Fuss over salvation brings apologies and retractions By John H. Adams The Layman Online Monday, January 15, 2001 After its top elected and staff leaders offered an assortment of apologies to people on both sides of the theological aisle, the General Assembly Council is about to wrestle once again with an issue that goes to the core of Christianity and Reformed theology. The question before the council, which will meet in Louisville Feb. 19-24, is whether Christ is the only valid path to God or whether there are other gods through whom an individual might be saved. During a denomination-sponsored Peacekeeping Conference last year, the Rev Dirk Ficca, the keynote speaker, suggested that Christians should respect other religions and not assume that Christianity is the only truth. At one point, Ficca, the executive of an inter-faith organization that includes self-described "pagan" religions, asked, "What's the big deal about Jesus?" Since the Peacekeeping Conference, Peter Pizor, chairman of the General Assembly Council, and John Detterick, the council's executive director, have been in the crosshairs of a number of Presbyterian individuals and groups that have weighed in passionately on the issue. Both Pizor and Detterick have made several comments – and some retractions. The most recent statement by one of the two leaders was Detterick's. In effect, he apologized to employees at the headquarters of the Presbyterian Church (USA) for how they felt about his earlier apology to Presbyterian Coalition evangelicals when they met in October in Indianapolis. Detterick had told the evangelicals that Ficca's comments were "out of bounds" and that his theology "conflicts with a basic tenet of the church's faith." He said the General Assembly Council, which had ducked the issue, would take some action. But after meeting with about 30 employees, Detterick said in a newsletter that was distributed to the denomination's staff in November, "I want to apologize for the disillusionment and hurt that reports of my words to the Coalition may have caused for some of you." Detterick also complimented the peacekeeping staff "for the good work they have done and continue to do." In the newsletter, Detterick stopped short of retracting what he told the Presbyterian Coalition. Both he and Pizor together, however, had retracted their original joint statement on the matter. In an effort to calm Ficca's critics, Pizor and Detterick teamed up to declare, "We believe that God's love and grace for us was revealed through the life, death and resurrection of Christ Jesus … " The phrase "for us" left many wondering whether Pizor and Detterick were agreeing with Ficca's basic premise that, for instance, Jesus would be the way for Christians, but Buddha would suffice for Buddhists. After reviewing what Scripture and the confessions say about Christ and salvation, both Pizor and Detterick told the General Assembly Council when it met last September that they were amiss in not making emphatically clear that they believed that salvation, for all people, is in Christ alone. Then, about the same time that Detterick was declaring Ficca "out of bounds," Pizor announced that he would appoint a task force to review the issue. Within days, both became the targets of Presbyterians who agreed with Ficca that Jesus is not the only "way, truth and life." So, Pizor postponed naming a task force and Detterick had a brown-bag lunch with Presbyterian employees who were upset by his remarks to the evangelicals. Both men obviously were less zealous to keep the Peacekeeping Conference from having a repeat performance. The Ficca issue was on the agenda at the September meeting of the General Assembly Council, but the council took no action. The Peacekeeping Committee did write a letter complimenting the people who planned the Peacekeeping Conference. Meanwhile, the Ficca issue has not died out. Debate continues on a number of Presbyterian-related web sites and in resolutions to the General Assembly Council.

Respond to this article

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