February 2006 letters, page 2 Archives of letters to the editor

Our denomination is dying for of lack divinely-differentiated leaders February 15, 2006 What Tony Palubicki [letter to the editor, posted February 13, 2006] fails to recognize as he celebrates the "fresh, prophetic voice" of Jay Wittmeyer is that our denominational leadership is on track and on target with this very strategy: 1) clarity in one's beliefs; 2) calmly stating those beliefs; and 3) taking action on those beliefs. Our denominational leadership is clear in the beliefs calmly stated in the report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church and they are poised to take action on these beliefs at the 217th General Assembly this June. Make no mistake: Our leadership is "anchored in" their "unswerving trust in God and prayer;" but please note the significant absence of any reference to trusting the Bible. Our leadership is not attempting to accommodate the viewpoint that the Bible is the infallible Word of God written; nor are they interested in giving any credence to the conviction based on that viewpoint, which holds that those engaged in same-gender sexual encounters should be bared from ordained office in the church. Ours are truly "self-differentiated leaders." They are fully prepared to "stay the course, stay connected, and stay calm" enough to get their way. Our denomination is dying for of lack divinely-differentiated leaders. Leaders who are called and set apart by God and for God. Men and women who did not chose, but who are chosen. Disciples who are connected to, calmly committed to, and always staying the course in that one and only way revealed to us in Scripture, the way of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It is not enough to mimic his example as per the advice of Jay Wittmeyer, one must be wholly devoted to being remade into the very image of Christ Jesus as he is attested for us in Holy Scripture. We need not self-differentiated leaders, but leaders who deferenciate their own selves into utter obedience to all the Bible teaches of the Master. Jim Henkel, NWI endorsing church pastor North Benton Presbyterian Church North Benton, Ohio Eastminster Presbytery PCUSA espouses a morally bankrupt position on Hamas February 15, 2006 The leadership of the PCUSA continues to put forward the morally bankrupt position that destroying a suicide bomb factory is the moral equivalent of sending a suicide bomber into a crowded bus; that assasinating the mastermind of a terror cell is the same as firing a rocket into a civilian neighborhood. In their letter to the leadership of Hamas, Kirkpatrick and Ufford-Chase evenhandedly condemn "all acts of terror ... in rocket attacks, suicide bombings ..." equally with their "condemnation ... of the assasination of Palestinian leaders." As the Talmud says, Those who are kind to the cruel in the end will be cruel to the kind. (Qohelet Raba, 7:16) "We have also condemned all forms of terror and violence that have led to such unspeakable human tragedy in the region. This condemnation applies to all acts of terror perpetrated against Israelis in rocket attacks, suicide bombings, and other acts carried out by Palestinians. It also applies to acts by Israel, such as the assassination of Palestinian leaders and others killed in those attacks, as well as the shooting of protesting youth and children." Diana Appelbaum New York Science and 'Darwinism' have no quarrel at all with God February 15, 2006 I got a laugh out of Dr. Uwe Siemon-Netto's opinion piece. But it reads more like a disjointed parody of Orwellian logic than the clear thoughts of an anointed scholar. Are we to understand that the defenders of the Constitution of the United States of America are now Stalinists? That federal judges are really cult leaders for documenting that Intelligent Design is a dying religious dogma and not science? His hyperbole is over the top. He does however remind us of the crisis of faith permeating conservative Christianity. It harbors the delusion that faith in Christ needs to be substantiated by science, or, if failing to do so, science is somehow the enemy of Christ. Science and "Darwinism" have no quarrel at all with God or the way he made the universe. It is only the religious right that fancies them so. It is far from badmouthing to note that this kind of rhetoric is typical of right-wing propaganda. His cynical use of language that is more appropriate in describing his own position is part of the package. The hard right needs to create enemies with glass windows they can smash. That is how they pump themselves up, convincing themselves of their higher moral superiority to justify their purification purges. Nevertheless, their foes are imaginary constructs. When the Church allows such rhetoric, it colludes with forces of insatiable evil. To his credit, Dr. Simian-Netto admits to knowing nothing about science. It seems however that his admission is not enough to give him the humility to refrain from talking as if he did. Then again, he talks about faith without knowing much about that either, so maybe he just can't help himself. Conceding that what he described is just his own personal problem, he crosses the line when he equates traditional American values with Stalinism. Comical as he is, too many good men and women gave their lives in defense of those values to let that stand. The Layman in publishing them has also crossed the line. Ritchie Jones Los Angeles, Calif. PCUSA's mission dollars shouldn't be spent on VDAY February 15, 2006 Why is our national church supporting such organizations! Follow this link to a woman's advocacy page and click to learn about VDAY. This is repugnant. The graphics at the top of the VDAY page are demeaning and just not what our mission dollars need to be supporting. Where do I complain about such misplaced endorsements? Chris Walker Richmond, Va. PCUSA needs to heed fresh, prophetic voice February 13, 2006 Jay Wittmeyer is a fresh prophetic voice that I believe the PCUSA needs to hear! Nearly all the issues our denomination is currently dealing with stem from the fact that we don't know what we believe. The "special interest groups" within our denomination appear to ignore Scripture's guidance on both sin and forgiveness. As far as I'm concerned, these "special interest groups" have polarized the church to the point where it is nearly impossible for us to intelligently, graciously and lovingly discuss any issue as a denomination. Perhaps the time has come for the PCUSA to follow Wittmeyer's advice and (1) clearly define its beliefs, (2) calmly state those beliefs, and (3) take actions based on those beliefs. The great good news is that we have the resources necessary to accomplish these tasks. We have Scripture, The Book of Confessions and the Book of Order. The question is are we willing to be led, instructed and guided by these resources or not. Perhaps what the GAC should do is instruct the Committee on Peace, Unity and Purity to reconvene and commission it to accomplish these tasks in the name of Jesus Christ – and Christ alone! The church desperately needs leaders who follow Jesus' example, who put God's interest first, who put the needs and interests of Christ's church first and not their own. Rev. Tony Palubicki More insight on membership losses February 13, 2006 Your article "While mainline Protestants lose members, others are gaining them," [page 11] in the January-February 2006 issue of The Layman presented some interesting facts but it missed the main reason for the decline in the Presbyterian Church (USA). The Glenmary Home Missioners of Cincinnati, Ohio, is considered by the U.S. government to be one of the nation's leading authorities on religious trends in the United States. Every ten years this organization conducts a very intensive nationwide survey of all religious organizations in the United States, and their survey of the period 1990 to 2000 found the only Christian churches that increased in membership were either evangelical or charismatic. Evangelical churches stress the divine origin of the Bible, the total truthfulness of the Bible, and the absolute sufficiency of the Bible. The Presbyterian Church (USA) is neither evangelical nor charismatic for the vows of ordination of all ministers, elders and deacons require they replace the Bible with The Book of Confessions. The Old and New Testaments are relegated to witnessing to Jesus Christ while the leadership of the church vows to be instructed, led and guided by the "confessions of our faith." For proof, refer, for example, to Section G-14.0207 Constitutional Questions to Officers, part b, c, and d of the Book of Order, the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA), Part II. In Chapter II of the Book of Order, The Book of Confessions is identified as containing the confessions of the faith. The Presbyterian Church (USA)'s abandonment of the anchor of the Bible is at the heart of all of the controversies and conflicts within the denomination. It is at the heart of the controversies over the Confessing Church Movement, the ordination of unrepentant sinners, the abandonment of Israel for Islamic terrorist groups, the re-imaging God movement, and the declining membership to name a few. Once the leadership of any denomination has released itself from the anchor of the Bible as the authoritative Word of God, that denomination will reduce itself to nothing more than an irrelevant social club with tax deductible membership dues. And being irrelevant to society and to Jesus Christ, that denomination will decline as per Ezekiel 34:1-10. Because these conflicts are spiritual, they must be addressed using Biblical, spiritual truths rather than worldly logic. Therefore, the solution to the problems facing the denomination, including the problem of declining membership, is simply to return the denomination to a strict adherence to the Word of God. This must be done by requiring all ministers, elders and deacons to be instructed, led and guided by the Bible rather than by the "confessions of our faith." Robert W. Kutz St. Petersburg, Fla. Bible is clear about teaching on homosexual activity February 13, 2006 The Report of the Task Force on the Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church says many things – it is 39 pages long. Not all of them are wrong. A number of them are. But there is one statement in the report which is crucial to all the task force's recommendations, which amounts to a watershed, erecting a wall of division which there does not seem to be any way to cross. The report assumes that there is no clear Biblical teaching about human sexuality in general or homosexual behavior in particular: The theological and Biblical literature on human sexuality in general and same-gender sexuality in particular in diverse, subtle and complex. It could not readily be divided into the two categories – either approval or disapproval of same-gender relationships and practices – that are assumed to anchor much of the conflict in the Presbyterian Church (USA) today. If that were true, the task force report and its recommendations would be wise, statesmanlike and hardly controversial. But it is not true. To say it requires the task force and would require the rest of us to ignore the simple fact that every time the Bible – Old Testament or New – mentions homosexual activity, it condemns it. This is not at all like the ordination of women, where it is difficult to reconcile one Biblical passage with another. Every mention of homosexual practice condemns it. It is plain that people who can disregard this have a radically different idea of what Biblical authority means than do those who believe this settles the question. It is plain that those who, in the face of this simplicity, can argue for the "complexity," lack of clarity, or decisiveness in "the Biblical and theological literature" do not belong in the same denomination with the rest of us. Note, by the way, the subtle equating of "Biblical and theological literature." The Bible, apparently, says one thing, but this is balanced by "theological literature" which says something different. If this is Protestant, much less Reformed, then those words mean something very distinct from what they have meant since the Reformation. The entire controversy over PUP begins and can end right here. Rev. Dan Reuter Reading the Bible through the historical lens February 13, 2006 Regarding Marc Karasek's response to my letter, I found his comments about what I said the Bible being a historical account interesting. My impression is that he doesn't place too much value on history. Yet history does apply to our lives so much. Just look at the wars fought in the 20th century. Not a pretty sight. But these conflicts were rooted in history. A good question to ask is would it make sense to look at Nazi Germany on its own without considering the complete history of that part of Europe? Of course not! If one just focused on Nazi Germany the conclusion would be that all Germans should be sent to those same death camps their state developed. But we do have the historical accounts of wonderful contributions that Germans made. I speak this as someone who is of German descent. Being that I enjoy music, a few names to toss around are Bach, Brahms and Beethoven. My first recollection of history is the study of the United States and its founding with George Washington and others such as Ben Franklin. Were they perfect? Of course not! Did they inspire? Yes. Mr. Karasek notes about what we in the PCUSA say about the Bible: "[Larger Catechism] Q. 3. What is the Word of God? A. The holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the Word of God, the only rule of faith and obedience." That is an excellent statement. Note that the Word of God includes the most popular published book in the USA if not the world. And like any other book you just can't take isolated statements to prove a point without considering what the entire book says as a whole. That is what the PCUSA says and believes. An aside, I remember hearing about how George Washington had wooden false teeth. That is part of history. Sometimes that takes away my impression of what he was like even though that wasn't his own fault. Like it or not, the Bible contains numerous accounts of imperfect people showing their faith in God in the end. That is what inspires me. From my own perspective, I sense that too often others in the faith somehow think they can be perfect without reading those parts of the Bible that plainly tells us we cannot be that way. There are those who will claim to be seeking purity to the ultimate and needless to say those left behind are just behind and don't matter. That doesn't make sense and I fail to see the relevance based on the Bible. It seems to me that what the Bible truly says as a whole is the importance of people of faith seeking to be one and loving each other. But we don't. Isn't that strange? Or am I on the wrong planet? Forgive the need to show some humor in the end. Earl C. Apel, member Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church Cincinnati, Ohio Today's 'prophets' are persecuted as well February 13, 2006 As we in the PCUSA contemplate how shall we respond to a possible '06 GA PUP approval, Jim Henkel's letter (a response to Bobby Hood, Feb 10, 06) to the editor contains quotes from Scripture that that cause me to tremble. However, as Greg Leaman (February 6, letter to the editor) has reminded Layman Online readers, there is another voice that still speaks from heaven – a voice once heard by the likes of Charles Spurgeon and John the Apostle – saying, "'Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities'" (Revelation 18:4). The Layman and the Layman Online, along with courageous others, have been clearly and boldly chronicling these sins for 40 years. But like the prophets of old, their words have gone unheeded and indeed church officialdom have sought to kill them by the only means that the government will allow and by some illegal ones as well. PLC's Parker Williamson is one very visible example, but he is only the proverbial tip of the iceberg; many have paid a dear price for opposing and exposing the sin within the PCUSA and other denominations. Others are cowering in fear, afraid to speak out. God is not mocked; he sees all that is going on, who is, as it were, playing the music and who is taping their feet to the ungodly strains. There is a Biblical basis for abandoning even one's father and mother and son and daughter in order to answer that call (Matthew 10:34-37, Luke 14:26). There is a Biblical basis for breaking faith with the familiar in order to keep faithful to the Lord Jesus (Luke 9:61-62). There is a Biblical basis for forsaking the fleshpots of Egypt/Babylon/Sodom in order to join the exodus from captivity to idolatry and immorality and death (Revelation 11:8, 18:1-4ff). There is a Biblical basis for leaving the spiritually dead to bury their own dead in order to follow after the Christ of God (Luke 9:59-60). The thunder of the voice uttering those words from heaven, reverberating across two millennia, in the words of that old Negro spiritual Steal Away cause me to tremble and they cause me to look for a hiding place. Like those old Black slaves, in this great time of disorder and choice making, there is but one place to run for refuge: the Rock of Ages, the Lamb of God, who having paid for our sins, now is our supreme Shepard. When the choices are made at June 2006 GA, it will be imperative to flee from those who choose this world rather than God's Christ, and thus, be spared their plagues. God bless the holy boldness of Greg Leaman, Jim Henkel and others who are speaking out for Jesus. That the armour of the Lord will encompass and protect them from the evil one is my earnest prayer. Jim Logan McHenry, Md. Where are the milestones and signposts? February 13, 2006 I believe C. S. Lewis said it best: "The safest road to hell is the gradual one – the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts." How many sermons are preached "without milestones, without signposts?" Pete Simpson Bloomington, Minn. A way to solve the PCUSA budget crunch February 10, 2006 Some relief to the budget crunch could come from eliminating funding of the Washington Office, the World Council of Churches and the National Council of Churches, pet projects of our stated clerk. It is a crime to take monies from true mission work and funnel it to strictly social programs that are diametrically opposed to Scripture. It appears that with Cliff Kirkpatrick's close association with the WCC, there is a serious conflict of interest. Is it not time to hold him accountable to the dwindling 2.3 million members rather than continuing to allow him dictatorial powers? Bill Arthur Greenville, S.C. How long will the Lord tolerate the arrogance? February 10, 2006 How long will the Lord tolerate the arrogance from the PC(USA)? The latest piece of nonsense has to be seen to be believed! In their wisdom, the leaders of this denomination are considering a "systematic effort of development and compassionate action in Palestine" – specifically, they want Americans (Presbyterians in particular, I guess) to invest in Palestinian businesses, buy their products and stay in their hotels. The same day this story was published, Hamas leader Khaled Mash'al addressed his people after a Friday sermon at the Al-Murabit Mosque in Damascus. The comments were broadcast on Al-Jazeera TV. Among his rants, he called for the destruction of America and Israel and promised violence against the west and Europe. Several times during his "speech," he was interrupted with shouts of, "Death to Israel. Death to Israel. Death to America." Okay, correct me if I am wrong, but Hamas is a terrorist organization. They hate America and Israel. Who in their right mind would want to go on a tour of a nation that has promised to kill you? I have an idea. If the G.A. (whoever said they were in their right minds, anyway?) goes ahead with this, I say we charter a plane and send every member of G.A., including our fearless moderator and stated clerk, over to a Holiday Inn in Palestine and see what happens. Beam me up Scotty. There is no intelligent life here. Dr. Mike Porter Pastor Norton Presbyterian Church An equally incoherent response to Rev. Harrison February 10, 2006 I'm very sorry that Rev. Harrison found my original comments on the Pittsburgh Presbytery incoherent and my beliefs shallow. It is not that I do no understand the God/Christ/Love/Cross/Atonement model which Rev. Harrison presented quite coherently in his letter, it is just that I have found a deeper experience in a simpler explanation, which I personally think offers a better model for understanding the denomination's failure to resolve the debate over ordination through the legislative and judicial process. I fully realize that in the system of belief to which Rev. Harrison subscribes there probably is no alternative approach and that, for most readers of The Layman, changing theological models is not an option, but I honestly do not see any way that the Pittsburgh overture or any other legislative or judicial clarification is going to resolve this impasse because human beings will love each other. Maybe not perfectly, or enough, but more than G-60106b would like to believe. Christopher William Purdom Elder Tabernacle United Church Some thoughts on 'alone' February 10, 2006 Jeff Cody seems to have some confusion as to what alone means (Letters, February 9). Since Jeff has joined the Roman Catholic Church, he now has the opportunity to access all those Latin grammars they keep lying around. Jeff, there is a difference between sola and solo. Sola scriptura never meant that anyone with the feeling that the Holy Spirit is guiding him without proper training in the discipline of Bible study could actually come to conclusions about the text. Having debated people of almost every denomination for 30 years, I came to the conclusion long ago that the failure to understand has more to do with rationalism than actually picking up a dictionary in your own language and looking up what a word means. Historical and cultural context are ignored, and the context of a particular chapter where a verse is found is nonexistent. If you don't believe that, try asking an Arminian the context of 2 Peter 3:9 or a Roman Catholic why 1 Peter 3:21 teaches baptismal regeneration while ignoring the other clauses in the verse that expressly deny it. Or seeing Paul's letter to the Romans 2:28, where Paul is teaching that external rites do not justify. Paul speaks of circumcision of the flesh, but one can easily substitute baptism and see that a baptism justifies no one. Some also believe that a person can outperform God's standards and build up a treasury of supererogatory merits that automatically place them in heaven with the church drawing upon those merits to save souls from the imaginary place called purgatory. Yet, Ecclesiastes 7:20 says that there is no man on earth who does not sin. Is it contradictions these people entertain or just plain ignorance of the Scriptures? Secondly they fail to place the verse they are reading into context with the entire Bible. Hence, the Roman Catholic sees no conflict in James 2:24 with Romans 4. Instead, the church was gifted with men who have been given the light; who have studied well and are ordained by the church to teach the Word of God accurately so that all will have the assurance God's Word was meant to give. Great men did not put their lives in danger to give us Bibles in our native languages just so we could twist what they say and create new denominations! Until people start realizing that the teachers of the church were appointed by God to be the bearers of His truth, people will be swung to and fro by every wind of doctrine. Just because one billion people say they believe what a denomination teaches doesn't mean that it is teaching the Word of God. Sola Fide! Sola Scriptura! Solus Christus, Sola Deo gratia! Sola Deo gloria! Robert Demarest Cuminale Charlotte, N.C. In response to Mr. Apel February 10, 2006 I thank Mr. Apel for responding to me. I would like to return the favor and respond to his response. My point here is that sin does result in consequences that are unfavorable to the sinner. I have yet to see the real evidence where the so-called labeled sin of homosexual practice always results in the tragedies such as what happened with Judas. The sad fact is that many people are blinded by sin in their lives that does not have any "visible" evidence of "unfavorable" consequences. That is the real danger of sin, in that it lulls us into a false sense of security; where we do not want to sacrifice our old lives, because we are too comfortable. We would rather cling to the notion that God is love and ignore the God as judge. This is not to say that anything can separate us from His love, but we can choose – a terrible choice – to live in our former lives, rather than dying to our old selves and being raised with Christ. Romans 6:4: Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. The Bible is, in fact, a wonderful historical account of believers through the ages who were inspired by God. This is a very worldly way to view the Bible. I would ask Mr. Apel to review his Book of Confessions, specifically drawing attention to the Westminster Confession and the Shorter and Larger Catechism. In numerous places, the Word of God is defined as: [Larger Catechism] Q. 3. What is the Word of God? A. The holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the Word of God, the only rule of faith and obedience. I am ashamed to say that, within the Church, this view of the Bible as a "historical account" or a group of stories that do not apply to our lives today is held by many, both those called to ministry and those in the pews. Bible illiteracy is, IMHO, one of the greatest challenges we have in the Church today. M arc Karasek Openness to EPC ministers February 9, 2006 Rev. Daniel M. Berry III, pastor of the First Presbyterian Church of Jackson, Ala., wrote (February 7 letters): "I may be expected to hold certain positions or encourage certain projects; but at this point, I am not, as a pastor, forced to advocate things I don't believe. I am still free to preach the Word of God as the Holy Spirit leads me, in accord with our traditional Reformed standards." While this may be true, I also noticed that he was at one time a pastor in the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC). This suggests to me that Rev. Berry is ministering within one of the more conservative Presbyterian denominations, one open to someone carrying that sort of baggage. I suspect that few of the presbyteries of the PCUSA would receive someone from the EPC. I further suspect that many evangelical pastors in other presbyteries are having a very different experience from Rev. Berry. A good case in point would be the debacle at Hollywood (California) Presbyterian Church. Another case would be my home church – it was a conservative church in a liberal presbytery. It sought dismissal from the PCUSA in 1989 partly because all of the ministerial candidates it called got raked over the coals by presbytery. It was dismissed into the EPC and it took its property with it. In those days, there was an escape clause for former PCUS churches that permitted that. Rev. Dr. Larry Brown African Bible College Lilongwe, Malawi Schism and the modern church February 9, 2006 The following quotes are from Donald Bloesch and P.T. Forsyth. Bloesch is a well-known evangelical theologian and has taught theology at Dubuque Seminary for the past half-century. Forsyth (1848-1921) was an evangelical Congregational theologian in England and one of Bloesch's theological heroes. I hope readers of The Layman will find these quotes helpful: "The shadow of schism lies over the modern church, both Catholic and Protestant, as the polarization between conservatism and liberalism deepens. Many churches and theologians today are trying to substitute consensus for polarization, but this is seeking unity at the expense of truth. The ground for reconciliation is God's saving act in Christ and not common cultural interests or institutional survival" (Donald Bloesch, The Invaded Church, 1975, p.50) "Confessing Jesus Christ as Lord also entails challenging the bureaucracies of the church that are intent on consolidating institutional power rather than losing themselves in the service of the Great Commission to bring the gospel to all peoples. If renewal is to come to the church in our time, it will probably come from concerned laity who have rediscovered the astounding claims of the Bible." (Donald Bloesch, The Church, 2002, p.276) "A popular misrepresentation is to see this division in the church as between socially conservative laymen and a coterie of enlightened clergy. As I shall try to point out very shortly, this kind of interpretation is a gross oversimplification. The division in the church today is between those who are loyal to the gospel, despite their often inadequate understanding of scriptural truth, and those committed to secular humanism, even though they may sometimes pose as representatives of the church." (Donald Bloesch, The Invaded Church, 1975, p.19) "The need today is for courageous Christians who are willing to suffer in their forthright witness to the truth. The great saints of the past endured intimidation and persecution not only by the world but also by the church. Yet in the knowledge that Jesus Christ is victorious over the powers of darkness, the committed Christian can face the future with confidence and hope, since he knows that he is on the side that will win in the end. Luther put it this way: 'Redemption occurs in hope. It is in the process of becoming. Here we must stand, fence, and deal out blows. The coward is overtaken by disaster.' Would that we might recover such a robust faith in our time." (Donald Bloesch, The Evangelical Renaissance, 1973, p.9) "It is my hope that Spirit-filled Christians will stay within the church and seek to be a leavening influence. It is nonetheless true that there is also a time to separate, particularly when the doors are irrevocably closed to any earnest attempt at reform or renewal. Yet this should be done as a last resort, and it should be deemed a failure and therefore an act that calls for divine forgiveness." (Donald Bloesch, The Evangelical Renaissance, 1973, p.9) "An ultra-liberalism in a historic religion like Christianity has always this danger - that it advance so far from its base as to be cut off from supplies, and spirituality starved into surrender to the world. If it is not then exterminated, it is interned in a region ruled entirely by the laws of the foreign country. Gradually it accommodates itself to the new population, and is slowly absorbed so as to forget the first principles of Christ. It comes to live in religious syncretism which is too much at home with the natural man to bear the marks of the Lord Jesus." (P.T. Forsyth, The Person and Place of Jesus Christ, 1909, p.25) Jeff McDonald member Covenant Presbyterian Church Omaha, Neb. A response to Bobby Hood February 9, 2006 Bobby Hood (February 6, letter to the editor) advocates a purge of those within our denomination "who deny the authority of Scripture and the clear teachings of sacred Scripture." Many will side with Rev. Lyle (February 7, letter to the editor) in being appalled by this recommendation. I am not, but neither am I naive enough to think that it will take place. The great middle of the Presbyterian Church (USA) won't stand for it. Those members of Rev. Lyle's "beloved community of God's Son," who are convinced that keeping Jesus' command to love one another requires niceness at every turn, simply will not abide by a purge for righteousness' sake. Besides these, there are those who view themselves as evangelicals or conservatives who, unlike Mr. Hood, see no "Biblical justification . . . for purging our denomination." In this vein, Rev. Daniel Berry (February 6, letter to the editor) argues, "Even if the PUP report is adopted . . . . It is important for ministers who hold evangelical views or convictions in accord with the Confessing Church Movement, as I do, to remain in the denomination and be strong voices in their presbyteries, upholding Biblical standards of ordination and providing clear enunciation of historic Christianity." Rev. Berry remains convinced that "ours is still a church that can and will be used of God and will provide the best opportunity for those of us of evangelical and conservative persuasion to carry out our 'Great Commission.'" I have no doubt that Rev. Berry will be blessed with the opportunity to attempt fulfillment of the Great Commission in a PCUSA governed by the principles and authoritative interpretation of the TTF report. With 21 presbyteries lobbying for the removal of G-6.0106b and the various renewal groups united in loyal opposition to cutting our "fidelity and chastity" standard, the way is clear for Louisville to champion the TTF report as the long-awaited middle way: keep the standard in place but allow the nicety of limited and reasonable dissent. Dissent will be allowed. The TTF report will be adopted. With this new order of the day in place, evangelicals and conservatives who believe that God is calling them to ministry and witness in a clearly apostate PCUSA, as a "strong voice" for "Biblical standards" and "historic Christianity," can get in line behind Rev. Berry. However, as Greg Leaman (February 6, letter to the editor) has reminded Layman Online readers, there is another voice that still speaks from heaven – a voice once heard by the likes of Charles Spurgeon and John the Apostle – saying, "'Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities'" (Revelation 18:4). There is a Biblical basis for abandoning even one's father and mother and son and daughter in order to answer that call (Matthew 10:34-37, Luke 14:26). There is a Biblical basis for breaking faith with the familiar in order to keep faithful to the Lord Jesus (Luke 9:61-62). There is a Biblical basis for forsaking the fleshpots of Egypt/Babylon/Sodom in order to join the exodus from captivity to idolatry and immorality and death (Revelation 11:8, 18:1-4ff). There is a Biblical basis for leaving the spiritually dead to bury their own dead in order to follow after the Christ of God (Luke 9:59-60). Jim Henkel North Benton Presbyterian Church North Benton, Ohio Isn't purging the 'province of Stalinist Russia?' February 9, 2006 Bobby Hood (February 6, letter to the editor) wrote you not to associate with immoral people. He did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But, actually, he wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler – not even to eat with such a one. For what have we to do with judging outsiders? Do we not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves (1 Corinthians 5:9-13). Jim Watson Richardson, Texas About James Presbytery leaders issuing warning February 9, 2006 "During that debate and discussion, the moderator publicly stated that such behavior was unbecoming and inappropriate to a body of Christians striving to listen to God's spirit and determine His will on this matter," they said. "Still, the behavior continued but at a lessened level. Such behavior may be appropriate to a political party rally but not to a body of Christians striving to hear clearly God's will. Such an assembly is gathered to do the work and will of God decently and orderly and should not be subjected to emotional outbursts, tirades, nor vilifications of personalities or issues that come before that governing body." "…emotional outbursts, tirades…vilifications of personalities or issues…." For a moment there, I thought they were describing the Washington Office of the PC(USA). Doug Coartney Eureka, Ill. The old observation is still valid February 9, 2006 "Liberty of conscience is nowadays only understood to be the liberty of believing what men please, but also of endeavoring to propagate that belief as much as they can" (Jonathan Swift). Kay Brooks Irving, Texas In response to Christopher William Purdom February 9, 2006 Christopher William Purdom's rather incoherent response (February 7 letters) to Dr. Robert A.J. Gagnon makes one thing crystal clear: He has confused love with unquestioning unlimited acceptance. I would suggest that Mr. Purdom spend a while meditating on the fact that Jesus loved the Pharisees just as much as he loved his disciples, yet was not particularly nice to them. Once he has done that, I offer these thoughts for his consideration. First, as any good Presbyterian elder ought to know (and Mr. Purdom clearly doesn't), "all those words in the Bible" are as much about the absolute sovereignty and perfect holiness of God as they are about the wonders of love. Second, "all those words in the Bible" don't speak about love doing things (as does Mr. Purdom), but rather about God doing things; while it is true to say that God is love, it is not true to say that love is God. Third, given both the love of God and the holiness of God, which is utterly intolerant of sin, many of those words in the Bible are there to teach us that the wrath of God against sin is a key and integral part of the love of God for his creation; hand in hand with this is the assurance of Hebrews 12 that the Lord disciplines those he loves in order to prune away our sin - a category which includes, inter alia, homosexual acts. Fourth, as such, Mr. Purdom is completely wrong to pit G-6.0106b against love, as if it were unloving to align the requirements of our constitution with the requirements of the holiness of God. Rather, the chastity/fidelity clause is an expression of the love of God for the church that seeks to bring his people ever more in line with his will. Finally, the statement which Mr. Purdom declares to be "the ultimate point of all those words in the Bible," namely, his declaration that, "Love is so imperative and so essential that it overcomes even death on the cross," is in fact an incoherent fatuity. No, love doesn't overcome death on the cross, let alone by being "imperative" and "essential." God, in love, overcomes sin, doing so through the death of his Son on the cross – and then God overcomes death on the cross by his power. To mangle this as badly as Mr. Purdom does shows an understanding of the cross and the atonement that is astonishingly shallow and fundamentally flawed. Rev. Rob Harrison Pastor Trinity Church in the Pines Grand Lake, Colo. 'State-of-the-Art Playground' for the record February 9, 2006 As we read your article "Hollywood's former senior pastor holds 'no bitterness'" by John H. Adams, we felt a word of clarification might be in order. In 1999, the state of California passed a law that updated the safety standards for playgrounds. This new law went into effect in January 2000. Our deadline to comply with this was January 2003. All playgrounds had to be assessed by playground safety specialists in order to see if they were compliant with the new law. After our playground audit in August 2000, our playground, at that time, was deemed unsafe. It was not up to the new code and it had to be removed in order to insure the safety of the children. Realizing that our church could not fund such a project, much hard work went into applying for many different grants. We were fortunate to receive grants from the Ralph Parsons Foundation, Weingart Foundation and Ahmanson Foundation. Various other fund-raising events were planned and carried out: a huge dinner fundraiser, trike-a-thon, and several silent auctions, not to mention the numerous individual donations that were made. Hollywood Presbyterian Church was able to help with $91,950, not $350,000. The heart of the project was to provide a safe environment for our preschool children as well as church families. The timing for completion, September 2003, came shortly after Alan Meenan's visit to Malawi just a month earlier. Upon his return, he challenged our church to give to the seminary in Malawi. At this point, our 3-year project to fund the playground had already been completed. If he felt his "calls to social responsibility resisted," it was not that we did not care about these seminarians or any others in need. This project brought in designated funds from non-members as well as members by the time the Malawi challenge was even presented by Alan. For the record, this "State-of-the-Art Playground" has been a testimony to not only our church, but to our community as they drive by our church. The message is that, at this place of worship, children matter and are of high importance. Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me and forbid them not for such is the kingdom of heaven." That speaks volumes to these families. We praise God for this amazing gift that He continues to use to draw others to Himself. Pam Tuszynski HPCC Preschool Director Martha Roberts Children's Director (during this project) HPCC Board of Directors HPCC Fundraising Committee Encouragement at Hollywood Presbyterian Church February 9, 2006 Greetings from the saints at First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood (FPCH). Faithful readers of The Layman have been deluged for months with lengthy letters and editorials defending our former pastors and blaming just about everyone else for the problems at FPCH. It is time to pause, have faith and remember that, "all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to his purpose (Rm 8:28)." Rest assured that our former pastors, those who have left, and most importantly, the pastors, staff and congregation standing firm at FPCH "love the Lord." FPCH is not and never has been the pastors' church, the session's church or the congregation's church. It is and always will be the "Lord's church." And don't worry, FPCH is vibrant, alive and far from empty on Sundays. We have the privilege of having Dr. Don Williams as a frequent visitor in our pulpit. Don has strong ties to FPCH, is a former assistant minister, a great man of God, a deep believer and a passionate evangelist. On every Sunday in every service, he preaches from the heart of God's Word and ends with a strong altar call. Every Sunday, people come forward to accept Christ into their lives. Don's challenge to us is to make the church grow – not from transfers of membership, but from conversion. It is a new and exciting time. As Don reminded us Sunday, we must not look back, but press forward keeping our eyes fixed on Christ. So continue to pray for our former pastors and FPCH, but do not be angry or discouraged. Know that God will do a great work in our midst and His name will be glorified in Hollywood. Phil Horton Member, FPCH Chatsworth, Calif. Thoughts on the term 'alone' February 9, 2006 I very much enjoy your Web site, especially the articles about a dialogue between Presbyterians and Catholics. I grew up Protestant and recently became Catholic, so I've seen a lot of issues from both sides now. Something I have noticed about the way some Protestants use the term "alone" is that the use of "alone" is not necessarily an affirmation of whatever or whoever is described as being truly "alone" – such as "Christ alone," "the Cross alone," "faith alone" or "grace alone." Before God created, God ALONE existed. God existed in and of himself. God existed sufficiently. God did not need to create, but he also did not need not to create. So, the sufficiency of God's existence was not at stake when he created. But for someone to come along and say "God alone," and no one else after God has created, and to try to justify the claim that in eliminating all which/whom God has created by referring back to God's sufficiency is a false affirmation of God's sufficiency. Such a thing would be a false affirmation of "God." Saying "God alone" in that sense is not a defense of God. It is an interference with his decision to create. I am not accusing anyone of this except the one whom the Bible ironically calls the "Accuser!" My point is simply that appending "alone" to something or someone is not necessarily an affirmation of that thing or person. When I hear "Christ alone," I have to ask what the point is, not because I don't affirm Christ, but because "alone" itself is not necessarily an affirmation. One thing to remember in all this is the warning Christ gave of people who would come along claiming to do God a favor as they persecuted his creatures. This corresponds to the idea of a false affirmation of the sufficiency of something/someone. Jeff Cody About the Pittsburgh overture February 7, 2006 We all know that those who support G-60106b believe that it is essential. The existence of an extra "really" or, in this case, a gloss on the word "shall" (which, I notice, includes the word shall just to add to the ludicrousness of our current predicament) will not change anyone's mind or make the existing clause any more enforceable, any more than writing more than 600 pages on "homosexuality" made the anti-gay position any more or less true than it may or may not have been before anybody read Mr. Gagnon's book. It is obvious that Mr. Gagnon has an immense respect for the power of words, but the flaw is not in the wording of the clause. The flaw especially is not in a lack of words and it will not be solved with more words. We already have an entire Bible full of words. The flaw is in the very notion of the clause itself. You cannot legislate love. Love is so imperative and so essential that it overcomes even death on the cross, and that is the ultimate point of all those words in the Bible. Christopher William Purdom Elder Tabernacle United Church Isn't purging the 'province of Stalinist Russia?' February 7, 2006 Regarding the letter (February 6) from Bobby Hood: "Purging?" I thought that was the province of Stalinist Russia, not the beloved community of God's Son. I believe our Lord once told a parable, something about wheat and tares, that makes clear who alone possesses the authority to make such judgments. Not that anything goes, to be sure, but when people start talking about purging the church, mischief is afoot. It is noteworthy that this letter refers to the Southern Baptists as an example to be followed. The purging of moderates from that denomination was ruthless and an utter negation of Christ's words from John: "The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one.…" Furthermore, to emulate the raw political power exercised in the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC ignores Calvin's instruction: "Finally, let them realize that in estimating the true church divine judgment is of more weight than human." Perhaps those who prefer a rigid doctrinal approach that allows for no dissent or differences might find a more congenial home in that denomination. However, such a path is diametrically opposed to our Presbyterian heritage and practice. Rev. W. Patterson Lyles Scripture says 'to guard the doctrine that has been entrusted to us' February 6, 2006 My question is not when we must leave, but when should we "drive out" those who do not hold to the fundamentals of the Christian Faith? 1 Corinthians 5:12 tells us to "purge the evil person from among you" and 2 Corinthians 6:14 tells us to not be "unequally yoked." As a Presbyterian for 56 years, I have struggled with the tension between staying, seeking reform/renewal and leaving, but have we missed out by not doing something similar to what the Southern Baptists did and purging our denomination of those who deny the authority of Scripture and the clear teachings of sacred Scripture? 1 Timothy 6:20 tells us "to guard the doctrine that has been entrusted to us" – have we done that? What if all those who left, some of those over trivial issues such as property, had stayed , guarded the doctrine and purged the denomination? I am concerned that we have always been playing defense and not offense. Isn't there Biblical justification (not rationalization) for purging our denomination? Bobby Hood 'I would encourage evangelical pastors and ministers to remain in the PCUSA' February 6, 2006 Re: When Must We Leave the Church? This is a very important question and a very important response, especially considering the present crisis and the critical issues facing our denomination. I speak to this question from a somewhat unique perspective, having served as a pastor for 10 years in the Evangelical Presbyterian Church and for two years as a pastor of the United Church of Christ. I am now grateful to be given another opportunity to serve a pastorate within the PCUSA. I also need to make it clear that I do not support the theological task force, or PUP, report which will be coming before the General Assembly this June. I am also concerned that many ministers and church leaders appear to hold theological views that undermine our Reformed heritage and call into question the authority of Scripture and the saving work of Jesus Christ. Still, even if the PUP report is adopted, I do not plan to leave our PCUSA. It is important for ministers who hold evangelical views or convictions in accord with the Confessing Church Movement, as I do, to remain in the denomination and be strong voices in their presbyteries, upholding Biblical standards of ordination and providing a clear enunciation of historic Christianity. The splintering of Presbyterianism into many small conservative denominations does not give honor and glory to the head of the Church. It makes those of us who are conservative and evangelical appear contentious, small-minded and self-serving. Evangelicals can minister more effectively within the current denomination where their numbers and resources will still be stronger than they would be in a much smaller conservative and possibly unnecessarily rigid or legalistic Presbyterian denomination. Of course, it would probably be advisable to participate in a PCUSA congregation where evangelical and Reformed theology are taught and revered, rather than within a congregation where such beliefs will frequently be contradicted or ridiculed; but I would encourage evangelical pastors and ministers to remain in the PCUSA. Even within the UCC, where ordination of homosexuals is commonplace, there are still churches where the true Christian faith is valued and the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman is still affirmed. Though the number of these congregations within the UCC is shrinking, many have, for their own reasons, chosen to remain within the UCC. There will be faithful congregations within all mainline denominations. I may be expected to hold certain positions or encourage certain projects; but at this point, I am not, as a pastor, forced to advocate things I don't believe. I am still free to preach the Word of God as the Holy Spirit leads me, in accord with our traditional Reformed standards. I still believe that the best place for Presbyterians who want to minister our Reformed faith powerfully to a needy world is the Presbyterian Church, (USA.) I say this not because I agree with much of what is currently going on in our denomination, but because I believe ours is still a church that can and will be used of God and will provide the best opportunity for those of us of evangelical and conservative persuasion to carryout our "Great Commission." Rev. Daniel M. Berry III First Presbyterian Church Jackson, Ala. Proposals for downsizing of an out-of-control religious bureaucracy February 6, 2006 I will offer, under no duress, my proposals for budget cuts within the PCUSA: 1. Cut 90 percent of the budget and staff of the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy. 2. Cut 90 percent of the budget and staff of the Peacemaking Program. 3. Cut 90 percent of the budget and staff of the Washington Office. These three cuts will remove about 90 percent of the current problems in the denomination! Also: 4. Cut 50 percent of the GAC administration budget. 5. Cut 50 percent of the OGA departments budget. 6. Cut all the grants to "ecumenical" groups. This should begin the serious and necessary downsizing of an out-of-control and unaccountable religious bureaucracy. And one last recommendation: Unless directed to do so by the GA in very specific language, Clifton Kirkpatrick should be making no pronouncements for the whole denomination – period! Todd Bensel Commissioned Lay Pastor Pilot Rock, Ore. Please continue to let us know about the conditions you encounter February 6, 2006 Please convey the following message to U.S. Marine Col. Carl R. Lammers: Dear Col. Lammers: I am so very glad and grateful for your ministry in Iraq, and pray for your safety and continued good work. Please continue to correspond with us here at home about the conditions you encounter. We need this firsthand information. God bless you! Maria Samuelsson To claim God's grace one must repent February 6, 2006 I read the last Layman and as I read the article on Don Stroud, [page 17] he claimed God's grace. However, to claim God's grace one must repent. Since Mr. Stroud has refused to repent of that which the Bible calls an abomination before God, he cannot claim grace. In fact he should be removed from office, defrocked and removed from the membership of the congregation. Christians are not supposed to even associate with those who claim to be Christian if they are incorrigible, that is repeatedly do that which is forbidden. Once removed from the roles he can then still attend, but may not become again recognized as Christian until he repents and changes his ways. Dale Creasey Fair Oaks, Calif. PUP report follows the lead of C-67 in its views of Scripture February 6, 2006 Mr. Earl Apel's [letter to the editor, posted February 2, 2006] low view of Scripture is, unfortunately, but a small step beyond the position our denomination took when we approved the Confession of 1967 (C-67) and gave up the "Westminster Standards" in favor of an encyclopedia of "reliable expositions of what Scripture leads us to believe and do" (G-10.0405, 3). C-67 stands in stark contrast to the balance of the historical creeds that comprise that Book of Confessions and it paves the way for some to fall into the very misunderstanding warned against by the Scots Confession: the blasphemy of holding that "the Scriptures have no other authority save that which they have received from the Kirk" (C-3.19). Whether he has made this particular misstep or not, it is evident that Mr. Apel believes it to be an utter absurdity to assert that one can know and proclaim with certainty what God speaks to us in the Bible. He maintains that this good book – like every other – is riddled with human error. Mr. Apel is wrong. Scripture is completely without human error. The Bible communicates the infallible truth of God's grace toward us in Jesus. It contains the full, inerrant record of all that we need to know about God's own will for the conduct of our lives as disciples of Christ. Every "do" and each "don't" is either plainly spoken in clear language or it can be easily discerned from that which is explicitly stated (C-6.006, 6.007). Like every act of sexual immorality, there is just no doubt that Scripture declares God's word regarding homosex acts to be this: "Don't!" Don't do it! Don't justify it! Don't defend it! Don't condone it! Don't excuse it! Don't bless it! Don't ordain it! Don't! Period! End of story! The report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church follows the lead of C-67 in viewing the Scriptures as "the one sufficient revelation of Jesus Christ" which are, "nevertheless the words of men, conditioned by the language, thought forms, and literary fashions of the places and times in which they were written" (C-9.27, 29; TTF report "Theological Reflection" section B, item 2: lines 154-165). It is small surprise then, that Recommendation 5 of this report falls right in line with Mr. Apel's conclusion. It holds that the Biblical prohibition against homosex acts can simply be interpreted away as the error of a culturally conditioned thought form of times gone by. It is non-essential to our current day understanding. Recommendation 5 is wrong. According to Scripture, God's word on homosex acts was, is, and always will be one and the same and only one word; a word so plain that even imperfect, error prone human beings – people like myself and like Mr. Apel – can grasp it with complete confidence and clarity: "Don't!" Jim Henkel, NWI endorsing church pastor North Benton Presbyterian Church North Benton, Ohio Eastminster Presbytery I am convinced that God values purity above unity February 6, 2006 Separation: When must one remove oneself from the company of those sliding down the slippery slope of heresy and/or apostasy? There is nothing I think I may effectively add to the many, many profound – and otherwise – remarks already made. Therefore, I shall simply recount another's intimate struggle with the question. The year: 1877. Please note: word spellings in the direct quotes of Charles Haddon Spurgeon are correct for his day. "Biblical truth is like the pinnacle of a steep, slippery mountain. One step away, and you find yourself on the downgrade. Once a church or individual Christian gets on the downgrade, momentum takes over and the downslide gets worse." C. H. Spurgeon [quote from Dr. John MacArthur's DVD (highly recommended!); "Does Truth Matter Anymore," part 2, chapter 13] The Sword and the Trowel [Spurgeon's Publication]; August, 1877 At the end of the article, Spurgeon fired this shot, which for the first time raised the issue that would become the focus of all the subsequent controversy: "It now becomes a serious question how far those who abide by the faith once delivered to the saints should fraternize with those who have turned aside to another gospel. Christian love has its claims, and divisions are to be shunned as grievous evils; but how far are we justified in being in confederacy with those who are departing from the truth? … It is one thing to overleap all boundaries of denominational restriction for the truth's sake: this we hope all godly men will do more and more. It is quite another policy which would urge us to subordinate the maintenance of truth to denominational prosperity and unity. "Numbers of easy-minded people wink at error so long as it is committed by a clever man and a good-natured brother, who has so many fine points about him. Let each believer judge for himself; but, for our part, we have put on a few fresh bolts to our door, and we have given orders to keep the chain up; for, under colour of begging the friendship of the servant, there are those about who aim at robbing the Master." Spurgeon was now suggesting that true believers might have reason to sever their organizational ties with those who were promulgating the new theology. ****** This was not a call for a new denomination. Spurgeon clearly distrusted earthly organizations: "We fear it is hopeless ever to form a society which can keep out men base enough to profess one thing and believe another; but it might be possible to make an informal alliance among all who hold the Christianity of their fathers. Little as they might be able to do, they could at least protest, and as far as possible free themselves of that complicity which will be involved in a conspiracy of silence." The Sword and the Trowel; September, 1877 Spurgeon was beginning to think more seriously and speak more explicitly about breaking fellowship with those whom he believed were opposing the gospel. For several decades Spurgeon had been the most visible and influential member of the Baptist Union. Yet it seemed he was now seriously pondering withdrawal from the Union as a matter of conscience. "The divergence is every day becoming more manifest. A chasm is opening between the men who believe their Bibles and the men who are prepared for an advance upon Scripture. Inspiration and speculation cannot long abide in peace. Compromise there can be none. We cannot hold the inspiration of the Word, and yet reject it; we cannot believe in the atonement and deny it; we cannot hold the doctrine of the fall and yet talk of the evolution of spiritual life from human nature; we cannot recognise the punishment of the impenitent and yet indulge the 'larger hope.' One way or the other we must go. Decision is the virtue of the hour. "Neither when we have chosen our way can we keep company with those who go the other way." [emphasis added] ****** Spurgeon was a Baptist and a Calvinist ... [quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Spurgeon; see http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm for a discussion of his defense of Calvinism] ****** Spurgeon and the Down-Grade Controversy by John F. MacArthur, Jr. Spurgeon hated schism. … But his conscience would not permit him to align with the enemies of the gospel. In the end he concluded that separating from the Union was actually the best way to promote true unity: "Nothing has ever more largely promoted the union of the true than the break with the false."[77] Spurgeon saw separation as a biblical necessity for himself. "Whether others do so or not, I have felt the power of the text, 'Come out from among them, and be ye separate," and have quitted both Union and Association once for all. . . . This is forced upon me, not only by my convictions, but also by the experience of the utter uselessness of attempting to deal with the evil except by personally coming out from it."[78] Spurgeon did not actively seek to pull others out of the Union, but he could not understand why men who wanted to remain faithful to the Scriptures would continue to belong to an organization that was so obviously barreling down the down-grade … "Numbers of good brethren in different ways remain in fellowship with those who are undermining the gospel; and they talk of their conduct as though it were a loving course which the Lord will approve of in the day of his appearing. We cannot understand them. The bounden duty of a true believer towards men who profess to be Christians, and yet deny the Word of the Lord, and reject the fundamentals of the gospel, is to come out from among them. "If it be said that efforts should be made to produce reform, we agree with the remark; but when you know that they will be useless, what is the use? Where the basis of association allows error, and almost invites it, and there is an evident determination not to alter that basis, nothing remains to be done inside, which can be of any radical service. …To stay in a community which fellowships all beliefs in the hope of setting matters right, is as though Abraham had stayed at Ur, or at Haran, in the hope of converting the household out of which he was called. "Complicity with error will take from the best of men the power to enter any successful protest against it. . . . Our present sorrowful protest is not a matter of this man or that, this error or that; but of principle.[79] The Down-Grade Controversy was a perpetual grief to Spurgeon until his death on January 31, 1892. Close friends, and even some of the students from his Pastors' College, turned against him. But Spurgeon declared to the end that he did not regret the stand he had taken. Endnotes: 77. "Notes," The Sword and the Trowel (May 1888). Reprinted in The Down Grade Controversy, 55. 78. "Notes," (June 1888), 56. 79. "Notes," The Sword and the Trowel (Oct. 1888). Reprinted in The "Down Grade" Controversy, 66. ****** The Baptist Union (by a vote of over 90 percent) censored C. H. Spurgeon. After this spiritual battle, however, the Baptist Union declined even more rapidly. Eight years after his death, Spurgeon's wife, Susannah, wrote: "So far as the Baptist Union was concerned, little was accomplished by Mr. Spurgeon's witness-bearing and withdrawal … But, in other respects, I have had abundant proofs that the protest was not in vain. Many, who were far gone on the 'Down-grade,' were stopped in the perilous descent, and, by God's grace, were brought back to the 'Up-line'; others, who were unconsciously slipping were made to stand firmly on the Rock; while, at least for a time in all the churches, Evangelical doctrines were preached with a clearness and emphasis which had long been lacking." [from Dr. John MacArthur's DVD, "Does Truth Matter Anymore", part 2, chapter 13] ****** I Corinthians 5:9-13; II Corinthians 6:14-17 ****** Some may ask if I am simply trying to justify a decision my wife and I have already made. Maybe, but I pray not. However, after looking at this portion of the life of this man of God, I am more convinced than before that God values purity above unity. Greg Leaman Sheboygan County, Wisc. PCUSA's position of moral superiority undermines our soldiers and nation February 2, 2006 It is tragic, but not surprising, that the comments and story of the heroic Iraqi Christian general are not well-known in the United States. It amazes me that anyone could assert so casually that this former Iraqi general doesn't know what he's talking about when he affirms that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were shipped to Syria. The man was there, and inspections for such weapons were never carried out on a large scale inside Syria. More tragically, our own Presbyterian Church (USA) has taken it upon itself to assume a position of supposed moral superiority which undermined our soldiers and our nation. We should be thankful for Christians like this heroic individual. I pray that there are still cells of evangelical Presbyterians in Iraq. Rev. Daniel M. Berry III Jackson, Ala. In the PCUSA the buck stops with the session, not the pastor February 2, 2006 I have been following the events at HFPC, and obviously there have been some heated emotions. However, regarding the budget and the former pastors: Mrs. Smith, [letter to the editor, posted February 1, 2006] the buck stops with the session in a Presbyterian Church not the pastor. You may have been a member for 40 years, but it is the session that controls the budget not a pastor, I would encourage you to read through the Book of Order on this issue. Regardless of the woes at HFPC, ultimate fault lies with the session. Andrew McCaskill New Covenant Presbyterian Church Aiken, S.C. The question: What does the Word of God say about divisions in the church? February 2, 2006 To ask the question when "must" we leave instead of when shall we walk out is indeed a good way to put it. Luther left when he was kicked out for being true to God's Word. Machen did too. However, Machen was accused of schism for forming his own mission board as a rival to the denomination's. To leave a church on our own would be schism unless there was official apostasy in the church over the essentials of the faith. It would not be schismatic if one was kicked out for being true to God's Word. All the other things listed in the article are valid complaints and frustrations. The real question is what does the Word of God say about divisions in the church? Though Israel was apostate many times, the model was not given to go out and form a new Israel that was "true." In the New Testament the appeal is constant to not abide and to agree with each other more than leave. It does speak of "casting the immoral brother out." But, for example, Paul does not tell the Corinthians to form their own church when there was sexual immorality and terrible teaching there. In Revelation, the few were told (not to leave) but to "hold onto what you have until I come." If we really want to do God's will, then we must appeal to God's Word. This is true not only when it teaches us about morality, but also when it teaches us about getting along together. These words may sound a bit harsh, but it is hard to condense this idea into a short e-mail. On the other hand, if the PCUSA is not considered an apostate denomination by the OPC, PCA or EPC, then efforts should be made to cooperate together. Perhaps the wounds are still too fresh. Dr. J. Ben Sloan Lake Murray Presbyterian Church Chapin, S.C. Apel answers Karasek's questions February 2, 2006 Marc Karasek [letter to the editor, posted January 31, 2006] asked me some very good questions in his letter in response to mine. So I will post the questions and provide the answers. 1) Mr. Apel says in his letter, "Otherwise there would be numerous unrepentant homosexuals hanging ourselves just as Judas did." How can the word unrepentant be used and it not be a sin? By definition unrepentant means, you know what you are doing is wrong, but choose to do it anyway. Answer: The use of the word unrepentant is a label. This is a label that many in the PCUSA seem to think they may freely attach to homosexuals since they conclude automatically that we are unrepentant and in sin. My point here is that sin does result in consequences that are unfavorable to the sinner. I have yet to see the real evidence where the so-called labeled sin of homosexual practice always results in the tragedies such as what happened with Judas. 2) If the Bible is the Word of God, then the current argument for ordaining has these rationales behind it: a) We now know things that God did not when he originally inspired the Bible. Answer: Actually the people writing the Bible did not know all things. I have no doubt they had inspiration from God and passionate faith. The fact is that the Bible was not a case where a secretary is taking dictation directly from God. However, even in that case of the secretary there is the possibility for human error since we are not perfect as God is. The Bible is in fact a wonderful historical account of believers through the ages who were inspired by God. But they are also human and the fact is that humans fall short of the glory of God and anything that humans produce will contain possible errors or be interpreted wrongly in later years by imperfect humans. Unless Mr. Karasek wishes to imply that there are humans that are perfect and can boldly proclaim what the writings really do say and think they cannot make a mistake. If so, it seems to me this is treading dangerous ground. b) We are now correcting his mistake(s). Answer: We are not correcting God's mistakes since God doesn't make mistakes. Rather we are seeking to be closer to God and have a better understanding in our own development and evolution as people of faith. What is wrong with that? How is that inconsistent with the fine example of Jesus? Earl C. Apel, member Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church Cincinnati, Ohio How about trading support for overtures? February 2, 2006 Would the presbyteries seeking approval of the PUP report and repeal of ordination standards in G6 be willing to trade? I would propose the right offer to accept those overtures if the left will do the same for the Beaver-Butler proposal. Jack O'Brien Pittsburgh, Pa. A great many of us still at HFPC are delighted to be able to move on February 1, 2006 I have read your yellow journalism throughout this whole mess and I have been amazed by the blatant untruths, the insinuations and misstatements. You should be ashamed. It has been my experience that when a million dollar shortfall is discovered, the buck stops at the desk of the CEO. How is this different? Acclamations of innocence by reason of "no knowledge" don't sit well with me. I was not one of the original complainants, but I can tell you that a great many of us still at HFPC are delighted that we are finally able to move on; that we are getting past the divisiveness which was fostered by Dr. Meenan and his supporters. Since this has been resolved, there is a feeling (finally) that this congregation might actually survive, in spite of our former CEO starting a local new congregation. I can see Meenan's heart is in the right place – if he can't have HFPC, he'll do his best to see that the congregation is irreconcilably split. That's a legacy to be proud of, or at least he seems to think so. Judy Smith Member of HFPC for 40 years PUP's commitment to Jesus and obedience to Scriptures is lip service February 1, 2006 I am heartened that Oak Hill Presbyterian Church in Dallas, Texas, has made the choice to stand up and be counted a Confessing Church. Taking this stand is very important while 21 of our presbyteries are seeking to repeal G-6.0106b and the report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church (TTF report) is being heralded far and wide as the cure to what ails our terminally diseased denomination. Confessing Churches make three decisive declarations: 1) Jesus Christ is the only Lord and Savior of humankind, 2) the Bible is the final rule of faith and practice, 3) holy living is required of all who would follow Jesus in obedience to the Scriptures, this includes walking in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between one man and one woman or remaining chaste in abstinence if one is single. The TTF report appears to agree with the first two articles espoused by the Confessing Church Movement, but denies the third. Like the 21 presbyteries that favor deleting our "fidelity and chastity" standard, the TTF report maintains that those caught up in sexually immoral lifestyles may be counted as faithful disciples of Jesus Christ and even – on a case by case basis – may be elevated to office in the church. This position reveals that the TTF report's stated commitment to Christ Jesus and declared obedience to the Scriptures is nothing more than lip service: Confessionally correct prattling that does nothing to influence a bottom line that is foreign to the Bible and alien to Christ Jesus' own call to holy living (Matthew 5:17ff). The TTF report invites the Presbyterian Church (USA) to embrace cheap grace; rejoicing that it is "for freedom that Christ has set us free;" but still "submitting again to a yoke of slavery" to sin (Galatians 5:1). It fails to count the cost of a lifestyle wholly and holy devoted to the one who purchased our freedom from sin with his own death upon the cross, that we might be dead to sin and alive to all that is good (1 Peter 2:24); dead to sin and alive to God alone (Romans 6:11-13). Jesus Christ, having bought us out of bondage to sin and death, now presses us into service as slaves of righteousness (Romans 6:18). We are none of us our own, for we were "bought with a price!" (1 Corinthians 6:20). The price of Christ's own precious blood. Scripture specifically charges us to "flee from sexual immorality!" (1 Corinthians 6:18a). "For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment" (Hebrews 10:26-27a, cf. 2 Peter 2:17-22). For all the TTF report's expression of faith in Jesus Christ, it portrays no fear of the Lord. It speaks not a word of the awesome and healthy dread that should overcome poor mortals in the presence of the Almighty: "Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire" (Hebrews 12:28). Any who adopt the TTF report or agree to delete G-6.0106b from our constitution are liable to judgment and are in danger of tasting the burning flames of God's wrath. No doubt some will think or say, "It really hurts me when you make such a judgmental statement." I can only reply: You haven't felt anything yet! Take the sting of my words as fair warning and turn from sin. The lake of fire, that second and eternal and forever agonizing death, awaits anyone whose name is not found written in the Lamb's book of life (Revelation 3:5, 20:15). Our entire denomination has arrived at that day when there is clearly set before us death or life, blessing or curse (Deuteronomy 30:19). We can reject the TTF report, along with every attempt to remove the fidelity and chastity requirement from our Book of Order, and embark on an effort to exercise right discipline that will excise from our number any who continue to defy our ordination standards; or we can adopt the TTF report, declare G-6.0106b a non-essential, and admit the boldfaced truth that we are indeed totally depraved, fully unrepentant, and determinedly destined to go to hell. Jim Henkel, NWI endorsing church pastor North Benton Presbyterian Church North Benton, Ohio Eastminster Presbytery Layman is depressing to read, when it should be uplifting February 1, 2006 I am a member of a Presbyterian Church in Missouri. I used to enjoy reading The Layman. As you can see, I said, "Used to enjoy reading The Layman." But, now I almost dread opening it up to read it. Why? You may ask. Well, I for one am one Presbyterian who is sick of reading nothing, basically, constructive or spiritual in The Layman. All, it seems to me, that we read about is the continuing debate about ordaining homosexuals and lesbians. Is there nothing else that is of concern in our denomination? Nothing else? What about articles about missionaries and missions works? What about articles about the growing of churches? What about articles about someone in our denomination who has excelled in his field of endeavor, a student who is excelling in his field of study? There are any numbers of things that the Presbyterian denomination should be concerned with, it would seem, rather than just harping and harping on this particular subject. Oh, yes I did read in the current issue of The Layman where the PCUSA says, "Killing baby is an act of faithfulness." Pardon me but I just don't understand that thinking. Two good things that were in the current issue was the article from General Abizaid and the article from Colonel Lammers. As a retired military person, and one who has a son who is career military, I find it very offensive for our stated clerk and General Assembly moderator to make the statements regarding our being in Iraq, and I would go to Iraq in a minute if I were called to do so. Thanks for printing these two articles. Of course, it's not surprising to me, and shouldn't be for other members of our denomination, what the stated clerk will do or say next. It's time and past time for him to go. Thus said, I will close this letter. But, I wanted you to know that I'm really tired of the same thing, issue after issue in The Layman. It really is difficult for me to tell anyone that I read it and I may not anymore. It's really depressing to read it. It should be, I think, somewhat uplifting . That is not the case, at all. IF we spent all the money that has been spent on the gay and lesbian issue to fund, or help fund, missionaries instead of taking the money away from them, then the money would be used for some good. But, now, it doesn't seem that this is the case. Rolland Gentzler Joplin, Missouri How many presbyteries support 6b? February 1, 2006 An encouraging statistic to report would be to include the number of presbyteries that have not yet voted to support the overturn of 6b. Just a thought. Walter Baker, elder Old Greenwich DVD offers Biblically based, well informed teaching on PUP report February 1, 2006 June is just around the corner. The 217th General Assembly and the decision on the Report of the Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity seem like gathering storm clouds on the horizon of our denomination. If the members of your church are like the typical cross-section of most PCUSA churches, some are very concerned, some could care less and most wish it would just go away. Presbyteries have held meetings to discuss the subject and task force members have spread out across the land to add their spin. To top this off, 21 presbyteries have proposed overtures that would remove G-6.0106b from the constitution. What appears to be missing is Biblically based, well informed teaching that can provide honest answers to the questions of our members, pastors and elders. I write tonight to make you aware of a set of materials that will do just that. It is a set of two DVDs featuring renewal leaders Anita Bell and Brad Long, pastor/theologians Mark Patterson and Gerrit Dawson and Parker Williamson, editor emeritus of The Layman. In three, 30-minute segments, these dedicated and knowledgeable leaders from the Presbyterian renewal movement respond to the issues raised by the PUP report. Called Jesus' Gift of Peace, Purity and Unity to the Presbyterian Church (USA) the lessons are presented in the hope that they will prevent the departure from Biblical faith and the subsequent loss of vitality that is taking place in the PCUSA. The members, pastors and elders in your church need to know what the PUP report means to the local church. This set of materials will help to inform them in a well thought out and balanced way. I encourage you to obtain this set of DVDs (also available in VHS format) and the accompanying study guide so that your session has the opportunity for study and discernment before the General Assembly in June. The materials are available from: Presbyterian-Reformed Ministries International 115 Richardson Blvd. P.O Box 429 Black Mountain, NC 28711 (828) 669-7373 prmi@prmi.org As a faith based ministry, PRMI suggests a donation of $100.00 for the set to help defray the costs that were incurred in the production of the DVDs. Please forgive me if this sounds like a shameless advertisement. The intent is to make evangelical and conservative Presbyterians aware that materials are available that will satisfy their need to know. Elder Mike Schrowang Londonderry Presbyterian Church Dakota Presbytery is not limited by geography February 1, 2006 Your article on the Beaver-Butler overture states that there are only three presbyteries that are not geographical as a basis for their composition. They are Korean presbyteries. That statement is not entirely correct. Dakota Presbytery in the Synod of Lakes and Prairies is another which is not limited by geography. It includes Native American Indian churches within the four states of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Minnesota. Provisions by the Synod of Lakes and Prairies and by the General Assembly were made many years ago to allow for this exception. Thank you for this correction. Rev. Claude John Jones Des Moines, Iowa

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