 |
|
| August
2006 letters Archives of letters to the editor  |
|
| GA
'has now put into church law what Mount Auburn has been doing all along'
August 30, 2006 I have been reading the letters on this site for several months now, and continue to be amused and amazed. As a gay man who long ago left the PCUSA because the liberal and moderate forces of the church showed themselves to be cowardly and more concerned with their status, prestige, security, comfort and property than with the gospel message of inclusion. In short, they, including the leaders of my former congregation, Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati, were liars who betrayed those they claimed to serve. Yet now, I see you conservatives and evangelicals and fundamentalists equally have clay feet. Let's face it, the only reason for you to now stay in a denomination that you truly believe is apostate is because of your fear of losing property, status, prestige and finances (e.g. pension). What kind of a witness to the radical gospel call of Jesus is that? Lest there be any doubt about what the liberal cowards in the church think was accomplished by the backdoor tactics employed at the General Assembly, let me share this from the recent newsletter of Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church:
Jack B. Harrison Cincinnati, Ohio As evangelicals in the PCUSA it is every man for himself August 30, 2006 Like many others I have been following the aftermath of the 217th General Assembly and the decision of some churches to immediately separate from the denomination. And while I agree with Tom Gray of the Kirk of the Hills Presbyterian Church that many more churches may be preparing for such a move, I have to strenuously object to his comment: "For those who stay with the denomination, it is a tacit, yet conscious, affirmation of the denomination's departure from the truth." Rev. Gray has no right to make this kind of judgment! With 1,500-1,600 people in worship, Rev. Gray can afford to make such statements. If they lost their property tomorrow (which I most surely hope does not happen), my guess is that those 1,500-1,600 faithful believers would be more than able to provide adequate manpower and resources to begin again in a different locale. Not all churches have that luxury. A few years ago, I chaired an administrative commission in Scioto Valley Presbytery working with a church seeking dismissal to another Reformed denomination. Although the dissenting party eventually decided to leave without any property, there was a great deal of concern about how this 235-member church could begin again when the presbytery could conceivably fight them for every paper clip. Small churches generally do not have the resources of larger churches, and so to make off-handed remarks supposing to know another church's stand when it comes to the one truth of Jesus Christ, is just plain arrogant! I wonder if Rev. Gray and the Kirk of the Hills Church (and other mega churches) would be willing to set up a legal defense fund to assist smaller churches contemplating the same decision? I wonder if Rev. Gray and the Kirk of the Hills (and other mega churches) would be willing to set up a fund to help dissenting ministers feed and clothe their families after they've been stripped of their Presbyterian ordination and are removed from their churches. I wonder if the big churches would be willing to counsel and equip smaller churches in the ugly battle brewing ahead with many presbyteries? If not, then Rev. Gray has no right questioning any church which does not immediately follow their lead. One of our biggest problems in the evangelical wing of this denomination is that we all act independently. We have so many renewal organizations (Presbyterians For Renewal, The Presbyterian Coalition, New Wineskins, Presbyterian Global Fellowship ...), but no real leadership working to unite evangelicals together in something more than a haphazard church by church response. So, while I wish Rev. Gray and the Kirk of the Hills Church all of God's blessings as they undergo this difficult process, his unfortunate comments remind me, yet again, that, as evangelicals in the PCUSA, it is every man for himself! Rev. Dr. John C. Minihan First Presbyterian Church Newark, Ohio (A Confessing Church) The world as I knew it is shaking at its foundations August 30, 2006 Since the hallmark of our beloved Presbyterian church has always been the infallibility of Scripture, and, having just read the last issue of The Layman, I am so shocked and sick at heart that I have sadly concluded that we have now come to the parting of the ways. I am 101 years old and feel the world as I knew it is shaking at its foundations. Elsie Swindells Appalled at the apostasy of PCUSA hierarchy August 30, 2006 Since the church in which my membership resides, albeit inactive, does not subscribe to The Layman, I have been getting my daughter's second-hand copy. I would appreciate receiving The Layman on a regular basis. I am appalled at the apostasy into which the PCUSA has fallen at the hands of the hierarchy. I grew up and was strongly nurtured in the faith when my church upheld the Scripture. At this point, I hesitate to acknowledge I was a Presbyterian. In the name of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, I pray that those who say they believe will have the intestinal fortitude to finally get out and make their stand. It is long overdue. I congratulate Shannon Meador. She has more courage of her convictions than the evangelical pastors. Louise R. Mohr Matteson, Ill. Are the 'Great Ends' unraveling? August 30, 2006 Under its preliminary principles, the Book of Order lists "The Great Ends of the Church." These are: The proclamation of the gospel for the salvation of humankind; the shelter, nurture and spiritual fellowship of the children of God; the maintenance of divine worship; the preservation of the truth; the promotion of social righteousness; and the exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven to earth. The actions of the General Assembly and the whole church, as reported by The Layman, seem to me to have only a vague connection to these "Great Ends." Am I missing something? D.G. Cratch Oxford Furnace, N.J. Confounded by what's happening in the PCUSA August 30, 2006 After reading this issue [July 2006], loaned to me, I am confounded by what I read and what is happening to the Presbyterian Church as I have known it for almost 70 years. Are the General Assembly and the presbyteries headed by a group of 1960s' far-out druggies and the crazy feminists of today? Whatever happened to the truth that our faith is based on the Holy Bible? I believe that God is the same God of the beginning and forever. The old adage, "If it ain't broken, don't fix it," pertains to the Bible. Leave it alone! Emma Hart Kensington, Md. Layman should double its efforts August 30, 2006 I am far from what could be called "a rabid letter writer." I seldom stop to take the time to tell others what I am thinking. I think the efforts you have been making in the past few years not only have been worthwhile, but it appears imperative that those efforts be doubled. In reading all that has transpired recently, I am amazed that the denomination continues to exist. I grew up as a Congregationalist in Connecticut, and I still feel that the basic health and welfare of a congregation rests on that local group. However, of course we are part of the world. We should have interests and concerns – not only about our immediate community, and our town, state and country – but also about what's going on in the world. I do question, though, some of what has been going on in the denomination at the national level. I'm sure that the people involved are "concerned citizens." But I raise the question of whether the national body of any denomination should become as involved with revolutionary revisions of principles which have stood well the test of time, as is apparently the case with our church. I truly hope that no one will feel the need to, say, rewrite the Bible. Keep up the good work. Your voice is needed. Herbert E. Baldwin Jr. Frankfort, Ind. Most of us wouldn't recognize a new Moses if we tripped over him August 30, 2006 I would like to respond to Karen Kolbinsky's plea for a new Moses (Elijah) in the August 29 letters. Actually, I made this point in a letter last week that you chose not to print – I suspect because of an injudicious term at the end of the letter, or because I took the renewal community to task. I'm going to do that again, so maybe this letter won't be published either. However, my point remains valid. I hear these calls for a new Moses as a high form of irony. For several years now (back to Indianapolis and even further) there has been a small group of pastors and leaders in the renewal movement who have had the courage to stand out front and call the denomination to account. They have done this at considerable personal and professional cost and risk. They have traveled to Indianapolis, Louisville, Columbus, Richmond, Orlando, Atlanta, Tulsa and Birmingham to witness, preach and pray for this denomination to confess and repent of its apostasy. In Richmond, three of them (Rus Howard, Alex Metherell and Bob Davis) had the fortitude to stand for election in opposition to the entrenched stated clerk. And yet, the professional renewalists didn't have the guts to endorse any one of these brave men. For years we have been calling on the combined renewal organizations to set aside their individual agendas and be at least as cohesive and organized as the adversary. That hasn't happened yet. I despair of it ever happening. A new Moses indeed. Most of us probably wouldn't recognize him if we tripped over him. Rev. Jim Yearsley Tampa, Fla. Congregations won't give in to Louisville's lies, threats and intimidation August 29, 2006 Radio commentator Dr. Laura Schlesinger admonishes young women who say they are engaged to be married that to be truly engaged they must have both "a ring and a date." Of course she's right – there often is, in the pursuit of visions and dreams, a long time and a long road between the vision and reality. Without the impetus of a firm commitment, things can and will drag on and on. So, where are we with the New Wineskins' vision of a new Presbyterian reality? I think we're close and I think it's time to set a date. Consider this. We're watching the wheels come off the PCUSA. Let's face it, if there were no property issue, PCUSA might be not much more than a listing in the Louisville White Pages today. Generally speaking, the evangelicals in the denomination are ready this moment to turn from the darkness and go back to the business of growing a catholic, borderless, international, Christ-centered church of ministers and missionaries, ordained and layperson, in the Presbyterian tradition. It is almost a certainty that Louisville ultimately will lose on the property issue. They have lost several recent court battles and will continue to lose for three reasons. They will lose because there is ultimately no authority for them to do what they are doing. They will lose because parishioners vote. And they will lose because, no matter which way you examine it, the big denomination trying to take the property away from the little congregation just doesn't pass the smell test. Within a few months, this issue will be settled. Mostly, it will be settled because congregations are just not going to give in to the lies, threats and intimidation leveled by Louisville against local churches. They're going to find that sessions are prepared for them and won't just roll over anymore. Louisville can't afford to lose and they'll soon determine that because they can't afford to lose, they can't afford to play. They will then seek a middle ground. I hope that includes returning ransoms, restoring the good names to pastors who did not meet the denomination's standards for inclusivity, and sharing whatever paltry bank accounts that might exist on a pro-rata basis. Yeah, I know, don't hold my breath. So, for all intents and purposes, the decision – the hardest part – is done. We're on our way. We know where we're going, we just don't know when. I'm writing to ask the New Wineskins to set a date. I'm suggesting that Sunday May 27, 2007, Pentecost, be that date. It is a solemn holiday, a day made precisely for starting churches, for evangelism, for inspiration at many levels, and for communion and communication. It is a date certain. It is close enough to quicken the pulse of those who have prayed for it, and distant enough to allow ample time to organize. I'm also hopeful that other writers will acknowledge their agreement. Don't we all feel the tug? Can't we respond? Let it be Pentecost! Jack O'Brien Pittsburgh, Pa. New Reformation needs leadership, not more screed August 29, 2006 An astonishing trend has begun to manifest itself, not the demise of PCUSA as enthusiasts have vociferously opined, but the very breakup of both renewal and reform! Letters to The Layman Online reveal that we are not seeing coalescence but deliquesence. The New Reformation seem headless. The very organs of uprising now appear dazed and ambivalent about the whole matter. New Reformation needs leadership, not more screed. Gary Starkey Yakima, Wash. PCUSA acts more like the godfather with its vendetta of vengeance August 29, 2006 "Do you love me more than the secular culture?" "Do you love me?" Do you love me?" This is the question that needs to be asked of their respective presbyteries, synods and the Louisville headquarters of the PCUSA by the Riverside Presbyterian Church (Linn Grove, Iowa), Kirk of the Hills Presbyterian Church (Tulsa, Okla.), Windsor Presbyterian Church (Des Moines, Iowa) the Hollywood Presbyterian Church (Calif.), the "dissidents" (so labeled by the Presbyterian News Service) of the First Presbyterian Church of the Torrance (Calif.) and all other current PCUSA church congregations that dare question their affiliation with the PCUSA. Our denomination acts more like the godfather with its vendetta of vengeance and omerta rather than God the Father who gave his only begotten Son that whoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life. As Saint Paul warns in Acts: "Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which he purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. Therefore watch, and remember ..." Art Montgomery, elder (inactive) Santa Barbara, Calif. Find God's perfect service for you where you are led by his Holy Spirit August 29, 2006 Just "read" the letters to the Layman Online (8/28/2006). What a "been-there" experience. I think you could change all the 2006s to 2002s and pretty much have the same sentiment which prevailed after the 2002 GA with the Confessing Church on the upswing. Institutional reform vs. personal ... the change must take place individually and with the words of I Corinthians 5:9-13 in mind.
Greg Leaman Sheboygan County, Wisc. PS: Congratulations to the new First Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Cedar Grove, Wisconsin for removing themselves to the EPC just this last month! God still is not mocked August 29, 2006 Earl Apel's attempt [letter to the editor, posted August 28, 2006] to insert and affirm into the sin debate the offensive language of the Confession of 1967 cannot, must not go unchallenged and uncorrected! Scripture is not the mere words of men; it is the revealed Word of God; and right there is where liberals and Christians completely disagree. Earl wants us to believe that it is his relationship with God that is important; I totally agree. That relationship must be one of a obedient child with a loving Father. God does not honor what you or I or Earl thinks any more than he did Eve's wisdom that she got from the serpent. He does not honor our disobedience of the prophets and apostles no more today than he did when he allowed the desert to swallow up those who opposed his servant Moses. What God honors is humble obedience. I know that liberals hate the apostle whom Jesus called to be his witness to us gentiles Paul. Homosexuals hate him, along with Moses, because he had the boldness to declare what spake the Lord. Liberals hate all of the servants of the most high God, because liberals believe that there is no most high God. So, it will become clear what is one's relationship with Jesus Christ, the only way to the Father, when one shows or fails to show submission to God and his holy will. That fuzziness will leave you standing, trembling before him! Not ignoring the elephant in the living room, the issue of whether engaging in homosexual acts is sin is firmly, without equivocation, labeled as sin throughout the Old and New Testaments. It is open to interpretation only on pain of answering to Jesus, the King of Kings; don't chance it! Dr. Robert Gagnon put together the Bible witnesses' corporate testimony in his 30 page Power Point presentation. Professor Gagnon further made available on his Web site both the PPT presentation and his no non-sense oral delivery of it. Earl, listen to it, read it; decide do you want to accept their holy witness or continue to accept the witness of people who pretend to be ministers of the Word but are deceivers, leading people away from the joy of godly obedience to the wanton despair of disobedience, vainly praying in their hearts that God will be mocked and there will be no judgment, no punishment. Jesus prayed for us, sweating blood, that we, who would believe through the Apostles' words, would be one as he and the Father are one. Stephen, dying from the stoning assault, saw Jesus, not sitting, but standing by the Father. Be not deceived, Jesus still sees the modern stoning of his saints. Woe to any that would harm them and their witness to the little ones! Hiding behind the mantle of an officer in a man-made non-profit Pennsylvania religious corporation will not stay the wrath of God. Not now; not at the judgment bar! James Logan McHenry, Md. Comments came from discussion with others disappointed in 'Ya'll Come' August 29, 2006 Jim, [letter to the editor, posted August 28, 2006] I know you are not a bad guy and do not in any way wish to indicate that as my opinion. My comment re the "smoke screen" evolved from discussions with others in attendance who were dismayed at the "Y'ALL Come" meeting. They had the impression from the Coalition that the meeting was to hear where those attending wanted the renewal groups to lead after the GA. The Coalition in particular, their dismay came from the clear position (not neutral) projected by the speakers from the opening bell that the Coalition was saying and "selling" stay and fight/fellowship. This was not necessarily what a large number of those present wanted to hear. This seemed to many a case of come let us hear, but getting come listen to us and our position. I wish you had been in the halls and at the lunch/dinner table listening as I was to comments from elders and pastors voicing what I have written. If reporting what I observed makes me a bad guy I guess I have to live with it. My intention was and is, as brothers in Christ we cannot afford to disappoint those we wish to work with. I heard many disappointed voices. Following the Wednesday night group meetings I heard many positive comments, "our voice has been heard, this is why I came." When the position of the Wednesday night groups was not reported or discussed, it further seemed that listening was not important. Particularly after reading the posted position statements. The straw poll taken at the last meeting was after a significant number of the attendees had left and thus not as good an indication as the 400 plus who were in the group meetings Wednesday night. When an organization signals come let us hear, spends more time on listen to us, then does not discuss the largest sampling of thoughts from those present, the problem is self created. Robert A. Browne Elder It's not Christian to accuse honorable people of lying August 29, 2006 You should read the letter sent to members by the presbytery before you accuse them of trying to identify dissidents. I believe the four people who signed the letter to be honorable Christians. The congregation nor the session has met with the presbytery. The letter indicated that the presbytery wanted an opportunity to answer questions in an open forum. I would suggest that you write the EOP for a copy. It is not right or Christian for you or others to accuse honorable people of lying. I was a member of Kirk until six months ago. Kay Ward We need a Moses to fill the vacuum left by fallen leaders in the PCUSA August 29, 2006 To echo a passionate plea on the part of a member who had attended the conference in Atlanta where Peggy Hedden had opened up the floor for comments, we indeed need a Moses (Elijah?) to fill the vacuum left by fallen leaders in the PCUSA. What if in answering our Lord chooses to exalt into those powerful positions now void of his Spirit lowly shepherds, carpenters, fishermen and tax collectors? Would this be consistent with what we've seen him do through ages past? Will a western world view of Church as we have embraced it for so long give place to God's own way of seeing us? Are we in America willing to agree with the God who claims the weakest, poorest and least of all among are chosen by him richest in faith? Might it be God himself is doing in our own time what has been prophesied by not only Moses but every true prophet and apostle who came after him? Is he not ever speaking to us through his word interpreted and inspired by the same Holy Spirit we cry out for to lead us this day? Are we his church called to collectively show forth his glory in all the earth as we continue preaching the simple good news of a message we've been given to share with a lost world? Our Messiah has come, he died, he rose again. As Peggy Hedden reminds us, we who are faithful to our Lord until the day of his coming will not be ashamed, we will be found standing at his right hand and invited in to receive our reward. What better reward is there for any faithful servant of God, child or holy bride than simply to see his face as we enjoy his presence forever? The passion of our heart as we his Church throughout all the earth cry together "come quickly Lord Jesus" will bring him quickly to our aid. Men will rise up to fight the good fight of faith behind him, following in the steps of our master. He is "our prophet, priest and king" and we his holy church, a royal family of priests and kings forever. Karen Kolbinsky Hillsborough, N.C. PGF has bought into notion that 'theology divides while mission unites' August 28, 2006 In the recent article "Identity and Integrity" on the Presbyterian Global Fellowship's meeting, I thought it could have been said that the leadership seems to have bought into the rejected notion that "theology divides while mission unites." While that phrase was not uttered by anyone in a leadership role at PGF, the concept was clearly present in their efforts to say as little on theology as possible while giving us an overdose on mission, mission, mission. I love mission work and the church where I serve God supports mission work very well, but Christian mission flows out of good, sound theology. If the leadership of PGF thinks they can avoid including a very clear theological declaration in their covenant that they want us to sign then they are sadly mistaken and their efforts in PGF will fail as it will not be blessed of God. Matt Ferguson PGF and presbytery meetings: Ignore what GA has done and focus on mission August 28, 2006 So let me see if I've got this straight. PFR executive director Michael Walker suggests "Maybe there is a way not to do business with Louisville, to say that our primary identity is not via the PCUSA, that we move beyond that kind of identity in a fresh way to be together that does not require us to pull out of the denomination." Two thoughts come to mind. What kind of intellectual, spiritual, theological or institutional integrity is that? Second, I can only imagine the response I would receive from my general presbyter. I'm sure he would simply be delighted to hear me voice such a conviction (said with tongue planted firmly in cheek). Yesterday, I attended our presbytery's "rally the troops, focus on the positive and ignore the negative" (my words and interpretation of the event) meeting. In fact, our meeting had a feel quite similar to that coming from the PGF meetings – pretty much ignore what GA has done and focus primarily on mission and everything will be OK. Your article "Identity and Integrity" was spot on. Rev. Steven L. Seng First Presbyterian Church Wellsburg, W.Va. The property trust was in fact thrust down upon churches by the hierarchy August 28, 2006 I'm glad to see the New York ruling come out as it did. I think one of the things that works in a favor of a church's claim to its property is the way that we instruct our commissioners to vote. For instance, commissioners are not bound to represent the views of the group it represents. A session or a congregation could have been adamantly opposed to the property provision in the Book of Order when it came before the presbytery, however the commissioners would not have been bound to vote the will of the congregation. The commissioners could have voted the will of the congregation and still been out-voted at the presbytery meeting. Hence, there never was a desire on the part of the real owners – the congregation – to create a trust for the denomination. The trust was in fact thrust down upon them by the hierarchy. If a church never did anything to turn the property over to the denomination by changing its deed, it's an indication that may have never consented to the will of the denomination. To claim that the church assented to the conveyance by its silence is ridiculous. There are many reasons churches remained in the denomination then that had absolutely nothing to do with property after the property clause was adopted. There were family ties, business ties, ministry ties and a lot more other things a church would have lost by leaving the denomination. If the draconian approach the denomination is currently using to stop churches from leaving by seizing their property, replacing their sessions and suing individual trustees, had been foreseen then, there is little doubt that many more churches would have left a long time ago. I doubt if there would have been a reunion in '83, and even if there had been, more churches would have exercised their option to leave before the window granted had been closed. I'm having a much more difficult time understanding why we should send our money to the stated clerk's office, only to have them turn around and use it to sue our brothers and sisters in Christ who have a legitimate Biblical and conscience issue. It's obvious we are going to probably need a legal defense fund for the churches who are yet to be sued. It is still my heart's cry for us as evangelicals to remain together and act in unison, but we should not abandon those who genuinely feel a call to change their ministry direction now. Rick Gillespie-Mobley Cleveland, Ohio PGF leaders: Read presbytery's 'Essential Tenets and Reformed Distinctives' August 28, 2006 The last sentence of your review of the gathering of Presbyterian Global Fellowship, states: "PGF will demonstrate that crucial connection only when it adopts Reformed essential and non-negotiable tenets of faith and ethics that tell the world exactly where it does and does not stand." Such a document was approved in June 2003 by the Presbytery of San Diego, "Essential Tenets and Reformed Distinctives." I commend it to PGF leaders. It sets forth six essential tenets and seven Reformed distinctives in answer to the question, "Do you sincerely receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith as expressed in the confessions of our church as authentic and reliable expositions of what Scripture leads us to believe and do, and will you be instructed and led by those confessions as you lead the people of God?" Not only does this document affirm essential and non-negotiable tenets of faith and ethics, it states what is not affirmed by our beliefs and doctrines. Bob Battenfield, elder Fletcher Hills Presbyterian Church Editor, PresbyNewsOnLine, Presbytery of San Diego Unless I identify what I deny as well as what I affirm my yes is meaningless August 28, 2006 Right on, Parker. Unless I am willing to identify what I deny as well as what I affirm, my yes is meaningless until I do so. When Art Cochrane wrote The Church's Confession Under Hitler, he was not sure the American church had learned the lesson yet. The confusion over PCUSA shows him to be right about the American church. His book was about Barmen and its significance for today. Hubert B Brom Kirkpatrick's statements on the two issues were absolutely consistent August 28, 2006 I'm frankly rather surprised that Mr. Adams seems not to recognize at all the fundamental distinction between a sabbatical and a moratorium, nor to recognize the difference in circumstances. When Kirkpatrick issued the appeal for a sabbatical, he wrote, "We realize that there is no way to require such a sabbatical in the Presbyterian Church (USA) and we do not propose any specific General Assembly action to achieve it. However, we to appeal to you, our sisters and brothers in Christ, to redirect our energies for the next number of years." In stark contrast, Rev. Weaver made the following request: "We call upon you to pronounce such a public statement of moratorium by 1 September 2006." A moratorium is a legal (and, consequently, enforceable) prohibition for a specific period of time. Mr. Kirkpatrick's statements on the two issues were absolutely consistent: in each, he acknowledged that no statutory authority existed for any such mandatory action. Consequently, in the first case, he appealed for voluntary cooperation, and in the second, refused a request for illegal exercise of power. There are plenty of legitimate issues to be addressed concerning the recent GA and its actions. I'm puzzled as to why anyone would choose to devote time and energy trying to equate apples with oranges. Brint Keyes Clarkston, Ga. PGF leaders handed out a document detailing exactly where they stand August 28, 2006 The final sentences in Parker Williamson's most recent article on the PGF conference reads as such, "PGF has begun well in saying that going global is a glorious adventure to which the Lord is surely calling his Church. But PGF must complete the sentence. Its words to the world will sound hollow if there is no integrity to its identity. PGF will demonstrate that crucial connection only when it adopts Reformed essential and non-negotiable tenets of faith and ethics that tell the world exactly where it does and does not stand." I guess I am confused. At the conference, the leaders of PGF handed out a document detailing exactly where they stand. They asked us to endorse it. They asked us to take it back to our sessions for endorsement. And I would argue that it clearly states the "Reformed essentials and non-negotiable tenets of faith and ethics" Williamson's editorial calls for. For example,
Doug Resler, pastor Overlook Presbyterian Church Mobile, Ala. If a branch of the PCUSA splits off, it will marginalize its mission efforts August 28, 2006 It seems Parker Williamson wants to castigate the PGF for not accommodating to his particular point of view. From what I have read in The Layman Online, PGF seems intent on circling the wagons, to motivate and direct churches to move out in mission. Williamson, on the other hand, gives lip service to the mission part, but seems more intent on circling the wagons so we can start shooting the "heretics" from within. The problem with PGF's strategy is that it is incredibly idealistic. It assumes that people follow Christ for the sole reasons of serving him through ministry to others. That is just not true. Most people find churches that reinforce their own views of Jesus, and grow more complacent in their faith over the years. (Although there are some wonderful and notable exceptions in the fold.) When Scott Weimer had people look out the windows as a "liturgical act," he failed to assume that most Presbyterians, liberal or conservative, are not able to see beyond the stained glass. Williamson, on the other hand, wants to move on out to the place where people are more like us. He makes the mistake of assuming that such a place exists. In fact, people like us tends to be a very small group, and usually gets smaller as time goes on. (See Protestant Reformation for countless examples.) I think Williamson needs to understand that it is relatively easy to get people riled up about all sorts of things. But it is much harder to then get them committed to the process of getting beyond their anger, and into positive action. (Think of this as a necessary divorce. Both parties usually become and stay very reactive, which explains the number of failed relationships that occur after divorce. They cannot get past their anger and hurt to the love they need for new relationships.) I don't usually make predictions. (The last one I made was that our invasion of Iraq would stir up a hornet's nest of unrest among the Iraqis.) But I do predict that if a significant branch of the PCUSA splits off, their actions will only marginalize their own efforts at mission, as well as those of their former organization. But maybe I should speak for myself. Last year, after leaving my position as a Presbyterian pastor, I chose not to reenter parish ministry. Now I am a hospital chaplain. Watching this mess, and seeing it from both points of view, makes me sure that I made the right decision. You guys can fight over the denominational carcass. Others of us are just going to do ministry. The Rev. Murray Richmond, chaplain Fairbanks Memorial Hospital/Denali Center Fairbanks, Alaska Why would selective enforcement of the Book of Order be a problem? August 28, 2006 For those who read God's Word "selectively," ignoring or disregarding those parts they don't like (Can you spell Marcionism?), why would selective enforcement of the Book of Order be a problem? Rev. Charles A. McFarlin Spring Hill Presbyterian Church Staunton, Va. We can tear the church apart with infighting or begin a new way of doing church August 28, 2006 In response to Williamson's anxieties regarding the PGF's lack of strategies that would match Parker's: What if PGF's vision sweeps the PCUSA – and a huge majority of our churches and local leaders catch the wave – and throughout the PCUSA congregations become incredibly involved in missions locally and globally? Would that not lead to the total irrelevancy of the Louisville bureaucracy to the point that it would naturally be shut down? Would not the lower governing bodies' executives be forced to acknowledge a new day in the PCUSA and thus adjust their agendas? It won't happen overnight, of course. But, if the vision catches on widely and that's what the PCUSA as a whole is talking about more than anything else (missions!), would not there arise from the pews the courage to overturn the decisions at GA level that have plagued our church? It might be a lot like what happened when talk radio transformed the airwaves, or the cell phone replaced the rotary phone (per Pentz' analogy), or other trends swept away older worn and weary patterns of behavior? We can tear the church apart with our infighting, or we can introduce a new way of doing church that will be so deeply welcomed that the sickness in the PCUSA will be no longer tolerated. Parker obviously wants us to split apart, start a new denomination or join another. Though I agree with much of his analysis, I do not agree that we always have to "attack" the evil among us. A huge new approach in the church's life can lead to such overwhelming acceptance that the evil will be defeated as Christ's Spirit pervades the church as never before. That's my prayer. Larry Wood, senior pastor The Church of the Hills, PCUSA Duluth, Ga. PGF is betting that missional churches will survive while liberals die off August 28, 2006 I agree that on the surface, Presbyterian Global Fellowship does not directly address the inadequacies and outright apostasies of the PCUSA. However, it does understand the demographics of death and risks all on pursuing life. As recent demographic studies in the United States show, those who promote liberalism are dying out in this country. Those who espouse death via abortion, gay marriage, etc., are not reproducing themselves and passing on their beliefs to future spokespeople for death. Exodus 20 reveals that God shows his love to the thousandth generation of those who love and obey him, but cuts of the wicked after a trifling few generations after allowing them to repent. Presbyterian Global Fellowship wittingly or not is betting that the missional churches will survive while the liberals die off. When only 7 percent of PCUSA pastors are under 40 years of age and the old diehard liberals literally poised to die hard it will be the missional churches who remain. Martin Thompson 'We need to stay informed and involved' August 28, 2006 I grew up in the Depression and participated in the end of World War II. While those experiences instilled a few virtues in me, I can see that one of my faults was being too trusting. Hadn't our national leadership brought us through those two great upheavals? I felt a patriotic trust that our country was inherently right and could be counted on to make right decisions in the future. My bride and I began to attend a Presbyterian church in the '50s whose minister seemed to be Bible-oriented and interesting, and the congregation seemed to be compatible with my standards. I was quite complacent and felt the same kind of assurance that those in power would continue to uphold the values and traditions of the past. I have never stopped being patriotic, and never stopped going to church, but the intervening years have disabused me of my simple trust. I did not take into account the liberal element that was behind the scenes then, as now, patiently making inroads, both nationally and in the church. Where were the presbyteries in this decades-long slide down the slippery slope? And where were the laypeople – were they demanding to know exactly what went on at each General Assembly, or were they satisfied with a fair-weather, generalized report? Were we as diligent as we should have been in studying the Scriptures and knowing exactly what our doctrine is all about? Or were we content to hear nice sermons and get comfortable in our relativist, syncretistic and pluralistic culture? Now that we have the internet, there is no excuse to be superficial in our approach to the church. Thanks to Web sites like The Layman Online, everyone is able to find out what's going on. I believe that internet access is making this particular PCUSA crisis more intense and widespread than the crises of the past, in the same way that the new media is having an impact on people's perception of national/world events. We need to stay informed and involved, and insist on communication from our presbyteries and sessions. We must not allow withholding of information for the sake of power. Joe Rumble First Presbyterian Church of Wenatchee The groups I hoped might provide direction to Presbyterians have all played out August 28, 2006 Maybe it is only the high temperatures and lack of rain here in Texas, but I am really getting depressed. All the groups for which I had such high hopes after the last General Assembly all seem to be falling away. The New Wineskins folk came and went with a promise to think about it and get back to us later. The Presbyterian Coalition said they weren't leaving, but didn't seem to offer any leadership in any other direction. The Presbyterians for Renewal have hitched their wagon to the Presbyterian Global Fellowship, and the PGF is a real mystery to me. Since they first appeared on the scene, I have wondered just what they had in mind, and I was looking forward to their meeting in Atlanta for some more definition. Well, that didn't work. From all reports, they all had a great time and agreed that the church had a mission and that it should get back to that mission. I'll bet most all of us would agree to that. The problem seems to be how do we work at that mission and preach the Gospel when we represent an organization that doesn't believe in the message we are trying to preach? I was taken by your quote from Roberta Hestenes when she described the PCUSA as "it is only a part of the richness and diversity and reality of a global church ..." She might use those same words to describe the green stuff that grows on my cheese when I leave it in the refrigerator too long. The thing being described is not "part of the richness" ... it is what makes me throw it away. So, all the groups I had hoped might provide some direction to lots of Presbyterians have all played out. My fear is that the door might be more and more attractive to individual members who might find it easier to just leave. Pete Allen First Presbyterian Church Mesquite, Texas What are evangelicals supposed to do now? August 28, 2006 How disappointing it was to read of what happened and what was really said, and not said at the PGF meeting in Atlanta. We are back at square one as far as I can see. No answer to the dilemma as to what evangelical members and member churches, are supposed to do now. One thing is sure, it cannot be more of the same old, same old. It is not the denomination that is dying, it is the spirit of God's people! Where there is no hope of justice, our souls begin to wither. True justice will come when either the leadership of this denomination is converted into the true faith, or when true believers "come out from among the, and be not unequally yoked ..." This is the true crux of the matter, since the inception of PCUSA it has been a marriage of a spiritually and unequally yoked entity. Jesus told us that a bad tree cannot produce good fruit, and a good tree would not produce bad fruit. So, folks, what kind of tree will we be? We have wasted too much time already trying to fix something that God does not want fixed. It never was pure in the first place. Read your history; it is an ever-running repeat. Glenda Smith Reems Creek Beech Weaverville, N.C. 'It is time to begin to remove ourselves from this decaying organization' August 28, 2006 It appears that we have lost to the pagan forces engulfing our times. But, rejoice, we are still in the United States, the sun will rise tomorrow, and Jesus Christ is still Lord. All churches should have their grant deeds reviewed by local property and trust attorneys in light of Lloyd Lunceford's book to determine what to do next, whether to file for quiet title or not. It will may take three years for the PCUSA church courts to rule that all presbyteries must consider as candidates, actively gay clergy. That gives us time to encourage elders of our confessing congregations to establish corporate entities separate from our local church, for purposes of education and outreach, and to be a place to raise money and gather assets to prepare to leave the PCUSA. The elders should consult a corporate organizations attorney through their local county or borough bar association to establish this entity, and keep it truly separate from the church, and thus out of the reach of the presbytery. In three years, enough could be raised to buy the original church from the presbytery, or to buy land or a building and start a new congregation. The great and wonderful party at the PCUSA has ended. Those who approach Scripture with a view of enforcing a pagan worldview have prevailed. But we are in the United States, and we are free men and women. It is time to begin to remove ourselves from this decaying organization. Elders need to take the lead in establishing these outside corporate entities, to raise money for our new churches, unencumbered by all of the darkness and strife. This should be done quietly. Three years should be enough time to raise enough to make your move. John Almquist Mission is ineffective when church's testimony is compromised by accommodation August 28, 2006 The Presbyterian Global Fellowship, it seems, is attempting to found a new Reformation on the basis of mission. If we focus on mission and not on the "mere politics" that has been tearing the PCUSA apart in recent decades, the church will find greater faithfulness to God. This tack will not work. In the past, the cry has been raised, "Theology divides and mission unites." It failed to energize and unite the church then, therefore we have no reason to believe that it will energize and unite the church now. Mission is by all means a vital concern to the church, and the church cannot be healthy and strong without a meaningful dedication to evangelism and mission. But evangelism and mission are rendered ineffective when the church's testimony to the world is compromised by the church's accommodation to the world's way of thinking. And that is precisely the problem the PCUSA faces today. The denomination tolerates those who want to redefine (or "reimagine") God in their own image, rather than acknowledge and submit to him as he has revealed himself. The denomination tolerates those who brazenly defy the law of God in Scripture in the name of "justice." The denomination tolerates those who find the value of faith principally in the man or woman who exercises the faith, regardless of who or what they place their faith in, at the expense of the glory of Christ, who alone is worthy "to receive power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing," (Rev. 5.12) and who alone, therefore, is worthy of the faith of men and women. The three enemies of the Christian soul – the world, the flesh and the devil – have insinuated themselves into the PCUSA over the last century to the extent that there is a major theological war going on between the forces of good and evil, and PGF leaders would dismiss this as "mere politics." The battle that rages today within the PCUSA is not a mere political battle – it is a spiritual battle between the forces of God and the forces of darkness. It is merely played out in the arena of church politics. One side we call "theological liberals." This implies that the other side must be "theological conservatives," and that there are people in the middle that we can call "theological moderates." But the words "conservative," "liberal" and "moderate" are invested primarily with political meaning, and if the theological war in the denomination were merely political, then there would be a solution in political compromise – we could come to an agreement that everyone could live with and we could then go on with the mission of the church. But the war that is raging is about who is to be seated on the throne of the church? Whose law is to be followed? Are we to submit to the authority of the Word of God when interpreting the Word of God, or may we legitimately bring in the opinions and beliefs of men when interpreting the Bible? Are all the moral teachings and theological doctrines of Scripture binding on our consciences, or may we bow the knee to secular scholars, cultural pressures and individual desires? Is God to be the center of our worldview, or is man? This is the ultimate issue in the Presbyterian Church (USA) today, and to dismiss it as "mere politics" or to think that it will solve itself if we focus instead on mission is mere wishful thinking that allows the problem to perpetuate itself, diminishes the church's testimony to the world, and ultimately accomplishes nothing for the Kingdom of God. Now is not the time to quit the Presbyterian Church (USA). The Lord is not calling for a Moses to lead us out of captivity in the land of Egypt. Rather he is calling us to be Joshuas and Calebs, who were undaunted by the sons of Anak, and willing to obey the Lord to fight to take back the Promised Land from the wicked and worldly people who had come to dwell there. The only hope for the Presbyterian Church (USA) is a new reformation – and that can only come from God. One does not reform the church of Jesus Christ by abandoning it to infidels, let alone making common cause with them. Let us not forget that we are called to be one Church. We are called to stand by our brothers and sisters who suffer throughout the world, even in our own land. I implore you, brothers and sisters who are considering leaving the Presbyterian Church (USA) because it has become compromised to the world and because the Lord has not reformed it according to our timetable. Join with me in putting off our own personal sins that hinder our prayers to God, and let us have great faith in the one who alone can deliver us from this dark hour. Join with me in praying for the reformation of the PCUSA according to the Word of God. Loren J. Golden Overland Park, Kansas Parts of Scripture are interpreted differently by various persons in the faith August 28, 2006 In your report about the ruling on the Ridgebury church in New York, I found this statement you noted interesting: "Presbyterians have always considered the highest authority is Scripture, with the confessions second and the Book of Order third." I guess that is accurate as Scripture does make it clear that God is the highest authority (over Scripture that was written by humans), that Jesus revealed God to us, and it is our relationship with God through Christ that really matters. I'm just curious as to why this statement about Scripture was even inserted in the article? It seems to me this would raise some very interesting questions. For various parts of Scripture are interpreted differently by various persons in the faith. And the fact is that those interpretations could support or negate many points of view in a civil court case. In some ways, it seems to me that on a more practical point of view there will be some fuzziness that may actually in the end cause results some may not really want to see who think it is really more crystal clear. On the fuss about the denominational leaders not being receptive to showing much grace on those talking about leaving, I can understand this. The PCUSA is after all a democratic institution just like the United States. We are all connected whether we like it or not through a common heritage and our own participation in its government throughout the years. The United States allows political expression of ideas that may be in contrast. The United States even allows some grace in many cases. The PCUSA is the same. But what if there were towns or cities throughout the United States that decided they wanted to be independent? Even if this was just talk, I expect President Bush and Congress would be raising quite a ruckus and trying to do their best to make sure the towns and cities stay in the good old USA. So how is this any different in our denomination? You even noted recently that Republicans make up 55 percent of our denomination. Would Republicans who champion our fine democratic model and are Christian really condone the idea of cities and towns just leaving without raising a fuss? I think not. How is this any different with the PCUSA? Earl C. Apel, member Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church Cincinnati, Ohio Berkley: It's not necessary to accuse colleagues of devious plots August 28, 2006 In regard to Robert Browne's letter of August 24, I would personally appreciate a little less accusation and a little more good will. It simply is not necessary to accuse colleagues of devious plots. By leading with "I think the smoke screen is still coming from the Coalition," Elder Browne seems to be implying that (1) Coalition leaders are purposefully distorting or hiding information, and (2) they have been doing it all along (the "still" language). That kind of approach simply stings and certainly isn't very conducive to collaboration. Likewise the closing shot, "Jim, why not post the true vote?" displays two notions: (1) I have previously produced an untrue message, and (2) I have a true message that I am withholding, for whatever reason. (I didn't, and I'm not.) Neither notion need be the case, but either is the logical extension of unwarranted distrust. If you start with the premise that "Jim is a dirty scoundrel, and so are the rest of those Coalition leaders," certainly what Elder Browne wrote makes some sense. But if you start with the premise that "those folks are probably at least as honest and fair-minded as we are, even if we come to different conclusions," you'll arrive at a different tone than that letter's. How much more charitable and even useful would be an attitude of all of us working together to try to figure out what is our closest approximation of what we saw collectively in the straw vote (all of us do better at that together than any of us do singly) and even better, that we work together in light of the obvious indication that we do have at least two substantially different directions we tend toward taking (no matter what the actual percentage of either camp)! In the same batch of Layman Online letters from August 24, Elder Lloyd Lunceford demonstrates a reasonable way to go about informing the discussion and even disagreeing agreeably. I'd sure encourage all of us to use that kind of communication as a model. If we make being contentious our main trait, we won't be fit companions for anyone. But if we make God's truth and God's graciousness our main thing, we'll be unbending toward true evil but padded when we interact with one another, so we don't needlessly bruise our companions along the way. Robert, you're not a bad guy. Neither am I, so please don't treat me as one. In fact, please don't even treat bad guys like you treated me. OK? James D. Berkley Director of Presbyterian Action Despite flurry of meetings, no new solutions for survival of PCUSA August 28, 2006 There has been a recent flurry of activity by various Presbyterian (fix it) organizations since the 217th. General Assembly meeting in Birmingham and voted on PUP. Three of them, Presbyterian Coalition, New Wineskins and Presbyterian Global Fellowship, have had recent meetings with the following results. Parker T. Williamson summed up the recent conference of the Presbyterian Global Fellowship, "Birthing new life in one direction while remaining tethered to a body headed the other way created a state of confusion, etc…" The Presbyterian Coalition is "working on it." New Wineskins' moratorium request for a peaceful period on thorny issues was recently denied by the GA. (The Layman Online Web site, to their credit, has been publishing daily news, Layman staff analysis on the news and email responses to staff articles to keep everyone up to date on the flurry of activity.) In short, however, no new solutions for the long range survival of PCUSA have emerged from these recent meetings despite the best efforts by devoted Presbyterian Christian groups. Top leadership in Louisville seems to need new batteries for their hearing aids. Time is a wasting. The estimates of members leaving the church per year range from 50,000 to 85,000 for this and future years. If we use 75,000, this only leaves a little more than 30 more years until the last "Presbyterian" turns out the lights for the final time. (2.4 million divided by 75,000 departing members) Actually, the church will most likely go bankrupt before the lights need turning out due to the drop in members tithing and the cost of lawsuits taking away church assets and property from departing congregations forming non denominational churches. This is another call for congregations of God-fearing laymen to get out of their pews and demand that PCUSA leadership "get their act together." Maybe an independent Christian mediation team is the answer. Phil Smith San Leandro, Calif. PCUSA leaders are speaking out of both sides of their mouth August 24, 2006 Pardon me for being confused. In their response to Dean Weaver, Joan Gray and Cliff Kirkpatrick offered the following as the first of three points to deny Weaver's request for a moratorium on legal and administration actions against congregations considering leaving the Presbyterian Church. (1) Moderators and stated clerks of governing bodies, including those of the General Assembly, are bound to uphold the Constitution of the Church and do not have the power unilaterally to set aside any portion of the Form of Government. The 212th General Assembly (2000) made it explicitly clear that even the General Assembly lacks authority to declare a moratorium on upholding the provisions of the Constitution. If the General Assembly lacks authority to declare a moratorium on upholding the provisions of the constitution, why are we now faced with the end run on the constitution provided by approval of PUP Recommendation 5? Recommendation 5 clearly allows constitutional provisions to be declared nonessential. My understanding of English makes it pretty clear that our leaders are speaking out of both sides of their mouth. I regret having to say this about Joan as I feel that she is a breath of fresh air considering most of our past moderators. As are many, I am ashamed of the hard line taken by presbyteries and by the stated clerk with respect to those congregations whose loyalty is to Christ and not to the god of political correctness and world culture. We are reliving what the church went through prior to the Reformation and whether Louisville likes it or not, God's Will will be done. Pity those who stand in his way. Lighten up Louisville, Christ's Church should not be a dictatorship. Bill Arthur Greenville, S.C. Another attendee of Coalition meeting disagrees with Berkley August 24, 2006 Re: Jim Berkley's letter to the editor, posted August 23, 2006 I think the smoke screen is still coming from the Coalition. Counts for others present support the estimate by Rev. Parker Williamson. Further and more important, on Wednesday evening the 450-plus attendees divided into groups of about 20-25, with a moderator. I believe there were 24 groups. Each group was asked to discuss the same specific questions and the response to those questions was noted on a 18x24 post-it sheet which was then stuck on the wall in the narthex on Thursday am. The questions were 1) stay and fight, 2) fellowship, 3) trans-geographic, 4) two-synod model, 5) separation of some sort. Each group summarized its response to these alternative on the post-it. I read all of them and it seems there were possibly three stay and fight, one for the two synod model, two or three for the fellowship choice and the remainder chose separation of some sort. Jim, why not post the true vote? Robert A. Browne, elder Georgia Another piece of PCUSA's anti-American/pro-Muslim propaganda campaign August 24, 2006 Most PCUSA Presbyterians probably missed it, but the Presbyterian Publishing Corporation – the PCUSA's publishing arm – has published a book that can only be characterized s a major wedge in the growing fissure between the denominational leadership's radical ideology and its mainstream constituency. Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and Action by David Griffin asserts that the Bush administration planned the September 11, 2001 attacks to justify going to war with Afghanistan and Iraq. While the PPC protests that publishing a work does not constitute an endorsement of its content, in the wake of denominational leaders allying with Hamas and Hezbollah this book gives the appearance of being another piece in an anti-American/pro-Muslim propaganda campaign. Lenin used "useful idiots" to describe the apologists in Western, democratic nations who were unwilling to find fault in any Soviet excess. Today, the useful idiots have aligned themselves with an enemy far more insidious than Communism. Militant Islam has one objective: To subjugate the world. In practical terms, that means adopt Islam or die. There is no middle ground; you cannot negotiate with people for whom your death is an imperative. It is both ironic and troubling that a denomination so deeply identified with Christian missions – the PCUSA – now finds itself speaking on behalf of a movement that can only be described as anathema to Christian evangelism. Gary Loftis Lake Mary, Fla. Coalition's house was divided almost equally between stay and leave August 24, 2006 Concerning the discrepancy between my friends Jim Berkley [letter to the editor, posted August 23, 2006] and Parker Williamson on the show of hands given toward the end of the Presbyterian Coalition's recent Ya'll Come meeting in Atlanta, I too was watching intently from near the front of the sanctuary, with a clear view of this important indication of current sentiment. My read differs with both of my friends, although I think Williamson is closer to the mark. Roberta Hestenes conducted the show of hands, and insufficient time was given for an accurate count of the hands in support of the two major options listed among the five on the chart provided to meeting participants. The first show of hands asked for was for the "stay-fight-win" option (with "win" never actually defined). It appeared to me that just under half, perhaps 40 percent of the hands went up in the air. The next option was a variant of the first – stay but focus on fellowship with like-minded groups of believers rather than spending all one's energy trying to politic at presbytery or GA. Because "win" was not previously defined clearly, there was some ambiguity and a surprisingly small number of hands rose, perhaps 10 percent, leaving someone at the podium to conjecture that maybe many in this camp had already raised their hands in response to the first option. The third and fourth options, trans-geographic presbyteries and the two-synod model received only negligible support, a few hands here and there (the two synod model only received three hands in support). That left the final option – leave, whether by negotiation or litigation. At least an equal number of hands arose as had been raised in support of the first option. In my judgment, the number seemed to actually exceed the number raised in support of the first option – by a slight margin of 5 or 10 percent. The bottom line clearly appeared to be a house divided almost equally between stay and leave. That certainly was the consensus of opinion in the hallways afterwards. I don't know how the Coalition will attempt to straddle two horses going in different directions, but I pray that they ask the Lord for wisdom, who promises to give it generously. Lloyd J. Lunceford, elder First Presbyterian Church, Baton Rouge Mission trips are designed to give a person warm 'fuzzies' August 24, 2006 I have often felt that "missions" trips are often designed to give someone warm fuzzies that they have somehow contributed to the Great Commission by spending thousands of dollars on a trip to Bosnia or Zimbabwe. My own church sponsors these trips regularly. They also have recently spent thousands of dollars to construct a state of the art summer "camp" in the woods. I consider these options and then I look at these facts: $30.00, US per month will subsidize a native pastor in India, $35.00, US will pay for one day of broadcasting on Radio 4VEH in Haiti. These are direct ministries with souls being saved every day. Guess where I'm putting my money. Pete Simpson Bloomington, Minn. With the advent of PUP we do have local option August 24, 2006 I read the Coalition report and was intrigued by what took place and the responses to the options before evangelicals. One option that was not clearly defined was flexible membership in presbyteries. I think your article and the Coalition defined it as "non-geographical presbyteries." The overture that came out of Beaver-Butler Presbytery which was authored by myself and several others (Jeff Arnold and Bill Teague), was not specifically non-geographical only. Our overture actually garnered a little over 100 votes at the General Assembly which was 20 percent of the voters. This is very hopeful for a concept that was introduced for the very first time. I believe evangelicals need to have another look at this concept. We need to give churches who are theologically in the minority in their presbytery the ability to move to another presbytery where they have a better fit. This at least would be an excellent interim move on the part of evangelicals and probably also for those on the left. It is clear that with the advent of PUP we do have local option. Now let's make sure that churches have a choice of which local option they will have to live with. As an evangelical, my heart goes out to conservative churches that are trapped in a presbytery that intends to engage in practices that contrary to what Scripture teaches (ie-ordaining homosexuals). Let's give them the chance to move within the denomination until some other final settlement of our differences takes place. I believe that some form of flexible membership in presbyteries needs to be on the table for the next GA. Clearly, the overture which Beaver-Butler tried to get through was too much for the committee. However, a paired down version may be more workable. Allow flexibility in presbytery membership for only a limited time such as four years. Moreover, many of the older Presbyterians had problems with non-geographical. So perhaps movement should be limited only to the adjacent synod. The reality of our denomination is that no one appears to be offering any real leadership into the future. I believe the days of national leadership are over anyway. The next generation does not want it and will not follow it. Let's accept the reality of our denomination being more or less a loose association with leadership strongest at the local level. I hear some people say that evangelicals should not associate with corrupt, willfully disobedient Christians. Scripture does say not to be unevenly yoked. If this is our sole model then none of us should have stayed in the Presbyterian church even 30 years ago. The cancer has been around a long time. I would direct us to the Biblical passages which refer to Abraham and Lot going in different directions but still maintaining a relationship as family (a loose association). There is also the example of Paul and Barnabas, "The disagreement became so sharp that they parted company." They did not end the relationship but put space between them until they could come back together. I still have hope for renewal and repentance for all in our denomination. Let's not quickly give up the fight and engagement with a culture that is in rebellion. Ultimately, God will bless those churches that are faithful and those that are not will die. Greg Wiest Glade Run UP Church Valencia, Pa. Experiencing the fallout of GA's decision to approve PUP report August 24, 2006 I fear that the article concerning the Riverside Presbyterian Church will only be one of many as we continue to experience the fallout from the GA decision approving the PUP report. Scripture calls us to be prepared to be persecuted for righteousness' sake. Our Thursday morning men's prayer group is in continued prayer for our church, seeking the Lord's leading through these troubling times. Bill Robertson First Presbyterian Church Manasquan, N.J. PCUSA should clean up its act rather use missions as a smokescreen August 23, 2006 A new reformation indeed! It is interesting that the participants in the Presbyterian Global Fellowship event were asked to face outward. Perhaps that was to avoid having to look inward. To avoid having to deal with the reality that had the large, rich and wealthy churches stood with vocal courage when it really mattered, the PCUSA might still have a message the world was interested in hearing. The world may welcome the money but I doubt they will welcome the messenger. We'd do better to clean up our act rather than use missions as a smokescreen to cover our local failures and theological shortcomings. John Cowan Cartersville, Ga. Berkley estimates Coalition's straw poll votes differently August 23, 2006 I find it interesting how often a researcher or writer discovers exactly what he or she is looking to find. It seems that my friend Parker Williamson is looking for people to leave the PCUSA, and thus it appears his reporting of the recent Presbyterian Coalition event in Atlanta is colored by that desire. Apparently it even skews his counts. Williamson says of the straw poll conducted toward the end of the event last week: "When a show of hands appeared, slightly more than half of the participants chose the separation option." That is simply incorrect. The number did not come close to approaching even half of the participants. I was sitting on the platform near the pulpit in the sanctuary, looking out into the congregation. Thus I had an excellent view of the straw-poll vote in the pews. The question was an important one, so I was straining to get an accurate sense of the desires of the body. People had the opportunity to vote for one of five options. By my estimate, approximately 40 percent on the crowd voted for the "Reform Within" option, and another about 40 percent voted for "Fellowship." Just three people voted for "Trans-Geographic Presbyteries" and only two people voted for the "Two-Synod Model," leading to the quip that there was one person for each synod. Since the "Separation or Relocation" option was so significant, even though the vote went quickly, I tried to get an actual count. Counting the hands on the left side of the sanctuary and part of the back of the right side (and balcony), I had gotten to about 35 people. Looking at the rest of the right side as the hands went down, it was safe to guess that a total of about 50 people voted that their greatest interest was in the option to leave. More than 400 people attended the conference, and I would estimate that at least 300 or more of them were at the crucial final meeting of a conference lasting only 24 hours. That means that not "slightly more than half" voted to leave. It was closer to a sixth of the crowd that tended toward separation. Conservatively, about 80 percent or more of the participants wanted to remain in the PCUSA in one way or another. Jim Berkley Director of Presbyterian Action |
|
| August
2006 letters, page 2 Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |