Episcopal church comes along and trumps PCUSA
Posted Thursday, February 26, 2009
Thank you! Episcopal Church.
Even though I have abandoned all hope in the PCUSA and have distanced myself from any affection for the denomination, I remain to be faithful rather than leaving to be faithful.
There is occasionally a small payoff. This is one of them. Just when I think no church body could be any more faithless, rootless or thoughtless than the progressive wing of the PCUSA, the Episcopal church comes along and trumps us.
A Buddhist Bishop – what a bunch. Jim Yearsley Tampa, Fla.
Assignment for the marriage committee
Posted Thursday, February 26, 2009
Golly, gee! The PCUSA’s moderator has created yet another committee to report to the General Assembly in 2010. Its purpose is to study civil unions and Christian marriage. Noticeably lacking from those named to membership on the committee is Jesus Christ! Is this an oversight or a fear of His vetoing the politically correct and cultural accommodation of the committee’s “predestined” conclusions and recommendations?
Scripture says, “There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.” (Prov. 14:12, NKJV) The Message is more graphic: “There’s a way of life that looks harmless enough; look again – it leads straight to hell.”
The good news is: “Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord GOD, “and not that he should turn from his ways and live?” And: “Look to Me, and be saved, All you ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.” And: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!” And: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.” And: “Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord.”
Your homework assignment is to find, and meditate on, these Old and New Testament references! Art Montgomery Santa Barbara, Calif.
Those in favor of NewB are getting out their vote
Posted Thursday, February 26, 2009
As was pointed out in a recent posting of mine, one of the troubling aspects of the current round of voting on “NewB” has been the decline in numbers of people actually casting votes, and particularly those who have been casting votes to uphold the current standard. I have looked at the results from the 15 presbyteries (thus far) that have “switched” from their previous vote(s) in favor of the current standard. In 11 of those the result would have been different if just the average number of votes in the previous rounds of voting had been there to vote again. The votes in favor of NewB in those presbyteries was less than the average number of votes in favor of the standards in the previous rounds. (For example, in Greater Atlanta the average vote totals the previous three times was 276-226 in favor of the current standards. Had anywhere near those 276 in the previous voting been there to vote, they would have easily defeated the 243 who voted in favor of NewB. However, only 233 were there to vote against NewB.)
Those who read The Layman and who live and can vote (or contact voters) in presbyteries yet to vote, should be aware that this vote would not be nearly as close as it’s becoming if people would simply get out and vote. Those in favor of NewB are highly organized and are getting out their vote. We need to be doing the same. Is there someone you can call to encourage to be there when your presbytery votes?
Rev. Harper Brady Concord Presbyterian Church, Baden, Pa.
The fact is the definition of chastity varies throughout the ages
Posted Thursday, February 26, 2009
The Rev. Paul Strand in his letter notes that progressives should have been pushing gay marriage in the first place since if it is approved by the PCUSA that would automatically bring about approval of gay ordination. However, Mr. Strand ignores one important fact. Not every person being ordained is married or in some sort of relationship whether they are gay or straight. All single persons have to do according to the current G-6.0106b is live in “chastity in singleness.” And the fact is the definition of chastity varies throughout the ages. What one person in 1,500 might consider chaste behavior for a single person is simply not the same as some would define in the 21st century. Yet the PCUSA offers no specifics as to what chastity really means. People draw their own conclusions – sort of a local option I guess. And since G-6.0106b has been in effect, there have been lawsuits, churches leaving the denomination, and I think some would say chaos, confusion and mayhem. In other words G-6.0106b has in effect brought about sin in the PCUSA, a word I also use carefully.
The reality is the current G-6.0106b does not reflect honestly what the PCUSA as a whole really believes and practices regarding ordination. And it divides rather than insuring unity and purity.
The proposed amendment is simply more consistent with the rest of our constitution and in reality what is practiced. It’s a question I think of the PCUSA for once “talking” what it is “walking.” I of course understand the feelings of Mr. Strand and others about so-called homosexual behavior. But to claim that the current ordination standard will ensure unity and purity is simply untrue based on facts.
My suggestion to Mr. Strand and others is if you honestly believe the current standard is worth preserving and protecting, then you need to step up to the challenge to defend it. This means being more explicit as to what “chastity in singleness” really means for any single person (gay or straight) in the 21st century and having this officially accepted by the PCUSA. But if you honestly believe, which I have a feeling you might, that the PCUSA would never accept such explicit language, maybe it is time to accept the fact that the language needs to reflect a greater reality and I think something that is more unifying in the end – the proposed amendment. Otherwise the PCUSA may very well continue as it has done with chaos, confusion, some mayhem, and sin. Earl C. Apel, deacon Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church, Cincinnati, Ohio
How can anyone read the Bible and believe that homosexuality is permissible?
Posted Thursday, February 26, 2009
Anyone who is willing to reinterpret the Bible to a belief pattern of being either neutral or pro-homosexual has an agenda that supersedes the Holy Bible. How can anyone manage to read the Bible and believe that homosexuality is permissible when there are express warnings about the uses of the male and female body, abandoning the natural function thereof and burning in unholy passion? Some people will never accept all of God’s standards. Are the Pauline verses of Romans to be disbelieved and abandoned, so a faction of the human race can feel good about themselves? May it never be.
In the Garden of Eden, God created first Adam and then Eve, not Adam #1 and Adam #2. The English language cannot make this any clearer. Neither can the Greek or Hebrew. Thou shall not commit adultery. If people who approve of or tolerate this alternate life style wish to live this way, so be it. Don’t try to ratify that belief system with God’s Holy Bible and the church. Danny Yochum, elder Big Creek Presbyterian Church, Hannibal, Mo.
How soon can the EPC come to Morganton, N.C.?
Posted Tuesday, February 17, 2009
How soon can we get an Evangelical Presbyterian Church in our neighborhood? I don’t appreciate being part of a presbytery voting like this. Richard Conway Morganton, N.C.
Amendment B should not pass because it creates chaos and confusion
Posted Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Well the Presbyterian Church is finally getting around to marriage. Obviously, the unspoken context of the discussion is gay marriage. And I say, it’s about time.
The progressives have always had it backwards — strongly advocating for the ordination of a few gay activists before pressing for gay marriage for thousands. Gay marriage has always been a goal. (See the Covenant Network website, Jeffery Siker article.) Why hasn’t it been the primary goal? Gay ordination would fall into place should gay marriage be blessed.
Whatever you feel about gay ordination, pro or con, Amendment B should not pass because it creates chaos and confusion. The ordained gay officer and his/her partner would be put in limbo. The candidate, but not the partner, would pledge to presbytery to live, essentially in a marriage relationship. But the church, officially, would not recognize the relationship. This is a mess. The change to local option would also create mayhem and lawsuits as some presbyteries would reject ordained pastors from other presbyteries. Amendment B promotes chaos, confusion and mayhem and this — and I use this word carefully — is a sin.
To my traditional allies who oppose Amendment B, I say don’t even mention sexual sin in your discussions at presbytery. No one is listening. For too many presbyters the justice/love hermeneutic trumps whatever we might say about Romans 1. Instead speak of the chaos and confusion this amendment produces. There is no peace and unity with the passing of Amendment B — just lawsuits, anguish and more division. And to my progressive friends I say, start over and do it right. Scrap the ill-conceived Amendment B and press for gay marriage if you must. Shouldn’t this always have been the stated goal? For too long you have put the cart before the horse. Rev. Paul Strand Palos Verdes Estates, Calif
Brown forgets who Jesus associated with
Posted Tuesday, February 17, 2009
In his most recent letter to the editor, Larry Brown, writes “… we can at least draw great comfort from the knowledge that the PCUSA will go down resolutely fighting for what really matters: the rights of the gay Palestinian tomato picker!” Obviously, Mr. Brown meant this in a humorous way, but I was immediately reminded of those with whom Jesus and his followers associated. I couldn’t help but think that Mr. Brown’s attempt at humor could have been re-written by critics of a young church in the first century to read something like, “we can at least draw comfort from the knowledge that the church will go down resolutely fighting for what really matters: the rights of the leprous Samaritan female tax-collector.” I am amazed at how easily Mr. Brown seems to forget who Jesus associated with, and in turn, for whom he expected his followers to stand up and fight.
Rev. Bart Roush Geneva, Ill.
Committee member supports marriage as between a man and a woman
Posted Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Thank you so much for the article on the GA Marriage Committee, however, I do wish to clarify two points: Firstly, I did not “volunteer” to serve on this committee. I was invited and, after much prayer and consideration, I agreed.
Secondly, my stand on marriage is a matter of public record: I was the commissioner who submitted two commissioner’s resolutions, one each at the 214th (12-09) and 216th (10-16) assemblies for PCUSA to support the Federal Marriage Amendment which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Even though both resolutions in their original form were defeated, it was the 216th GA that approved the language: “General Assembly entities shall not advocate for or against the Federal Marriage Amendment” to answer my resolution.
Your prayers for the committee members and work are greatly appreciated!
Rev. William C. Teng, pastor Heritage Presbyterian Church, Alexandria, Va.
Curse the money that has been extorted from Kirk of the Hills
Posted Friday, February 13, 2009
Lord God, I pray to you in the name of Jesus Christ today, that you would for your own glory curse the money that has been extorted from your servants at Kirk of the Hills. I pray you would cause this fund to be a poison and that misfortune would follow it into every account into which it is placed. I pray it would be of no benefit to any entity that uses it. For you, O Lord, have taught us that it is against your holy and good will that we should steal. May this disaster be for those who have broken your holy law a testimony and witness concerning your justice; and may all your servants who watch this ruin transpire be encouraged that you, O Lord, do move among the affairs of men, promoting your own good name and the welfare of your chosen ones. Rev. Russ Westbrook, teaching elder Riverside Presbyterian Church, PCA
Where’s Scripture in marriage study?
Posted Friday, February 13, 2009
Thank you for the heads up on the “marriage committee.” Noticeably absent from the bulleted items on the committee’s points of study was what Scripture says or how it influences policy and practice. Was this an oversight of the Layman’s assessment or is it a void in the project? Rev. Steven L. Seng Wellsburg, W.Va.
Fight for what matters: ‘The rights of the gay Palestinian tomato picker’
Posted Friday, February 13, 2009
In her commentary regarding Tulsa’s Kirk of the Hills church (now an EPC congregation), Peggy A. Alexander wrote:
With the average PCUSA church having 205 members and an average Sunday attendance of 114, the denomination can’t continue to lose members at the rate of 50,000+ each year. The PCUSA is bleeding to death at an alarmingly rapid rate, and nothing is being done to stop it other than waving the “property trust clause” flag to intimidate churches from leaving.
While all of the above may be perfectly true, we can at least draw great comfort from the knowledge that the PCUSA will go down resolutely fighting for what really matters: the rights of the gay Palestinian tomato picker! Larry Brown African Bible College
‘The awesome and inclusive love of God through Jesus Christ’
Posted Friday, February 13, 2009
How sad and closed-minded can one be about the awesome and inclusive love of God through Jesus Christ. If only we all would use the Word of God through Jesus Christ expressed when one reads, studies and interprets the whole Bible. The men (generic) who interpreted the Bible to form the discriminatory part of our Book of Order could have made our church, and led others to the salvation guaranteed us all, without the exclusiveness expressed in our Book of Order relative to the ordination of those who may have the best suited talents and faith to help our church. Ted Coppock, elder Westminster Presbyterian Church, Des Moines, Iowa
‘War of attrition’ tactic by the liberals is succeeding
Posted Friday, February 13, 2009
Here is something else that I’ve put together regarding the number of voters voting in the current round. I don’t know if you all have done any kind of analysis on this, but I think it’s an interesting (and disturbing?) trend.
What is of real interest is the number of votes being cast this time around. While the number of presbyteries who have voted is still small enough for me to do this with my calculator, I looked at the 44 who have voted so far. Of these, three have had a voice vote (either this time or the previous time) so I’m throwing them out. But in the 41 who have recorded numbers of votes, I find this. Only three of the 41 have more commissioners voting this time around (a total of 13 more votes in those three presbyteries). One presbytery had the same amount of votes cast this time. But the other 37 presbyteries have averaged 25 less voters per presbytery (over 900 fewer votes cast this time around in those presbyteries).
I’m not a great statistical analyzer, but at the very least this says to me that people across the denomination are saying “We’re tired of voting on this over and over and we’re just not going to mess with it anymore.” Looks like the attempted “war of attrition” tactic by the liberals is succeeding. They will continue to beat this dead horse until the only ones voting are those voting for their position, because all the evangelicals will have left (either literally or by just not showing up to vote). Not a good prognosis. They’re succeeding in tiring us out.
Harper Brady Concord Presbyterian Church, Baden Pa.
What constitutes a heretical church?
Posted Friday, February 13, 2009
Re: “Two sides of church property dispute and fidelity to beliefs”
What constitutes a heretical church? Are we on the cusp of a new definition of ‘heresy’ by default? A hierarchical church plus the loss of anti-heresy congregations reduces the opposition resulting in a new church, regardless of the inerrant scriptures or alleged (or preferred) history. Dawson Watkins