In response to Jeff McDonald’s recommendation [Letters, March 28, 2007] I did review the specifics of the Riverside Church case.
Interestingly enough, Mr. McDonald fails to mention that the Rev. Russell Westbrook has never been a PCUSA minister. He was an RCA pastor serving the congregation under the formula of agreement. It would seem logical to me that a pastor from another denomination trying to take a PCUSA church out of the PCUSA would be removed immediately no matter what the circumstances.
It is in the best interest of the presbytery to investigate this matter. It seems awfully fishy to me. All in all, presbyteries need to do a better job of screening potential candidates and formula-agreement partners from outside the PCUSA who want to serve in our churches. Rev. Nathan Lamb
I’ll believe the Washington Office really means it when I see it
Posted Friday, March 30, 2007
Your article about the Washington Office urging us to “tell the Congress to restore the Constitution” brings a couple of things to mind. Perhaps the Washington Office is on to something.
The Constitution, if I recollect correctly, seems to say something about being endowed by our Creator with certain “inalienable rights.” Note it does not say inalienable “American” rights. The rights are granted, thereby, to all human beings – American, Iraqi or all others. Therefore, was it right to engage the battle to free such a tyrannical regime as Saddam Hussein? Factoring in the Biblical principles of “to whom more is given, more is expected” and “no greater love hath a person than to lay down his or her life for,” how is such a conclusion wrong? Getting back to the Constitution, indeed, would be a good thing.
In addition, the Constitution grants the president the power, as Commander in Chief, of oversight of the armed forces, not the Congress. Therefore, this nit-picking, micro-managing and time-table-establishing Congress, it seems, needs to back off and let the president do what he is empowered constitutionally to do. I think the Washington Office is on to something. Let’s get back to something more constitutional.
As an afterthought, how about getting back to the Constitution regarding education? Where does the Constitution grant this sphere of intrusion (note I did not say “influence,” for intrusion is the correct word)? Things not specifically granted to the federal government is specifically granted to the states. Oh, to get back to the Constitution. But the truth is, I’ll believe the Washington Office really means it when I see it.
Lest this be seen mostly in sarcastic terms, the fuller truth is it is one of my deepest prayers that we would return, truly, to a more constitutional manner of civic and national life. But it won’t happen unless people speak up publicly and to one another and work toward that goal. Rev. Steven L. Seng
Restore the Constitution?
Posted Friday, March 30, 2007
Hmm … the military tribunals were approved by the Senate, the House and the president. Sounds like the constitutional procedures were followed to me. But wait … the propaganda wing of the PCUSA doesn’t like the tribunals. Well, then, scrap them. They cannot possibly be in the best interest of America, Americans and our society. 9-11 was so much fun! Paul Derkasch
The PCUSA should go back to being a church
Posted Friday, March 30, 2007
About the Washington Office: I think it is time for us (the PCUSA) to go back being a church. We not a social agency. As a Reformed church, we are to lead people to participate, not to occupy their places. The present model is too similar to the centralizing, Roman Catholic model. John Soares
A response to recent letter concerning Riverside Church in Iowa
Posted Friday, March 30, 2007
I wish it were as simple as Jeff McDonald states in his letter [Letters, March 28, 2007]. However, as the record shows, the session of Riverside took action June 28, 2006, to recommend that “the Riverside Presbyterian Church secedes from the Presbyterian Church (USA) and seek union with a confessionally Reformed evangelical denomination which holds to the Doctrine of Biblical Inerrancy.” A congregational vote was taken July 30, 2006 to adopt the aforesaid motion.
As is obvious, all of this took place before the call of a special presbytery meeting to elect an administrative commission to address the situation.
Property issues aside, Presbyterian churches exist in a covenant relationship with each other and the denomination. The breaking of a covenant cannot simply happen by saying “we’re gone” any more than a couple can divorce by one party saying to the other “I divorce you” and the marriage is over. A covenant is a contractual relationship that takes negotiation to sever.
What is more, American civil law is very clear on the matter of contractual relationships. They are to be taken seriously. So, whether the issue plays out in ecclesial or civil court, no one can “secede” without serious consequences. Some Southern states once attempted to secede from the union – and lost.
Church members, even the entire congregation and the pastor, can renounce the jurisdiction of the PCUSA, but an organized and incorporated body still exists that cannot be transferred, dismissed or dissolved without action agreed upon on by both parties. A church with zero members can still exist as an incorporated body of the presbytery. As is the case in all situations, conversation in a decent and orderly manner regarding disagreements and disputes is far better than one-sided actions prior to resolution.
Yes, I have read “The Louisville Papers” – with two different sets of eyes. John Pehrson
Where are the men?
Posted Thursday, March 29, 2007
We already had a church – until we men abandoned it by failing to serve as elders, joining committees, and serving as delegates to presbytery and general assembly meetings.
We lost our church to women who, in their kind and gentle caring ways, failed to see the big picture when voting with their hearts on issues that are now destroying the PCUSA as we know it. There is no taking it back unless men get involved.
John Chilberg
Did I miss something?
Posted Thursday, March 29, 2007
For many years, I have been an occasional reader of The Layman Online. During those years, I have also written letters, from time to time, as the Spirit moved me.
More often than not, I have found myself in agreement with the longing for Biblical fidelity that characterizes so much of the content found in The Layman. More often than not, I have been in strong agreement with the passion for evangelism, Biblical literacy and integrity that has been found in the pages of The Layman. I, too, have longed for the PCUSA to repent of the idolatry of humanistic secularism wrapped up in religious garb.
In fact, all of these things are just as near and dear to my heart as they have ever been.
So, I’ve been watching The Layman with much curiosity over the past several months, hoping for a word or two of wisdom, insight and guidance during these times when it appears that the PCUSA is intent on pursuing idolatry to the point of self-destruction.
Instead, what I’ve found is that The Layman appears to have become the media outlet for the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. When did this transition take place? I certainly bear no malice toward the EPC, but I’m not very happy about the fact that they appear to have taken over a valuable and helpful news outlet, for dealing with the affairs of the PCUSA.
Did someone send out a formal notice regarding this change of denominational affiliation? It seems like that step would have been very helpful to readers like me, who come to these pages looking for news and information about the PCUSA.
Jonathan Van Deventer Johns Island Presbyterian Church
Growth means change, change means conflict
Posted Thursday, March 29, 2007
According to Mr. Dillow, the church was growing, giving was increasing, there was an increase in both new members and baptisms at FPC Glasgow under the ministry of the Rev. Harris.
Yet, there was great opposition by a part of the congregation. I know this sounds strange because one would expect that such success would breed support of almost everyone in the congregation.
However, I have been the pastor of a church (not the one I now serve) that started growing shortly after I began my ministry there. For the most part, after the first new members class of about 18 people, everyone was surprised and pleased. After the next new members class (about six months later) of approximately 20 people, the “old guard” who had been in control saw the new members as a threat to “their church.” They thought these new people, who were not like them, were coming into “their church” to take it over.
Fear mounted! And the conflict began. Things were said about me that were not true and I found the presbytery to be of little help (though I was not fired).
Growth always means change and change always means conflict – it has never been any other way. Presbyteries claim to want churches to grow, they just want it without conflict. The presbyteries with which I am familiar value conformity above creativity and church growth. They would like churches to grow so long as nothing is changed; after all, conflict slows the flow of money to other governing bodies – or so the theory goes.
What a dilemma. Our denomination is in desperate need of pastors who dare to have an entrepreneurial spirit, yet the system does almost all it can to discourage the development of such radical hearts.
Now, I don’t know if this is what was going on at FPC Glasgow, but I would not be surprised.
Thomas A. Litteer, Pastor First Presbyterian Church, Sparta, N.J.
Doctrinal certainty and clarity’ subject of poem
Posted Thursday, March 29, 2007
In light of the coming revisions to the Book of Order, I hope the responsible parties will keep in mind our long history of doctrinal certainty and clarity as I offer this poem.
Kirk Johnston, Pastor First Presbyterian Church Paola, Kansas
Hurray for Martin
Posted Wednesday, March 28, 2007
I am in Atlanta and had the good fortune of bumping into Bill Martin and a number of his congregation several years ago at an Intelligent Design seminar in South Carolina. They had a zeal and sincere surety about serving God, which was apparent with an initial shaking of hands during an introduction.
Circumstances have had me visiting his church a half a dozen times since in St. Pete. I was so impressed with the congregation’s methodical, dogged commitment to truth and, ultimately, Bill’s leading a large number of folks in doing the difficult, but courageous and correct thing.
To me, the issue was, and is, pretty clear cut. Staying with the PCUSA is not an option for anyone wanting to experience the fullness of what God has in store for his children in these sadly demented times. Compromise comes with a cost. The world desperately needs the love of God and the light of the truth. Bless Bill Martin for his indefatigable graciousness in dealing with this apostasy.
Shame on the PCUSA for the positions it takes against godly congregations that have poured their time, treasure and talent into their churches. Shame on them for thus denying to those congregations what our Founding Fathers held to be self evident – that they, the denomination, derives “their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Their denying those rudimental “certain unalienable rights” to these congregations will one day require their accountability.
Dean Kolbinsky Atlanta, Ga.
About Pastor William Martin and Cornerstone Church of St Petersburg
Posted Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Thank you for the comprehensive and accurate article on NEPC and the PCUSA.
Unfortunately, Bill Martin will shoulder the entire financial brunt of the PCUSA decision to not authorize a dime of severance pay due to the fact that Bill will to speak God’s Word through Cornerstone Church. The severance letter was the perfect metaphor for the PCUSA and its PUP report, which states “peace, unity, and purity” but accomplishes the opposite. Yes, the devil is at work all around us. Bill’s severance letter ended, “Yours in Christ. …” Bill Martin is a warrior in Christ’s army, and he will receive his due reward in eternity.
Jim Gagliardi St Petersburg, Fla.
Action against church ‘reflects poorly on Prospect Hill Presbytery’
Posted Wednesday, March 28, 2007
I want to thank the Rev. John Pehrson for his response [Letters, March 23, 2007] to my comments concerning Riverside Presbyterian Church in Iowa.
Unfortunately, Pehrson failed to examine the news stories and documents related to the church’s dissent. He mistakenly writes that Prospect Hill Presbytery could not utilize the dismissal procedure because the church had already renounced the jurisdiction of the PCUSA. Yet, it was only after an Aug. 14, 2006, presbytery meeting that Riverside renounced the jurisdiction of the PCUSA. Prior to the presbytery meeting, Riverside made a request to be dismissed. The presbytery did not even consider dismissal an option and immediately released the church’s pastor. In Riverside’s letter to the presbytery, following the presbytery meeting, Riverside’s session wrote, “It is the intention of the presbytery to never act upon our lawful request to be released as a congregation.”
Prospect Hill Presbytery’s attitude toward the dissenting congregation corresponds to the directives outlined in the notorious “The Louisville Papers.” Pehrson writes as if he is unfamiliar with “The Louisville Papers.” The presbytery’s refusal to consider a charitable dismissal of Riverside Church is the fundamental problem.
The presbytery seems to think that this dispute is all about them and their interests, rights and constitutional duties. In reality, though, this approach is selfish and reflects poorly on Prospect Hill Presbytery. Riverside’s case appears to be an example of a presbytery that has uncritically accepted the hardball tactics of “The Louisville Papers.”
Jeff McDonald Omaha, Neb.
I respect and admire Martin and the rest of the staff
Posted Wednesday, March 28, 2007
As a charter member of Cornerstone Bible Church, I would like to add that I respect and admire Pastor Bill Martin and the rest of the staff for being obedient to God’s call. After all, wouldn’t it have been easier for Bill Martin and his wife to go to another church or another community and sit back and relax?
With our trust in God, we press on as we walk through the road less traveled, looking ahead to a new beginning. As our chosen verse says:
- “Forget the former things, do not dwell on the past. See, I am doing a new thing in your midst. Now it springs up, do you not perceive it?” (Isaiah 43:18-19).
Joanna Y. De León St. Petersburg, Fla.
Regarding ‘Longtime pastor leaves denomination’ article
Posted Wednesday, March 28, 2007
As one of those felt led to leave the PCUSA with Pastor Bill Martin, I just wanted to compliment you on your accurate reporting of the event and the issues surrounding it.
As a now former member of NEPC, I felt your article captured the spirit and essence of what happened. Pastor Bill truly has a heart for the Lord. After this whole affair, I question if that is the case with the PCUSA.
Eric J. Kolbinsky St. Petersburg, Fla.
Cornerstone is a ‘telling development’
Posted Wednesday, March 28, 2007
The departure of the pastor, staff and a good chunk of the membership of Northeast Presbyterian Church’s membership is a telling development, indeed.
First, a trusted pastor (he was there for 21 years, so they must have trusted him!) tells his congregation that the PCUSA is irretrievably lost to apostasy, cannot be reclaimed, and is unfaithful to God, unfaithful to his Word, unfaithful to his people, unfaithful to the Gospel, and unfaithful to the Great Commission. He teaches from Scripture that the faithful must not remain yoked to the unfaithful. And many follow him.
The New Wineskins Strategy Report concluded that, faced with such a situation, faithful options include both departing and staying, so long as the call for each option came from God. Those who chose to remain at Northeast expressed many concerns and reasons for staying.
Let’s look at those excuses. Are they an expression of faithfulness to God?
1. Who would evangelize the neighborhood? That is a legitimate concern, although one wonders how you evangelize to a neighborhood in the name of a denomination that is unwilling to expressly confess Christ as “the way, and the truth, and the life?” That may be the reason that they have not yet crossed your doorstep.
2. Who would be left to reform the PCUSA? That is a concern for those who truly want to save the PCUSA from its national leadership. In light of the PCUSA’s conduct for the past two decades, I pray that the folks espousing this excuse have recently seen a dry fleece on a wet Florida front lawn.
3. Whether walking away would be disrespectful to the church’s forebearers? I have the advantage of being a member of a nearly 300 year-old church, so we are fairly safe in saying that our forebearers would have been appalled by the PCUSA of 1983-present. Northeast presumably knows its history and, if its forebearers were accepting of apostasy and expediency, I suppose this is a valid reason. They know for sure.
4. Not wanting to leave a property in which there was so much financial ($8 million to $10 million, by Martin’s estimation) and emotional investment. Aha! “The Louisville Papers” win! If you threaten their property, they will stay. Better re-read Matthew 19:16-30.
The in terrorem philosophy of “The Louisville Papers” also is evident in the opposition to a severance package for a pastor and staff who had done the right thing and saved a congregation the agony of protracted litigation. What a witness to the neighborhood and the world that would have been: folks who disagree on theology nonetheless sending forth a part of their body to carry out the Great Commission. Nah – can’t do that. Louisville won’t like it.
Why? In the months since the publication of the NWAC Strategy Report and the Orlando convocation, I have received numerous phone calls from elders and members of churches who say, “Where can I find out more about what is going on in the denomination? We hadn’t heard about PUP, the Trinity paper, or any of the other things you guys wrote about. We asked our pastor and he told us not to worry about it. Now we’re worried.”
The proposed gag order on Pastor Martin was, I suggest, evidence that the bureaucracy knows that it is completely out of synch with the grassroots of the denomination. They are terrified that new EPC congregations will attract many of the faithful, and they will do anything to keep the lid on.
In the meantime, we need to support Cornerstone – spiritually and financially. They witnessed to us; it is the least we can do.
Michael R. McCarty Elder-member NWAC Strategy Team