the PCUSA to think of divesting selectively from the nation of Israel without doing the same to other nations is evil, wicked, led by the devil. More and more the girlymen of the PCUSA demonstrate apostasy as the Holy Bible predicts in these last days, and the PCUSA is demonstrating their apostasy. I Timothy 4:1-2, "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly that, in the latter times, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of demons. Speaking lies in hypocrisy, and having their conscience seared with a hot iron." (KJV). There are those in the PCUSA who speak lies in hypocrisy, and have their conscience seared with a hot iron. Lou. S. Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. Fence is 'not helpful' to the suicide bombers October 20, 2004 So Nile Harper thinks the fence is "unhelpful." He gets it. The Israelis may agree with him in that the fence is not helpful to the suicide bombers. The difference is that the Israelis think this is a good idea. The PCUSA is apparently in the business of facilitating the access of suicide bombers and other terrorists to Jews. Don't want the folks to get out of breath on their murderous business, I guess. Does Jesus require making terrorism convenient? Richard A. Aubrey Jr. Cost of Hizbollah trip didn't come from our church's per capita October 20, 2004 This junket by 24 Presbyterians to visit Hizbollah leaders must have cost the people in the pews about $50,000. I would be incensed if my church's money went to such a visitation of a terrorist group that has been on the U.S. State Department's terrorist list since the 1980s through Republican and Democrat administrations. However, as our church stopped sending any money to the General Assembly, South Atlantic Synod and Peace River Presbytery last year, my ire is lessened. Larry Rued, elder First Presbyterian Church Bradenton, Fla. Pro-Palestinian resolution is not smart, Biblical or healthy October 20, 2004 It still amazes me how anyone who professes to be a Christian can ignore or even worse violate the Word of God. There are three groups in these last days: Israel, the Church and the Greeks (nations, unbelievers) – (I Cor. 10:32). "Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God." Notice the church is not the Jews. Those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed. The pro-Palestinian resolution endorsement is not only not smart or Biblical, it's not healthy. I suggest those involved meditate on this revelation: God and his Word are one (John 1:1). The god that the Palestinians worship is not the God Almighty of the Bible (Titus 2:13). Jim Anderson GA action on Iraq is a liberal, partisan stand October 20, 2004 As a long-time Presbyterian (over 30 years), I find the actions of the General Assembly appalling, and so do many of my Presbyterian friends. Who authorized this vote on the Iraq war? Throughout all the literature it makes reference to "many people," "many Presbyterians" – who are these many? Where are the statistics that suggest this was the will of the Presbyterian flock? To say "many" is a very empty reference, one upon which television commercials are made. This is a liberal, partisan stand, pure and simple. Our own congregation was not notified of this decision and even though we had a report from our delegate from the pulpit, this action was never reported. It came to light only after the local editor of the paper used it as a basis of his editorial, denouncing the assembly actions as betraying our efforts. Is there not a published agenda going into the General Assembly? Why were the Presbyterian flock not told in advance this would be coming up for vote? Only after the local editor exposed this issue, did the pastor respond in the church newsletter, as the local editor reported, "with a spoonful of yogurt." He gave it a different spin, referring to the statement as someone's "own political agenda." It has still never been mentioned from the pulpit, in study groups, etc. Why would the Presbyterian assembly choose to take a partisan stand on such an issue? Why would they not, instead, pass a resolution of prayer for peace, prayer for guidance for our leaders and military personnel who have to make gut-wrenching decisions everyday regarding the safety of our country and its citizens, prayer for the safety of our troops, and all others from the coalition? Did the assembly pass a resolution stating that Saddam Hussein is "unwise, immoral and illegal?" Surely, you have the wrong enemy in mind. Did they give any consideration to the thousands of Iraqis found in mass graves, to the images of firing squads against innocent Iraqis, to the prison abuse of innocent Saddam subjects who might have done nothing more than refuse sex with him, etc? You tell me – who is 'immoral?'" It is our president, an openly professing Christian, or is it Saddam Hussein? I think the Presbyterian assembly needs to get the pulse of its membership before taking any such action. This action has never, not even now, been discussed openly by the session or congregation of my local church. When I asked our delegate, at a session meeting, how he voted on the issue and what direction he received for doing so, he said, "I voted my conscience." What about the conscience of those he represented? We are giving serious thought as to whether we are indeed Presbyterians. Carol Wyman, elder What is a neoliberal? October 20, 2004 Since James V Ponraj from India has written here about his disappointment with Stated Clerk Kirkpatrick's "backing away" from a couple of linguistic inclusions in the WARC's statement, would Mr. Ponraj be so good as to define "neoliberal?" What that term means is not clear to me. Rebecca McElroy Monroe City, MO Majority may support G-6.0106b, but they can't enforce it October 20, 2004 I'm afraid I must quibble with the proposition of John Judson's letter of October 18 that "We have chosen by an overwhelming majority to enforce Biblical standards for ordination." While I have no disagreement with his conclusion that those in the denomination who believe sexuality should be limited to mixed-gender marriage have a large enough majority in the Presbyteries to prevent the near-future removal of G-60106b, there is nowhere near a large enough majority to actually enforce it. There is no social system, including the PCUSA, in which 70 percent of the population can keep the other 30 percent from engaging in a behavior to which they are committed and which they believe is not only a right, but a moral imperative. Chris Purdom, elder Tabernacle United Church Philadelphia Dialogue and discernment is good; judging is not October 20, 2004 We do not ask local sessions to delve into the detailed personal sex lives and sexual practices of those who may be considered as candidates for ordination whether they are known/believed/ perceived to be heterosexual. It is against God's will to treat any candidate for ordination differently because of their known/believed/perceived sexual orientation or gender identity alone. Assuming that any person, heterosexual or homosexual is promiscuous in a relationship is judged only by God. Dialogue and discernment is good. Judging is not and God speaks to us that it is not. As for the PCUSA mission campaign, any not for profit campaign that has "Campaign expenses" above 5-10 percent is a sham. (total pledges and gifts $8,167,224 with expenses of $,1684,747 – nearly 20 percent) This is outrageous! Ted Coppock Des Moines, Iowa The irony of identifying 'committed gays' as more worthy of ordination October 18, 2004 I continue to read with great interest the developments within the Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity (PUP) despite the fact that I have officially left the PCUSA in the past year. I still have many friends in my former congregation and pray that God will be glorified by worshipping him and living by his Word. So, as I read that the PUP was contemplating a proposal to allow ordination of committed gay people, I realized that there is a certain irony to identifying this group as being more worthy of ordination than other homosexuals. As I thought about the merits of the proposal, I reasoned that gays who say they are "committed" to their relationship must also be committed to their homosexual behavior. Then, in my logic at least, they may be even less likely candidates for ordination than other gays. Here is my logic. A person who ventured into the area of homosexual behavior may have felt drawn there in spite of a conviction that it was wrong, with regret and repentance afterward. The internal struggle with these desires may continue with occasional lapses followed by more regret and repentance. The "committed" gay persons, however, say to themselves and to God that there is nothing wrong with homosexual behavior. In fact, they commit their life to following this path. For this reason, any person who believes that homosexual behavior is sinful behavior cannot give approval just because the person is fully committed to his or her sin. My prayer continues that all people everywhere will come to Jesus Christ and that his children, those who currently profess faith in him (including myself), will see their sin and repent. Praise God that he continues to love us anyway and gives us a chance to turn to him once again. Reed Siebenthal PUP's trial balloon destined for a crash landing October 18, 2004 Desperate to avoid taking one side of an either-or issue, the Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the church has floated a trial balloon. It is destined for a crash landing. They ask us to skip over the basic question of whether homosexual behavior is a sin. Rather, we are asked to choose whether we prefer homosexuality in its promiscuous form or in its committed form. Having engaged their logic, we waltz off into a conclusion that gay and straight both struggle equally with fidelity and thus commitment is the central and more theologically important issue. We then consider seven or eight ways in which the church might respond to infidelity in general. We are left to conclude that gay and straight are alike in so many ways and share so many similar struggles that homosexual behavior is not the essential issue and can be left to local sessions to sort out. It's rather like comparing an honest merchant and a thief. Rather than saying that acting on the impulse to steal is a sin, we skip that step and begin the discussion with the notion that both the merchant and the thief have come into a sum of money. Let's consider how they use that money, whether for charity and the work of the church, or for selfish purposes. Following the same tortured logic, we might come to reason that it's not how you get the money but how you spend it. The merchant and the thief share similar temptations and both are sinners, so we need to get beyond this thievery business and concern ourselves solely with stewardship. It would be laughable if these were not serious scholars charged with interpreting God's Word for his church. The Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church cannot escape making an either-or decision. Either acting on homosexual impulses is a sin or it is not. That is the question before them and it is the only question we should allow them to answer. They are correct only in one area. Commitment is important. But, it must be a commitment based on God's will for us as revealed in Scripture. They might consider this rather than attempt to bamboozle us with sophomoric diversions. John Cowan Cartersville, Ga. Pew-sitters know more than the 'theologically superior intellectuals think we do' October 18, 2004 Funny, but I read a summary of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Presbyterian Church (USA) and read lots of "pastor-ese." Pastor-ese is a lot like lawyer-ese – that language which is used to obfuscate not clarify. Obscure terms flourish in this report: distinctives; narratival; propositional; and the list goes on and on. Then, we find statements culled from this paper, lumped together in single sentences: "Neither breaking the vows of marital fidelity through adultery nor homosexual promiscuity are in keeping with the imperatives of the gospel." Duh! It took a task force to come up with this? Had the task force intended to be intellectually honest with those of us in the pews, they would have realized that comparing promises made to God with promiscuity is a ridiculous and obtuse … Okay, it's just plain dumb. There is no equivalence between these two, and for them to think that we'd swallow this garbage is simply insulting. Excuse me, but as one of the inferior pew sitters in the real world, I can guarantee that we know a lot more than the theologically superior intellectuals think we do. And, we know something else that was glaringly absent from this report! That is: 1. Practicing homosexual behavior is sinful behavior. 2. Unrepentant sinners should be prohibited from standing behind the pulpit. 3. God's house is a hospital for wounded souls, all of whom are in desperate need of healing. 4. All repentant sinners are welcome in God's house. A statement like, "Efforts to reduce the range of Presbyterian views to a simple 'either/or,' therefore, are misleading and contribute to the discord that has surrounded the church's debate on this issue", is an example of a rudimentary political tactic used to discredit opponents … even before they disagree. By using this tactic, the proponents of this paper can claim that those of us who read this inferior work are the trouble makers. It's an election year after all. Sorry, but regular people can boil things down to black and white! Yes, there is good and evil in this world; we can and should distinguish between the two. And no, there does not have to be shades of gray. It's all a matter of the Bible and common sense; one doesn't need a Ph.D. from Princeton to figure this one out. David Morrison Pittsburgh, Pa. Conclusion of task force will be irrelevant because PCUSA has made its choice October 18, 2004 I suppose that I ought to be upset about the latest news from the PUP task force, but I am not. I am not upset about it because in the end, whatever they draft will be irrelevant. Their conclusions will be irrelevant because we are a denomination that has already made its choice. We have chosen by an overwhelming majority to enforce Biblical standards for ordination. Any realistic study of the last three denomination wide votes on this issue leads to the realization that we have drawn up sides and the sides are further apart now than when the first vote was taken. Even if the GA were to send an overture favoring ordination of gays and lesbians in committed relationships to the presbyteries in 2006, it would not pass. It would not pass because in order for it to pass those in favor of the change would have to win not only every presbytery in which the vote swung on a few votes, but also every presbytery they previously lost by at least a 10-percent margin, all of those they previously lost by at least a four to three vote and some of those they previously lost by a three to two vote. My friends, this will not happen any time soon. Those in favor of the ordination of gays and lesbians can raise all the money they want, have as many people at GA headquarters as they want, but in the end, the majority of presbyteries in this denomination are not going to vote to allow this change to occur. So, the next time you feel like the denominational sky is falling, remember that the majority of presbyteries (meaning elders and ministers) have voted consistently and courageously to maintain the historic standards of our church. And one more report is not going to change that. John Judson Covenant Presbyterian Church San Antonio, Texas Why didn't article mention presbytery's document on essential tenets? October 18, 2004 As has been previously published in The Layman, the Presbytery of San Diego's Committee on Preparation for Ministry has published a document entitled "Essential Tenets and Reformed Distinctives of the PCUSA." The document has been republished by Theology Matters and has generated considerable attention and comment over the past 18 months. I am surprised your 10/15/04 online article by John Adams, "Task Force broaches possibility of listing some essential tenets," does not make mention of the Presbytery of San Diego's barrier-breaking, eye-opening, faith-consolidating statement. Go to our website, www.presbyterysd.org to find "Essential Tenets." Bob Battenfield Elder Commissioner to 216th GA Fletcher Hills Presbyterian Church Copies of the Presbytery of San Diego's "Essential Tenets" were distributed to members of the task force during its meeting in Lisle, Ill., Oct. 12-15, but the paper was not discussed in open session. The Editors Faithful Christians do not stand by while their deepest beliefs are trashed October 18, 2004 Late last year, I wrote a note to The Layman that ended with a statement that when the PCUSA ceases to be good, it will cease to be great! This statement was based upon the premise that although the majority of the PCUSA membership is still made up of good, faithful, practicing evangelical Christians, it is doubtful that the PCUSA as a denomination is good. A denomination that is good does not allow a small minority to impose their unholy view of Scripture on the majority. A denomination that is good does not permit her Lord and Savior to be demeaned by a small minority. A denomination that is good does not permit any group to corrupt the sacrament of holy marriage by allowing people of the same sex to be either legally or sacramentally wed. A denomination that is good does not permit unrepentant, practicing homosexuals, adulterers and other sinners to hold high ecclesiastical offices within its churches. A denomination that is good does not support the murder of unborn children during partial-birth abortions. A denomination that is good would never admit that it is powerless to enforce its own constitution. The majority of PCUSA members are well meaning, but good, faithful Christians do not stand by while their deepest beliefs and traditions are literally and figuratively trashed! In the past year, I have seen nothing in the PCUSA that would make me change my mind. When are we going to stand up and call this small, but growing minority what they are: heretics? When are the gloves going to come off and strongly denounce their heresies? When is enough enough? When do we just leave them in their sin – does anybody really think that we can change their minds? Remember that there is nothing special about the PCUSA. It is just one small part of Christ's Church, made up of all believers. Therefore, there is no reason to be faithful to a denomination that is in steep decline and will cease to be relevant within the next few years. The faithful have left before, such as what happened during the disruption in the Scottish Kirk back in 1843 when during a session of the General Assembly in Edinburgh, around forty percent (474 ministers, including my own grandfather) signed a Deed of Demission and nearly 60 percent of their entire population left to form the independent Free Church of Scotland. Likewise, let's get over the money and property issues! Scripture says for us to separate from the unbelievers! What are we waiting for? John W. Blaikie Centereach, N.Y. Participant is shocked that Kirkpatrick could back-off from the WARC statement October 18, 2004 I am just shocked to read the article forwarded to me (Kirkpatrick backs off rhetoric of anti-capitalism statement, by John H. Adams, The Layman Online, Friday, October 15, 2004). As a participant of the WARC General Council. I am unable to understand how Rev. Cliff Kirkpatrick could be so indifferent and biased in his approach to issues on neo-liberal economic globalization and empire, when the members of various churches and others vehemently spoke against neo-liberalism, empire and globalization, sharing their stories with tears in their eyes. How on earth can the body of Christ be so indiscriminate and indifferent to its brothers and sisters who are suffering in the third world countries? I am really shocked that a person holding such high office could back off from the statement of WARC GC. I just wish that WARC carries out decisive action and not accept cowardly backward thinking as accepted. I am really disappointed with the statements made by the honorable WARC president. I pray that the deliberations in the WARC General Council are taken forward and not taken back. James V Ponraj India Article includes key to the problems of PCUSA October 18, 2004 I have just read an article that seems to me to give the key to the problems our denomination is facing. Not only in the matter of sexual morality but in other areas as well. In the October 2004 issue of Christianity Today, page 55, is an article by Robert Sanders entitled "The Ecstatic Heresy." I don't know what copyright rules you or I need to adhere to but a summary of the article would clarify for most people the basic conflicts in mainline denominations today. Three statements are recorded, from Methodist, Presbyterian and Episcopal sources. Here is the one from the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church: "How we all fit together, how our singularities are made sense of, how our divergent views and different understandings of God's intent are reconciled, passes all understanding. All that we can do is to travel on in faith and trust, knowing that all contradictions and paradoxes and seemingly irreconcilable truths – which seem both consistent and inconsistent with Scripture – are brought together in the larger and all embracing truth of Christ, which, by Christ's own words, has yet to be fully drawn forth and known." Robert Sanders goes on to write: "These men do not speak in a vacuum. They are influenced by a tradition, a powerful theological perspective that resonates in our culture and is taught in our universities, graduate schools of religion, and seminaries. I call this the 'ecstatic' perspective, a term taken from theologian Paul Tillich. Essentially, this perspective claims that God can only be known in feeling, in ways that transcend the language of God or about God." But one must read the entire article which gives clear examples of how this heresy, while sounding nice and loving and reconciling, is actually adopting a totally different concept of revelation from God and in Christ. It seems to me to be the key to interpreting statements from commissions and study groups that are seductively beautiful and unifying but deny orthodox faith and obedience. V. Birch Rambo, M.D. Summerville, S.C. Unlike PCUSA, writer can distinguish between right and wrong October 18, 2004 Frontpagemag.com, an online news magazine has an interesting article by Brigitte Gabriel. She was raised in Lebanon and saw her mother wounded during the war there in 1975. This young lady testifies eloquently from personal experience of the vast gulf between the moral values of Israel and the widespread hatred of Jews in the Arab world. Unlike the PCUSA she can distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil. Ron McCormick BSA should take up a favored Presbyterian tactic, and 'divest themselves of us' October 18, 2004 Fifteen years ago I was employed by the Boy Scouts of America as a field director with the Bergen (N.J.) Council. My time with the BSA was very rewarding, and the only reason I am no longer a professional scouter is that in 1990 I pledged to God that I "would do whatever" he wanted me to do, and "go wherever" he wanted me to go. I was shocked when the Lord took me up on that pledge and called me to be a pastor! The BSA has weathered storms of cultural criticism and pressure for many years. Accommodations were made years ago to allow women to serve in all leadership positions within local scout units, including scoutmaster. So anyone who would accuse the BSA of being inflexible is just plain wrong. Allowing women to fill leadership roles in the BSA in no way compromises the Scout's Oath to keep one's self "physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight." Were the BSA, which is not a Christian organization by the way, to abandon its principles and accommodate to those who would enforce their personal amorality upon a private membership organization, it would be a death blow to a program that has helped contribute to the development of some of the most outstanding men, and women (young women have been part of the co-ed Explorer and Venture program for years) our nation has ever produced. Considering the current direction of the PCUSA I would suggest the BSA take up a favored Presbyterian tactic, and "divest" themselves of us, they will only be the better for it. Jim Wilken Marion, N.C. Task force do your stuff, but do it Biblically October 15, 2004 Mike Loudon stands firm again! Somebody certainly needs to do so. These 10 "items" are ridiculous, deceptive, un-Biblical, non-Biblical, erroneous, wrong, misguided ... and many other unsavory things, the list of which is too long to publish. There are two perspectives here, just not the two presented: The proper perspectives are Biblical vs. un-Biblical when dealing with the practice of homosexuality. Granted that all have sinned – even or maybe especially those of us ordained as church officers. Those of us who recognize our frailty and fallability and propensity to sin repent of those sins we commit and try not to repeat them. It is not the orientation of homosexuality that precludes ordination – and, I would argue, non-ordained leadership positions in the church – but the unrepentant practice and acting out of that orientation. Come on people, let's get on the same page – God's page, the Biblical page – and recognize that we cannot faithfully encourage, anoint or support active, willing perversion of God's created order. Task force do your stuff, but do it Biblically and for God's glory, not to satisfy a secular minority with a heretical worldview! Rev. Larry Yerger Wintergarden Presbyterian Church Port Charlotte, Fla. The matter was settled long ago by God, so there really is no debate October 15, 2004 The proposal produced by the PUP Task Force subcommittee is a disservice to the church. It demonstrates clearly that the task force is unable to say anything constructive to the church. Efforts to cast "the propriety of covenantal same-gender unions" as the "real question" are what is actually "misleading and contribute to the discord that has surrounded the church's debate on this issue." This is because the matter was settled long ago by Almighty God, so there really is no debate. God has told us in no unmistakable terms that abominable sexual practices, including those expressed in the homosexual death-style, can never "be a positive good" and that no one sinful expression of sexuality is to be preferred over another, since both are equally unholy. The governing standard has never been the committed nature of a homosexual relationship. The governing standard has always been fidelity to God's Holy Word. John "Mike" Loudon hit the nail squarely on the head in the PUP Task Force's discussion when he noted that, "There are only two views: Biblical and non-Biblical." And "self-described primary writer" of the draft proposal, William Stacy Johnson, while misguided in asking Rev. Loudon, "Isn't that just the difference in interpretation?" did go on to ask the salient question, "You're not saying that those on the other side have non-Biblical views, are you?" Sadly, your report notes that "Loudon did not answer." Since Loudon seems to have the insight to proclaim clearly the underlying issue, but could not find his voice to reply to Professor Johnson, I will answer the question in a manner that is neither provisional nor hypothetical, but solidly Biblical and Reformed: "Yes. Those on the other side of the question of normalization of homosexual behavior have non-Biblical views." God's faithful people must stand up and say "Enough is enough." Rev. Bill Pawson Westminster Community Church Canton, Ohio A Confessing Church 'PUP' paper would take PCUSA further away from the Word of God October 15, 2004 The "PUP" Task Force subcommittee's paper that was produced in order to "get conversation started" appears to be very decided in the direction it desires the conversation to take, and it is a direction that would lead the denomination further from the Word of God. Within the 10 statements, there is repeated reference to church history, to Reformed/Presbyterian doctrine and tradition, but no direct reference to the Bible or to God's creation ordinances. Should any of us really be surprised at this? Regarding the fifth statement found in the subcommittee's paper, I had to check myself in order to keep from laughing when I read the reference to "ethical standards" for same-gender relationships. Unless those ethical standards referred to are absolute Biblical standards, they are not truly ethical standards at all. It is absurd to invest time on trying to determine the ethical standards of sin. The church has no more business weighing the ethical standards of a homosexual relationship than it does the code of ethics of adulterers, pedophiles or those who live in "committed" heterosexual relationships outside the bounds marriage. All stand beyond the clear and firm boundary that God has established of marriage between a man and a woman. The declaration in the eighth statement that "all persons ordained depart at least to some degree from the high standards articulated by the Book of Order," troubles me by what I perceive as the implication that the Book of Order is a higher standard than the Bible itself, and further, by suggesting that un-repented sin is the same thing as sin one seeks to repent from. It's not that some of us are sinners and some are not, but rather that for the better part of 40 years now one group of sinners and their supporters have been trying to legislate away their sin. I pray God will continue to give strength to Rev. Loudon, and that he will remove the scales from the eyes of those members of the PUP Task Force who appear blind to God's Word. Jim Wilken Marion, N.C. PCUSA will dwindle into irrelevance while Biblically faithful denominations grow October 15, 2004 The Position Paper on the Sanctity of Marriage is a breath of fresh air for clarity, Scriptural soundness, and common sense. Would that the PCUSA were capable of such sound theology. The EPC Web site ( www.EPC.org) lists several position papers which make for good reading and recall a better day in the PCUSA halls of academia. When one considers our "position" papers starting with our efforts on sexuality, family and now international commerce, one realizes how far we have fallen. There are a few other things we could learn from the EPC. One is the importance of the laity and the dangers posed by an unrestrained clergy. They require a 2 to 1 ratio of lay people to clergy on all major committees. The other is the importance of voluntary association. All church property is owned by the local congregation. Surprisingly, there is no Washington Office. Their overall environment encourages the central office to be more responsive to the local congregations rather than be the autonomous loose cannon our leadership has become. Sadly, we can't expect much change in the PCUSA. Our bureaucracy is so insulated from the local churches that even if the money were cut in half it wouldn't affect their jobs nor their ability to associate with their soul mates at the NCC, WCC and the left wing fringe of the Democratic Party. Our presbyters and pastors have long since acclimated to the ultra-liberal philosophy. Those that haven't have retired. And, in fairness, there are enough people in each church that agree with the liberal agenda to keep our pastors and the majority of our members from acting effectively to bring reform. The vocal conservatives will stand and fight until each in his or her own time recognizes its futility and moves on. The membership numbers will continue to fall and be ignored by Louisville. Barring a miracle, the PCUSA will dwindle into irrelevance over the next 20 years while the EPC, PCA and other Biblically faithful denominations grow. John Cowan Cartersville, Ga. PCUSA leadership has its own agenda October 15, 2004 It should come as no surprise that the "Joining Hands and Hearts" campaign is generating a negative cash flow, even though Presbyterians are known for being very supportive of missions. Just read several other articles in The Layman, such as "More Light Presbyterians declare war on PCUSA," "Churches preach anti-West sermon" and "Presbyterians stand by divestment vote." Why would serious Christians give hard-earned money to such a misguided denomination? Guess the real question is why do we members stay in such a misguided denomination? Our Louisville leadership has a problem relating cause and effect. It is rather obvious that the average layman has no faith in the direction they are attempting to take us. They and the General Assembly ignore the several presbytery votes against repealing G-6.0106b, although the margin on the last vote was 3 to 1 against repeal. They have their own agenda and the majority be damned. They are forcing a gracious (?) separation. It might be that they are doing us a favor by forcing like-minded pastors and laymen to take a firmer stand against the shenanigans of Louisville. We need to be jolted out of our apathy with the apostate actions of the PCUSA. Bill Arthur Greer, S.C. GAC can't have it both ways October 15, 2004 I regard this article as a lame attempt to placate the hornets nest they have stirred up. It doesn't wash. Either the writers are for the resolution as passed by GA 216 or they are opposed to it. This letter states neither position, for or against. Thus, I conclude they would have it both ways. That ambiguous position is untenable and unbelievable. C. R. Thompson Fairfax Presbyterian Church Fairfax, Va. Disinvestment works both ways October 15, 2004 The Presbyterian Church (USA) continues to reap what it has sown. An article in the New York Daily News by John Leo castigates this denomination with the comment, "The latest disgrace is the Presbyterian church's plan for selective disinvestment in Israel." An article in the Baltimore Jewish Times says, "Jewish groups were outraged when the organization passed a resolution over the summer calling for divesting from companies that do business in or with Israel." The headline of this article read, "Presbyterians stand by divestment vote." I apologize to all Jewish groups for the reprehensible conduct of my denomination. After 55 years of terrorist bombings, and two deliberate wars which have killed thousands of innocent Israelis, you would think the left wing peaceniks would understand that the Palestinian jihad wants to destroy Israel, not make peace with it. But they still don't get it, or don't want to get it. Disinvestment works both ways. My church has not sent in per-capita assessment to denominational headquarters for over 10 years. It appears we never will. Jack Vanderbleek, elder Northeast Presbyterian Church St. Petersburg, Fla. More Light Presbyterians declare war on PCUSA October 11, 2004 The so-called More Light Presbyterians recently announced a "Victory 2006 Campaign." It should be obvious to anyone who reads the media release that this phrase is cast in the language of warfare. But as one reads their announcement, it is patently clear that the members of this organization are not concerned with warring against Satan – "the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient" (Eph. 2:2). Rather, they are declaring war against the Presbyterian Church (USA). Their goal, of course, is to remove all impediments to ordination for gay and lesbian homosexuals, bisexuals and transgendered persons. They say that they want to "make the PCUSA stronger by strengthening the denomination's commitment to equality." But surely they lie when they say this, because the PCUSA never has and never will equate unrepentant sin with righteousness. In addition, their claim that success in this project will "promote the peace, purity, and unity of the Church" must also be seen as a lie, since their intention to achieve "victory" through a "campaign" can in no wise be understood as "peaceful." It would undoubtedly result in further divisiveness and corruption within the denomination. How can they be "non-hostile," as they say, when their goal is "victory" over those whom they apparently perceive as enemies? I see nothing of the Spirit of Jesus Christ in their actions toward the church. These people seem determined to secure domination of the PCUSA at any cost. Erin Swenson claims that the "campaign seeks victory for the entire Church," but that, too, is a lie – for if she and her colleagues "win," the Scriptural foundation of the church will be undermined. And if she "wins," many thousands of Presbyterians such as I would "lose." Donna Riley claims that "for decades" their "calls for action have been met with inaction" by the church. But this also is a lie. In the past seven years, by ever increasing margins, the denomination has thrice affirmed the Scriptural soundness of G-6.0106b. Those votes can scarcely be described as "inaction." (Oh! I get it! She claims as "inaction" anything that does not give her what she wants! Right?) Rather than "constructive dialogue" and "story sharing," Ms. Riley and Ms. Swenson could do the PCUSA a real service if they would explain concretely the Scriptural and Confessional basis of their proposed attempt to attain "victory." In the words of Thomas Jefferson, "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind" should impel them to explain precisely – not in abstract terms such as "justice" and "love" – why the church should accept as proper the sexual aberrations and perversions by which they proudly identify themselves. Such an explanation might address, among other topics, why they apparently believe that none of their sexual values and goals are forbidden by any of the prohibitions listed in Confessions 7.249 (Larger Catechism Q. 139). The PCUSA has endured enough of the unrest fomented by the More Light Presbyterians, the Covenant Network, the Witherspoon Society and their supporters in Louisville and elsewhere. How much longer must we shelter this cancerous growth that seeks to destroy the body? William R. Thurman Jr., elder First Presbyterian Church Thomaston, Ga. Recommended reading for Academy of Religion October 11, 2004 In addition to Prof. Gagnon's critique, I highly recommend the following reading list to those insufferably arrogant eggheads of the American Academy of Religion: Matthew 11:25-27, Acts 5:34-39; Acts 17:16-23 Even if they do, they still won't get it. It's just too simple to satisfy their egos. Fenton G. Cates Ashland, Ore. Bravo on GA actions against Israel October 11, 2004 Thanks to the General Assembly for taking a stand. This issue is the central issue of American foreign policy, yet it is kept completely out of focus. Without the Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, there would have been no 911, no Iraq, no general hatred of America by the Arab world. America is funding this horrible aggression, and bankrupting herself to do it. All of these costs are worth the benefits in the minds of the Israeli government, but not to anyone else on this planet. Israel does all possible to prevent peace. There is simple equation that explains this. Every year without peace allows Israel to steal more land and grants them more money from the US. When peace arrives, these benefits stop. War will continue until the benefits are removed as incentives to continue it. You have spoken the unspeakable, to suggest the emperor has no clothes. What courage it must have took. Bravo. In your position, you can't be criticized as anti-Semitic. The Israeli government is not only the worst enemy of the Palestinians, America and the rest of the world, but also of Israel itself. What a powerful nation they would become if they set aside their greed and cruelty. John Herman They despise liberty and love tyranny October 8, 2004 Re: Presbyterian group's "peacemaking" statement: As per usual, too many in our once great denomination have forsaken the truth of Jesus Christ for the lies and empty promises of socialist theory. I have yet to hear of this same bunch so bent on the destruction of free nations and free economies levying even the smallest hint of criticism toward Soviet Russia, totalitarian North Korea, Communist China or the imprisoned island of Cuba. Thus, one must reasonably guess that they hate the one and love the other: That they despise liberty and love tyranny. Nor do I ever, ever hear the smallest admiring comment toward the United States, which has freed millions upon millions of human beings from the effects of their socialist workers' paradises; nor do I hear anything other than the foulest opprobrium for an economic system that not only feeds the nation that has nurtured it, but somehow manages to feed the rest of the world as well. But I reckon to the supporters of tyranny, feeding folks and freeing nations is imperialism. Go figure. They are, I fear, merely totalitarians at heart. They hate our freedoms. They hate our prosperity. They despise our various huge bourgeois middle classes. They hate our liberty and self-determination. They want to be the princes of this world, and we and our social and economic successes get between them (these self-anointed elites) and their serfs (the so-called "oppressed"). "If only you would do what we and our political science professors tell you to," they would say. "Then all would be well." They want to be kings and queens upon the earth. I, for one, don't want it to happen. Millions upon millions have died when people just like these have attempted their childish visions of Utopia and tried to produce the attendant "New Socialist Man." How long, my friends, do we suffer these apologists for oppression in our midst? How long must we listen as they tear at the only democracy in the Middle East, effectively call for the overthrow of our Republic here at home, and as they objectively demand the return of savage dictators in Iraq and elsewhere. For a while, I thought to demit and leave. With the counsel of dear and respected friends, I have changed my mind. I am going nowhere. However, I now believe it is time for them to leave. I would not have a skunk in my living room. Why must I suffer would-be tyrants in Christ's Holy Church? Leave? I think not. That is the easy way out. I intend to stand and fight. Garet Aldridge Jr. Chaplain USA (RET) Orange Beach, Ala. When will the sleeping majority wake to what is occurring? October 8, 2004 I have read Elder Spotts' letter prayerfully and sat with it before I responded. As an ordained minister in the PCUSA I read this article with sadness in my heart; sadness based upon the letter's content and its truth in how far our denomination has fallen. Elder Spotts has eloquently stated some of the concerns that so many of us feel in our beloved PCUSA. The change does begin in the local churches. We are a denomination that spread power thinly so that the people sitting in the pews would have say in their church locally and beyond. Something is wrong when we have to discuss if Jesus Christ is Savior and the way to salvation. It should strike terror in every Presbyterian heart that a question such as this is even asked! When will the sleeping majority wake to what is occurring? What will the future bring for us? A new reformation within our denomination or will we let the devil finish his devouring? Rev. Benjamin D. Seller First Presbyterian Church of Dumas, Texas Where is our session's letter? October 8, 2004 I'm curious, did Spotts send this letter out to all Presbyterian sessions as I understand the report to read? If so, our session has not received it, perhaps because it hasn't been mailed yet or, worse, someone decided not to deliver it to our session, hmmm. I too share the concern that some sessions are out of step with their congregations. Richard Conway, elder, current session member First Presbyterian Church Morganton, N.C. Editors: When we interviewed him, Mr. Spotts had mailed 5,500 letters – about half of the number of Presbyterian congregations – and was sending the rest as quickly as possible. Don't just suggest – organize October 8, 2004 Will Spotts is absolutely correct! As I wrote my son (Rus Howard) and some of his friends recently, "You guys spend too much time writing and not enough time organizing." Cliff Kirkpatrick is a master at organization and control. Unless someone takes time to organize at the grass roots level in the pews, nothing will change. The Layman will survive but nothing will change. Have you ever considered asking your contributors and paid subscribers in each Presbyterian congregation to meet, then take matters up with their sessions, then to the presbyteries? Don't just suggest it; organize! David Howard Whose 'basic Christian' doctrines? October 8, 2004 Wilbur Owen "Will" Spotts, 32, an elder in Maryland, is spending $5,000 – mostly his own money – to convince the sessions of the 11,000 congregations in the Presbyterian Church (USA) that they should work to change the direction of the denomination. I sympathize with elder Spotts and the Old Gray Dog Foundation offers financial assistance to him in this endeavor. But I do have a problem with part of his letter: Explicitly require all officials of the PCUSA to uphold basic Christian doctrines. Whose basic Christian doctrines? James "The Old Gray Dog" Tuckett Adams' 'restraint' in article is admired October 8, 2004 Re: Presbyterian appeasement statement assails U.S., capitalism for not failing enough, causing 'monstrous suffering' by John H. Adams A suggested alternative: "A Presbyterian group, whose lifestyles would be the envy of 2/3rds of the world although they are supported by others, has assailed the United States, which has created 90% of the life-extending medical advances in the last 50 years, for pursuing a "global empire, backed by unprecedented military supremacy," as opposed to losing the Cold War on purpose. America's commitment to a free "capitalistic economic system [that] has enriched the corporate ruling class (a.k.a. employed people) at the expense of the earth (unlike say, defoliated Haiti) and the poor (who want to move here)" and generating "monstrous inequality and massive suffering," unlike Communist countries, where everyone is suffering equally. " I admire Mr. Adams' restraint in composing his unaltered article. Brian C. Rouch Verdict has restored 'my faith in Presbyterian churchmen' October 8, 2004 Thank you, Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Mid-Atlantic, for the vindication of a true "man of God." You have restored my faith in Presbyterian churchmen. Evelyn M. Thom Baton Rouge, La. Presbyterians haven't changed much through the years October 8, 2004 After reading the various articles from you, Witherspoon Society and Covenant Network along with the General Assembly publications, I thought that we have not changed much. Will Thompson in his study, Three Centuries of Presbyterians along the Potomac, cites a 1774 remark of Nicholas Cresswell of Alexandria, Virginia: "Went to a Presbyterian meeting. They are a set of rebellious scoundrels, nothing but political discourses instead of religious lectures." Gerald Little Bainbridge, Ga. Why do we worry more about culture than we do about God? October 8, 2004 When are we going to stop worrying about what the culture – and those addicted to it – thinks about us [as Christians and Presbyterians] and begin to worry about what God thinks about us [as Christians and Presbyterians]? Since when is "the denomination everything," as someone recently intimated, and the realties of faith sidelined [or is it sidestepped?] so that we don't provide "more reasons for the denomination to split?" I am tired of not being able to affirm the Biblical Truth that we once stood with/for without someone worrying about "offending" someone else. Whatever happened to the scandal of the Cross and the rewards inherent in remaining true to God's Word? Let us put on the whole armor of God and re-present the Gospel as we should – in love and for the benefit of those who need to hear. Rev. Larry Yerger Wintergarden Presbyterian Port Charlotte, Fla. Gunn short-sighted for refusing to read Layman anymore October 8, 2004 I have read the letter from Wilson Gunn, general presbyter of National Capital Presbytery concerning several questions I asked back in early August. He states that he will not be reading The Layman anymore so he will not respond to further questions from any writer. I believe this policy is not a good one. I asked for simple straight answers to three questions. 1. Did in fact, as stated by another writer, your presbytery send any gay folk as a delegation to Africa from your presbytery? 2. Did your presbytery house any representatives from the African presbytery with gay partnership individuals in the presbytery, and 3. Why wasn't the leader of the African presbytery met at the airport by a member of your presbytery at the General Assembly in Richmond? Mr. Gunn referred me to a publication put out by National Capital Presbytery to answer my questions. The article stated that the presbytery did send a gay couple as representatives with instructions not to acknowledge or engage in any behavior that would indicate to the East African Presbyterians that they were in such a relationship. I believe that this would not a good decision. No matter what your feelings are concerning gay/lesbian relationships you must be sensitive to your hosts views and culture. The East African Presbytery at a later date were made aware that the National Capital Presbytery had sent two practicing homosexuals and they were offended. I believe the attempt to mask this fact in the end was worse than being up front with it. The article stated that no East African Presbytery member was housed with gay couples during their visit to National Capital. Someone has not been truthful and should be taken to task for stating such a complaint if it in fact is not accurate. I believe The Layman didn't make this allegation but was made in another letter to the editor. My third question was not dealt with by the article. There was an explanation about housing of the executive but no answer concerning lack of escort from the airport. I asked these questions to get a better handle on what were the facts and I appreciate Mr. Gunn's response although I think he is shortsighted in his refusing to look at The Layman and letters to the editor again. I try and read all the Presbyterian publications as much as possible and all of them spin their philosophies and theology. I am trying to be as informed as I can on issues concerning the church and often I find it is hard to get at the truth and even harder to get truth published. The Layman like all of the other publications by Presbyterian church. reflects the thoughts and whims of their individual staff and who they answer to. It has always been the case and I find the truth lies somewhere in between what each side says. I don't believe that I am alone in my quest for what is the truth. There are serious problems in our church and the emphasis seems to be away from Jesus. I see splinter groups and support groups being formed for many issues with apparently no thought or priority of serving Christ but just the agenda of that group. What a pity! Thanks for the opportunity to express several opinions and I will not stop reading your publication. I will read with the understanding that you are presenting your viewpoint and I need to research to get at the facts. E.E. Jones Cullen, Va. Boy Scouts of America has 4-million youth October 8, 2004 The BSA has almost four million youth members plus about one million adults. Ernest Doclar Grapevine, Texas Presbytery action was effort to silence orthodox Presbyterians October 5, 2004 I share with others my pleasure in reading the synod court overruled the Presbytery of Western North Carolina's action against Parker Williamson and The Layman. We should not overly revel in this appropriate decision by the synod, but instead should remember that Western North Carolina Presbytery made their now-overturned decision in an effort to silence orthodox Presbyterians. Last October The Layman published "A Declaration of Conscience" that exhorted orthodox Presbyterians to be good stewards of the money entrusted to them and to ascertain for themselves who should be the recipients of those gifts. In 2003 my church conducted a very thorough examination of the denomination and concluded that sending money to the denomination was not justified. Consequently, our church stopped sending money for GA per capita, South Atlantic Synod per capita and Peace River Presbytery requests for funding. If readers would want to receive more details on the hows, whats, and whys we took the action taken, they can contact me at presby1368z@yahoo.com. Larry Rued, elder First Presbyterian Church Bradenton, Fla. Reader questions donations to per-capita and PLC October 5, 2004 First, I'd like to thank The PLC and The Layman for all it does to keep us pew-sitters informed about the shenanigans coming out of Louisville, GA, etc., without the shiny veneer of the "official" PCUSA spinmeisters, and to allow a forum to share concerns through letters, etc. But having said that, Parker Williamson must consider himself lucky to have emerged from the SPJC process with any kind of victory, let alone one that has him keep the status of a "validated ministry" off-limits for a year and has everyone involved start a "kiss and make-up" process. The "fuzzy math" concerning how many issues he won or lost cited in your article the other day is even worse when looked at more closely: of the 25 numbered or lettered specifications, Mr. Williamson "won" on only six. Two of those, (6a and 6b) sounded like questions to determine if this problem was even in the ball park, and 9a and 9b had to do with the questionable issue of "brief statements." Certainly a Presbyterian pastor ought to be able to read and decode long, unclear statements, especially a pastor as accustomed to contention and controversy as much as the executive of the PLC has come to be. And look at a few of the specifications on which he lost: videographers? court reporters? method of approval of minutes? C'mon, get real! This is the kind of thing that makes outsiders leery of the institutional church. And it makes us pew-sitters wonder what goes on with our per-capita as well as our contributions to the PLC. How many people were saved or brought to a better relationship with Jesus Christ while all these people decided if it was "fair" that a videographer wasn't included in the presbytery hearing? Finally, if Mr. Williamson feels obliged to cite and appeal on 25 (count 'em, 25!!) "irregularities" to save his position in an organization that treats him so badly, yet an organization he claims to love and to wants to save, I suggest he consider the Groucho Marx theory: Why would he want to be a member of any group that would want him as a member, a group that now has had to resort to such high-level judicial proceedings to do so? And maybe the rest of us ought to ask the same question about the PCUSA as a whole. Eric Wallace Dayton, Ohio Presbytery failing small churches October 5, 2004 Again the people in charge of the Presbytery of West Virginia have failed the small or should I say "non-capital producing" churches of West Virginia. As many churches continue to fall off the radar screen of the presbytery, it becomes easier for them to forget about the these churches leaving them to focus on the larger churches in the Kanawha Valley and Huntington. Unfortunately those in command are worried more about the bottom line than saving souls for Christ. Benjamin P. Glaser Clarksburg, W.Va. For gay advocates, the church is a means to an end October 5, 2004 Ralph Carter affirms evangelicals' worst suspicions: namely, that LGBT Presbyterians are driven not by the gospel of Christ but by the consuming need to justify their lifestyle. Quote: "I stay in the Presbyterian Church because it is one of the best places for doing LGBT advocacy. Think about it. One of the biggest barriers to the life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness by queer people can be found among so-called people of faith. And what better place to work on them than in churches and synagogues?" Clearly, queerness is their true center. For Carter and other gay advocates, the church is a means to an end. This is a substitute proclamation – an ersatz gospel – standing in the place of Presbyterian discipleship. Note well that Carter is a false prophet if there ever was one and the More Light Network the veritable font of false prophecy. The good news is that all of this effort at self-justification indicates an active conscience. Advocacy is in fact nothing but the attempt to generate a morality that keeps the conscience easy. Should all of society and even the church offer gays the seal of approval, will they be at peace? Will they finally feel justified? No, for justification is not a cultural construction – nor is conscience – but both come from God whose word on these matters is already well known and well articulated. If More Light Presbyterians think that all their political pushing will finally silence God, they have nothing but disappointment ahead. God loves them too much to give up on them. He will not leave them content with half-truths and cherished falsehoods. Neither should the PCUSA. Carter and all LGBTs and More Lighters need to repent of their arrogance – of their idolatry of setting up wayward sexual lifestyles as little gospels to be gladly evangelized. They are a blight on our love feasts until they do, and any Presbyterians interested in peace, unity and purity will certainly join in calling for their correction. To do nothing – to be silent and apparently peaceable – is now gay advocacy as well. Noel K. Anderson, executive pastor First Presbyterian Church Bakersfield, Calif. Louisville actions seek to destroy PCUSA October 5, 2004 There seems to be no end of actions coming out of Louisville seeking to destroy the PCUSA. First, the GA is spoon fed a resolution calling for corporate divestment in Israel and persuades the GA to approve it. This causes a firm storm of publicity hostile to our denomination which is widely accused of anti-Semitism. Instead of backing off, the staff in Louisville defends it profusely. Now the GAC is telling church members that the resolution wasn't their fault and that they must follow the will of the GA and carry out the divestment. Next, the Louisville staff persuaded the GA to label our troops in Iraq as war criminals. Now the GAC has adopted a proposal for churches to care for military families and returning veterans. Where has the GAC been? I dare say that every church in the PCUSA which has family members in Iraq has been doing this. My church has sent a thousand pounds of comfort items and Christian materials to the Chaplain of the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment for distribution to the troops. We have sent several hundred pounds of school supplies to the Chaplain of the 25th Infantry Division for his soldiers to give to Iraqi school children. The above represents terrible decisions by the PCUSA staff. There is no remorse, just stonewalling. To add to the problem and to continue a decline in membership, the stated clerk condemns capitalism and embraces socialism (or communism). He met with the World Alliance of Reformed Churches which called capitalism an immoral economic system defended by empire. He was then elected President of the WARC. This immoral economic system has produced more wealth than any system in the world, and has been very generous in sharing it with those in need. To change our economic system will require that our political system be overthrown. This ideology is being shoved in our face by the stated clerk. The wealth of the PCUSA is due largely to this terrible economic system. Generous contributors will be overjoyed. Jack Vanderbleek, elder Northeast Presbyterian Church St. Petersburg, Fla. Right prevails in Williamson case October 1, 2004 Re: "Synod court sets aside presbytery's invalidation of Williamson's ministry": At long last, right prevails! Thank goodness we have people in this world like Parker Williamson who have the staying power to stand up for their rights and beliefs. May God continue to bless Parker Williamson and the work of the PLC. Carolyne Coco Baton Rouge, La. Thankful for Williamson decision October 1, 2004 How thankful we are! Wendy and Monty Burnham The truth prevails in court decision October 1, 2004 The truth will set you free. Richard Conway, elder First Presbyterian Church Morganton, N.C. National Capital Presbytery responds to Githii article October 1, 2004 One of your readers (E. E. Jones, 8-20-04) had expressed a desire for more information clarifying the gross errors expressed by others (James Yearsley, 8-18-04) who have contributed letters related to the tenuous mission partnership National Capital Presbytery has with the Elburgon Presbytery in the Presbyterian Church of East Africa. Some time ago I promised you a response. These matters are related to the article you published featuring the perceptions of the PCEA moderator David Githii. To read the facts The Layman did not choose to include and those sought by various persons writing letters to you please access the article in "The Connector," the National Capital Presbytery newsletter at http://www.thepresbytery.org/Resources/The_Connector.html I will not be checking your site in the future related to any comments your readers care to offer, so please do not expect any response from me in this regard. Wilson Gunn, general presbyter National Capital Presbytery 8401 Connecticut Ave. Suite 805 Chevy Chase, Md. Don't shoot the messenger October 1, 2004 Come on, Rev. Stocker. The only reason that you "find the Presbyterian Lay Committee involving itself in the purely political questions surrounding the existence and policies of the present state of Israel" is because of the incredibly stupid, divisive and wrong action of the General Assembly of the PCUSA in calling for divestment. Some entity has to point out the error of what has been done, and the Presbyterian Lay Committee would seem to be most appropriate to take on that role. Now if you'd questioned why the General Assembly of the PCUSA was "involving itself in the purely political questions surrounding the existence and policies of the present state of Israel" I could understand your pique. Warren B. Howe, MD Bellingham, Wash.

Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links