January 2008 letters Archives of letters to the editor

Schism appears quite inevitable January 31, 2008 Regarding the article, "'Fidelity/chastity' ordination standard not an essential of Reformed faith and polity, commissioners decide," I'm stupefied beyond words. Just when I thought the machinations of the so-called PCUSA leadership could not possibly be more patently disingenuous, I'm "faked out" again. How dare they endeavor to intentionally take Scripture and church precedent out of context. And for what, cosmopolitan correctness? How dare they compare their "struggle for equality" to Blacks, Latinos and other minorities who sustained inequities that were neither the result of flaunting of personal choice or, for that matter, biochemical anomaly. Which motif of justification are they flagging this week anyway? There is a huge difference between laying sin at the Cross and making sin into the shape of the Cross, and these neo-Guevarists are devilishly cunning and masterful in the art of prestidigitation. Who would have thought Nikita Khrushchev had covert jihad in mind when he banged his shoe while yelling at President Eisenhower, "We will bury you!" Looks as if American political, commercial, diplomatic and militaristic superiority won the Cold War at the expense of the Biblically based, evangelical Calvinism through which and for which God foreordained us in the first place. Are they not aware that God will not be mocked? What about the message this kind of circus would send to the young people? Have they not read Mark 9:42? Whoops! Sorry, I forgot ... Scripture and confessional references? Not "politically correct." I recently read the current rate of the decline of the Presbyterian Church (USA) now stands at about 13 members per hour. At that clip, there will be 113,880 fewer PCUSA communicants next year this time - and, yet, they claim to champion inclusiveness? God help us. Eric Wells Boardman, Ohio 'It really comes down to Biblical authority' January 31, 2008 We all love this church and hate to see what is happening. It really comes down to Biblical authority, the lack of regard for it, and where that will lead. Many of us have a long history in this church, or are on staff with an evangelical congregation and will only leave as a last resort. That is why I came up with my amendments to the Presbyterian Church (USA) constitution and why Beaver-Butler Presbytery came up with theirs. Many are reluctant to leave, and this offers a solution by gathering the evangelical PCUSA churches into their own constitutionally created structures within the PCUSA. If we are to do this, we need to do this while we still have enough votes to do it. The deadline for overtures is in February. It is a time for sober thinking and much prayer. John Almquist A reply regarding article by James Berkley January 31, 2008 Face-to-face, I have already said to Mr. Berkley that his utterances border on slander, if not libel. Nevertheless, I have a dream that one day we followers of Jesus may wake up and realize that we are all on the same team with the same Captain! Then it may happen that we will stop throwing mud and accusing one another of unfaithfulness and truly begin to work together, going the same direction following the same Leader! In the meantime, I'm going to spend more time watching the Sports Channel where there is much less violence and anger expressed than between brothers and sisters in the faith. Jack Terry honorably retired elected member Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy A reply regarding the Western North Carolina Presbytery story January 31, 2008 What a misleading title to this article. It is a shame that we have to have a legal line item in the first place, but not all the money approved is pointed to Montreat. As you pointed out, the Marion church has already filed a suit that we must respond to as a presbytery. Unfortunately, others may do the same. As for Montreat EPC, it is the sincere hope of many of my colleagues in ministry that we can come to an understanding without legal actions. As it is, I believe that mediation must be sought before any "suing" will ever take place. Since the two committees cannot come to an agreement, maybe the two lawyers will be able to without having to go through a court battle. It's too bad that we were forced to take the action (setting up a legal fund) that Montreat undertook last year … before they petitioned to join the EPC. With all due respect to Dr. Williamson, we are already in a vortex. Things are being spun out of control and headlines like this do not help matters. The presbytery budget is not just a "mission" budget, but also includes administrative costs and, believe me, this is one administrative cost that none of us look forward to utilizing. I would hope that The Layman Online would not mislead with a headline, even though I do give you props for presenting both sides of the debate. It is still my hope that both Montreat churches can work out a compromise on this issue and be a shining light for working together, something that the Montreat EPC church said they would seek to do at the April presbytery meeting last year. I do believe that all believers can live in peace and work together and then no legal defense funds will be needed. May that day come soon. Edyth P. Pruitt Lenoir, N.C. Editor's Note: The Layman Online, as in the case of Ms. Pruitt, welcomes letters from its readers commenting on the issues of the day. In regard to her criticism, The Layman Online stands by the story regarding the action of the Presbytery of Western North Carolina and the headline on that story A reply regarding the Twin Cities action: Duh ... really? January 30, 2008 A few thoughts regarding some of the letters [Letters, January 29, 2008] reacting to the apostasy of Twin Cities: Eric Wells: I would say some congregations rather than many, Eric. Why, you might ask? Because the overwhelming majority of leaders in this denomination – especially corporate apologist clergy – are intentionally keeping this information from their congregations. They will not "rock the boat" and risk offending their pension-plan managers. It is much safer to keep the member in the pew ignorant of the failures of leadership. The tortured and twisted rationale of the Twin Cities committee on ministry is beyond the pale and entirely outside of traditional Reformed faith and practice. David Lenz: God bless you for trying. However, any of us who were awake and paying attention during the Re-Imaging fiasco are unsurprised by this behavior. After all, the Twin Cities is the ideological Mecca of those heretics. More to the point, David, is that you now must gather like-minded faithful leaders who understand the marks of the true church to act. File a remedial action against the presbytery immediately. Please do not allow this to stand. Ken Tazelaar: What can be done, Ken? Initiate a remedial case. A remedial case is initiated by the filing of a complaint with the stated clerk of the governing body having jurisdiction. A complaint is a written statement alleging an irregularity in a particular decision or action, or alleging a delinquency. E.E. Jones: I, too, wonder about the alleged evangelical members of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity. In fact, I have publicly challenged several of them to comment on this obvious disconnect with the assurances we were all given in the headlong rush to change, by fiat, the polity of the church. None of them has had the temerity to so comment. Now, I wonder if that is because what is going on now was their intent in the first place. I suppose another possible explanation for their silence is simple shame. Bill Crawford: As always Bill, I appreciate your faithful witness while I disagree with your position viz. remaining and going. However, in this case I would defer to Bob Kopp's Animal House analogy (Face it Flounder ...). The disconnect between the membership of this denomination and its elected leadership is staggering. More problematic is the reality that a majority of particular churches are de facto Congregationalists and/or led by pastors without the courage to confront and name the sin before us. The next step will be the San Francisco approval of Lisa Larges. And again, many of us will be left with all of the same questions. Here is a new question I haven't heard asked. If, in fact, Dr. Capetz is already engaged in a teaching ministry under the auspices of the United Church of Christ, then why doesn't he just take his ideological issues there where they are welcomed and celebrated, and leave the Presbyterian Church (USA) alone? Just wondering. Rev. Jim Yearsley Tampa, Fla. An appeal to my presbytery, the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area January 30, 2008 On Saturday, Professor Paul Capetz asserted that affirming "chastity in singleness" (Book of Order G-6.0106b) was tantamount to taking a vow of celibacy. This assertion at its heart calls into question the words of the Angel Gabriel, "with God nothing will be impossible" (Luke 1:37, RSV). As Jesus reiterated, "with men it is impossible, but with God all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26). And yet, in restoring Professor Capetz as a minister member in the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area, we say to the church and the world that there is at least one thing that is impossible with God; namely, redemption for men who desire men and women who desire women (see Romans 1:26-27). That "homosexual orientation" is unchangeable goes largely unquestioned in Western society today, but God mercifully calls into question all our impossibilities. Romans 1 tells us that our Savior Jesus, "the just who shall live by faith," lives in order to save us from our enemies (Romans 1:17). As King David saved the ancient Israelites from the Philistines, themselves sent as a manifestation of God's wrath (see Judges 2:14, Romans 1:18), so the clear implication of Romans is that the King of Kings, Jesus, saves us from enemies far more terrible than the Philistines – enemies not of flesh and blood, but the powers and principalities of this world. God's mercy does and must abound in His Son Jesus. Romans chapter 1 shows us the glory of just Jesus against the black background of universal sin (all we like sheep had gone astray). But the just Jesus is also the justifying Jesus. Romans 1 begins with the resurrection of the dead, and this is no accident. The resurrection of the dead is inseparable from restoration of right relationship between men and women (R. 1:4,17ff). Remember the woman of the city who was "forgiven much" and therefore "loved much" bathing Jesus' feet with her tears, anointing Him with precious oil (Luke 7:37-50). Somewhere she had heard the word of forgiveness, and in the Gospel stories we see a woman redeemed, transformed. Jesus said of such a one, "wherever the gospel is preached this will be told in memory of her" (Mark 14:9). Simon the Pharisee called this woman a sinner as her tears fell on Jesus' feet. One could well guess that, in Simon's view, it was impossible that this woman be anything but what she was known to be, one whose body and soul were corrupt. But what is inconceivable and well-nigh impossible with men is more than conceivable and do-able by the Word of God. As Luther said, "the word, the word, the word will do it." God the Father delights, "sings with joy" over what He has done and is doing in Jesus (Zephaniah 3:17). But not only that, it is "these sinners" who go first into the Kingdom and, in so doing, provide a shining hope for us all. When these are saved, those to whom salvation was accounted by church and society an "impossibility," then hope springs up in our own hearts. Perhaps we in the pews and pulpits and choir lofts also can be saved from our innumerable miseries, weaknesses, sins and burdens that have grown too heavy for us to bear. Our heart rejoices in Jesus, the Anointed One, anointed both by God and by the sinner who "once was lost but now is found." Who can doubt that that unnamed woman is now crowned in light at the throne of the Lord of hosts? Beloved brothers and sisters of the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area, I appeal to you by the mercies of God. Let us not be conformed to this age, but transformed by the renewing of our minds. Rev. Amy Flack minister member Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area Ellsworth and Hager City, Wisc. A reply regarding the Presbytery of Western North Carolina January 30, 2008 It is very interesting that the "Legal Fundraising" line item is over twice as much as the "new church development" line item and only slightly smaller that the entire "Division of Evangelism …" grouped budget. Granted, this legal fund is less that a tenth of the largest grouped item, but that item is staff. Be happy that the presbytery is spending more on physical needs (supplies and equipment) than the legal fund by $6,000, however the real physical needs ("Hunger Committee" equals $1,450). I know that staff and people cost money and that the Hunger Committee is not necessarily monies for food, but when you look at the budget as a whole it is amazing how little is spent on ministry and the cause of Christ vs. physical human wants and protection of the presbytery's (isn't it God's?) property. Bruce Ludwick Action on Capetz will accelerate 'the decline of the PCUSA January 29, 2008 Regarding the story: "'Fidelity/chastity' ordination standard not an essential of Reformed faith and polity, commissioners decide:" The only purpose served by his reinstatement will prove to be the acceleration of the decline of the Presbyterian Church (USA). Mark my words, within a few short weeks, congregations that may have entertained the idea of leaving will be pushed right over the edge. Eric Wells Article on the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area is 'to the point' January 29, 2008 Your article is concise and to the point. I am the commissioner who made the comment about consequences. As you note, the discussion mostly played out on the previous motion. I, along with others, worked hard to rally an evangelical response to the request for restoration. We had nearly every evangelical commissioner there that we could. The vote totals show the composition of this presbytery. David Lenz pastor Hope Presbyterian Church Richfield, Minn. Blasphemy! January 29, 2008 Brothers and Sisters in Christ, will the blasphemy never end? This ongoing desecration of God's Word must stop! What can be done? Ken Tazelaar Waukegan, Ill. 'Nothing has changed' January 29, 2008 I wonder what the members of the PUP task force who went around the country telling scores of Presbyterians that "Nothing has Changed" with the passage of its recommendations will say now. Two individuals from two different presbyteries have been cleared for ordination. Many execs and presbytery staffs did the same thing. Many of us warned about the "Crack in the Door" and were ridiculed. No organization can exist without trust. Many in the Presbyterian Church (USA) have no regard for anything but their own agendas and, with that attitude, they will bring about the demise of this branch of the Church. E.E. Jones Growing awareness January 29, 2008 For those who are just now realizing that the PUP report is all about allowing critical and intentional ambiguity into our faith and practice, I have a few words: Take a deep breath, sit down, pray and then give up the old game. Everything has changed. It started 80 years ago and has never stopped. We have been outflanked at every step. It is time to embrace a new thing. Bill Crawford pastor First Presbyterian Church of Thibodaux Thibodaux, La. A response regarding Larges and Capetz January 29, 2008 The back-to-back logical sequences of constitutional defiance enabled by PUP have generated an avalanche of outrage, ecclesiastical depression and the like which I have rarely experienced. The frozen chosen seem to be thawing a bit under the heat of ... Regardless, I am hearing from across the country and even the world – pastors and elders and members and non-members and non-PCUSAers and others – that the worst fears of PUP are being realized. I'm even hearing a lot of concern about our "emerging" denomination increasing the assault on the unique saving Lordship of Jesus as attested in Holy Scripture and upheld by our constitution. Even if this particular concern is not yours (viz., Capetz and Larges), the fear is that anything related to Biblical Christianity will now be subject to the dark enabling of PUP. God have mercy on the Presbyterian Church (USA) and those of us who remain to be faithful. Robert R. Kopp Why not file complaints about other issues? January 29, 2008 If Westminster Presbyterian Church and others like it would file complaints to the synod concerning the ordination of homosexuals and preachers performing gay marriages, which are also violations of the Presbyterian Church (USA) constitution, maybe churches like Roseville and Fair Oaks would not feel compelled to leave. If the constitution is not being enforced concerning ordination standards, why should it be enforced with respect to property? All of these cases seem to be about money and somewhere in the process the will of God gets lost. If a church discerns that the will of God is for them to depart the PCUSA and join another church, then that shouldn't be questioned. Forcing churches to stay in the PCUSA is not the way to promote "peace, unity and purity," especially unity. The ultimate goal for all of us ought to be to do whatever we need to do to further the Kingdom of our Lord. If that means doing it in another denomination, so be it. The only people benefiting from all of the court battles are the lawyers. If the PCUSA is really interested in furthering the Kingdom of God, they ought to let churches go in peace and pray for them and their ministries. Tim Rodgers Vicksburg, Miss. Only other option for the PCUSA is 'total schism' January 28, 2008 With respect for the Rev. Greg Wiest [Letters, January 23, 2008], the only faithful and honest other option total schism. The liberal and conserving camp must separate. Schism would say to the world "in this camp, we believe that the prophets, apostles and Christ Himself spoke the truth." While, in the other camp, they could say "we know better, with our great modern understanding, than did the prophets, apostles and Christ Himself." Both camps should be honest enough to say what they believe and take care that the world be not deceived or confused. It could be done graciously and legally, but it must be done. It is time for separation so that evangelicals can get on with the work of preaching the wonderful, soul-saving, life-changing Gospel of Jesus Christ while the liberals wade deeper into the humanist morass with Universalists and others who deny the Savior of this world. The need is critical. According to the National Center for Health Statistics, in the U.S. 2.5 million people died in 2005, going to where the Lordship of Jesus Christ will no longer be a matter of opinion, but eternal fact! In the same year, there were 4.2 million births – precious little humans needing to be taught the abundant life available in Jesus Christ. Our message must not be confused by association with those who believe the Gospel message is a lie, a fable! James H. Logan Sr. Rock Hill, S.C. A pastoral exchange on the state of the PCUSA January 28, 2008 Dear Rus: While I remain to be faithful rather than separate to be faithful, according to His call in my life and my passionate love and "under" shepherding (John 10) for the saints entrusted to me who were so wounded in recent years within the context of my affection and affirmation of the irenic and redemptive spirit of Blackhawk Presbytery, I am increasingly saddened and often outraged by the beast's best efforts through apostates among us who dishonor Jesus, disregard Biblical revelation and defy our constitution. I am praying John 3:19-21 for our franchise; and especially for presbyteries that have lost His way in the extra-revelatory ideologies so dissonant with Holy Scripture as upheld by our constitution. Another remaining but increasingly frustrated and exhausted friend in the battle for souls wrote this morning and said he was tired of being slandered for exposing the nakedness of our emperor. I said he pleases Him and His; and that will have to be enough in these ... [last] ... days. Fortunately, trusting His victory "in the end" encourages faithful witnesses like yours in this "mean" time. I will pray His best for you every day in all things at all times in all places with all people. Robert Kopp Dear Bob: You have begged and beseeched me to send you a letter outlining all which we have been through at Peters Creek since we began conversations with Washington Presbytery about leaving the Presbyterian Church (USA) in order to join the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. You have told me that my record of our experience would become a blessing for many. While I do not believe that a travelogue about our journey will be as valuable as you contend, I share these thoughts. The Layman and other online journalists have done an excellent job exposing the horrific treatment of congregations by PCUSA presbyteries. Heartland Presbytery is now referred to by many as "Heartless" Presbytery. Their treatment of Kirk Johnson, his wife, their families and the congregations they serve has been horrendous. However, I must give Heartland Presbytery credit for being true to their word – they made no secret that they plan to play hardball with any who seek to leave the PCUSA for the EPC. I would have preferred their brutal honesty to the overt falsehoods offered to us and the press about Washington Presbytery's treatment of us. I have found a gross lack of integrity in the words, actions and self-promotions of Washington Presbytery. Promises were made to us, only to be broken. Kind behavior was touted in the press, but was never realized. Lies were told and kept. Positions were misrepresented. Myths were created and sustained without scrutiny for accuracy. My hope that we would be treated with integrity throughout this process proved to be a mirage glimmering in the distant and murky reflections of men, women and pastors I had once respected. Now I know why Scripture repeatedly tells us, "Trust in the Lord." Despite my best efforts to be honorable and above reproach throughout this process, I am certain I have sinned. I have written many and asked their forgiveness for anything that I have said or done to hurt them. I pray that they will forgive me. I pray that we can finish this process with grace rather than in acrimony. This letter lacks the details you seek. However, I do not have the heart to retell my story in detail. The pain is still much too great. My prayer is that no other pastor or church will suffer what we have experienced. L. Rus Howard teaching pastor Peters Creek Presbyterian Church Venetia, Pa. Janie and Lisa and Paul ... Oh my! January 25, 2008 Well, here we go. Jane Spahr announces her retirement and is feted beyond any rational understanding for doing everything she could to undercut the traditional faith and practices of what was once a great Reformed body. Now we have Paul Capetz and Lisa Larges pushing their sexuality onto the church and using the PUP guidance to do so. Imagine my surprise. Actually, imagine the utter lack of surprise – as if we all didn't know that this was the agenda and purpose of the gang of 20 (the Theological Task Force) when they foisted their PUP syncretism on the 2006 General Assembly. This was a fully foreseeable and expected result of the task force. What is more painful than anything else is the realization that 20 people, with the willing cooperation of a handful of General Assembly commissioners, changed our polity by fiat. It is truly disturbing that so many people have been gulled by the duplicity and disingenuousness of a minority faction in the church - a faction that values peace at the expense of unity and purity and celebrates personhood instead of obedience to the Word of God. Approval of either of the actions (San Francisco or Twin Cities) is certain to speed up the exodus of congregations looking for a faithful Reformed body with which to connect. I recently heard of a member of the task force speaking of his pride at what they had accomplished ... hmm. We can only pray that the commissioners to the 2008 General Assembly will act to revoke the heresy and apostasy of 2006. Rev. Jim Yearsley Tampa, Fla. A reply to the story about Lisa Larges January 25, 2008 While I focus my energies on countering the dissipating Christology as attested in Holy Scripture and upheld by our constitution, it becomes increasingly clear that those who suspected darker motives for our PUPpies are increasingly vindicated despite continuing vilification. The warnings of the logical sequences following the adoption of the PUP report were scorned as hysterics. What are our PUPpies saying now? Uh, nothing. That's because the intent is being incarnated and no one is doing anything about it. PUP has enabled defiance of the constitution in this particular instance. What's next? Animal House has become a sad metaphor for us. My sense is those who authored the PUP report knew what they were doing to enable contradictions of Biblical Christianity and to encourage our own "emerging" church. I sensed that in every communication from the authors, who became advocates. My sense is those who supported PUP either didn't understand the logical sequences and trusted the authors/advocates who said the logical sequences were not logical sequences or did understand the logical sequences and remain affectionately affirming for the apostasies being enabled by PUP. For those of us who will remain to be faithful and have a constitutional prerogative to remain "Christian" as defined by Biblical revelation and upheld by our Book of Order and The Book of Confessions, we apologize to Jesus for what has become of us, how we increasingly insult His holiness, and the souls being lost because of our double-minded witness. As for me, I will ask His graces to witness in the spirit of 1 Peter 3:15. God have mercy on the Presbyterian Church (USA) and those of us who remain to be faithful. Robert R. Kopp 'Third way' idea is presposterous January 25, 2008 This response is not directed at Rev. Greg Wiest [Letters, January 23, 2008], but at the issue he raises – the possibility that there is a third way regarding the two opposing views on sexuality, etc. The whole idea that the third way is viable is as preposterous as it would seem. Bottom line, in one sense, is: Does our denomination support gay marriage and the ordination of openly gay persons? Existentially speaking, at least, it is possible to have a dual synod/presbytery/etc. form of government. Theologically and practically speaking, it is untenable. No matter which side one comes down on, by virtue of being part of the same denomination you are in full support of the opposite view. The third way is no way. Rev. Steven L. Seng pastor First Presbyterian Church Wellsburg, W.V. A reply to the letter by John Foreman January 25, 2008 John Foreman's "perfect compromise for the PCUSA" [Letters, January 17, 2008] hits the nail on the head. How can you argue with it unless you simply like arguing over intractable disputes? Of course, this is something our denomination appears to be good at doing. We enjoy beating our head against the wall because we think it will feel so good when we stop. In fact, Foreman's suggestion is so smart, logical, commonsensical and on target as to keep it from ever seeing the light of day in our current denominational climate. There are probably far too many vested interests in the present conflict and far too much desire for winner-take-all battles and scorched earth policies instead of pursuing a way for both sides of the aisle to serve the Kingdom faithfully. It's a pity. Rev. Clay J. Brown pastor First Presbyterian Church Mooresville, N.C. Interesting twists to the present state of the PCUSA January 25, 2008 There are a few interesting twists to the present state of the Presbyterian Church (USA). So many members seek ways to remain affiliated with the PCUSA in name, but somehow be isolated from what the PCUSA is doing in their name. What is the purpose of a denomination in that case and why bother? What does a dual presbytery system solve? It won't fly anyway because all the conservative churches would end up in one presbytery and, since property issues are settled at the presbytery level, they'd be disposed to let all their members leave. Louisville wouldn't stand for that. It is truly amazing that the PCUSA wants the conservatives to stay - and even more amazing that so many churches and their pastors cower before the heavy hand of Louisville. One wonders what forces are at work that hold so many under the yoke of those who make a mockery of their beliefs. Perhaps all of this is just a necessary stage in the slow-motion disintegration of the denomination. Still, if Scripture is to be believed, God will act decisively in His time, even if His children won't. And if Scripture is not to be believed, then Louisville is right, so what's all the fuss about? John Cowan Cartersville, Ga. San Francisco Presbytery and Lisa Larges: The PUP report 'changed nothing?' January 24, 2008 Um … I could have sworn that we were told that Recommendation #5 of the PUP report changed nothing. Guess whoever said that, (wasn't it the General Assembly stated clerk?) was wrong. Or, at the very least, we have to wait until the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission tells us. Rev. Robert G. Campbell pastor Tully Memorial Presbyterian Church Sharon Hill, Pa. An interesting observation about San Francisco Presbytery's action January 24, 2008 I had an interesting observation after reading the article concerning Lisa Larges. The article actually just notes that some churches do not see G-6.0106b as authoritative. Note the article statement: "Larges, who is blind, is a deacon at Noe Valley Ministry Presbyterian Church in San Francisco." The article states that she is not in compliance with G-6.0106b, so the earlier action to have her installed as a deacon was not according to the Book of Order. Maybe the difference was that the deacon action was a local church action versus the ministerial candidate being a presbytery action. Bill Alexander Bartlesville, Okla. A reply regarding the Sacramento case January 24, 2008 Patrick Jean's excellent article on the Westminster filing in Sacramento Presbytery contained the following complaint from the Westminster pastors and session: "It [the previous presbytery ruling] simply gave the property away to another denomination without compensation." I have read this complaint in at least one other instance. Both complaints are erroneous in that the churches in question are moving to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. In that Presbyterian denomination, as in others, there is no "trust," implied or otherwise. Nothing of any kind is being "given away." Property is held in an ethical and moral way: by those who paid for and maintained it. It seems to me that Westminster's leaders, among others, are the ones trying to grab what isn't theirs. Tom Gray Kirk of the Hills, EPC Tulsa, Okla. PCUSA hold on property: legal(?), but unjust January 24, 2008 I am not a lawyer, but I've been thinking about all the current hubbub about church property and property law. The Presbyterian Church (USA) claims that all properties occupied by local churches are held in trust for the denomination, and that they actually are owned by the denomination. Very well, let me present a hypothetical situation. Let's say one wintry Sunday morning, Mrs. Magillicuddy slips on a patch of ice in the church parking lot and breaks a leg. And let's say that Mrs. Magillicuddy is particularly litigious, and wants to sue the church. Without having studied law, it seems to me that the church's lawyer could argue that the lawsuit should go to either the presbytery or to Louisville, since the church does not actually own the property. That lady who spilled coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonald's, did the local franchise pay the millions in damages or did the corporate headquarters? Here in Malawi, churches and other institutions of religion must pay taxes to the Malawi Revenue Authority (MRA, their version of the IRS). In the case of the Presbyterians, the denomination pays it, not local churches. Here's another hypothetical situation: what if laws in the U.S. changed and churches had to pay property tax. Would presbyteries or Louisville pay it, since they legally own all church properties? And, not having studied law, I am perplexed as to just how a denomination that is only 25 years-old, being formed in 1983, can own the property of a church that has occupied its site since the 1800s. It's the people in the pews who must pay the light bill, the phone bill, the water bill and the janitor's salary. What happens when the membership of the local church dwindles to such an extent that they can no longer pay the utilities and the janitor's salary – will the presbytery pay the deficit? Of course not. Yet, the people can't leave without paying tribute to the presbytery. It seems to me that the presbytery gets all the benefits of property ownership, but none of the liabilities. Sweet. And what's to keep a presbytery from selling a local church property from under the feet of a congregation that never contemplated leaving just because it, the presbytery, wanted the money? It's no wonder that some churches that have no intention of leaving the PCUSA are moving to get clear title of their property. Here's one irony arising from money issues: The vehicle that I drive here in Malawi was mostly paid for from funds from a liberal PCUSA church that has little interest in supporting an evangelical missionary. Generations ago, before the church went liberal, a member set up an endowment fund for the support of foreign missions. The fund is still there and cannot be used for any other purpose besides supporting missionaries – even though the church, having gone liberal, is no longer interested in missionaries. Under the Providence of God, I happened to show up at the right place at the right time, applied for money for a vehicle, and got it just because the liberal PCUSA church had to do something with the money. My guess is that a number of similar endowments exist and are just sitting there. Too bad the PCUSA presbyteries can't tap into them and then let churches that wish to depart go. Rev. Larry Brown African Bible College Lilongwe, Malawi Where do we go from here? January 23, 2008 I am reading with interest the stories on how practicing homosexuals are seeking ordination via the authoritative interpretation handed to us by the PUP report. I am also following the exit of Memorial Park Presbyterian Church, which is only a few miles away from my church in Pittsburgh. In the middle of this, my evangelical colleagues all ask the question of where do we go from here? For New Wineskins, the answer is "out the door." For the Presbyterian Coalition, it's "stay, fight and win." For many of us, leaving isn't an option and "stay, fight and win" isn't terribly inspiring. My guess is that our ecclesiastical courts will try and waffle on the issue. That is, they will allow some ordinations, but not others. Neither side will be happy (although, those seeking the ordination of homosexuals will find partial satisfaction) There is a third way. It accepts that our denomination is headed toward local option. I don't like or agree with local option, but the realist in me accepts that this is where our denomination is headed. The third way says: "Give churches the choice in presbytery membership and synod membership." The minority in San Francisco Presbytery should not have to stay in a presbytery that has violated their conscience and moral code that they clearly understand from Scripture. Let them go to a presbytery where the local option is adherence to an orthodox, evangelical understanding of Scripture and ordination. Why should they have to continually battle in the ecclesiastical and civil courts for what their conscience and Scripture tell them what is true? The third way, of course, is the "E-link Overture" from Beaver Butler Presbytery. It is coming to the next General Assembly and it may be the only way out of our current mess. E-link allows for choice in presbytery membership and synod membership by a church. It is an overture that does not attempt to make either side a winner. It allows us to stay in the same denomination and allow the natural progression of each side's theology to reach a natural conclusion. One side will outlast the other. One will emerge as the true faith, the other will die. The only other option is total schism. Rev. Greg Wiest Glade Run UP Church Valencia, Pa. Puzzled by choice of PLC's executive director January 23, 2008 Hmmm. … Mike Montgomery from Atlanta [Letters, January 17, 2008] says that the Board of Directors of the Presbyterian Lay Committee has made it clear that their mission is no longer exclusively to the Presbyterian Church (USA). Yet, in each of the four stated objectives of the Lay Committee, specific reference is made to the PCUSA, while no other denomination is singled out. Therefore, I am very puzzled at the choice of Charles Burge to be executive director. I have no doubts that he is a very godly man but, in terms of any mission to the PCUSA, I do believe that his PCA affiliation results in a net loss of credibility. Or will we start seeing articles highlighting the ills of the PCA, OPC, EPC, etc.? Steve Smith West Hills, Calif. EDITOR'S NOTE: As part of its news and informational ministry, The Layman Online publishes a wide range of material regarding Presbyterian and Reformed denominations – focusing specifically on increased coverage of the Presbyterian Church (USA), but also providing news and other material of interest to its readers regarding other denominations. San Francisco Presbytery action 'is tragic' January 22, 2008 It is tragic what happened at the last meeting of San Francisco Presbytery. On the Presbyterian Church (USA) Web site, there is an article that this is the first presbytery to use the 2006 authoritative interpretation, implying that there will be more presbyteries following San Francisco's lead. What happens to the great evangelical churches, such as Walnut Creek and Menlo Park and others, that are member churches in that presbytery? I think that we know from the First Hollywood Presbyterian experience how the progressives treat evangelical pastors in this denomination. I hope that everyone is paying attention. This may be the last General Assembly where we have enough votes to affect the direction of this church. The solution that I offered may not be the answer, but we better come up with something right away. John Almquist 'We need a few more representatives' January 22, 2008 We need a few more representatives, such as someone from, say, New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, Washington, Oregon, California. At least one from the synods, etc. Just a thought. Dorthy Dietrich Retired certified Christian educator Thank you, Glenda January 22, 2008 Glenda L. Smith [Letters, January 17, 2008] said, "... The difficulty with modern theology, from Karl Barth on … faith is a totally upstairs leap. The difficulty with modern theology is that it is really no different from taking drugs. You may try drugs, you may try modern liberal theology. It makes no difference – both are trips, separated from reason." Glenda could not have said it any better to those Barthians who leap into never, never land. Praise God from "Whom All Blessings Flow." Are you listening, my Barthian friends? Louis Stephen Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. Knowing Scripture January 22, 2008 A few decades ago, our United Presbyterian congregation was considering two Sunday school curricula: "Knowing the Word" and "Doing the Word," as I recollect the essence of if not the exact titles. Choosing "Knowing the Word" appeared to be the correct choice, since how can one know what "doing the Word" means without a knowledge of what the Word says? I now drive about 500 miles a week on business. It has afforded an opportunity to hear the Old Testament and the New Testament afresh and in large connected chunks. It has deepened my knowledge of the Word and instructed my "doing" of the Word. My resource is a dramatic audio reading with music and sound effects. I stay awake and alert as I drive, listen and rejoice. It is available from: Faith Comes by Hearing 2421 Aztec Rd NE Albuquerque, NM 87107 I have no financial interest in this company. The only interest is encouraging God's people to know the Word. James H. Logan Sr. Rock Hill, S.C. 'Perfect compromise' problematic for some in the PCUSA January 21, 2008 Wowie, zowie, what a brilliant idea! ("The perfect compromise for the PCUSA," John Foreman; Letters, January 17, 2008) I'm in. Now, that being said, Rev. Foreman asked for reasons why this might not work. The only one I can think of is a teensy one – it will bring about the immediate and catastrophic demise of the Presbyterian Church (USA). For those who are more interested in maintaining man/woman-made institutions than following Christ – well, it could be somewhat problematic. Thanks for a great solution. Sign me up for your fan club! Rev. William K. Little pastor Mt. Vernon Community Presbyterian Church McKeesport, Pa. Consistent inconsistency in action by presbytery January 21, 2008 As I read the article concerning Heritage Presbyterian Church in Houston, I had a strange reaction to the comments about the analysis of the recent voting for dismissal. Several questions came to mind. Has the presbytery's review team come to a conclusion that is based primarily upon the denomination's "updated" definition of "schism?" The dictionary definition of schism says that it applies to a group that is "trying to cause a split or division in a church. ..." Is a split vote an automatic desire to "cause division" or simply a decision to go a different direction by a majority voice? The Book of Order indicates in Chapter 7 that business is done primarily by majority vote (most recent edition of Robert's Rules of Order) and only by those present at the meeting. Therefore, is a majority vote (80 percent) to change denominational affiliation automatically a desire to "cause split or division" in the congregation? If a presbytery voted 51 percent to 49 percent to remove G-6.0106b from the Book of Order, would that presbytery be called "schismatic" by a synod reviewing their actions? Has the General Assembly ever been considered "schismatic" in voting 80 percent in favor or a motion (the percentage of Heritage's vote in favor of dismissal)? After all the relatively close votes at general assemblies, it is unimaginable that 500 commissioners voting in favor of a motion, with 125 voting against (again, roughly the percentages of Heritage's vote), would be characterized as "schismatic!" Just what is so threatening to the denomination about a church that would like to change its "voluntary association" to another denomination, especially one that is "Reformed," that causes denominational leaders to adjust their definitions and actions to be so controlling? Is not the presbytery's responsibility to "divide, dismiss, or dissolve churches in consultation with their members?" (G-11.0103i.). Is not the presbytery being "schismatic" by desiring "to cause a split or division in the church" by pitting a minority against the majority in a legitimate congregational decision? A majority vote is a majority vote by the Book of Order! Let the presbyteries do their Book of Order responsibility of supporting the churches' decisions, rather than requiring the congregations to serve them in mindless, papal obeisance. Indeed, when will God's people stand up and say, "Enough is enough!" Rev. Tom Sawyer Middle Sandy EPC Homeworth, Ohio A reply regarding the Trinity paper January 21, 2008 Here we go again – the good ol' Presbyterian Church (USA) is having fun changing the name of the Trinity into the "Infinity Trinity." Why can't we just leave good enough alone (to use an old phrase). If it works, don't fix it. Jesus had no problem with Father, Son and Holy Spirit – trying to use inclusive language is a nightmare sometimes. Just because we are receiving non-Christian people into the church, wherever they come from, why do we have to try and accommodate everyone so we don't upset anyone? I think its about time we start upsetting some people and get back to being Reformed and Presbyterian – something we have forgotten how to do for the last 20-plus years. Do we wonder why churches are leaving the denomination and going to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church? As long as we try to redefine God in our own language, we are going to have major problems. In reality, I guess we can make God anything we want, but Jesus was very explicit when He used "the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost." Had God wanted other representations for God's name, I am certain God also would have provided these. Being a somewhat conservative (I hate labels) Presbyterian, I can see why churches are jumping ship and going to more "evangelical" churches. It is my hope that we can "reason together," but the future looks pretty dim if things keep going the way they are. And, in the end, perhaps this is not a bad thing – the liberals can then take over the church, which is their goal, and call God anything they want – and everyone else can find other churches. My prayer is that God will call us back to the Presbyterian Church we once were and all the churches that are abandoning it, or will abandon it in the future, will consider hanging on just a little longer. If we are going to the dogs anyway, let's be certain we have the right dogs for us. Gene Edwards Presbytery knows vote on lesbian 'is wrong' January 21, 2008 As of this writing, San Francisco Presbytery approved a lesbian's ordination – acting as the Peoples Republic of San Francisco, defying the Book of Order and the Holy Bible. No matter what is written in opposition, we have stiff-necked, rebellious people who will one day be judged by God at the great white throne of judgment (Revelation 20-21). We must pray, hard that it is for this writer, but we must be Biblical. The presbytery knows it is wrong, yet does not know it is wrong, and the consequence of approving this sinful, wicked act is against the Body of Christ, the Holy Bible and, above all, the Triune God. We must pray for a revival. Louis Stephen Nowasielski Wilmington, Del. The perfect compromise for the PCUSA January 17, 2008 While the New Wineskins proposal to eliminate the property trust clause should happen, it won't happen. But what if an additional clause could be added so that everybody would vote for it? It's so simple. Let's just give everybody what they want! Let's ask the General Assembly for a simultaneous removal of the fidelity/chastity clause and the property trust clause in our constitution. For either one to happen, both must happen. Everybody wins. Who could object? Can anybody give me a good reason why this shouldn't happen? When the dust settles, everybody will be part of the denomination of their choosing. But wait ... it probably wouldn't pass because way too many Presbyterians don't really want to resolve these issues. They'd rather fight. Forever. John Foreman pastor Adventure of Faith Presbyterian Church Port Orchard, Wash. Welcome, Charles Burge January 17, 2008 Just to say I think Charles Burge is an excellent addition to The Layman and look forward to his leadership. Whether he comes to us directly from the Presbyterian Church in America or not, he is a seasoned evangelical who is well-positioned to take us into the 21st century. Yes, while most of us who support The Layman are Presbyterian Church (USA)-affiliated, The Presbyterian Lay Committee has also made it clear (at least to my understanding) their mission for the future is no longer exclusive to the PCUSA. That Mr. Burge comes straight from Coral Ridge is a huge plus for us! Mike Montgomery Atlanta, Ga. Thank you, Charles Burge January 17, 2008 Thanks for coming to the helm of The Layman in this time of cultural crisis in the American church. I was in the Presbyterian Church (USA) for 15 years as a pastor and am now in the Presbyterian Church in America, which I love. May God bless you and congratulations. Todd Baucum pastor First Presbyterian Church, PCA Enterprise, Ala. An appropriate quote January 17, 2008 Quoting from his book A Christian View of the Church, Francis A. Schaffer said: "... The difficulty with modern theology, from Karl Barth on … faith is a totally upstairs leap. The difficulty with modern theology is that it is really no different from taking drugs. You may try drugs, you may try modern liberal theology. It makes no difference – both are trips, separated from reason." Glenda L. Smith Asheville, N.C. A reply regarding Heartland Presbytery January 17, 2008 Sounds like "Custard's last stand" is being repeated in Missouri. Let's hope the "Indians" don't win this one. Common sense, not revenge, should return to the Heartland. Janice Caldwell A reply regarding Memorial Park Presbyterian Church January 17, 2008 Isn't it convenient how the Book of Order, that we affirm to support at ordination, becomes "one of the governing documents" when it becomes troublesome or stands in the way of our wants? Royce Browder general presbyter Upper Ohio Valley Presbytery A reply regarding 'Presbyterians to vote on lesbian's pastor ordination' January 17, 2008 The decline of the Presbyterian Church (USA)! Gil Torr Concern over Burge's PCA association highlights regrettable attitudes toward PCA January 16, 2008 The call to prayer by Winfield Casey Jones is timely and appropriate regarding the appointment of Charles F. Burge as executive director to the Lay Committee. That Burge is associated with the renowned Coral Springs Presbyterian Church (PCA) is immaterial and only highlights some regrettable attitudes toward the Presbyterian Church in America. Lest we forget, the Lay Committee is in no way affiliated with any denomination – Presbyterian or otherwise. In sharp contrast to the sour grapes and neuroses within certain PCUSA alliances, Parker Williamson's life and ministry are defined as ripe fruit of the gospel. Such Kingdom faithfulness and resolve can only come from the Lord. As our Episcopal brothers and sisters say, "Thanks be to God." Phyllis Sharpton Cumming, Ga. Thank you for being there to tell the truth January 16, 2008 I did not give to the Presbyterian Church (USA). I gave to the Red Cross - not trusting the PCUSA. Isn't that sad? Thank you for being there to tell the truth. Minnie B. Christensen Merced, Calif. Thank you for your work January 16, 2008 I am nearly 80 years-old and an elder in First Presbyterian Church in White Sulphur Springs, W.V. When Katrina struck, there was an outpouring of generosity from our state and Greenbrier County. I know truck after truck was loaded (I helped in this venture) to go to those in need. I've always done what I'm able to do for others. Thank you for your work. Mary Lynch White Sulphur Springs, W.V. The Lord forbids fellowship with Satan's minions January 16, 2008 Just reading I Corinthians this morning and was reminded, in 10:20-21, of the Lord forbidding our fellowship with Satan's minions. Doesn't that apply to the unbelievers in the church today? John P. Galbraith 'Your work has sustained me and many others in trying times' January 16, 2008 I have joined a Presbyterian Church in America church. I have wrestled for a long time over the direction of the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the Holy Spirit's personal calling. Your work has sustained me and many others in trying times. I pray for your success and perseverance in efforts to call the PCUSA back to its Scriptural roots and away from its progressive slide. Larry Howell I will pray for the success of your continued work January 16, 2008 I am not a Presbyterian, but I love your church. I want to personally thank all of you on the excellent work all of you are doing to proclaim the truth of the church's misdoings, deceits and blatant misconceptions that the average church member would never see in print or spoken in word. I will pray for the success of your continued work. Boyce J. Scott Perryton, Texas Those who don't get The Layman 'do not know the truth' January 16, 2008 Thank you for keeping us so well informed. Those who don't receive The Layman really do not know the truth. Virginia Blackwelder Mooresville, N.C. 'Thanks again for your honest and correct reporting' January 15, 2008 We appreciate your newsy articles, which keep us informed of the liberal, non-Biblical group in our denomination. However, this is a note of gratitude for the article, "The vitality in this church is actually the Holy Spirit at work," you ran on Rus Ritchel in North Carolina. He is a product of our church in Aurora, Ill., and will be celebrating with us when First Presbyterian Church will celebrate 150 years. Thanks again for your honest and correct reporting. Woody and Joy Hulting Aurora, Ill. 'We need you and are praying for you' January 15, 2008 Thank you for all you are doing for our denomination. Please keep on. We need you and are praying for you. Anne Fee Omaha, Neb. 'Please keep up the good work' January 15, 2008 I have not followed the Presbyterian Church (USA) story very closely. It sounds like we have a little problem. I will try harder to be more current with the situation. Please keep up the good work – we do need to know. Mark W. Chamberlin Baldwinsville, N.Y. NWI sample overture on property 'akin to the raising of Lazarus' January 14, 2008 Though I agree with the desire of the New Wineskins Fellowship to do away with the property chapter, it would be akin to the raising of Lazarus for it to actually even pass the General Assembly. There are two reasons for this: 1. The Presbyterian Church (USA) giving up the property chapter would be like someone allowing their life insurance policy to be cancelled for non-payment when they are fully aware that they have terminal cancer, a large family to support and not much time left. 2. The denominationalists in the PCUSA live by the fiction that when people put their offering in the plate during Sunday morning worship, they actually mean to give their offering to the PCUSA as a denomination and not to the local church. Timothy B. Smith pastor Sonoma Springs Presbyterian Church Las Cruces, N.M.

January 2008 letters, page 2 Home · News · PLC Publications · The Layman Online Reviews · Archives· History of the Lay Committee · Feedback · Links