 |
|
| May
2006 letters Archives of letters to the editor  |
|
| We
need to be bound together not with 'Cheap Grace' but in 'Costly Grace'
May 30, 2006 We seem to be missing a sense of "joy" in this trial. What if our Lord is trying to do something new? A new Presbyterian denomination may be just what we need, so we can focus on evangelism, prayer and mission work. Certainly, every session should contact their local county or borough bar association and seek a consultation, in light of the ruling in California-Nevada Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church, et al. v. St. Luke's United Methodist Church, (California State Court of Appeals for the Fifth Appellate District, F 041778, upheld by California State Supreme Court, December 3, 2004), which allowed the local congregation to keep their property. Each church must determine the effect of this ruling on potential state court rulings. Conversely, if every congregation sought a declaratory judgment as to title of their local church property, in their respective state court at the same time, Louisville could not respond to such a massive rush to the courts. Maybe its time to think collectively in terms of a new Presbyterian denomination and pay a tithe or exit fee to the old denomination. What binds us is Christ, his work on the cross, his call on our lives, his word and his love for us. We need to believe that he is faithful. We need to think in terms of the future. We need to be bound to each other, in his love, not with "Cheap Grace" but in "Costly Grace," as Bonhoeffer so aptly put it. John Almquist Do you think God is going to honor PCUSA and its willful disobedience? May 30, 2006 I continue to read The Layman and appreciate its continued "voice in the wilderness." However, I left the PCUSA one year ago and joined another Presbyterian denomination that is faithful to the Scriptures and the Reformed faith. My family has been Presbyterian since 1750 and I wanted to stay and fight, but I now rejoice that no one questions the authority of the Scriptures in our church and I don't have to worry about who is teaching my children. I have to say, I think the idea or possibility of renewal within the PCUSA is very much decided – it's not going to happen! The PCUSA leaders have willfully rejected the Scriptures, the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Book of Order. Jesus is quite clear in Luke 10:16, "he who rejects me rejects him who sent me" and in Revelation 3 in speaking to the church at Laodicea, our Lord says, "(3:15ff) I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish your were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm – neither hot nor cold – I am about to spit you out of my mouth." The denomination has ceased to exist as a whole (there are some churches still seeking to be faithful to the Lord and to the Scriptures). Wake up, how much more apostasy are you willing to swallow? Once this General Assembly is over, you will have to face a majority of liberals who will chase you out of your positions, your buildings and ultimately your faith. You are in the same pattern that happened with the renewal groups in the Northern church in the 1930s and in the Southern church in the 1960s. Look at the history of this denomination and the scoundrels in leadership at the General Assembly – they have rejected Jesus Christ and his Scriptures! Do you think God is going to honor this denomination and its willful disobedience? Quit wasting your time and leave. I am sorry to speak such harsh words, but foolishness is foolishness. Andrew McCaskill Aiken, S.C. Fuss shouldn't be about property, but about faith May 30, 2006 Regarding Mr. Herb Goetz's letter [posted May 26, 2006], I have some thoughts to share. The sticking point it seems to me is the property issue. OK, let's go back to the Bible where it all begins in Genesis. God creates the earth and then turns it over to us humans. So God in effect gives us humans the control of property. That is a fact. Later Jesus, in answering a question about worldly goods in Roman times says to give to the great Ceasar what belongs to that ruler and to what belongs to God what is God's. This raises a most interesting question as to who among us humans should decide what is God's and what is not. Of course the rub is that if we humans are fussing about what belongs to God and does not, we in effect show much more faith in the worldly goods than the spiritual. That seems obvious to me. So I'm bothered by the fuss about property. The fuss should be over faith and leading others to Christ that has the real relevance in life. Earl C. Apel, member Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church Cincinnati, Ohio What do you stand for, not whom do you stand with May 30, 2006 A common foe is not the same as a common goal. What you stand for is more important than whom you stand with. Those who fail to learn the lesson of Dr. Machen are doomed to follow in the footsteps of his "warrior children." James E. Tuckett The Old Gray Dog GA actions may be God's will, not 'misdirection' May 30, 2006 Kay Brooks [letter to the editor, posted May 26, 2006] writes "God may allow the GA to continue in its misdirection for his [sic] own purposes." There seems to be a pattern among readers of The Layman to assume that any GA that does not abide by their version of "the truth," is not listening to the Spirit. It is sad that Ms. Brooks is so certain that her own beliefs are synonymous with God's will that she does a twisting logic to keep God in line with what she thinks. It apparently never occurs to Ms. Brooks and others that the GA actions may be God's will, not "misdirection." How refreshing it would be if GA action that is contrary to what we think would lead to some serious reflection about what God might be telling us rather than to outraged insistence that GA has got it wrong again! Rev. Anne-Marie Hislop, pastor St. Andrew Presbyterian Church Davenport, Iowa FOG: A wonderful name for another GA task force May 30, 2006 Re: GA will be asked to name FOG group to abridge, overhaul Book of Order What a wonderful name for another task force of our very own General Assembly. Afraid it may become a pejorative? I suspect I could find a couple dozen blogs already using the term that way, and at least that many condemning G.A. leaders for making such a blunder. To paraphrase veteran sportscaster Dick Enberg, "OH MY"! Pat Riggins DVM First Presbyterian Church Bloomington, Ind. Renewal groups should find some way to pool our resources and energy May 30, 2006 I am very appreciative of the differing perspectives and emphases of the various renewal groups within the PCUSA, but I have often wondered if our efforts would not be more effective if we could find some way to pool our resources and energy. We desperately need the deep theological reflection and Reformed emphasis offered by some. We also need the issue-oriented drive and political savvy of other groups, as well as the enthusiasm for missions of still other Presbyterians. Those on the other side of these issues are well-organized and quite clear about their objectives. We need the same kind of vision, clarity, and strength of organization in our renewal efforts. Daniel Berry No mature Christian would advocate that God's children disobey his laws May 30, 2006 PUP's recommendation that church members ignore the church's law against ordaining practicing homosexuals makes me wonder how the members of the PUP committee raised their own children. Did they say to their own daughters, "Our family rule is that you do not engage in sex until you are married, but, if you want to be a prostitute go right ahead." Did the members of PUP say to their sons, "Our family rule is that you do not drink or do drugs, but, if you want to kill yourself, go right ahead." Is this the way members of the PUP committee raised their own children? If the members of PUP insisted that their own children obey their family rules, then why are they insisting that the children of God disobey the church's rules? I call this being two faced! They would never say to their own children that they could disobey the family rules, but, it is just fine for God's children to disobey the church's rules. It is obvious that the PUP committee members have one set of rules for their own families and another set for the church family. I would place this two-faced behavior on about a junior high level. No intelligent, mature Christian would advocate that God's children disobey God's laws. It is a mark of their immaturity that they have not realized their two-faced position. We Presbyterians don't talk much about the Devil, but we should as it is clear that the Devil is influencing our more immature members and causing them to rebel against God's laws. Jude 7 – "just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire. Jude 8 – Yet unlike manner these men in their dreamings defile the flesh, reject authority, and revile the glorious ones. Jude 19 – In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions. It is these who set up divisions, wordly people, devoid of the Spirit. Jude 20 –But you beloved, build yourself up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit; keep yourself in the love of God. Nancy Forsyth Pikeville, Ky. How about using the 'More Light' arguments for 'More Land' churches? May 26, 2006 In regards to the PCUSA groups attacking proposed changes in church property law. I have been very fortunate over the years to be able to learn so much from some groups in the PCUSA as to how to present the "truth" of my position in regards to different subjects. Therefore, I would like to suggest the following: 1) If Jesus would really have wanted us to have church property held in trust for a denomination, he would have said so. Since Jesus never said anything in regards to church property, (in fact, no where in the Bible that I can find), therefore we should not have a property clause. 2) Aren't we really talking about "local option" here any way. Just because it is in the Book of Order, so what? We are only looking for "peace, unity and property." 3) Let us just agree that this is a matter of conscience and that while we appreciate all the reasoning being presented, I would like you all to know that I have a "scruple" with this particular part of the constitution. That means that I can't be held accountable, right? With the above in mind, I am going to start an organization of "More Land" churches. Anyone want to join? Herb Goetz Slippery Rock, Pa. Don't you have more important things to worry about than your faith? May 26, 2006 Don't Presbyterians in Iowa have more important things to worry about? I have spent enough time in the Midwest to know that the small churches that dominate presbyteries like your own are in serious trouble financially as a result of the massive population decline since the '80s farm crisis. At this rate, there will be even fewer people in your state to keep the schools running, much less anyone going to your churches. I am willing to bet many of your churches cannot afford to pay full-time pastors and have declined steadily in membership during the past two decades. I am also willing to bet this has little or nothing to do with denominational politics and more to do with the Iowa "brain drain." Maybe you should stick to doing the work of the Spirit and evangelizing so that you will still have a presbytery in 2020. Boo to you, Prospect Hill. Nick Lincoln Richmond, Va. 'I still belief that each church should own its own property' May 26, 2006 I have to agree to the overture. I was against the issue in the original context back in the early '80s or late '70s, whenever it was. I still believe that each church should own its own property. If the presbytery built the church with its funds that is different. How many old churches were built by the local people before they even joined the Presbyterian denomination? Many! Just look at how many are 150- to 200-year-old buildings. D.M. Jones Kinsman, Ohio Ceding property to the PCUSA wouldn't be in best interest of congregation May 26, 2006 Re: Presbytery wants congregation to cede property authority by changing church's charter I wonder why the Presbytery of Charlotte would make such a request. Does the presbytery value and protect the interests of its constituent congregations? Perhaps not. I think the Harrisburg Presbyterian Church is in an enviable position. I am unable to think of a single reason that the members would want to accede to such a request. It seems to me that, with PCUSA in such an extreme state of apostasy, disarray and perhaps collapse, such a move would not be in the best interests of the Harrisburg congregation. George Hill Port Allen, La. 'To obtain the knowledge of Christ, we must seek it from the Scriptures' May 26, 2006 Re: OGA opposes overture on authority of Scripture I offer this commentary on Christ's words set forth in John 5:39:
Donald G. Nichol God may allow the GA to continue in its misdirection for his own purposes May 26, 2006 John Cowan's letter of 5/24 should be digested carefully by all. While most of us believe "God's will be done," let's not make the mistake of assuming that whatever happens at the GA, it is God's will for us to stay in the boat. God's plan is not always obvious to us, and it may not be revealed for years. God may allow the GA to continue in its misdirection for his own purposes. "Personal courage and personal action" – I am using Mr. Cowan's words here because they are profound. Those who have ears, let them hear! Kay Brooks Irving, Texas Some random musings in response to a couple of recent letters May 26, 2006 I would like to make some random musings in response to a couple of recent letters. First, to Meghan Foote [letter to the editor, posted May 24, 2006]. Your attempt to paint a universalist picture of salvation based on the idea that all authority on heaven and earth are given to Jesus and thus no one can seek salvation outside of heaven and earth is clever, but not quite clever enough. It is true that God has granted all authority to Jesus Christ, but so far as I know, he has not prevented human beings from rejecting Jesus' authority even as they have always rejected his own. In rejecting Jesus' authority, specifically his desire for all people to trust in his own sacrificial death for sin and God's raising him from the dead as the first fruits of salvation, and to be baptized in the triune name of God so that as faithful participants in relationship with God we can be indwelt by the Spirit, transformed and sanctified by the grace of Jesus Christ, and love and obey God, some do seek other means of salvation "in heaven and on earth." If Jesus' authority is exercised regardless of people's attitudes, faith commitments and actions, then Jesus must authorize or even enact all the sins and acts of evil in this world. Would that be something you believe, too, Meghan? Did Jesus intend Hitler and his henchmen to kill in excess of 6 million human beings? Did Jesus authorize Stalin and his henchmen to kill in excess of 30 million human beings? Did Jesus give Mao permission to kill over 70 million human beings? No wonder we should have let old Saddam alone – his number haven't gotten that high yet, and he is doing it under Jesus' authority! Right, Bob Vitray? Bob [letter to the editor, posted May 24, 2006], you make several assertions about The Layman ostensibly supporting the war. I don't know that the editorial position of the publication or the organization ever took such a clear stand – if they did you should document it, if your real goal is truth. Some of the other assertions you make about the president's national guard service and about the swift boat officers who challenge John Kerry's record also lack documentable proof. As Christians, we all should do what we can to prevent war – most notably seeking to make disciples of all nations and peoples. However, as sinners, we must also recognize that evil can grow and that governments and the powers at their disposal (namely military powers) may sometimes have to be used – always with regretable effects as well as salutary ones. Salvation finally does belong to the Lord and specifically to Jesus Christ. Partisan political positions neither improve or negate the partial and equivocal nature of all human actions. Welfare is as flawed as warfare. (Don't mistake me as equating the two – helping ministries are always to be desired over constraining actions, but neither will ultimately save anyone or the world.) Rev. Scott R. Mackey Highland Presbyterian Church Tyler, Texas Left should hold U.S. enemies to the same standards that they hold our soldiers May 26, 2006 With regards Mr. Vitray's letter of May 24, 2006 (Are We Prayerfully Committed to Kill an Iraqi for Christ?): I am not sure what to make of this. The historical facts mentioned in this letter are so bizarrely skewed as to make me wonder if this letter is a parody of the leftist/liberal attitudes toward all things "Bush" or a fine example of irony and/or sarcasm concerning the leftist position on the War on Terror. However, if Mr. Vitray is, indeed, serious (and certainly his standing as veteran gives him greater authority); may I point out just a few little problems here. I am a career military Kind-O-Guy. I am a veteran of each and every action fought since Vietnam all the way through Afghanistan. I missed Panama since I was serving in my first church after seminary prior to returning to active service with Desert Shield/Storm as a Chaplain. I like to say that I started with Vietnam and finished in Afghanistan. I hold the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal, two Meritorious Service Medals, six or eight Army Commendation Medals, and twenty some-odd other thingies for my chest. It still costs me the same to get a cup of coffee now that I am retired; but I think this might give me some status to address Mr. Vitray's letter (assuming this is a serious letter and not a lampoon). First: While Mr. Clinton did some very good things (vis-à-vis the life saving actions in the Balkans), building up the military was not one of them. On his watch (though it began with Bush 41), the military was cut roughly in half based upon the so-called "Peace Dividend." This reduction, of course, took place after the buildup under Mr. Reagan-a buildup that destroyed the Soviet Empire and ended the Cold War but caused so much fear and opposition among our leftist brothers and sisters. (If the American left had its way, the iron curtain would still be there, and we would still be in imminent danger of global thermonuclear war.) Many of his policies (Don't ask-Don't tell, et al) caused a great deal of hostility and antagonism among the troops. I can recall, shortly before deploying for Bosnia-Herzegovina out of Germany, the brigade sergeant major had to remind the soldiers not to make any rude noises and not to turn their backs when Mr. Clinton reviewed the troops. I further recall a young man who proclaimed that he was "gay and proud" "falling" out of a third story barracks window in Germany. (He lived through it.) A very detailed investigation was carried out. But, as is usual in such cases, "Nobody saw nuthin'." Mr. Clinton's lying in a court of law about his adulterous affairs as well as his famous line, "I did not have sex with that woman." became a matter of X-rated humor and sheer derision among our soldiers. All of this and so much more would make the statement, "… the fine army built up under Bill Clinton" a pretty good illustration of the word "ludicrous." As to the Army "cracking:" Some on the left may wish it to happen. But it will not. I have a number of dear friends in country right now. They are not cracking. One, a Major-a Blackhawk driver--is a bit upset that this is becoming a weekday only war. He knows (as do we all who have actually been there and done that) that we need to pursue the enemy with even more aggressiveness, 24/7/365. We also know that, while Uncle Sadaam and his people were not directly linked to 9-11, they were funding and training terrorist organizations all over the world, including organizations that had attacked and would continue to attack Americans, Israelis and many others in the future. We also know that every terrorist we kill there (most now come from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and other places-few are Iraqis) is a terrorist who is entirely too dead to cause trouble elsewhere. As to WMDs (and the long-toothed claim, "Bush lied and people died."): Well just darn. Every single intelligence service in the world believed that those things were/are there. Sadaam's general officers and field commanders thought they were there. Personally, I am not sure that they aren't/weren't. Iraq is a big place. There are lots of places to hide stuff. And, shortly before we moved on Iraq, long convoys were seen via satellite imagery headed from suspected storage sites in Iraq and into Syria. And when we have found small WMD depots, the goal post has been moved by the left. "They are old munitions." or "There aren't that many of them." or some other such balderdash is what we get to hear. And one must wonder, on 26 April 04 (about a year after our invasion) exactly where Al-Qaeda got 20 tons of chemical agents with which to attack the US Embassy, the Jordanian Royal Palace and the Jordanian Intelligence Headquarters. Fortunately, the attack was thwarted. But such an attack, given the correct environmental conditions, could have killed 80,000 people. Twenty tons of chemical material is not something one makes up in the kitchen while watching an old episode of "Designing Women." I don't hear much about that from the "Bush lied and people died" crowd. Nor do we hear much about the dozens of other attacks against the United States by Islamic terrorists (of which Al Qaeda is merely a part). Check the Web site for more information. And we are not amused by those who would convict the Marines who are accused of committing war crimes before they have had a trial. They are going to be courts-martialed so that we can find out if they are, in fact, guilty. If they are, the sentences will be terrible. Gee, I wonder if those who blew up our embassies in Kenya, the WTC in 1993, and other atrocities will be held over for trial. No? Hummmm. Could there be a double standard at play here? I do wish that the left would hold the enemies of the United States to the same standards as they hold our soldiers. Yes. Bad and evil things happen in the heat of battle. Been there. Done that. We do the best we can, but in battle things do get out of control and there are almost always COBs (civilians on the battlefield). That is why they call it "The Fog of War." Unless you have been so scared that you cannot hold your bladder-unless you have tried to comfort a wounded fellow soldier while you yourself are trying to keep from bleeding all over yourself because you picked up a low velocity metal splinter; you do not know what you are talking about. Unless you have dealt with the guilt of having killed one or more of your fellow men in battle or have participated in the horror of seeing your friends literally blown to bits in front of you, you are an arm-chair general and a Monday-morning quarterback. So you are now allowed to be quiet, please. You may sit in the corner and listen politely, however. You might learn something. But your opinion on how to behave in the heat of battle is not required. Smoke 'em if you got 'em. I shudder to think what the result would be if we fought WWII under the same constraints that the American left would attempt to impose upon our men and women. I speak German voluntarily. My daughter speaks pretty good Japanese-voluntarily. I suspect, given the strictures desired by the left, such language skills would be mandatory following our defeat in World War II, and I would have no American Jewish friends with whom to schmooze, tell semi-true stories, and drink beer. You don't win wars by playing nice. (Exit strategy-how about we win for a change!?!) As to Mr. Bush's National Guard service: For the 100th time: Those documents presented as truth by the left-wing media were merely crude forgeries no matter what the moonbats at the Daily Kos say. I know they want them to be true, but truthiness ain't truth and Jon Stewart is not a newsman. (Neither is Rush Limbaugh, but that is for another time.) And, in a time when the Guard and Reserves are an absolute necessity in our victory over terror, criticizing Mr. Bush's proud (and documented) service in the Texas Guard is particularly reprehensible, especially when set up against the also documented fact that Mr. Kerry was never anywhere near the Cambodian border on any given Christmas and never had a single thing to do with Black Ops except maybe by accident. He was a Swiftie, which is good and honorable. He treated his service as a "Ribbon Run" which is shameful. (He wrote up his own awards-something I cannot fathom.) He was also a man who accused an awful lot of good men of crimes against humanity without any proof whatsoever and who aided and abetted our political defeat in Vietnam on the streets of the United States. (This is not to leave out the lamentable political leadership of the time (in both parties) which was the main cause of making that war unwinnable.) As to comparing Mr. Kerry to our Lord: Jesus Christ of Nazareth was not for the salvation of all humankind before he was against it. He was an Israeli Jew, not a wanna-be French-ish pseudo-intellectual whose university grades were even lower than Mr. Bush's. He never nuanced his way to surrender in the face of evil. I truly hope that Mr. Vitray's letter is a parody of the absurd positions of the blame-America-first left. If not: Mr. Vitray, the barbed wire tops of the fences (what fences there are) on our southern border point south in order to keep people out, not to hold them in as is true in China, North Korea, Cuba and so many other Socialist Workers' Paradises. We are not perfect, but we are doing a good job of providing life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to a vast, overwhelming majority of our people. An unjust, homophobic, xenophobic, racist, imperialistic nation would not have a problem with attracting streams of millions of illegals crossing into our country each and every night. The opposite would be true as these victims of American tyranny ran (not walked) to the relative prosperity and freedom of Mexico, Venezuela and Bolivia. And, as to being happy to wage war: That is almost too silly to answer. I know of no soldier, sailor, airman, marine, or coast guardsman who wants war (and I have served with some of the best). I know of no general officer (and I have served with some of the best) who enjoys sending people to their death. War is the unhappy alternative to being conquered by evil men and women who would destroy us by force of arms. If we cannot get that simple truth straight, then we have lost our ability to know right from wrong and good from evil. We are, thus, no longer Christians. And, if anyone is fool enough to think that radical Islam does not intend this very thing for us-the oppression, the murder, the destruction of our way of life, then she needs to do a bit of reading while she is being fitted for a burquah and buying extra eye makeup. Again, I hope this letter is a burlesque of the left. If not, it is a marvelous (albeit surrealistic) distortion of reality. Either way, well done, Mr. Vitray. May you each have a grateful and reflective Memorial Day. And thank God for what our troops have done for us as they fight to make men free. Garet Aldridge Jr. Chaplain, USA (RET) Orange Beach, Ala. COLA arranged GA tours of civil rights sites after receiving requests May 24, 2006 I have been an avid reader and supporter of The Layman for years and I have never felt it necessary to write to you. But after reading the editorial on page 6 of the latest edition, I felt compelled to do so. Whoever wrote this editorial does not have all of their facts straight. I call your attention to the fourth paragraph which talks about the excursions all around Birmingham... Let me point out the inaccuracies: 1. The PCUSA per se, has not scheduled any excursions around Birmingham, COLA (committee on local arrangements) has done that. Especially the Special Events Committee of which I am the co-moderator. When we began planning the cultural and missions tours last summer we were not going to include much about the civil rights struggles in the south. But we received many calls asking us to include them. So we included a trip to the Civil Rights museum and the 16th Street Baptist Church. We added a trip to Selma and to Montgomery. Of the 14 trips only four deal with civil rights. And our reason for putting in the trips is not to highlight the horrors of that era, Alabama style, as you put it. But to let people who have never been to Birmingham see that the city in particular and the state in general have moved light years from those dark days. 2. The tours are not to distract the commissioners from their duty but to give them and more importantly, their spouses an opportunity to do more than sit in a hotel room all day or try to find something to do in Birmingham while their commissioner spouse was at the GA meetings. Also, the tours are open to anyone who wishes to go on them. 3. Two very faithful and dedicated Presbyterian women put the tours together. They are Rita Helton and Jane Wilson. They worked tirelessly under a strict deadline to put these tours together. They received much feedback and suggestions from me and others on COLA. They never complained. I feel you owe these women an apology for disparaging their work. Finally, as a conservative Christian I feel The Layman gives us a black eye because of salacious statements such as the paragraph I mentioned. Rev. Larry Turner, pastor Oakmont Presbyterian Church Hoover, Ala. If AI on per capita passes GA, it will be ruthlessly enforced by Louisville May 24, 2006 If passed by the GA, overtures such as this requiring sessions to make per-capita payments will surely be ruthlessly enforced by the Louisville office (which does not believe it is its job to enforce the constitution). The passage of this new authoritative interpretation, which would need no ratification by the presbyteries, would become church law. That proposed new law will become another reason, in a long list of reasons, to for folks to leave the PCUSA. And it will make their decision to leave much easier. It is clear that Louisville's estimate of PCUSA member exodus in 2006 and 2007 will be conservative! James H. Logan Sr. GA should suspend the divestment process while they study the issue May 24, 2006 I am the director of Interreligious Affairs for the Los Angeles Chapter of the American Jewish Committee. We are quite concerned that the GA next month will adopt the General Assembly Council's resolution to create a special task force to oversee church actions as they relate to divestment. We understand this would effectively table any action until 2008, but we would like to see this issue put to rest this year. Divestment has never been a good strategy for PCUSA if for no other reason than its divisiveness in the pews, but sometimes passionate ideologies drive away common sense. If divestment had any legitimate rationale before, it clearly does not now. Hamas, a clearly bellicose organization openly dedicated to Israel's destruction, has been elected to govern by the Palestinian people. This places the PCUSA in the difficult position of condemning Israel, where all people have basic (albeit imperfect) human rights, while appearing to support one of the most oppressive and hostile governments in the world. While our primary task remains a reversal of divestment, if the Peacemaking Committee puts forward the council resolution discussed above, our best case scenario will be a suspension of the divestment process while the study takes place. We are hoping that our friends at the General Assembly will motion to amend the resolution – either at the committee level or from the floor – to suspend the divestment process while they study the issue. If such an amendment were to carry, it would remove much of the symbolic value of the divestment process. Rabbi John Borak Per capita protests can continue under proposed AI May 24, 2006 Per capita protests would still be possible under the proposed authoritative interpretation. If a session were to transfer all but the officers to the inactive list in December, the annual report would reflect per-capita membership consisting of the combined total of the session, deacons and trustees. In the January meeting, the others members could be restored to the active membership role in time for the annual meeting. The actual membership is small under this plan, but the congregation would be in full compliance with the authoritative interpretation. Just a thought. Rev. Michael Neubert Herrin, Ill. Legalism can never create a sense of unity May 24, 2006 This is nothing less than an act of desperation. Legalism can never create a sense of unity. Of course, in this case, it is not unity that is desired, but money. Rev. Tom Litteer, pastor First Presbyterian Church Sparta, N.J. Humans can't say that their limitations are God's limitations May 24, 2006 Mr. Spitzmiller's [letter to the editor, posted May 22, 2006] quoting of Scripture to prove that Christianity is an exclusive religion: "I am the way the truth and the life, no one can come to the Father except through me," reminds me of something that I've been wondering about for sometime, if we also believe that "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me," what does it mean to say that someone came to the Father other than through Christ? It seems to me that the only way someone could come to the Father outside of Christ would be to also do it outside of heaven and of earth, and I don't understand what that would mean. The question "can someone come to salvation outside of Christ?" is meaningless because there is nothing and no one that exists outside of Christ. I think people may come to salvation in ways that look odd to the human members of the church, but I don't think those human members have the authority to say that their limitations are God's limitations. The human structures of the church are and have always been exclusive, but I don't think it follows directly there from that God is exclusive. God's telos for humanity is that all humanity thrive. Meghan Foote Decatur, Ga. Despite referendums presbyteries ordain whom they please with impunity May 24, 2006 If those who handle the agenda at the coming General Assembly are wise, they will not force the PUP report upon the membership. By selectively enforcing part of the Book of Order and ignoring the rest, the important elements of the PUP report are already in force. Why fuel division when the battle is already won? Thus PUP may fail, but is it a victory? The PCUSA is solidly and irretrievably controlled by liberal theologians. Despite numerous referendums on the ordination question, presbyteries ordain whom they please with impunity. Committees of the General Assembly, which were formed to chart a course through the minefields of modernity, render only sappy love documents devoid of serious Biblical scholarship. The Book of Romans, no favorite of modern theologians, has much to say. In chapter 11 verse 8, Paul sums up some Old Testament observations. "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day." Did Paul foresee modern theology? We rightly call on God to help us and indeed he is in control. But, as it was in ancient times, God's plan is rarely what mortals hope for. We should not expect God to force this General Assembly to reverse 100 years of misdirection. Those who view God's leading as different from that of the PCUSA will have the honor of witnessing their faith with personal courage and personal action. There will be no easy rescue. John Cowan Cartersville, Ga. PCUSA relies on benevolence of the dead because the living are bailing out May 24, 2006 Perhaps, like me, you have heard the "Good News about Mission Worker Funding" through an e-mail from Marian McClure and John Detterick. A large bequest has temporarily plugged the hole in the dyke, leaving the level of funding needed to maintain the 15 mission personnel positions that would have been eliminated (but not by natural attrition) solidly in place for the next two years. There may even be enough surplus to replace some of the 40 natural attrition losses. Hooray for endowments? I have served in two local congregations that had the benefit of modest endowments. Neither of these fellowships could have afforded full time pastoral services without the income generated by the thoughtful bequests of those long dead. Like these 15 Presbyterian Church (USA) mission personnel, I know that my livelihood has depended upon those who chose to keep giving to the church beyond their own lifetime. However, my gratitude toward the generosity that out lived them is tempered by the observation that many of the living – who remain to keep placing an offering in the plate each week or month or quarter or year – appear to suffer a strange malady. They exhibit a chronic, almost irrational fear of organizational poverty coupled with a tight-fisted grip on their personal purse strings. If stated forthrightly (which it never is), the ill-feeling that grips them could be summed up by saying, "Our church is too poor to support any new venture in ministry or mission, yet too rich to expect my financial pledge to increase." The prognosis is grave. Protecting the endowment becomes a primary objective. Paltry personal stewardship becomes an ingrained habit. Preserving a shrinking status quo becomes an obsession. Dead church walking! People make bequests to serve the life of the church beyond their own death and the church memorializes their contribution by dying to serve that endowment. Two cheers! The dead have bailed us out! The dead have bailed us out! Ding-dong the church is dead! Which old church? The dead folks church! Ding-dong the church endowed is dead! Bought and paid for from the grave and destined to be buried there. Jesus' advice to one wealthy young man was that he should get rid of it, "Sell all you have and give the proceeds to the poor; then (in your poverty), come follow me" (Matthew 19:21 and parallels). When we can depend on dear Uncle Harold or sweet Aunt Hattie to leave us a small fortune after he or she kicks-the-bucket, there is little reason to rely on God. Again, Jesus says, "Leave the dead to bury their own dead, but you go and preach the kingdom of God" (Luke 9:60). We are called to claim our security and sufficiency in the eternal promise of the Lord Jesus Christ, rather than in an earthly bequest from the dearly departed. Listen again to Jesus, "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money" (Matthew 6:24). Someone will argue, "The PCUSA is not serving to store up this latest bequest, we are investing it to pay the salaries of 15 front line mission workers. We are advancing the work of God." My first response is to again quote Jesus: "The work of God is that you believe in him whom he has sent" (John 6:26). My second response is to note that the PCUSA is forced to rely on the benevolence of the dead for a bail-out precisely because the living are bailing out. I see nothing on the horizon that will change this trend. We keep cashing in the church of Jesus Christ for a mausoleum festooned with memorial plaques; then, we keep mourning when no one wants to join us for fellowship in our shining sepulcher filled with dead people's bones (Matthew 23:27). Jim Henkel, NWI endorsing church pastor North Benton Presbyterian Church North Benton, Ohio Eastminster Presbytery Are we prayerfully committed to 'kill an Iraqi for Christ?' May 24, 2006 Maybe you don't support the war, but I would need to be convinced after seeing one issue where you turned your pages over to a General and a Colonel (who serves as a publicist, but who makes much more of the fact that he is an Episcopal bishop.) How is this a conservative Christian position? Are we prayerfully committed to "kill an Iraqi for Christ?" Saddam Hussein was a terrible person, but he was never a threat to us and now the fine army that was built up under Bill Clinton (don't forget the minimum two year delay between allocation and expenditure, not to mention training and acquisition time) is strained to the breaking point. The cracks are already beginning to show as evidenced by the recent reports of an atrocity committed by U.S. Marines. As a veteran I am aware that this sort of thing happens in any war, but it provides another reason (as if we needed one) why we should not go to war unless it is absolutely necessary. In the latest issue one of your writers goes out of his way to mention the manufactured evidence about President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. Not one word about the fact that he managed to skate around the points requirements for completion of service. Nothing about how he conveniently dodged drug testing. If you want to give an example of falsification of, or post facto revision of service records why not talk about what the "swift boat veterans for truth" did to John Kerry. Kerry served as honorably as was possible in a "twilight war," and was demonstrably aware of the difficulties and challenges inherent in making the commitment necessary to go to war. Of course, he committed the greatest sin of all in America today. He spoke the truth even though it was unpopular. Does that remind you of someone you may have heard about in the gospels? Would Jesus be so eager to wreak death and destruction as you apparently are? I disagree. Bob Vitray John Knox Presbytery set an example that other presbyteries may need to follow May 22, 2006 What a refreshing, uplifting and encouraging report. (Iowa congregation leaves PCUSA with its property). Both John Knox Presbytery and Third Presbyterian Church in Dubuque are to be commended for how graciously they dealt with this difficult situation. Years ago, the church I pastored voted to withdraw from the Presbyterian Church (USA) under the provisions of Article 13 in the plan of reunion. The congregation voted to unite with another Presbyterian denomination. There was only one vote not to withdraw. My decision was to remain with the congregation that had called me to be their pastor. Before the presbytery would transfer my membership, I had to appear before a committee of presbytery for an "exit interview." The "interview" turned out to be more of an "inquisition." One minister said angrily, "If you leave the Presbyterian Church (USA) you will never be allowed back in! Do you understand me?" (I'm still not certain whether he meant that as a threat or a promise). Some members of the committee wanted to bring charges against me and bring me to trial. In the end, however, cooler heads and warmer hearts prevailed, and I was dismissed along with the congregation. For the church and for me as their pastor, it was a painful but necessary action to take. Yes, how refreshing to hear of the gracious actions of John Knox Presbytery under very difficult circumstances. They have set an example that other presbyteries may soon need to follow "... to further the mission of Jesus Christ ...," which is far greater than any congregation or denomination. R.C. Oates Faith Presbyterian Church (PCA) Brookhaven, MS Praying that other presbyteries will follow such a fine example of Christian spirit May 22, 2006 My hats off to both John Knox Presbytery and the Third PC at Dubuque! Your actions truly define the character we so lack in our churches these days when everything is about property and not what is of the essence, i.e., glory to God. I pray that the rest of the presbyteries in the PCUSA will follow such fine example of Christian spirit and maturity and let congregations leave should they choose to disaffiliate for whatever the reason. I also pray that each congregation will have the courage to follow their collective conscience and take necessary actions that reflect their faith and integrity, even if it means to disaffiliate. Our founding fathers came to America for the religious freedom and right to property. I wish we give heed to how we became such a great nation under God. God bless you, John Knox and the Third. Rev. Peter B. Min Torrance, Calif. Printing the views of those who defy Scripture gives creditability to the movement May 22, 2006 I have continued to receive The Layman following the death of my mother eight years ago (who resided with my family). Each issue, while purporting to enlighten the readership appears more to move the minds of the membership way from Biblical foundations. Simply printing the utterances of those who would defy the very clear Scripture that prohibits homosexual activities gives creditability to that movement. Bishop Tutu's recent statements in the current issue regarding the "oneness" of God's people is also contrary to God's word. Christianity, like virtually all the major religions of the world is "exclusive" – "I am the way the truth and the life, no one can come to the Father except through me." The Layman's continued support and publishing of these heretical views leaves me no alternative but to request that the name of Mrs. Helen Spitzmiller be removed from your subscription list. Ted Spitzmiller Rio Rancho, N.M. 'What is Jesus teaching in Matthew 5-7 but correct doctrine?' May 22, 2006 I recently commented about the PUP report and some recent letters to The Layman containing lots of "God-talk" and relevant-sounding Scripture passages plucked cleanly out of context. I confess I was thinking about Ritchie Jones' letters. His latest provides some fine examples as he contends that Jesus wasn't interested in doctrinal purity, claiming that "Jesus never said anything about doctrine." What is Jesus teaching in Matthew 5-7 but correct doctrine? Perhaps Jones didn't get past 5:9 with its blessing on peacemakers. He is correct when he says that Jesus prayed "eloquently in favor of unity." But what sort of unity? In John 14-17, Jesus gave his disciples a very moving image of Christian unity based on obedience, the Holy Spirit, and God's word, praying "Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth." (John 17:17) Jesus did not pray for (and lay down his life for) a doctrine-free, superficial unity of merely getting along and playing nice together. Jesus' teaching in these four chapters provides a rich doctrinal tapestry, touching on such matters as the Trinity, the person and work of the Holy Spirit, obedience, the believers' relationship with the world, and many others. I have to wonder if Jones read the preceding 20 verses before he seized on Mark 7:21 to support his claim that "real purity is measured by the things we do." If he had, he might have noticed that in verse 9, Jesus very succinctly described his problem with the Pharisees: "And he said to them: 'You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!'" They had allowed traditional behaviors to trump the doctrinal purity of the Law. In direct contrast to Jesus' words, Jones comes down on the side of the Pharisees. Jesus called people who focus on outward purity "whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean." (Matthew 23:27) Correct doctrine teaches us that the content of our hearts matters greatly to God: "Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me" (Psalm 51:10); "Search me, O God, and know my heart; test me and know my anxious thoughts" (Psalm 139:23); "The Lord says: 'These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men" (Isaiah 29:13); "'This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,' declares the LORD. 'I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people'" (Jeremiah (31:33) "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God" (Matthew 5:8). There are dozens of other examples of the value God places on a pure heart. Correct doctrine (including Mark 7:21) teaches us that the things we do are the outward manifestation of what is in our hearts. It is the content of our hearts that leads us to act in sinful or righteousness ways. If the content of the heart is the Holy Spirit (the law written on our hearts) – convicting us, teaching us, and urging us toward spiritual purity – we exhibit the fruit of the Spirit described in Galatians 5:22-23. If the content of the heart is only carnality and the traditions of men (or modern culture), we exhibit the behaviors Jesus listed: "evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly," which Paul described in Galatians 5:19-21 as the fruit of the sinful nature. In the end, Jones seems to suggest that Jesus desired his followers to live in peaceful unity with "evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly." That way is pretty consistent with the PUP report and is free of doctrine. Unfortunately, it contradicts the doctrinal purity of the true Gospel that first condemns and then empowers the believer to overcome such behaviors. Steve Jones, elder Kokomo, Ind. How do we preserve valuable information and make it available into the future? May 22, 2006 To those considering relocation of the historical collection now at Montreat Conference Center: I am a Ph.D. student working on Middle Tennessee from early settlement (ca. 1795) to ca. 1870. A number of the early settler Scots-Irish families on whom I need information were members of early Presbyterian congregations in Middle Tennessee. I will need to examine all the Presbyterian church records I can find relative to Middle Tennessee for the period in which I'm working. Some of them are archived at Montreat. Trying to determine online what sources might be held at the Montreat Historical Center, I found the article re consideration under way to close the center and relocate archived materials, possibly to two repositories. Please do not do that. If the Montreat Historical Center is closed, be sure to create an infallible reference trail and catalog of what's where and how to find it. Secondary sources that I'm now using refer to original records housed at Montreat. Without a trail, serious researchers will not be able to locate referenced sources for future work, and will be unable to verify earlier work. Often in relocation of archived materials sources are discarded or "lost." It is alarming that this is now a possibility for Presbyterian Church records archived at Montreat. Records now held at Montreat are/will be essential to researchers, and it is impossible to know now what records future scholars will value. Splitting collections of records will decrease their value, complicate the work of scholars, and probably destroy extant information. The online article raises another problem inherent in archival relocation. Logistics of relocation, cataloging, storage make records inaccessible to researchers for long periods. Records relocated from Montreat to Pennsylvania and/or Georgia archives will not be primary interests of those repositories. They may be unavailable for research indefinitely. Consideration should not be "how do we with least cost and least trouble store this stuff from the past." The question for the decision makers should be "how do we best preserve valuable information in unique records and make them available into the future." I urge you not to relocate the historical materials now at Montreat unless preservation of extant sources and researchers' ongoing access can be ensured. And I urge you not to split the collection or discard materials which may hold future research value. Jane Townes Shelbyville, Tenn. 'Too bad you're still spreading your distrust and hatred' May 22, 2006 I have not received a copy of The Layman for more than 8 years. Therefore, I was extremely disappointed when I received your latest edition (Vol. 39, No.2/April 2006) because I thought you had ceased to exist. Too bad you're still spreading your distrust and hatred. Rev. George L. McLaird Mill Valley, Calif. Jones misses Christ's consistent defense of the 'doctrine' May 22, 2006 According to Ritchie Jones (Sprinkling The Layman just a little with the Gospel; May 17), "… [a] shockingly unscriptural claim … needs to be challenged ("Jesus taught purity (correct doctrine) trumps both peace and unity." Dr. Paul A. Tambrino; May 15). Mr. Jones is caught in the sometimes muddy puddle which mixes the written law of God as revealed in the Old Testament with the record of the oral traditions of the teachers of the law since the days of Moses. Christ does consistently point out (condemn) the "questionable" additives the teaching of the oral traditions had mixed into the culture of his day. But Mr. Jones, by failing to discern the difference between the oral traditions and the law, misses Christ's consistent defense of the "doctrine" (the written law) upon which his coming was based. By missing this distinction, Mr. Jones throws open all kinds of doors to relativistic truth. So, just a short summary of some of the statements and commentaries on the law (doctrine) which Jesus and the apostle Paul provided follows. Find more, everyone, for yourself and see the very important distinction which must be made between the written law of God which will not be abolished "until heaven and earth pass away" and the fallible oral traditions of Israel's (and today's) religious leaders. First a couple of definitions: doctrine noun. (Dictionary.com) 1. A principle or body of principles presented for acceptance or belief, as by a religious, political, scientific, or philosophic group; dogma*. 2. A rule or principle of law, especially when established by precedent. *dogma noun (same resource) [[in spite of a popular misconception over the primary definition of this word – GL]] 1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church. 2. An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at "doctrine." Jesus' opinions on the doctrine (the Law) of his day (all references from the English Standard Version): Matt 5:17,18: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Luke 24:44: "Then he said to them, 'These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.'" John 15:24,25: "If I had not done among them the works that no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin, but now they have seen and hated both me and my Father. But the word that is written in their Law must be fulfilled: 'They hated me without a cause.'" Luke 16:16,17: "The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone forces his way into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void." And a few comments on the inter-relationship of Jesus and the Law by the apostle Paul. Acts 24:14,15: "But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the law and written in the Prophets, having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust. Rom 2:22-24: "You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. For, as it is written, 'The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.'" Rom 3:28-31: "For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one. He will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." Rom 7:25: Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin." I Cor 15:56,57: "The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." Gal 2:16,17: " … yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not!" Thank you, Father, that through your Holy Spirit and your obedient Son, we, who obey you and your Word, understand the Law has been fulfilled for us through your Son's complete obedience to your mission for his earthly presence. Keep us close to you and your law through the power we need to fulfill the responsibilities of your children as shown to us through your law, your Spirit and your Son. Greg Leaman Sheboygan County, Wisc. Presbyters use 'code' to deny ministers entrance into a presbytery May 22, 2006 As people around the world are debating the "truth" of the newly-released The DaVinci Code, we Presbyterians should be made aware of the "code" that is being used and misused by some of our presbyters. Their "code" is one of silence, and it is often used to deny ministers entrance into a presbytery. In other words some of our presbyters have taken it upon themselves to ruin the lives of ministers whom they do not want within their presbyteries. This is totally unethical and persons in the pews need to know the truth about what is going on within our denomination. If presbyters have this much power and influence, what else might they be determining? General Assembly commissioners? Members of the Committees on Ministry? Inquirers? Candidates? There is no end, and this must be stopped. I sincerely hope that The Layman will investigate and bring this travesty to light. It is only by the grace of God that the presbyters themselves have not received the silent treatment. It seems that we have our own "Opus Dei" which not only uses a secretive practice but also has its own secretive website. Why? Rev. Richard Wilson Pleased with solution to differences between church and presbytery May 19, 2006 As a former pastor of Third Presbyterian Church of Dubuque, Iowa, I am pleased to see that the church and presbytery were able to mutually work for a solution to the differences in the two bodies. Though I had a good relationship with the presbytery while I served at Third Church, there was always a tension between the direction that the denomination and presbytery were going and the position held by the majority of members of Third Church. My prayers will be with them as they seek to find their place with the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. Walter Hamer, pastor First Presbyterian Church Monett, MO Can't Layman respect Tutu for his generous, embracing, inclusive worldview? May 19, 2006 Having received your newspaper gratis for over a decade (I have no idea why!) I am led to offer commentary. The April, 2006 issue placed Desmond Tutu on its cover page, raising my hopes for content of a more loving nature within. Alas, the good Bishop was badly used as a "draw." Your traditional mean-spirited slant on the decline and fall of the PCUSA violates the very witness Tutu advocates. Surely your editorial board can find some shred of respect for his generous, embracing, inclusive worldview! I am pleased that no more free issues will be sent to me. Praying for your sins has been a tedious and totally useless effort. Shame on you! Rev.Dr. Joan Vassar-Williams Ward Pinehurst, N.C. 'Scruple' with those who turn truth into diatribe for own agenda May 19, 2006 In patience, our eyes are opened to truth. I have a "scruple" with those who profess the truth by invoking what turns out to be their own diatribe for their own personal agenda. Dawson Watkins Is it God and not another who has called you to scatter the flock? May 19, 2006 Your "Clipped Comments" column has a More Light Presbyterian saying, "The time is right now for disciples of Jesus Christ to stand up for those denied full participation in our church – lesbian, gay, bisexual and trangender sisters and brothers who God has called to ministry." Are you sure it is God and not another who has called you to scatter the flock? This MLP also says, "Our Scriptures and our prophets teach us that our dream of community requires an equal place at the table for all of God' s children." Along with the lesbians and gays would this all also logically include pedophiles? I hope not. Rev. Arthur H. Johnstone Jr. Clarkston, Wash. Da Vinci Code reads like the minutes of the General Assembly May 19, 2006 I write just before The Da Vinci Code is released as a major motion picture. Dan Brown's best selling novel has passed the $40 million mark in sales and now appears in 40 different languages. The broad appeal of this piece of fiction is readily apparent: It is a fast-paced murder mystery that laces its plot with conspiracy theory, sexual innuendo and ancient fertility rites; all set against a modern European backdrop of intellectual elitism and renaissance art. Within this carefully crafted context, Brown champions the womanist cause and the homosexual agenda, idealizes the sacred feminine, promotes goddess worship, capitalizes on the enduring myth of the Holy Grail, presents history as fabrication, ridicules the Judeo-Christian tradition, denounces the Bible, demonizes the Roman Catholic Church and denies the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth and his resurrection. With the exception of the murders, the European backdrop, the disrespecting of Catholicism, and the references to the Holy Grail, it reads like the minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA). The price of admission for those who choose to partake of Dan Brown's fanciful concoction is drinking down this huge, choke-a-horse sized dose of false teaching. "True believers" will suffer little effect beyond a nasty aftertaste (if one is a Christian) or a self-satisfied, warming glow (if one is a secularist, modernist, occultist, New Age practitioner, conspiracy theory junkie, or devotee of any number of other -ists and -isms – including progressive Presbyterianism). Brown's work will change few hearts or minds among "the faithful." Nominal believers and non-believers are in greater danger from Brown's fictional brew. Many will surface from an immersion in his stirring tale with their heads swimming in doubt. Some will just shake it off. Some will turn their backs on religion in general and Christianity in particular. A small few may be swept into exploring the intoxicating, exotic nuances of nature religions. Others will get up from their reading chairs or theater seats with a heart full of questions seeking answers: Was Jesus simply human? Was he married to Mary Magdalene? Did they have a child? Does Jesus only live on in some obscure, reputedly royal line birthed by his daughter? Does he otherwise remain dead and buried? Which is the stuff of legend, Dan Brown's version of the truth or what the Bible says? What does the Bible say? The Bible says Mary Magdalene was a person who found her healing and hope in Jesus then never looked back. She became a fixture in the company of his disciples (Luke 8:2). With other women from that company she stood by as he was crucified (Mark 15:40), observed where he was buried (Mark 15:47), brought spices to anoint his dead body (Mark 16:1) and discovered his empty tomb (Mark 16:4-5). The Bible reports just one brief encounter where Mary Magdalene was alone with Jesus: when she became the first witness to behold him in his resurrection glory (John 20:11-18). Dan Brown says that glory doesn't exist. Dan Brown says that Jesus Christ was crucified, dead and buried – period. According to his fantastic fable, a very pregnant and grief stricken Mary Magdalene fled to France after Rome robbed her of her life partner. As the Holy Grail that held the blood of Christ in her womb, she gave birth to a daughter and lived out the days of her widowhood admiring the hints of Jesus' visage that were mirrored in the face and manner of their child. Brown writes pure fiction. Brown himself admits that the cultural context of first century Judaism virtually demanded that Jewish men marry (The Da Vinci Code, Anchor Books Mass Market Edition, p. 265). It was something of an embarrassment that Jesus remained single and the canonical gospels stay discretely silent on this point. Had he been married, there would be no reason to keep quite about the fact. Jesus was fully human; marriage only would have served to prove that truth. It would not have corrupted his sinless nature to be married, for there is no sin in marital union. Why not shout it from the rooftops that Jesus was wed? Because he was not. According to Brown's inventive narrative, upon the death of Mary Magdalene her earthly remains eventually came under the guardianship of the Priory of Sion; a sibylline society charged to protect the supposed secrets that are buried with her. He then invites his readers and viewers to join him on "the journey to pray at the feet of the outcast one, the lost sacred feminine" (The Da Vinci Code, Anchor Books Mass Market Edition, pp. 277, 489). The final destination in this quest is to kneel "at the bones of Mary Magdalene" (Ibid). Brown holds out a grave full of a dead woman's bones. The Bible holds out the promise of the empty tomb and the resurrection power of the Lord Jesus Christ: "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?" (John 11:25-26). I certainly do. Pray that the release of the film version of Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code will open opportunities for faithful Christians to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. This may not be the novelist's or the film makers' intent, but God has a way of taking even evil intentions and turning them for good (Genesis 50:20). "Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen" (Ephesians 3:20-21). Jim Henkel, NWI endorsing church pastor North Benton Presbyterian Church North Benton, Ohio Eastminster Presbytery 'Louisville Lobbyists' outnumber the commissioners May 19, 2006 Just a thought: A comparison of the number of voting commissioners to GA compared with the number of PCUSA national leaders and staff is interesting. For example, the "Louisville Lobbyists" outnumber the commissioners (the ratio is 1.4 lobbyists to "squire" each commissioner (if my math is correct). Also the about 500 lobbying for the Louisville agenda is equal to more than 2-1/3 average-sized Presbyterian (USA) churches (average membership of 214) The computations are based on Table 1 PCUSA Congregations and Membership – 1994-2004, which is available on the national church website. Oh Yes, "we" want you to vote your conscience! Art Montgomery El Montecito Presbyterian Church Pray for evangelical groups to present a united front against the heresy May 19, 2006 It's my prayer that the various evangelical groups within the PCUSA will come together to present a united front against the heresy prevalent in our sick and dying denomination! Jane Neal Director of Youth and Family Life Ministries First Presbyterian Church Marion, N.C. Truth is far more important than unity – especially a false unity May 17, 2006 Regarding the PUP report We need to keep in mind that "unity" is mentioned only three times in Scripture but "truth" is mentioned 235 times! It seems that truth is far more important than unity – especially a false unity. "Unity in the faith" is mentioned in Ephesians 4:13 but it is tied to knowledge of the Son of God and becoming mature in our faith – attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Verse 14 goes on to say "then we will no longer be infants tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming." Let's not be tossed around by the deceitful scheming of some and blown here and there by PUP. Let us stand for the truth given us in God's Word, the Bible! Rev. Daniel Patterson Chenoa, Ill. Washington Office sees the Bible as little more than a source of catchy phrases May 17, 2006 The posting by the Washington Office on the Witherspoon Society web site provides a revealing glimpse of our leaders' view of Scripture. The letter says "We will be doing a 'New Thing' Isaiah 43:19." I doubt even the Washington Office has enough hubris to believe that lobbying for liberal causes is the equivalent of God's mercy shown to Israel. So what does this trivialization of Isaiah reveal? It tells me that these people see the Bible as little more than a source of catchy phrases. High school students often approach Shakespeare the same way – and with the same reverence – when they need a dash of class to dress up an otherwise dull essay. Context, meaning, and intent are secondary to the cosmetic effect. I found myself reaching the same conclusion as I read the PUP report (not to mention some recent letters to The Layman). The report contains lots of "God-talk" and relevant-sounding passages plucked cleanly out of context, but offers little Biblical substance. Perhaps this is not surprising since the authors found clear and unambiguous sections of the Bible to be too "diverse, subtle and complex" to understand. With their reliance on carefully selected outside resources, it is as if the task force searched Paul (or Tom, Dick or Harry) every day to see if what the Scriptures said was true. Whether looking for a nicely turned phrase or hoping for some shred of evidence to support a culturally-derived principle, this approach to the Bible will yield many words but few insights. Steve Jones, elder Kokomo Ind. The 'rudder' of the evangelicals cannot turn the 'ship' of the PCUSA around May 17, 2006 Maritime historians tell us that the reason the Titanic sank in 1912 was because of a flaw in its design: the rudder was too small. When the fatal iceberg was spotted, frantic attempts to steer the ship away from danger failed because the rudder wasn't big enough to sufficiently turn the ship in time. I see an analogy between the rudder of the Titanic and the evangelical wing of the PCUSA. Many congregations have stayed in, thinking that someday, somehow, they will turn the denomination around. At your last GA, the evangelical candidate for moderator got 35 percent of the vote. Evangelicals control few presbyteries. The "rudder" of the evangelicals cannot turn the "ship" of the PCUSA around. It's now simply a matter of math; the numbers don't add up. The eventual demise of your denomination is pretty much a given now – though they may delay things a bit if they merge with the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. The decline of the PCUSA is part of a bigger trend. Evangelicals have an infallible Bible. Roman Catholicism has an infallible pope. Eastern Orthodoxy has an infallible order of worship. Mainline Protestantism offers nothing that is infallible, and is therefore collapsing, infallibly. I have an interest in seeing the PCUSA in its present form dissolve, even though I'm in the EPC. Whenever a non-Presbyterian learns that I'm a Presbyterian, they automatically assume that I'm PCUSA and that I'm pro-choice, pro-gay and anti-Israel. Attempts to explain that there are alternative worldviews within Presbyterianism are usually met with blank, uncomprehending facial expressions. People looking for an evangelical church may keep going when they see the PCUSA logo on the sign out front. I strongly feel that the time has come for PCUSA evangelicals to make their exit, with or without their property. Rev. Dr. Larry Brown African Bible College Lilongwe, Malawi Sprinkling The Layman just a little with the Gospel May 17, 2006 In Dr. Tambrino's response [letter to the editor, posted May 15, 2006] to my so-called "diatribe" against Parker Williamson, he states his belief that "Jesus taught purity (correct doctrine) trumps both peace and unity." That is a shockingly unscriptural claim that needs to be challenged. The Scriptures say that Jesus went out of his way to override Biblical purity laws. He taught in Mark 7:21 that real purity is measured by the things we do. He ate with his hands dirty in the homes of outcasts, he touched lepers, he let himself be touched by unclean women, and he did not subject himself to the required purification rites after he did. He showed by example the good news that when we are in Christ, those whom we touch become pure also, not the other way around. While Jesus never said anything about doctrine, he blessed the peacemakers and he prayed eloquently in favor of unity. Yet, Dr. Tambrino suggests that these teachings are less important than something Jesus never taught and that Matt. 10:34 is permission for disciple to wage war against disciple. Wrong! What the Scriptures do say about doctrine is that it must agree with the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. Anyone who advocates differently is "conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain." (1 Timothy 6:3-5 NAS) The sad thing about Parker Williamson is that even if he succeeds in his life's ambition of taking down the PCUSA, his victory will be hollow. There is no Gospel in it. My only purpose in writing to The Layman is to sprinkle it just a little with the Gospel. Ritchie Jones Los Angeles, Calif. Ordination question expects acceptance of the confessions in their entirety May 17, 2006 The attempts of Santa Barbara and San Diego presbyteries to list the "essential tenets" of the Reformed faith fail. The reason is a failure to read what the ordination question asks: "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...?" The essential tenets, then, are those which are expressed in the confessions. The first ordination question is about Jesus Christ, the second is about Scripture, and the third is about the confessions. The question does not intend the candidate or the presbytery to select from the confessions a subjectively chosen list, but rather expects acceptance of the confessions as they stand in their entirety. Of course one could pick from one of the confessions a statement that seems doubtful or antiquated, as if this called into question the validity of the confessions, but one could also do the same with Scripture. What is important is the inspired vision of the content of the confessions, Jesus Christ the Savior and Lord, and to be guided to see him in the Scriptures – also in their entirety. Rev. Ernest Williams, stated supply First Presbyterian Church Falfurrias, Texas |
|
| May
2006 letters, page 2 Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links |