February 2005 letters Archives of letters to the editor

There are limits to tolerance February 28, 2005 This week, pastors of the 40 largest PCUSA churches have been invited to a meeting. What they discuss and what they decide, or do not decide, will go a long way in determining the future of this denomination. Because the Westminster Fellowship cares very deeply for this denomination and would like nothing more than to see it restored to Reformed foundation with TULIP as its essential tenets and the Westminster Standards as its Confession of Faith, we sent the following letter to the invited pastors: Let us introduce you to our newest colleague in ministry: The Reverend Elisabeth "Eily" Marlow-a self-professing, practicing lesbian. According to Marlow herself, her "wife's" name is Jamie Jazdzyk, a minister in the Lutheran church. Last Tuesday night, the Presbytery of Milwaukee voted 104-20 to approve Rev. Marlow's ordination. Previously, Marlow has stirred controversy by her leadership a decade ago in the "Re-Imagining God" scandal that rocked the PCUSA. She next received national attention at the 1998 General Assembly, when she helped lead the effort to rescind the assembly's earlier action to end denominational support for the National Network of Presbyterian College Women for their unabashed support of a pro-homosexual agenda. Then again, when Milwaukee Presbytery first took her under care, there was national attention directed at her. In the meantime, the Presbytery of Milwaukee enacted a resolution declaring they would defy the Constitution of the PCUSA and ordain whomever it wanted, without regard to any prohibition. Two nights ago they kept their promise, and the Presbytery of Milwaukee joined the ranks of a dozen or so other presbyteries that are actively making war upon our constitution. We are writing you today because as the senior pastor of one of our denomination's largest congregations, you have been invited to attend a meeting at St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church in Newport Beach, California. You and your colleagues at that meeting have it within your power to reverse the downward spiral of our denomination. For this reason, we urge you to join with us in a visible, tangible sign of our outrage at this affront to God's Holy Word, and call for all Christ-centered congregations to withhold per capita support of the General Assembly, and hopefully magnifying a hundred-fold the impact of your refusal to pay per capita. As you know, the Office of the General Assembly, that is funded by per capita, is required to uphold the Constitution, and it has steadfastly refused to do so. It was just announced that the Presbytery of Shenango is going to end all undesignated support of the PCUSA. If the largest congregations in our denomination do so as well, the crisis can end. Perhaps that is why John Huffman said in 2002 that "enough is enough" and that those who are defying the Constitution of the church should "be held accountable." He said that he would ask his session to take action to cut off its per capita payments if by January 2003 there "is not compliance in spirit and in detail" and that he would ask his session to escrow the funds for one year, and then, in "January 2004, if churches are still not complying with the constitution, the funds would be redirected for mission." Dr. Huffman was right to make that promise. Dr. Huffman was right in his general observation about the crisis in our denomination. A crisis that since his promise has done nothing but escalate. Dr. Huffman was right to call for accountability. But our leaders in Louisville are not the only ones who must be held accountable. So must each of us be held accountable. "Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins." James 4:17 (NIV). The time to act to avert this crisis has passed. The time to confront it is here. You can make a powerful impact. Withholding or redirecting per capita -particularly in conjunction with the other largest congregations in our denomination-is the single most powerful tool in your arsenal. We believe that God will hold each of us accountable if we now fail to act. In New York Presbytery, Jon Walton and Tom Tewell do not deny that they have ordained elders whom they believe to be practicing homosexuals, yet their presbytery protects them. In Western North Carolina Presbytery, Rob Martin was not disciplined for publicly denying the bodily resurrection of our Lord and Savior, despite the testimony of a dozen ministers and elders who personally witnessed his remarks. In Baltimore Presbytery, Don Stroud was not only protected as an openly defiant and gay minister, but also elected as a Commissioner to General Assembly as an act of the Presbytery's defiance. In Redwoods Presbytery, Katie Morrison was ordained despite her unashamed proclamation that she was a practicing lesbian. In National Capital Presbytery, Eric Scott Winnette was allowed to continue his ministry even though on the floor of General Assembly, as a Commissioner, he proclaimed his homosexual practice. His senior pastor, Susan Andrews, was given a pass by the presbytery for her support of him, despite the language of G-6.0106(b) prohibiting his ordination. In the Greater Atlanta Presbytery, the Reverend Eric Swenson's homosexuality was not only countenanced, but the Presbytery voted to allow him to change his name to "Erin" to support his desire to be known as a woman. In Hudson River Presbytery, Joe Gilmore and Susan De George have announced their churches will openly defy the Constitution and regularly participate in ordination of homosexual elders, and their presbytery looks on in approval. In Heartland Presbytery, J. Dicks McKell favors the ordination of practicing homosexuals, and his congregation last year elected an elder who is openly living in a homosexual relationship, yet his presbytery does nothing to stop this defiance. This list of defiance could go on and on. But some say we should be tolerant of those making war on our church and its constitution. "There are limits to tolerance. We excuse things and the truth is ultimately lost." So said our late brother Frank Harrington in the last sermon he preached from the pulpit of Peachtree Presbyterian Church before his sudden death a few days later. "A wink here, a shrug there, a look the other way yonder and we find ourselves tolerating things and refusing to challenge behavior that is clearly wrong. …The reality is that today we are increasingly making excuses about our behavior. Increasingly we are tolerating private behavior that has serious public consequences…We can run from our moral responsibility, but we cannot hide from the consequences. We can detach ourselves and stand on the sidelines, but the challenge and the responsibility that we collectively have will not go away. We can wait for somebody, anybody to do something while refusing to engage the issues, but we are still collectively responsible." Are you going to wait for somebody, anybody to do something? "We are all still collectively responsible." Here is how Frank concluded his final sermon: "We have noted that tolerance has its limits. We have acknowledged that we live in a time of moral confusion. But note with me, thirdly, the heart of the matter: We need clear direction! …We need some clear directions and we should be getting it from the Church. I promise you that this church and this pastor in the future, as in the past, will attempt to be as clear as possible concerning morality, both public and private." By withholding or redirecting per capita you can give our church the clear direction that Frank was referring to. You can lead where our church is so desperately lacking leadership. If you will, myriads of congregations throughout the denomination will follow you. The time is critical. The day is short. John Huffman's own promise must be made good! The gospel has been entrusted to us. We are trustees of the Word, not tenured professors of religion. Until 1965, the membership in Presbyterian Churches in the US was growing. Every year since, it has been dying. The 216th General Assembly reported that the PCUSA had a net loss of 46,000 members in 2003. Let me ask you something. If a potential new member asks you if the PCUSA ordains self-affirming, practicing homosexuals as ministers and elders, will you deny it? At the 216th General Assembly John Buchanan's Covenant Network made a major undertaking to change or eliminate the Authoritative Interpretation. They came within a handful of votes of victory. No one, not one single person we know on either side of the issue, thinks they will lose next time. That's why we started the Westminster Fellowship. We refuse to give up on our church that we have so long served. We are thus funding litigation in California State Court seeking to invalidate the unconscionable property provisions of Chapter VIII of the Book of Order, and we will continue to do likewise throughout the country. We constitute the front lines in the battle for constitutional integrity. We call on you to join us. The time for action has come. We urge you in the strongest possible terms to lead our church on the per capita issue. L. Rus Howard Peter's Creek Presbyterian Church James Tuckett, honoraby retired Heartland Presbytery PCUSA, WCC can see no evil in Palestinian society February 28, 2005 I am flabbergasted that WCC's international affairs expert Peter Weiderud could tell the press that the WCC is "unaware" of any intimidation of Palestinian Christians by the Palestinian Authority. It reminds me of PCUSA Marthame Sanders statement that in dealing with the Middle East "balanced is absolutely not the right approach." Like the PCUSA, the WCC can see no evil in Palestinian society, and is willing to see only evil in the Israeli government. Those willing to see the Middle East without the anti-Israel blinkers worn by so many PCUSA leaders will be interested in this well-documented report detailing land confiscation, arrests of converts to Christianity, anti-Cristian riots and desecration of churches by the Palestinian Authority. Diana Appelbaum Was George Orwell talking about PCUSA? February 28, 2005 I agree with Pastor Henkel [letter to the editor, posted February 24, 2005] that "the decisions and direction of General Assembly, synod, and even the presbytery have no bearing whatsoever on the conduct of congregational life." I believe that the reason that they have no bearing on congregational life and will not lead to a mass outflow from PCUSA is that most of the members and many of the elders are not even aware of what the presbyteries and the General Assembly is doing. I know that this is the case in First Presbyterian Church of Royal Oak. This is because none of these actions are reported to the session or the members and when these actions are reported, they are so sanitized and parsed that it is difficult to understand what they are. It is the same approach as Presbyterian Today takes when they report only favorable things and spin anything that might cause concern. At FPCRO, the interim pastor that recently left would throw out any copies of The Layman that were available. This control of the message and the media would be called propaganda and censorship in most organizations. I think that I just found the only type of church discipline that the liberal wing approves of – controlling the message, to control the people. Was George Orwell talking about PCUSA? Doug Hepner Do opposite of what WCC says February 28, 2005 The World Council of Churches Nobody Goes to Anymore has no moral standing. Nobody looks at what they say and then worries that diverging from it might be an instance of sin. In fact, if you don't have time to do research on an issue, see what the WCCNGtA says and do the opposite. You won't always be right, but that is the way to bet. Richard A. Aubrey, Jr. Has the name of the task force changed to reflect new attitude? February 28, 2005 I was at a gathering of ministers yesterday and one asked, "When did the task force's name change?" I thought it started out to seek the Peace, Purity and Unity ( PPU) of church, now it is Peace Unity and Purity (PUP). When did it change?. And does it reflect an attitude that unity trumps purity?" It is a provocative question. The gathering couldn't answer. Can you? Harriss Ricks Richmond, Va. The use of "peace, unity and purity" was not part of the 213th General Assembly's resolution on the task force. However, that phrase – in that order – was used by Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick in his report to the General Assembly endorsing a "third way" or "more excellent way" of resolving the conflict over ordination. The Editors PCUSA is on the wrong tract in accepting homosexual lifestyle February 28, 2005 The Presbyterian Church (USA) is definitely on the wrong tract with its embracing homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle and especially in its ordination of a known homosexual. I will be leaving the Presbyterian church if this movement continues in this direction. Bill W Smith Glenwood Presbyterian Community Church Deland, Fla. Are Presbyterians heading toward a merger? February 28, 2005 My name is Kevin Colvard. I am an ordained Cumberland Presbyterian minister in Birmingham, Ala.. I am a member of Grace Presbytery. Presently our presbytery is one of the three presbyteries (CP, CPCA, PCUSA) hosting the concurrent G.A. meetings in 2006. I am "hearing" that from the PCUSA perspective, that this is a concrete step towards organic merger. My question is this: Is there any specific, concrete, documentable source for this concern? Is this merely speculation and conjecture? Are you aware of any related discussion about this issue? Could you suggest a reliable source of information? I am a delegate to our G.A. this summer and the author of a memorial from our presbytery concerning the concurrent G.A.'s and I would appreciate all the "real" information I can get. Kevin Colvard The office of the General Assembly of the PCUSA says it is involved in "bilateral and multilateral dialogues with other churches [including both Cumberland denominations] and traditions in order to remove barriers of misunderstanding and establish common affirmations." The editors How much money goes to pro-abortion group? February 28, 2005 Could I get information about past and present dollar amounts that go towards supporting Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice? Thanks in advance. John Guthrie Do politeness and tolerance and inclusiveness trump morality? February 28, 2005 I never did understand – and still don't – how come the GLBT crowd decided to take over the denomination instead of simply starting a new one of their own. Plus, I can't understand why the decent non-GLBT people in the pews put up with the GLBT takeover. How was it possible to pull the wool over their eyes? Since when do politeness and tolerance and inclusiveness trump morality? Just wondering. Alan Cole McLean, Va. Congregations should realize the impact of national issues on their identity February 28, 2005 Jim Henkel's letter [letter to the editor posted February 24, 2005] points out the apathy in the local PCUSA congregations to national and international issues that PCUSA, ACSWP and General Assembly seem to be preoccupied with, predicting "there will be no mass exodus from the PCUSA ... because these issues make ... no difference at all." Mr. Henkel is convinced that such apathy will never change. Regarding the focus of local congregations, I think Jim Henkel is right on target about how local churches view local issues and their congregations as their top priority. However, the question is not whether local congregations will remain apathetic to PCUSA national stands on such issues, but whether local congregations should wake up and realize the impact of such national issues on their very identity as Presbyterians. The purpose of having a national organization is to "define" what it means to be a member of the organization. While local issues may be priorities, the "definition" of what the organizations' mission is also determines how the world will view the groups' local activities as well. The reason why people belong to a specific religious denomination is that religious denomination "means something;" it represents a set of beliefs and standards that the church accepts and incorporates in their beliefs. I seriously doubt that most Presbyterians would view that their denomination "stands for" turning its back on Israel, while it is under attack by terrorists, as clearly shown in Friday's terrorist attack in Tel Aviv. If the PCUSA decided it wanted to play a role in the Middle East, and was concerned about Israel, why has it not issued statements condemning such terrorist attacks? I have seen none. I think it is our duty as Christians not to abandon the Jewish people and Israel. Apathy and silence are not the answer to the PCUSA attacks on Israel, and the layman must not remain silent on the issue of Israel and let PCUSA anti-Israel activists define the "position" of the church. History has shown that local apathy regarding the national leadership of an organization ultimately leads to such organizations being sidetracked from their primary goals and mission. For example, I am also a contributing member of the YMCA, so it was quite a shock to discover last week the national body of its sister group, YWCA, agreed not to condemn a YWCA world group that compared Israel's actions to "Hitler ... exterminating the Jews." This is not why I have contributed as a member of these groups. Instead of promoting inclusiveness, now the YWCA is in effect attacking Israel and the Jewish people, who are literally fighting for their lives against terrorists. Is this the image the YMCA/YWCA wants to convey – comparing Israel and Jews to Hitler? Should Christian organizations mock the Holocaust with attacks on Israel's attempt to keep its people safe? (A PCUSA Peacemaker-sponsored speaker did the same thing at Wooster College in October 2003.) When people see "Presbyterians" in the future, will "Presbyterians" be known as the leaders of anti-Israel efforts across Protestant Christian churches? It is ironic that the same national PCUSA leadership that claims to want to build inclusiveness has no problem with turning its back on the Jewish people and the Holy Land of Israel. This is how "Presbyterians" of any sort – PCUSA, EPC, RPCNA, etc. – are going to be remembered in the future; the assumption of non-PCUSA Presbyterians that the Jewish community will understand the variations of Presbyterianism is completely unfounded. In minds of most of the Jewish people, a Presbyterian is a Presbyterian. Realize that now, and don't be smug that it is the PCUSA having problems, not another branch of the Presbyterian church. If all Presbyterians don't shake this apathy and remember there is an identity as an organization larger than that of personal individuals, then Presbyterians will be remembered as "the Christians who hate Israel." That does no good for Middle East peace, for any Presbyterian, and for the work of Jesus Christ. Apathy and silence on the PCUSA-Israel divestement issue may be the common reaction at local Presbyterian churches, but that is certainly not the answer. The Presbyterian congregants can do better than that. Jeffrey Imm Olney, Md. Biblically-based members of task force are being outvoted and outmaneuvered February 28, 2005 According to your article, the final task force report may allow for the ordination of gays, "as not being overly divisive." Maybe it is time for CCM members to set up "independent" "shell" Christian education corporations whose board members would be the same folks as the members of the local session. These corporations could be set up for the local church members to transfer assets into, should the worst come. It would also be a great pressure point to use against Louisville. By lessening the impact of the property issue, Louisville would lose their pressure point over the congregations and would be forced to listen and maybe even repent. At the same time, Louisville would be receiving less money. Maybe if we were a poor church our problems and divisions would be small and we could spend more time praying and worshipping our wonderful God and Savior. The Biblically based members of the task force are being outvoted and outmaneuvered. God bless those Biblically-based members of the task force who gave their all, and fought the good fight. The Lord bless them mightily. If the left prevails on this report, this could be quite detrimental for the overwhelming majority of us in the PCUSA whose life and faith are Biblically based. This is an important time to pray. John Almquist PCUSA is leading people into sin, instead of helping them leave their sin behind February 28, 2005 Open letter to the Presbyterian Church (USA)'s General Assembly Mathew tells us, as believers, we are to hold each other accountable so that we might not stray from the truth. This is as true for individuals as it is organizations. "… teach them to obey everything I have commanded …" (Matt 28:20) Thus my reason for writing: As a life long Presbyterian, I have noticed that through the past several years you (via the General Assembly) have moved further and further from the teachings of Jesus Christ and closer to the teachings of the world. I've watched as you've begun to embrace homosexuality, abortion (including partial-birth abortion) and many new age philosophies. I need to remind you that you are treading in very dangerous waters. In Luke 17:1-2 it reminds us all: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person [or organization] through whom they come. It would be better for him [or them] to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. So watch yourself." I believe you all are leading people into sin, instead of lovingly helping them leave their sin behind and repent. I am praying for you all, that you too, may stop your sinful teachings, turn back and again follow the one and only true God, Jesus Christ. Until such time as I see your repentance, I have no choice but to instruct my church to no longer allow any of my tithes to support the presbytery. I believe it is moving toward becoming a non-Christian organization. I am called to be a good steward of the money God has given me. I can not support those things you all follow that are contrary to God. I say all of this in the Love of Christ. I will pray and I challenge you all to do the same; that Jesus Christ may lead you out of this darkness and back into the light of his holy name. Gary Hall Writer isn't surprised Kirkpatrick involved with WCC February 28, 2005 The February 25 Layman article entitled "Jewish leaders condemn WCC for backing Israeli-divestment plan" also mentions the National Council of Churches (NCC) and states they are "bankrolled chiefly by the PCUSA and other mainline denominations," and that the NCC "supports the divestment resolution." A couple of articles on FrontPageMagazine.com and Discoverthenetwork.org report the NCC is actually "the legacy of its fore-runner, the Communist front-group known as the Federal Council of Churches." The articles report that the NCC "played a central role in subsidizing revolutionary Communist movements in the Third World," and "supplied financial support for Soviet-sponsored incursions into Africa, aiding the terrorist rampages of Communist guerrillas in Zimbabwe, Namibia, Mozambique and Angola." Further from the articles: "At one time an unabashed apostle of the Communist cause, the NCC has today recast itself as a leading representative of the so-called religious left. Adhering to what it has described as 'liberation theology' – that is, Marxist ideology disguised as Christianity – the NCC lays claim to a membership of 36 Protestant, Anglican and Orthodox Christian denominations, and some 50 million members in over 140,000 congregations". The Layman article states that PCUSA Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick is a member of the central committee and executive committee of the WCC. Why am I not one bit surprised? Lea Price LaGrange, Ill. Does WCC think God would divest from his people? February 28, 2005 Isn't this great? What a legacy for the PCUSA to have so influenced the already apostate WCC to follow their lead. "Let the blind lead the blind, they all go together into destruction" In spite of such abundance of bread here in the West, it seems that the famine for God's true Word increases among those who call themselves "covenant people" following after Jesus Christ himself ... there is ever increasing darkness descending all around us in this part of the world. Does the Council of World Churches really believe God himself would have us divest of interest in the very people who have been called by his name from the time he established Jerusalem as the City of David and Israel after the name he gave to Issac's own son? The obvious dullness of hearing, lack of vision on the part of so many "ordained" clergy who continue to exalt their own human opinion as truth superior to the Word of God himself is what Jesus, while walking as a common man among common men, warned his disciples to "beware of" in way of the "leaven of the Pharisees" ... this is the greatest danger for any who follow them back into such pernicious ways. The Apostle Peter gave sound warnings to let any who called the early church, using terms of severest warning to any who would lead little ones astray after themselves into a way other than that which has been given from the beginning as truth to prevent us from faltering, stumbling round in darkness or returning to the same dark places converted souls have been delivered out of by his Grace. He admonished all who had an ear to hear and the wisdom to discern between what is true and what is false that only as we refuse to be removed from our safe position in Christ our Lord can we hope to be kept from falling into the same snares, pits and traps as those who are blindly following any other voice but his own while passing through this present world. It may be in truth the World Council of Churches is truer in the confession of what they believe as a crossless, Christless imitation of the true bride of Christ than what the PCUSA leaders who are betraying the very Lord who bought us continues in confession and profession to claim as their identity. As the devil is unmasked he will also usually overplay his hand for any who might yet have a doubt as to who is behind the scenes pulling the strings of those who dance happily along as part of the show. As we have been reminded throughout the ages "the church's one foundation is Jesus Christ our Lord" we can trust that the very cornerstone on which those who are faithful continue to build to the end will be found in him who is sure. The author and the finisher of our faith, as we keep our eyes fixed on him by the same amazing grace that saved us we will find strength to stand, walk and to endure up until the end of the age, the end of all time as will be known as human "history" will be swallowed up in victory as finally the "mystery of Heaven" is revealed through the same Jesus Christ who has called us his own. Karen Kolbinsky For many, decisions of governing bodies have no bearing on congregational life February 24, 2005 My thanks to Rev. Raymond M. Tear [letter to the editor, posted Feb. 21, 2005] for pointing out that the action of Mission Presbytery regarding the dismissal of First Presbyterian Church Laredo, Texas, to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church seeks to protect the resources of the congregation rather than to plunder them. Rev. Tear goes on to share his "fear" that the exit of the Laredo congregation might be a "harbinger of a coming wave if the Lord does not send renewal across the PCUSA." Have no fear Rev. Tear, the wave will never amount to more than a ripple. Witness the tiny trickle of local churches that bother to declare an affinity for the so called Confessing Church Movement (CCM, which hasn't moved anywhere since the Atlanta convocation way back in 2001). Thus far, attempts to jump start that "Movement" have failed. The newly emerging Westminster Fellowship is the latest effort in that vein. The New Wineskins Initiative (NWI) is also attempting to stir the waters. NWI flows not out of the CCM, but the Presbyterian Coalition; that confluence of the various renewal/reform groups existing within our denomination. NWI is gearing up for a convocation of its own this June 15-18, in Minneapolis. It appears that the objective of NWI is to build an alternative denominational structure while maintaining affiliation with the PCUSA, so that (should God refuse to favor the work of the Presbyterian Coalition by sending "renewal across the PCUSA") NWI member congregations are prepared to effect a separation and raise up a new denomination. While it is premature to predict how many local churches will "sign-on" with NWI, expect the numbers – at their greatest – to reach into the hundreds; in truth, it may prove very hard to break a hundred. It is hard to raise more than a ripple because of the layer of deep apathy that runs across the surface of the PCUSA in regard to national or international level issues. Many (perhaps the majority of) local church members look no further than the ministry and mission of their particular congregation. What higher governing bodies do, decree, or allow simply makes no difference. The decisions and direction of General Assembly, synod, and even the presbytery have no bearing whatsoever on the conduct of congregational life. It isn't about whether a delegation from Louisville visited with Hezbollah, it's about whether the pastor visited Aunt Sally with communion. It isn't about boycotting Taco Bell, it's about being certain to remember Grandpa Hutchins when he goes for surgery. It isn't about the reorganization of the Davidson College Trustees, it's about whether the local church trustees fixed the dripping faucet in the ladies room. It isn't about making pilgrimage to Houston to pray for denominational renewal, it's about the Thursday morning women's prayer circle continuing to intercede together for the needs of friends and family. It isn't about reaching a common mind regarding the ordination of homosexuals, it's about coming to a consensus on the color of the new carpet for the church parlor. It isn't about General Assembly directed divestment in companies doing business with Israel, it's about raising enough money at the next community breakfast so that the men's fellowship can invest in the materials to rebuild the widow McGreavy's front porch. It isn't about sending an overture to General Assembly for or against abortion rights, its about walking with Sam and Sarah through their grief over the loss of their still-born daughter. It isn't about the deliberations of the Theological Task Force on the Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church, it's about sitting down to talk through the hurt feelings that the self-appointed "Queen of the Church Kitchen" inflicted on a new volunteer who dared to place a piece of the congregation's best, rose-pattern silver into the everyday flatware drawer. There will be no wave of congregations seeking dismissal, there will be no mass exodus from the PCUSA; because finally and forever, in the minds and hearts of most local church folk, the things written about in this letters to the editor column just make no difference – no difference at all. Jim Henkel, Confessing Church Pastor North Benton Presbyterian Church North Benton, Ohio Eastminster Presbytery Divestment at this time is a cruel manifestation of either ignorance or malice February 24, 2005 After reading that the Presbyterian 2004 General Assembly's resolution calling for divestment of denominational funds in corporations doing business with Israel, I am writing to beg you to reconsider this ill-conceived action. Divestment from Israel at this time is a cruel manifestation of either ignorance or malice. Israel, the one true, functioning democracy in the Middle East, is at grave risk of losing its battle for existence; fighting the "Palestinians" who send terrorists to kill Israeli citizens, the surrounding Arab countries who have stated openly that they wish to annihilate Israel, and much of Europe which sees Israel the source of all the problems. I have not read anywhere that your General Assembly is removing itself from any of these other entities, only from Israel, the honest model of democracy for the whole Middle East. Without the fence (which is 93 percent wire) even more Israelis would have died and would be dying. More suicide bombers would have been able to accomplish their nefarious actions, resulting in their deaths, also. The houses that have been destroyed have not been destroyed in retaliation for the suicide bombings but to remove places where terrorists can hide. Please cancel your plans to divest yourselves from companies that do business in Israel. Frances Schwartzwald Grand Prairie, Texas It continues February 24, 2005 Subject: Lesbian ordination The disintegration continues. Paul H. McKay Is reunion the goal of 2006 General Assembly? February 24, 2005 Greetings in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ! As a Cumberland Presbyterian, I am interested in the events in the PCUSA since very few lost persons know the difference in our divisions. I have been, and continue to be, disturbed at the special interest groups that are determined to slander the name of Christ for their personal goals at the 2006 GA. However, I do have a question for my brothers and sisters in the PCUSA. We have been repeatedly told by our stated clerk that there are no union discussions and that Kirkpatrick has made that clear. However, I continue to find articles that quote Kirkpatrick saying that is the expressed goal of the meeting – is he that deceitful? Keith Mariott, pastor Branchville Church Laredo church doing the work of Jesus February 24, 2005 Sounds like PCSUA needs to bow to the Laredo church and recognize that it is out doing the work of the Lord Jesus. Meri Burlingame Onalaska, Wash. Same letter, same issue, different date February 24, 2005 As I have noted before in this 'publication' ... It certainly is easier to write my concerns when I may simply repeat a previous submittal. The original was submitted and published on or about May 18, 2004. The concern expressed in the following is "over." Ms. Marlow is now approved to be ordained as a minister of Word and Sacrament in the desperately drifting Presbyterian Church (USA). Is there fallout on the way? Please note, the May 17, 2004, article "'Practicing, non-repentant homosexual' certified as candidate for PCUSA ministry" is not the first. I'm not sure Milwaukee's action doing the same thing in September, 2003, was the first either, but in a letter to the editor dated October 3, 2003, a writer noted: "If Ms. Marlow still proclaims her sexual preference as lesbian at the time of her ordination vote, the motion will not, I predict, receive unanimous approval. [It was not, but 104 to 20 is not indicative of a strong Biblical conviction in the Milwaukee Presbytery] But, I also 'understand' that if she states she is celibate at that time, we who would won't have a chance to discuss the advisability of disapproval. And, once again, the Book of Order will trump the Bible." This is precisely the situation the Episcopal church found itself in years ago with Gene Robinson. Perhaps standing for the truth now will avoid the situation in which the Episcopal congregants have now found themselves. Will we? Doubt it. Will God deal with it. No doubt at all. Someday soon, we may hear, "incoming," and receive deserved peripheral damage from our great God and Savior's righteous anger and judgment. There are things to be done. And God will do them when he has judged his people are no longer truly dedicated to defending his Holy Name regardless of the cost! Are God's true children in his church ready to see his Holy wrath? Have God's people ever been? His Word doesn't show they have, but it does show his people can learn – at least the hard way! Greg Leaman Sheboygan County Wisc. Orthodox faith is carrying out the mission Christ gave it February 24, 2005 I mourn with you over the implosion of the PCUSA. I was a Presbyterian for 25 years. It was good to me and I experienced a lot of growth. But with recent developments I had to question whether the church that Christ founded could behave this way. My wife and I went searching. Methodist, Lutheran, Baptist, and a client suggested Orthodox. I knew nothing of the Orthodox faith. It took a year of prayer, study and attendance before we converted to this (what seemed to us, strange) church. The last three years as a Presbyterian, I kept knowing there had to be more than this. Believe me when I tell you, there is more. Much more. I can only encourage you to continue your faithful work, but do take a look at the Orthodox faith. It was the original church from which the Roman Catholic split. It is alive, it is well, and it is carrying out the mission Christ gave it. Glenn Turner Davidson proposal was deeply flawed and could be detrimental to future February 23, 2005 The following letter was written to Davidson College's board of trustees before their vote to allow up to 20 percent of the governing board to be non-Christians. I am writing this letter to express my objections to the proposed amendments to the college's statement of purpose and bylaws. I am a graduate of Davidson College, class of 1965, and served as a member of the board of trustees from 1985-1999. During that time, I served as chairman of the Committee on Campus and Religious Life, the executive committee, and was a member of the Presidential Search Committee. During the time that I was a trustee, the trustees reviewed this issue in a thorough and fair-minded way. As you are no doubt aware, the motion to amend the bylaws did not receive the necessary two-thirds vote to pass. I am opposed to the proposed changes for the following reasons: 1. I think the proposal is flawed. The proposal argues on the basis of the Christian faith and Reformed tradition for openness and the inclusion of other religious traditions. I am not really aware of any specific place in the Reformed tradition or the Christian faith where that is espoused. In fact, there is a great deal of evidence in both the Old and New Testament that both Israel and church exercised great care in terms of preserving the identity and integrity of the faith community. I do not see how one can legitimately argue on the basis of the Christian faith and Reformed tradition a proposal that in affect undermines that tradition. 2. I am opposed to the recommendations on the basis that I believe in the long term it will undermine the effectiveness of the college. A great deal of the constituency of Davidson College is found in the Presbyterian Church (USA). For many people, one of the distinctive characteristics of the college has been its relationship to the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the Christian faith. While over a period of time there have obviously been a number of changes at the college, I think this commitment needs to be reaffirmed. As one who was actively involved in the debate on the board of trustees a few years ago, I remember that there was significant opposition to this change. Some of the individuals who joined with me in opposing this change included John Belk, Ed Crutchfield, Miriam Cannon Hayes, Rusty Goode, Larry Dagenhart, Billy Clark and Tee Thompson. At that time there was a strong feeling that this was not in the best interest of the college to make this change. I am also aware that Ed Crutchfield, during the time that he was chairman of the board, was adamant in his insistence that this issue not be brought up again due to its divisive nature. 3. I am opposed to these recommendations because I do not favor the addition of another member of the religion department. It strikes me as somewhat incongruent that Davidson College, a church related college, would have a number of people in its religion department and not have an individual who was committed to the Reformed and Christian tradition. I do not believe that the addition of another faculty person really addresses the issue that has been raised. In short, I believe that this proposal is a deeply flawed and will ultimately undermine a great deal of what Davidson College has stood for. I believe there is significant opposition to this change and this opposition could be greatly detrimental for the future of Davidson College. I write this letter in deep respect and appreciation for Davidson College and for what it has meant for me and my family. Those of us who are a part of the Davidson family have a great love and respect for what Davidson has stood for for almost 200 years. I urge the board of trustees to reject these proposals. Thank you for your consideration of this letter. William P. Wood, senior minister Davidson leadership is reaching out for human acceptance February 23, 2005 It is hard to imagine that Davidson College's decision to welcome non-Christian trustees would be an embarrassment to anyone in the PCUSA. It is perfectly in tune with the direction the PCUSA leadership has charted for its members. Still, it does stimulate some interesting thought. Perhaps those in academia struggle with subverting themselves to a supernatural power. More likely, they, like most of us, have forgotten the joy and the openness of Christian witness and long since forgotten how to be proud of doing it. Why would one presume that an all Christian board would be unwelcoming to a non-Christian? Would a sick person in search of treatment refuse care at a Catholic hospital because the staff paid deference to the pope? For that matter, would a Christian, a real and devout one, refuse care at a Muslim facility? Does a church-affiliated organization have to disavow its theological underpinnings in order to serve all of God's people? We are supposed to interact with everyone without the requirement that they pay homage to our God. But we are supposed to interact in the name of that God. It is a name strong and mighty and we shouldn't be ashamed to publicly call ourselves his. And those we would serve have some responsibility to accept us for who we are and not expect us to crumble before their expectation of political correctness. The Davidson leadership, following the lead of mainline Christendom, is reaching out for human acceptance. They will find it. The only negative is that nagging admonition about being spewed out of God's mouth. That sounds bad. So go you Davidson Wildcats! Wherever it is you are headed. John Cowan Cartersville, Ga. Davidson board cannot claim the support of Leith for its misdeeds February 23, 2005 The following is a February 21 letter to Thomas W. Ross Sr., a Davidson College trustee who served as chair of the ad-hoc committee that recommended that the Presbyterian college allow non-Christians to serve on its board. Dear Mr. Ross and members of the Board of Trustees: I am in receipt of your letter of February 11, 2005, regarding the actions the board took on February 4 revising the statement of purpose and the by-laws. It was, of course, with great sadness that I learned of the board's decision to deChristianize Davidson College. Clearly you have gathered a sufficient number of votes to do this. There is, however, at least one portion of your reasoning to which I must strenuously object. Paragraph B of your letter reads, in part: B. Following engagement with the writings of Karl Barth and John Leith, we affirmed what we believe is the Reformed Tradition's openness to other religious heritage, by granting access to board membership to those who are not Christians, as well as committed Christians who are not active members of a Christian church, but who will pledge to support the Statement of Purpose. You simply cannot claim the support of Dr. John Haddon Leith for the board's misdeeds. Nothing that he ever wrote or said could possibly be construed in that way. I was a student of Dr. Leith. I have visited in his home, as he has in mine. I have read his books. I am one of three ministers whom he asked to oversee the continuing publication of his books. By his choice, I am an officer in the Foundation for Reformed Theology which he established. I preached his wife's funeral service. I preached the memorial service for him which the family asked to be conducted in Richmond. His daughter continues to serve as an elder of the congregation which I pastor. Again, nothing that John Leith ever wrote or said could possibly be construed to support turning over any portion of the governance of a Christian college to those who are not Christian. If anyone told you that, you have been very sadly misinformed, unintentionally or otherwise. Anyone who suggested that to you should have known better. For instance, even the chapter of his book, Basic Christian Doctrine, having to do with "Christian Faith and Living Religions," particularly in its subsection, "Inclusive and Exclusive," deals with the power and freedom of God to work beyond the bounds of the institutional church. It does not have to do with Christians abdicating their own responsibility for the governance of the institutions of the church. Those are two very different things. John Leith was committed to the propagation of Reformed theology and to the renewal of the Christian church, particularly in its Reformed and Presbyterian manifestations. He understood well the fragility and even fickleness of human institutions. I have heard him say many times that the way to have a Christian school is to have committed, church going Christians teaching in the school. I am confident that he understood the same to apply to the administration and governance of the school. There is nothing in the Bible, nothing in the Christian faith, and nothing in the Reformed tradition of the Christian faith that would remotely suggest that it would be appropriate, intelligent, or faithful to give over any portion of the governance of Christian schools or other institutions to those who are not Christian. Moreover, your concession to "committed Christians who are not active members of a Christian church" involves a contradiction in terms. To be Christian is to be a member of a Christian church; to be a member of a Christian church is to be Christian. For a person to hold himself or herself aloof from the fellowship of a Christian congregation and yet claim to be Christian is arrogance of the highest order. It is individualism; it is secularism; it is not Christianity. The board has gotten away with deChristianizing the college. That may or may not have been your personal intent or desire. But that will inevitably be the result and effect. There may be nothing I can do about that. However, I will not let you, sir, get away with smearing the name of Dr. John Leith by associating it with what the board has done. James C. Goodloe IV, '75 Would Jesus Christ want the PCUSA to alienate itself from Israel? February 23, 2005 The WCC announcement yesterday predictably supporting the PCUSA divestment from Israel is significant in that WCC is encouraging other churches to do the same as PCUSA. The WCC governing body encouraged the World Council of Churches' member churches "to give serious consideration to economic measures" as the PCUSA is planning against Israel now. In addition, the United Church of Christ ongoing discussions and recent documents on how to duplicate the efforts of PCUSA in divesting from Israel are also disturbing. What the PCUSA far-left leadership fails to understand is the impact these positions have on Christian-Jewish relations. The perception is that, led by antisemitic PCUSA members, the Protestant churches are ganging up to try to undermine Israel. This anti-Israel perception is not just drawn based on the PCUSA and liberal Protestant churches actions on Israel divestment actions alone. Certainly the shameful meetings in June and October 2004 with the terrorist group Hezbollah was enough to discredit any "good will" that PCUSA suggested with its Israel divestment movement. However, that was only the tip of the iceberg of the anti-Israel movement in the PCUSA. The membership of the PCUSA in "End the Occupation" which supports groups that agree with Jihad, such as International Solidarity Movement (ISM), is yet another example. The International Solidarity Movement supports "armed struggle" and has advocated the destruction of Israel. ISM was asked to display its unique brand of anti-Israel message just last month at Clarendon Hill Presbyterian Church in Somerville, Massachusetts, where the "Christian Jewish Anti-Terror Alliance" protested this support of pro-Jihad groups by a PCUSA church. Using a version of the discredited, pro-Marxist "liberation theology," aggressive anti-Israel positions of many PCUSA activists and liberal Protestant activists with these political groups are building an increasing wedge between Christians and Jews. What does this anti-Israel position really seek to accomplish? And why is the PCUSA membership tolerating its faith being "hijacked" to be a leader in an anti-Israel crusade? Moreover, would the greatest Jew of all times, Jesus Christ, want the PCUSA to alienate itself from Israel and millions of Jews? How is this fulfilling the goals of Christianity and spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ? I think this alienation of Christians from reaching the Jews is going to be terribly destructive to the Christian religion, and years from now, other Christian denominations will look back at the weakness in the PCUSA leadership and unwillingness of the PCUSA members to stop this as a primary reason. PCUSA members can alter the possible future now by standing up to the PCUSA leadership and aggressively disowning these anti-Israel activist groups. Jeffrey Imm Olney, Md. Leith's name used to fit the needs of this Davidson board February 21, 2005 I will say it again! Rev. Baskin and Mr. Hunter are so right. My dad would never have approved of the appointment of non-Christians to the Davidson College board of trustees. It blows my mind to think that somehow my father's name has been used, and the meaning of his writings misconstrued to fit the needs of this board. Unfortunately, my dad is not here to defend himself and I would venture a guess that the board would not be using his name, as they have, if he were living. I will try my best to defend what I know my dad stood for. I can't think of many issues that my dad was more passionate about, other than making sure the Gospel was preached on Sunday morning, and that you were present to hear it. My ears, and my ears only, have been privy to many a phone and one-on-one conversation, as his booming voice carried throughout our house. When I was younger, I heard the dissatisfaction and the sadness he felt when Davidson's {then} board made the decision to change the Bible department to the Department of Religion. If he did not approve of this measure, how in the world can anyone think that he would have approved of the board's latest decision, which somehow is in line with dad's Reformed thinking? I think the Davidson College Board of Trustees chose, very carefully, to use dad's name for its purposes, as his name "holds more water" with the constituency that the college has built its foundation on. This is wrong! Caroline Leith, elder Grace Covenant Presbyterian Church Richmond, Va. PCUSA is in close alliance with organizations that endorse terrorism February 21, 2005 I am stunned that the Presbyterian Church USA, has joined End the Occupation, a coalition that includes several organizations that endorse terrorism. Within the last twelve months, PCUSA delegations have twice met with Hezbollah, a listed terrorist organization. Although leaders of the PCUSA have issued formal statements repudiating terrorism, they have sometimes admitted to having difficult recognizing it. In his 2004 Christmas message, PCUSA Moderator Rev. Rick Ufford-Chase wrote: "It's increasingly difficult to distinguish between … the victims of terrorist attacks or well-executed military campaigns … the United States or Osama Bin Laden ..." By joining End the Occupation, the Presbyterian Church places itself in close alliance with several organizations that endorse terrorism. Among these are the International Solidarity Movement, which views the murder of Israelis by suicide bombers as a "form of 'jihad;'" Al Awda – The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, a group dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish State "by any means necessary;" and the Palestine Solidarity Movement, which, at its National Convention at Duke University in October, 2004, voted to defeat a floor motion to condemn terrorism – a vote greeted with thunderous applause. Rev. Mark Davidson, pastor of the PCUSA Church of Reconciliation in Chapel Hill, NC, was a featured speaker at the PSM conference. This marks the third year in a row that the PSM National Conference has voted overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining its endorsement of terrorism as one of the "strategies and tactics," appropriate in the elimination of the State of Israel. End the Occupation is a large coalition. Some member organizations are legitimate religious groups, such as the American Friends Service Committee. Some are political associations with questionable attitudes toward terrorism, such as the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Many member organizations are radical left groups such as the International Socialist Organization and the National Lawyers Guild. This week the National Lawyers Guild held a dinner to honor Northeastern University Professor Shahid Alam, notorious for comparing the 9/11 hijackers to the Founding Fathers – favorably. Most groups on the list are single-city committees, often affiliated with one of the national anti-Israel groups: the ISM, PSM, and Al Awda. I would love to understand why this decision was made. Tamara Fiche, Ph.D. West Orange, N.J. Sad to see Davidson jump on the secular bandwagon February 21, 2005 If the president of Davidson is being quoted correctly, as thinking that admitting non-Christians to the school's Board of Trustees is comparable to admitting women and African Americans, then the confusion there is worse than I had thought. Being a woman or being an African American is a matter of biology. For now, I will set aside the argument that being a woman is also a matter of cultural conditioning, or that some light-skinned African Americans choose to try to "pass" as white. Being a Christian is a matter of faith, open to all persons, regardless of their biological circumstances or cultural conditioning. Davidson's admitting women and African Americans is in no way similar to having the school governed by people whose faith, or lack thereof, is a matter of their own choice. The changed admissions policy at Davidson reflected a recognition that all are equal before God, regardless of biological circumstances. The changed policy regarding trustees reflects a lack of recognition that Christian values and priorities are distinctive and critical in today's world. As a graduate of Duke University (A.B., Women's College, 1964), I attended the school at a time when the culture as a whole was starting to become secularized. In fact, I believe the professor I had for a required course in the Bible would be very unhappy with how I turned out. Although an ordained minister in his denomination, he habitually made sarcastic remarks about people of faith, even at the final exam. My experience with the professor at Duke suggests that it takes more than a few non-Christians on a governing board to promote secularization at a school, but I am sad to see Davidson, a school from my own denomination, jump on the secular bandwagon in the manner it has chosen. And I regard the logic in the president's statement as even sadder. Duke has long since removed the cross from its official seal and the traditional "religion requirement" from its curriculum. What is in store for Davidson's Christian identity? Linda J. Speck, Ph.D., inactive elder First Presbyterian Church Ann Arbor, Mich. Those forcing diversity upon the Boy Scouts have no love for the organization February 21, 2005 I am not at all surprised that Boy Scouting in Canada is gradually (perhaps not so gradually) disappearing. One only has to look to the history of subversive infiltration to see why such a sad state of affairs exists. Many of those who promote the concept of "diversity" in Scouting have no interest whatsoever in seeing Boy Scouts continue as a viable organization. They believe that they can cause the organization to crumble from within if they can convince ("strong-arm") the organization to adopt policies which are in stark contrast to the fundamental principles upon which Boy Scouts as an institution was founded. Why would, say, Jews want to join the Nazi Party, if not to subversively destroy the organization from within? (An activity for which I would have a lot of sympathy, by the way, despite the violation of the rights of the Nazis, regarding freedom of association and freedom of speech. It is very difficult to be an absolutist.) The many leftists who want to force "diversity" (e.g. homosexuality, atheism, and so on, ad nauseum) upon the Boy Scouts have no great love for the organization. They don't think that the tan shirts with the colored shoulder loops and the American flag prominently displayed are so incredibly fashionable that they long to see their sons (and daughters, for that matter) wear them. They don't tear up when they see young Scouts participate in a flag ceremony. They don't smile when they see a Scout give the Scout sign while reciting the Scout Law. On the contrary, they despise the organization, and all that is stands for. They seek to destroy it. I, for one, intend to do all that I can do to prevent that from happening. Charles Steinhauser Scoutmaster, BSA Troop 52 Circleville, Ohio Presbytery actions were to protect FPC Laredo and their 'wonderful' work February 21, 2005 I am the pastor of FPC, Ingram, Texas, and a minister member of Mission Presbytery who attended the meeting described in your article. I do wish that article had made clear that that vote against dismissing them with the property was done because the original information seemed to a majority of commissioners to be financially burdensome. Therefore, the motion to dismiss them and their pastor to the EPC allowing the use of the property was an interim measure which accommodated the timing of EPC presbytery meetings for receiving the congregation and Pastor Youngs. And the separate motion for a recommendation to be brought to the March meeting which does "not overly financially burden that congregation." In short, it is intended to protect FPC Laredo and the wonderful work they are doing in their corner of God's vineyard from the small number of commissioners who seem to want to be harsh because, with regard to the PCUSA, the Laredo folks have "had all they can stand and they can't stands no more" to paraphrase Popeye the Sailor as he prepares to eat his spinach. It was with great conviction and true sadness that I voted in favor of both motions. I fear it is a harbinger of a coming wave if the Lord does not send a renewal across the PCUSA. Pastor Raymond M. Tear If we all pulled out would the PCUSA even be able to survive? February 21, 2005 Open letter to First Presbyterian Church in Laredo I'm sure this was not an easy decision. It took a lot of courage. I believe you should be allowed to leave with your property. You have been paying all the expenses over the years to maintain it and cover it with insurance. I don't think the PCUSA would have an easy time filling the church from scratch. Was there a split in your congregation or was this a unanimous decision? I think if the PCUSA should want to keep the building you should be compensated for the sale of the building at full market value. We are sorry to see you leave. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, and if other churches follow your lead. I'm not sure this is the right thing to do instead of staying and fighting for God in these divisive times. If we all pulled out would the PCUSA even be able to survive? I wonder. God bless you in your decision and may your future be a bright one lead by the Holy Spirit. Sharon Mathey Middle Sandy PCUSA Homeworth, Ohio Why is Kirkpatrick defending pagan religions that use mind-altering drugs? February 21, 2005 What in the world is the leadership of our denomination doing defending pagan religions that use mind-altering drugs? Perhaps Mr. Kirkpatrick has been participating in some of these "tea" drinking rituals himself; certainly no person of sound mind would do such a ridiculous thing!! Glenda Smith, elder Reems Creek Beech Presbyterian Church Weaverville, N.C. Can there be real fellowship without total agreement? February 21, 2005 Re: John Almquist letter to the editor posted February 15, 2005 "Bring together EPC, PCA and CCM for fellowship" At this time no fellowship is possible as you suggested. I feel that we in the PCA cannot join with churches that do not follow the Westminster Standards and ordain women to eldership. Can we have any real fellowship while these issues are not in total agreement amongst us? By the way, why didn't you include the OPC in your request? Robert Demarest Cuminale Charlotte, N.C. New trustees in time will dismantle Christian truth from Davidson College February 21, 2005 The president of Davidson College near Charlotte, N.C., has compared the decision by the school's trustees to open the board's membership to non-Christians to admitting the first African-American and women in the 1960s and 1970s, according to a recent article in the Charlotte Observer. I trust the Charlotte Observer has quoted accurately. Does not the Scripture teach about light and darkness? Does not Scripture teach not to be unequally yoked? Can Christ's kingdom co-exist with the kingdom of darkness? Is this the insane position of being politically correct? Vagt tries to justify his distorted thinking by linking African American's and women, when Vagt has not written what he means by African American and women. Vagt's position on Davidson College is the application of those abandoning the Holy Bible, a college once established to promote Biblical truth applicable to all disciplines of life. The new trustees in time will dismantle Christian truth from Davidson College, as did Harvard, Yale and other colleges and universities established for the glory of God. So many colleges and universities today are synagogues of Satan. Someone has once stated, "Open minds like open windows need screens to keep the bugs out." Lou. S. Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. The fires at the stake are starting to flicker February 21, 2005 From the Early Church martyrs through Reformation, the Established Church in the name of Christ has been so terrible to its followers. And now we have punishment and possible court action if this congregation loiters after church and they will be considered trespassing. I can see the fires at the stake starting to flicker and the rack being readied as it is time these rebels be brought into line. Chuck Larsen Church splits over actions of PCUSA February 21, 2005 Amen! The First Presbyterian Church in Ephrata, Wash., which is a Confessing Church, has divided over the actions of the PCUSA. The majority of the former members have formed the Community Church of Ephrata and are in the process of affiliating with the EPC. The remainder of the congregation chooses to continue to work from within the PCUSA to try to effect change. J. Baum, member Community Church of Ephrata Is this a joke? February 21, 2005 Davidson College too secular for the Presbyterian Church USA? This has got to be a joke! Earl Tilford Professor of History Grove City College Connections between schools and Jesus is coincidental February 21, 2005 Even the most apologetic (as in defending intellectual credibility more than feeling sorry about it) would conclude any connection between many of our franchise's institutions of higher education and Jesus is increasingly coincidental. Dr. Robert R. Kopp It's not second-class to be Christian February 21, 2005 I don't understand why requiring Davidson College's trustees to be Christians sends a signal that they're a second-class citizen. Since when has it become second-class to be a Christian? I think Jon Fuller's comments are second-class! Carolyne Coco Baton Rouge, La. Leith would have opposed non-Christian trustees at Davidson February 17, 2005 The following letter, dated Feb. 16, was addressed to Judge Thomas W. Ross Sr., who served as chairman of the ad hoc committee that recommended that the trustees change the college's constitution and statement of purpose to allow non-Christians to serve as trustees. The writer, G. Martin Hunter, a Charlotte, N.C., lawyer, submitted it to The Layman Online for publication. Ross's letter to the Davidson College Board of Trustees is posted on the Davidson Web site. I am writing to thank you for your letter dated February 11, 2005, sent from the Office of the President of Davidson College. I expect that the letter was a form letter, and I doubt that anybody actually read my letter dated December 22, 2004, but I appreciate your responding to me nevertheless. I am relieved that the Trustees left a commitment to Christianity in the Statement of Purpose. I do feel compelled to respond to your statement that [f]ollowing engagement with the writings of Karl Barth and John Leith, we affirmed what we believe is the Reformed Tradition's openness to other religious heritage, by granting access to Board membership to those who are not Christians ... Judge Ross, I have great respect for you. You did an outstanding job as a Superior Court Judge, as Chair of our state's Sentencing Commission, and as the Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts. As a Wake Forest Law graduate, I know that you are doing an outstanding job as director of the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation. I'm just a practicing attorney, Davidson graduate and Presbyterian elder. I'll never be a Trustee of Davidson College. But let's face it, John Leith would never have advocated opening the Board of Trustees of Davidson College to non-Christians. Saying it's so doesn't make it so, and never will. Although I have read the Barmen Declaration, I only got about 50 pages into Karl Barth's work on Romans before I gave up. Accordingly, I cannot say what he would or would not have thought, or whether he had even heard of Davidson College. If your committee managed to plow through Barth's work on Romans and all fourteen volumes of Church Dogmatics, then I salute you! I have read three of John Leith's books, and I knew Dr. Leith, because he spent a year as the theologian in residence at my church, First Presbyterian Church in Charlotte, North Carolina. I heard him preach and lecture on numerous occasions. I ate several meals with him. Maybe you've seen some essay or letter that I haven't seen, but based upon my having read his books, having heard him preach and lecture and having talked to him, I can't believe he would have been in favor of changing the nature of the Board of Trustees at Davidson. I'm not alone in my beliefs about Dr. Leith. Dr. William P. Wood, a former Davidson trustee, and the senior minister at First Presbyterian Church in Charlotte, and Dr. James C. Goodloe, IV, the minister of the Grace Covenant Presbyterian Church in Richmond, Virginia, would agree, and wrote letters protesting the changes. In addition, one person who knew Dr. Leith better than most of us, his daughter Caroline, wrote a letter to The Presbyterian Layman saying that Dr. Leith would not have been in favor of the changes. Had the discussion about changing the composition of the board revolved around "inclusiveness," or "justice" for non-Christians who nevertheless graduated from Davidson and love Davidson, then I would have felt better. At least the argument would have been an honest argument about how far a college can go and still call itself "Christian." What disturbs me the most about what happened is the ad hoc committee's continued insistence that the changes were in keeping with the Reformed Tradition. That just isn't so. The committee's continued insistence is deceptive, and flies in the face of the spirit of Davidson's Honor Code. G. Martin Hunter Charlotte, N.C. Group pushes view that Jews do not need Jesus February 17, 2005 I agree that the conference was one sided. Dexter Van Zile, a United Church of Christ layman, approves of and appears to be promoting the group Presbyterians Concerned for Jewish and Christian Relations, (PCJCR). This group aggressively pushes the view that Jews have their own covenant and don't need Jesus Christ. Their Web site came into being because they want to make their stance the official doctrine of our denomination. They are attempting this in order to prevent Presbyterians from sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ with Jews. As a Jewish Presbyterian, I'm horrified that they might succeed because they're very zealous and persistent. Please don't support them. The Rev. Leslie Fox, member at large Presbytery of Seattle 'We need to be united in Christ' and proclaim the principles found in Bible February 17, 2005 I just don't understand. How can our denomination – or at least representatives of our congregants and members – continue to promulgate an agenda that favors same-sex unions, contracts or other legal manevours that are antithetical to both our Constitution and the orthodoxy of Christian teaching? ow long, O Lord, must we be confronted by those who would like to deconstruct our beliefs and faithfulness to God? Though I am one of those people who believe in equal rights for all human beings, making "special rights" and exceptions for certain "groups" violates my understanding of the relationship of our country's foundational documents – "all men are created equal." Why do the "special interests" in our country get all the support (except, of course, when those special interests are promoting Christianity or public morality – i.e., conservatives) and folks like the Philadelphia 4 are persecuted. By the way, what is happening with the Philly 4 and why have I not seen any coverage on their plight in the "mainstream media?" Folks, I am tired of our schizophrenic stance on these issues – we need to be united in Christ and live and proclaim the principles found in the Holy Scriptures – that's the Bible in case you've forgotten – or we are lost and soon we will, as a denomination, go the way of the Shakers – albeit for an altogether different reason. Please, let us all work for a return to "Biblical orientation" for our lives and downgrade other "orientations" to what they really are: anti-Christian and non-Biblical. I pray that it is not too late. Rev. Larry Yerger Wintergarden Presbyterian Church Port Charlotte, Fla. Divestment has alienated many with little prospect for any positive effect February 17, 2005 I agree with A.C. Straayer's [letter to the editor, posted February 15, 2005 ] position the church should be cautious about taking political positions. Political positions involve so many facets it is extremely difficult for the church to take a position without simply offending parties necessary for good missions. This is the main reason I am against the current divestment program. It has already alienated many with little prospect for any actual positive effect. I did want to comment on Straayer's Palestinian/Israel statements that delve deeply into politics. Straayer views the Palestinians as victims to Israeli military dominance. A short look at history balances this view. Straayer states, "What happened is a huge influx of Jewish immigrants … the Palestinians became relegated to the reservations." This statement clearly bends historical facts in that it assumes the influx of Jews caused Palestinians to be marginalized. In 1948 the U.N. mandated separate lands to be set aside for the Jews and Arabs in "Palestine." At this time Britain left the area creating a power vacuum. In lands mandated to them, the Jews attempted to establish a nation. At this time Egypt air and navy forces attacked the mandated Jewish lands. In the aftermath, many Arabs left Jewish lands and some were expelled from strategic areas. The U.N. mandated these lands to the Jews for the express purpose to establish a nation for the displacement of Jews from WWII. An influx of immigrants shouldn't be surprising, but expected. At this time the Arabs could have established a homeland in the mandated Arab Palestinian lands. However, Jordan captured the West Bank forbidding the establishment of a "Palestine" and expelled all Jews. These Arab refugees were relegated to "reservations" by fellow Arabs. Keep in mind that approximately 160,000 Arabs remained in Israel and today have more freedom than anywhere in the Middle East. Straayer states Israel can come into any Palestinian home and make a shambles of it. His viewpoint obviously assumes there is no justification for any military action. In 1964, Syria proposed to the Arab League the establishment of the PLO. The reason for this was to use the disenfranchised Arab refugees to destabilize Israel. The manifesto of this group was the liquidation of Israel. In 1967 Russia used false information to convince Jordan, Egypt and Lebanon to gather troops on Israel's borders. After provocative actions by the Arabs, Israel launched what NPR describes as a defensive action against Egypt and Jordan. This short war left Israel with much more territory. Israel attempted to sue for peace through the U.S. with the intention of returning most of the land. The Arab world rejected this proposal because they would have had to agree to Israel's right to exist. Concerning the proposition of the Israeli military entering Palestinian homes, Straayer asks, what would the U.S. do? That is an interesting question. If the Mexican government established and funded military operations including mortar attacks and suicide bombing against U.S. targets on a daily basis what would the U.S. do? Straayer makes the statement that knee-jerk conservatives support Israel because they are the promised people. I do believe the Jews are the promised people, but I certainly don't feel everything they do is right. I feel Israeli's targeting of suspects is morally questionable and not in their best interest. I do again agree with Straayer when he states "the Palestinain people have watched helplessly while their lives have been stolen from them." History will write this failure is as much the fault of Arafat and Arab politics as Israels' desire for survival. On a final note, Straayer asks how do we know that Ishmael is not of this covenant with Israel. God tells Abraham to listen to Sarah because his descendants will be through his son Isaac. Exodus 19 restates this covenant and states "out of all nations you (Israel) will be my treasured nation." God tells Hagar not to worry that Ishmael will also be made into a nation, but clearly a different nation, and there is no covenant with Hagar. Doug Ramaker Indianapolis, Ind. Israel and Palestine were created on the same day in 1947 February 17, 2005 In his/her letter of February 15, 2005, A.C. Straayer challenged the right of Israel to exist arguing that "[w]hen God sees fit to give the land back to the Jews, he will accomplish that." Of course this is a test that Staayer applies to no other nation or people on earth – do the Palestinians need express permission from God to have a state? How about the Nigerians, Japanese or French. Straayer also claims that "a much bigger percentage of Muslims worship the one true God than do either Jews or Christians." How he knows this for a fact is anyone's guess, but the downplaying of the Jewish relationship with God is a sign of a person who has serious issues with Jews as a people and not just with the state of Israel. Finally, Straayer say that the history of Israel began with "papers" that stated that "the Jews would have a home within Palestine and that democracy (for both sides) and economic parity would reign." These papers exist only in Staayers imagination. Israel and Palestine were created on the same day in 1947 when the UN voted to divide the British Palestinian Mandate into the two separate states – one for Jews, the other for Palestinians. Sadly, the Palestinians had no interest in a state and declared war. This war is still being fought, on the ground in the Middle East, as well as here in America by people like A.C. Straayer and groups like the Presbyterian Church. The lies, defamations, libels and double standards which Presbyterian leaders use to defend their bigoted economic war against Israel can only be explained by looking to historical Christian contempt for the Jewish people themselves. Mike Hardage New York GA actions disregards the history of the establishment of Israel February 15, 2005 As a Presbyterian, I am saddened by the decisions of the General Assembly, regarding Israel. I think such a decision only endangers peace in the Middle East and totally disregards the history of the establishment of Israel. I believe that the members of the assembly must fail to understand that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was an avid supporter of Adolf Hitler, even visiting him in Berlin. Also, they fail to acknowledge that the establishment of Israel was a decision of the United Nations, not of the Jewish survivors of the Holocaust who were, at the time, living in DP camps in Germany. It also disregards the fact that Jews have lived in Palestine since Biblical time; they were not all in the disaspora. It was also the decision of Arab nations not to accept the partition of Palestine, to focus on driving the Jews out of Palestine totally and destroying the nation of Israel in toto. That is still their aim. Susan Pentlin, Ph.D. Warrensburg, MO

February 2005 letters, page 2 Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links