By Michael Gryboski, Christian Post
A congregation in Kansas that recently voted to leave Presbyterian Church (USA) for a more theologically conservative group is in a legal battle over its church property.
Presbyterian Church of Stanley, a congregation of about 1,000 members located in Overland Park, will have to go to court with its former PCUSA regional body, the Heartland Presbytery.
A spokesman for the Church of Stanley, who requested to remain anonymous, told The Christian Post that the central issue of the legal dispute was ownership of the church’s property and assets.
“The legal dispute is about … the property,” said the spokesman to CP on Tuesday, noting that “the presbytery claims they own” it.
The spokesman could not provide ample details about the matter, but did comment to CP that arguments will likely be heard in district court sometime next June.
47 Comments. Leave new
Heartlands’ back at it again, the presbytery lost the Colonial Pres case in both Missouri and Kansas, so they are going for the gusto on this one, they have had churches in Missouri bailing on them since that case was settled, maybe they think the second time will be the charm.
21% of a 1000 member church want to stay PCUSA, they should get the opportunity to do so and those who want to join ECO should leave and start a new ECO congregation in the area. Not sure why the presbytery does not assume original jurisdiction and make it so? Anyone can leave the PCUSA whenever they want, leaving with property is a presbytery decision and if the presbytery decides they want to support this 21% and keep the church PCUSA, why not? May God bless both these groups as they find their new homes for ministry…
Why should 21% of the church get the building that most likely the other 79% paid for, that’s a joke, it’s the churches property, not the presbyterys, that was decided in the Colonial case. So the Presbytery is going to take a chance on this one. Since I know revisionist don’t usually tithe, it’s unlikely that the 21% could keep the building up without someone else paying for it anyway.
@ James H: The congregation was constituted by the presbytery, our polity clearly guides that the congregation’s property belongs to the presbytery for the use of all in the presbytery and the larger Church as a whole – what you’re describing is a congregationalist framework (majority rule by the congregation) – this is a Presbyterian PCUSA congregation. The people who supported this congregation and its facilities gave their time and talents to God – no strings attached – right? Now they want to assert control of those gifts, in other words they really gave to their “majority rules club” and not to God freely. If they now disagree with the theology or polity of the congregation’s constituting organization leave and let the remnant who want to continue ministry continue on with their blessing for God’s continued work in the life and witness of both congregations. This “I gave the money for this building” so I get to keep it – and “majority (or mob) rules” stance is out of line…
“Mob rules: aka democracy usually is okay with progressives, i.e., the PCUSA, except when it hits their pocketbook.
@FL: this is not about a “pocketbook” this is about a group of people (21% of a congregation of 1000) who profess Christ as Lord and Savior continuing a ministry that was constituted and under the auspices of the PCUSA. Why would anyone have a problem with that? If they other 69% want to affiliate with another group – there is nothing stopping them…
As an aside, either group can “continue its ministry” in another location. IMO, the most gracious solution would be for the minority to receive a ministry gift from the majority to enable them to start over at another location. Why? Because a relatively small minority of people will have difficulty in maintaining the infrastructure of a large church.
In my former Presbytery, Kiskiminetas, the gracious dismissal policy in place allowed for a church to depart if those desiring to leave received 67% of the votes cast. One church left under that policy … a 69% majority voted to leave. If that result can be honored, it is not unreasonable, IMO, to honor the wishes of a 79% majority. Many of the minority members joined a PCUSA church located next door to the departing church.
As a long time member of this church and a party in this dispute I can tell you 60% of the approximate 1000 members refused to vote because it was against The Book of Order. 300 out of a 1000 members unquestioningly followed the 10-30 members leading this . The minister in this church in the last 4 years has systematically with subterfuge moved the leadership here from moderate to ultra conservative. The leadership repeatedly says they are willing to meet and work with the Presbytery and opposing members for resolution but then secretly say “we will not talk to you, see our lawyer”. The leadership has been told to “share fairly” by the judge but refuses to allow opposing member’s children to use the nursery. We ask for a Christmas Eve service (they will have 3 services) & told to contact their lawyer. We have been threatened with lawsuits if we have any contact with the membership at large. Look at the legal paperwork/emails not just their propaganda. I have never seen a minister who is willing to destroy a church for the sake of his own gain. Charter members have been bullied into silence. Session members bullied into resigning though they say “no one has been forced to resign”. They are unable to stand up to the name calling and demonizing of their Christianity. It is not the presbytery or denomination in this fight it is members who have paid for and supported this church for 35 years asking the presbytery for help.
In my observations over the years, Heartland Presbytery seems especially ungracious in the way it deals with congregations attempting to depart. The result is, well, a pile of ashes for the Presbytery, as they expend precious resources pursuing futile court actions (futile in their part of the country). The targeted congregations also have to expend monies that otherwise could be used to spread the Gospel and perform ministries of compassion. Very sad.
The presbytery did assume original jurisdiction. A PJC decision was rendered in favor of the “true church”. This group in leadership refuses to hand over the keys, passwords, financial records and security codes. They are holding the building & property hostage. The presbytery filed a lawsuit because PCOS session said you will have to sue us in civil court if you want to talk to us. they still refuse to talk to us unless we are in court and you know how long it takes to get a court date.
@ John E – your bias is showing in this comment “Because a relatively small minority of people will have difficulty in maintaining the infrastructure of a large church.” – you assume that the remnant group will not grow (you limit the Holy Spirit!) and/or the congregation will not be be supported in re-development by the presbytery as a whole. The presbytery as a whole can support this remnant group for the time needed to re-develop sustainability for the congregation. As another aside, it appears the remnant PCUSA group in this congregation is bigger than 21% – as this “vote” to leave was out of order and without permission of its constituting organization. Majority based “voting” dismissal policies are not appropriate for PCUSA presbyteries and will likely be revised – each case in a schism must be looked at individually to see if there is a viable remnant congregation to continue as a PCUSA ministry in the particular place, if so property decision should be made with that in mind by the presbytery – our beliefs and polity demand it.
…well thanks Dana for the clarification and this is very telling – who here is being “ungracious” James H and FL??
Presby Layperson
Trusts are set up by the people are paying for and or controlling the assets for the benefit of another, not the other way around. These churches NEVER agreed to the trust clause or they would have put in in writing or in the property deeds. The PCUSA trust clause is back door stealing, plain and simple. Half the States don’t even recognize them. The vast majority of the churches in the PCUSA the denomination didn’t lift a finger to help them grow or pay for anything.
The gall that a bunch of people can vote to take something away from someone that didn’t pay for it is crap. And don’t give me the “we are a connectional church” balony, that was blown away in Detroit when the AI passed illegally, and your kind high jacked the GA into the far left agenda that louisville keeps trying to shove down our throats, and you want to talk about”mob rule” give me a break!
@ Jame H – such a gracious response! Last time I checked my congregation elected elders, who elected commissioners to presbytery, who elected commissioners to GA who voted on any and all business before that body – same as your congregation right? Just because you don’t like the outcome you think it;s OK to resort to name calling (“your kind”) – exactly what “kind” do you think I am? I profess Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. — On the trust issue, this congregations had the opportunity to leave at reunion under Article 13 (I assume) – if they did not – they are part of the PCUSA and should abide by the constitution that organizes them. We are a connectional body and that has an impact on how we do things and behave toward each other.
Presby Layperson,
“you assume that the remnant group will not grow (you limit the Holy Spirit!) and/or the congregation will not be b supported in re-development by the presbytery as a whole”
With all due respect we have history since 1983 to tell us that they can use all the money they want, but the progressive agenda is driving people from PCUSA churches.
It’s special pleading to assert that there is some big majority of people wanting to stay in the denom because many people did not vote for whatever reason. It is of course impossible to say what their intentions were as they chose not to participate. Seems to me if they really wanted to stay PCUSA, they would have actually voted and made their opinion known, even if they objected to the vote. If a majority voted to stay, of course the church would not leave.
Does the loyal remnant need the current facilities to grow and thrive? Saying they do is what limits the work of the Holy Spirit. THAT’s bias.
I guess I should say the parts where I assign some blame to the minister is my opinion and the opinion of many there.
with all due respect to you James H – empirical evidence and research suggests there are many causes for people leaving mainline churches in the last 30 years – your jumping to “progressive agenda” as the sole reason shows you are clearly biased toward a particular view of this complex and multifaceted issue…
Dana – in the PCUSA we are all ministers of the gospel, you should not feel intimidated in presenting your observation and experiences that the Pastor of your congregation is inappropriately influencing members and congregational leaders down an inappropriate path of schism.
You say it yourself John E: “loyal remnant” – these mock votes by schism advocates will not be supported ever by those who respect the theology that is the foundation of our our polity. The presbytery constituted the congregation – the presbytery should be involved in any and all changes, to say otherwise is a de facto assertion for local congregationalist polity control.
Thank you. It is nice to hear someone say I shouldn’t be afraid to express my thoughts but that is the climate we have been worshipping in for about 3 years. But our group found each other before we all left and we are trying to fight for the church we love. Many can’t enter the doors again until a decision is made–too stressful. They will be back, they promise. Hopefully there is something to come back to. We had hoped to have a court date in January. But the ECO lawyer “couldn’t possibly be ready until summer.” We are praying to be able to celebrate the birth of our Lord and Savior in our sanctuary. So far they refuse to negotiate making up excuses.
This is what we lived with–people in our faces calling us un-Christian and they still are. It is why many left for a more peaceful place to worship and I don’t blame them.
Well, Presby, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree about the propriety of the whole situation. Thanks for the discussion.
How sad that the discussion of the disposition of the FPOS property focuses solely on the property trust clause and “polity” of the PCUSA rather than the larger question of what would best forward the Kingdom of Jesus Christ. If we are truly interested in the theology of the Presbyterian Church, we ought to throttle anything that smacks of idolatry. I contend that the property trust clause is idolatrous, because it contends that all properties of a local church (whose head is Jesus Christ) “…nevertheless are held in trust…for the use and benefit of the PCUSA.” Do not all churches (and their properties) belong to Jesus Christ? Is it not possibly the height of arrogance for a presbytery to self-servingly decree that a minority of 21% who wish to remain in the PCUSA are the “True Church” to whom the church property belong, thereby disenfranchising the 79% majority who wish to serve the Kingdom of God in another denominational setting? What makes the 21% the “True Church”? As far as I can tell, only the fact that they wish to remain in the PCUSA. Hardly a theological justification. What concern is shown for the 79%? Not much. Would it not make greater sense for the glory of God to bless the significant majority with the decision to remain in the property which better fits their size, and to seek from the majority suitable funding to help establish the 21% minority in a new location that fits their present needs? Why overly favor a small group of believers over against a group that is 350% larger, simply because one wants to wave one denominational flag, and the other wants to stand under the banner or a new denomination? Have we become so partisan as Christians that we are coldly willing to promote our own denomination at the expense of the Kingdom of God? Or are we to the point where we declare in the name of Christ that the denominational minority is the “True Church,” and the departing majority is “The Reprobate” — the False Church, those under the curse of God? I am ashamed as a Presbyterian that the historically positive name of this Reformation-birthed movement is being dragged through the muck of worldliness all for the sake of maintaining a material empire rather than acting in the best interests of the larger Kingdom of God. May the Judge of all the earth do right in this sad conflict.
To the degree the Presbyterian Church of Stanley is able to challenge the property claims of the PCUSA, the congregation ought to be praised for having the backbone to fight. The revisionists are the ones who should leave. Eventually, the judges will see that.
For many if not most judges, religion is a great mystery. The judges may finally see that the church doctrine is akin to the law. If an immigrant, say, comes to this country and finds our laws strange, we do not change the law to suit the immigrant, do we? The advisement against homosexuality, the belief that it is wrong, has been part of our law and our religion for thousands of years. The US Constitution prohibits Congress from establishing and enforcing religious doctrine to the contrary.
The ‘trust clause’ is bogus. That’s why half the States in the US won’t enforce it. But wait – maybe I’m wrong. Let’s extend the logic of the trust clause by amending the by-laws to read, “All property of the members is held in trust for the congregation.” That way if a member joins they can later go to another church, but their homes belong to us.
Dana: “This is what we lived with–people in our faces calling us un-Christian and they still are. It is why many left for a more peaceful place to worship and I don’t blame them.”
At no time Dana did I or any one else say you were not a Christian, frankly that’s a cheep shot, but given the attitude that’s been displayed to the majority that wants to leave the PCUSA, I can see why there are problems. No one questions your heart, but you cannot defend the ungodly and frankly the disaster the GA that brought this about. The winner takes all attitude and I mean “take all”, property endowments etc is what we all object to.
The people who paid for these churches did not intend for an anything goes church. That’s why with all due respect the left wing churches remain mostly empty. People by their vey nature want standards, and the PCUSA now has them, but the wrong ones. The GA was high jackedby the left, and you may be surprised but I’m somewhat a moderate. However things went too far this time, we are not the ones who started this conflict, but we will not go down drain with the rest of the PCUSA, we will stand for truth, and as such we will fight for the assets that were paid for by Godly people who want to lead this World to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.
James H. – Dana is pretty clearly talking about her experiences as a member of Stanley church. Your response in the beginning of the second paragraph implies that you are a member of this congregation on the “other side;” is that true?
It also appears from the news stories and from Dana’s account (which has not been challenged on any factual grounds) that some sort of vote was taken unsanctioned by the presbytery or otherwise out of order, and a very large number of members did not participate. If so there is no clear sense of what “a majority” would mean.
Presby Layperson
We do have a exodus problem in the PCUSA, frankly speaking the PCA has more missionaries on accident than we have on purpose. You’re about mainline churches in decline, but why go to church when you’re told anything goes, and God’s ok with that.
pres
I’m not a member of the Stanley church, I’m not even in the same state.
If so, then you have no idea what treatment she and other members of Stanley church who wish to remain in the PCUSA have lived with.
I can tell plenty by the comments made here of those that are bound and determined to take the building away from the majority who voted to leave…it’s sour grapes. I’m sorry that this happened, but it’s exactly this winner take all attitude since the GA, maybe you all are starting to know how we feel on this side of the issues, since the poke in the eye we got through the AI on marriage let alone Israel.
Give me a break on the treatment she has had to deal with, it’s nothing like the way the moderate to conservatives have been treated by the likes Heartland presbytery etc who now control the PCUSA.
James H – it seems that no one posting here other than Dana is claiming to be part of the Stanley congregation. So apparently you know nothing of Dana’s experience. Not to mention that there is no mention anywhere about the number of members participating in the vote that Dana indicates was out of order and not attended by many, many members, so you have no way of knowing the wishes of a majority of the congregation. What we do know is that the teaching and ruling elders of this congregation have publicly agreed to be governed by the church’s polity.
pres: “What we do know is that the teaching and ruling elders of this congregation have publicly agreed to be governed by the church’s polity.”
I think we can safely say that the church’s polity went to hell in a hand basket by the illegal AI vote on gay marriage at the GA.
two weeks until Christmas, and the window of time for the illumination of conscience from our Lord. He has asked for all Protestants to get down on their knees and ask for forgiveness, so that the warning will be less painful, and will not lead to instant death from the shock of seeing one’s soul in a state of mortal sin.
You may be surprised that I too am a moderate. Not liking the far left or the far right. But at this church when the Bible is shaken in your face with people saying “you don’t believe in the Bible” or “you don’t belive in Jesus Christ” they have gone too far right. I like to side on Jesus’ side where all are welcome in the House of the Lord not just those who are “like-minded”. The greatest commandment of all is to believe in the Lord your God with all your heart, all your mind and all your soul and to love one another as yourself. Here they say all are welcome but we must believe as they do–that PCUSA does not believe in the Bible and they do not believe Jesus Christ is our Savior. Although the same people are not Bible literalists–they like to pick and choose which parts they follow. How can you have it both ways? They did decide this week to allow PCUSA children in the nursery IF they pre-approve them. Very Christian like!
Just so we’re clear, this 21% number was of those that were present. Presently, the PC(USA) members that want to stay meet for the 8:15a service at the Presbyterian Church of Stanley’s building. The number of people that show up to that service ranges between 20 – 30 people per week.
Interestingly enough, there is another church less than five miles from this church. Their vote was greater than 90% to leave, but they vacated the building instead of “fighting” an ungracious Presbytery. I’ll let you do the research into “how well” they are doing; but you probably won’t be surprised by what you find.
I’m also a long time member of PCOS; 15 years attending, 13 years a member.
This is the first I’ve heard of 600 people refusing to vote because “it was against The Book of Order.” That’s a new reason, and I do fully intend to track down that reasoning. If you have any information on the matter, please let me know where I can find it.
I won’t comment on your comments re: Pastor Eric for the simply reason that you aren’t stating it as fact. So, I’ll respect your opinion and move on.
I’m really scratching my head about this part. “We ask for a Christmas Eve service (they will have 3 services) & told to contact their lawyer.” To my knowledge, no lawyers have been involved, yet talks continue re: the PC(USA)’s usage of the Presbyterian Church of Stanley’s church during the 05:00p hour on December 24th.
Here’s the thing I’m not understanding. Pastor Eric’s message didn’t miraculously change the first Sunday after the vote. He still preaches the same God-inspired Word every Sunday. His message has always been rooted in deep biblical truth. Nothing has changed with our children or youth programs. Our Choir still sings the same music.
I’m not going to tell you how to feel, but I am going to ask you to challenge the reason why you feel the way you do. Is this because you love the PC(USA)? Is this because you love the building? Or is it because you feel like Pastor Eric has directly done something to discredit the Word of God?
Um … to quote from another comment here, evidently someone who was there for the vote:
“Just so we’re clear, this 21% number was of those that were present. Presently, the PC(USA) members that want to stay meet for the 8:15a service at the Presbyterian Church of Stanley’s building. The number of people that show up to that service ranges between 20 – 30 people per week.”
The Stay PCOS PCUSA group agreed to take any of the 3 service times that ECO would give up. To get 8:15 we had to go back to court on Nov 13. The ECO lawyer still did not want to give up a time. The judge ordered the ECO lawyer to call the church leadership right then and there to get a time. Before with a united church that service only ran 20 -30 attendees. We chose not to disrupt the 9:30 time which is the most attended because when all this is decided many of those people will stay no matter what denomination is preaching. We also understand that many of our supporters will not step back in that church until the leadership that has emotionally abused them is gone.
If you are talking about 1st Pres of Olathe they chose to vacate because their aging membership was so low they could not afford to maintain the building or payroll. They voted to close up shop and joined a community church. I know members from that church.
I have been a member longer than this but that is not the issue here because I know we have both experienced the ugliness of this. I will comment about our pastor in another reply. I take it you were elected elder/deacon this Sunday so I hope you track down many things that are happening there. The stay PCOS PCUSA has tried to make sure all their supporters have access to what is being said and happening with this issue. We were refused access to any church membership rolls, email addresses, or house addresses so our communication was limited to info from a 2year old printed church directory. A newsletter handed out one Sunday or emailed contained information that any vote by the congregation to leave the denomination was considered illegal by the Book of Order which all church leaders vowed to uphold. PCUSA supporters were told that they could refuse to vote or if they wanted to express their feelings at the vote that was understandable. I believe it was also stated at the Oct 5 congregational meeting that this vote was considered illegal by the Book of Order so that it was recorded in the minutes of meeting. It was stated that minutes of the meeting would be available afterwards but if there are any we have been denied those. Anti-PCUSA members did a mailing and email slam for weeks asking members to be sure and come vote. You acknowledge that around 60% did not vote.
As for Christmas Eve, the AC in a Nov 20 email sent to your Committee of Counsel asked for a Christmas Eve service. That request was denied. The Committee of Counsel stated they refuse to negotiate any item not specially directed by the judge. There has not been a request from Stay PCOS PCUSA that has not been referred to the ECO lawyer. The only reason you are negotiating now is the threat of going back to the judge who might give us the 6:00 service instead of the 5:00 time we are willing to take as of this time. You need to ask to see ALL the emails being sent by the Committee of Counsel and your lawyer. One supporter was even told by Bill Koning to contact your lawyer for use of the PCUSA flag and banner. Why spend the money on a lawyer to hold the PCUSA flag hostage when you do not want them. More later to document some more things.
These evangelical/latter-day fundamentalists do read the Bible VERY selectively, if they read it at all. Even though they rarely read it, they have very rigid views about what it says, particularly about how other people should be living their lives.
Folks, once you’ve read the Bible in its entirety, the horrible parts, the beautiful parts, and the confusing, nonsensical parts, it is tragically easy to tell the posers from the true scholars. The posers may wave it around like a theatrical prop and worship it like a golden calf, but one thing they seldom do is actually read the thing…or very many other books for that matter. (It’s CHEAP shot, dude…not cheep shot. Good Lord.)
The good news is, you don’t really have to read the Bible to pretend to be an expert. All the good parts have been made into movies. There is even a remake starring Bat-Moses. Nothing says “Happy Holidays” like Passover. Oy!
Oh Red Dirt…..It is my observation that the ECO-separatists at our church are REALLY good at ignoring rules they don’t like and making up others when it suits them. “We don’t change the laws to suit the immigrant,” you say? Yet you support those who arbitrarily change rules to suit themselves. Pot meet kettle! ; )
Here is the thing, Red. When you join a Presbyterian Church, abiding by and upholding the “Book of Order” is part of the deal. Members count on it for protection of their own interests. If you don’t like the deal, you are welcome to take your business elsewhere, as is your privilege and your right. This is America, after all. But just because you give the organization a dollar, that does not mean you own the place, nor does it give you license to steal from that organization because they make you mad one day.
Giving money to a charitable organization is a one-way street. Their stuff does not magically become your property just because you wrote a check, no matter how much they may tick you off. (I’ve been on the wrong end of this deal myself, so I understand you you feel.) If someone joins a church AND gives money without bothering to learn anything about how the organization is governed, that’s a problem….primarily their problem, I think. BUT if that person was led to believe when they joined that the rules governing the organization don’t exist or don’t have jurisdiction…well….that’s quite a different problem isn’t it?
Organizations run best when they have rules. In PC(USA) the rule book is the “Book of Order.” You agree to it when you join. You vow to uphold it when you are ordained…as a pastor or an elder. If you don’t like what the “Book of Order” says, you change it…through constitutional processes, not via coups d’etat, not via mob rule. The recent progressive shift in General Assembly is a natural consequence of the conservatives packing up their toys and going home. You kind of made this weather. Don’t blame us for the rain.
Weather reports aside, at Stanley, our esteemed session has renounced jurisdiction of the “Book of Order” quite vociferously. When a pastor or elder renounces jurisdiction, they just tore up their elder card, thus abdicating any right or authority they ever had to own, operate or decide anything with regard to a Presbyterian church as far as I’m concerned. After the session voted to leave PC(USA), but before the 10/5 congregational vote, they renounced jurisdiction multiple times, in writing, occasionally to the PJC (church court) of all people. Their reasoning I think, was that once the session voted, the church was no longer PC(USA) at that point.
The purpose of the illegal 10/5 congregational vote was to prove they had a mandate from the people. A mandate they did not get. Fewer than half of the 1000 members they still claim to have showed up for the sham vote. After receiving mailing after mailing about the weird, Kafkaesque “standing rules” for the election, who could blame them for staying home? Fewer than a third of the thousand voted to leave. That is no majority.
What I really wonder about though is the moral integrity of someone who would break ordination vows so flippantly and seemingly intentionally. Personally, I wouldn’t follow someone like that to the grocery store, let alone some made-up denomination…or…..endless litigation.
You seem to have some legal expertise, Red, but let me tell you something. Overturning the implied trust in the state of Kansas is not going to be easy. Over a century of case law is pointing the judge toward hierarchical church law….some cases VERY recent. This could always go either way, of course, as court cases always do, but I think the ECO folk know that their chances of riding off into the sunset with all the assets (millions of dollars worth) are not good unless they manage to insult, abuse and humiliate the PC(USA) loyalists until they give up and leave. Hiding the friendship pads and offering plates so we can’t use them. Kicking our children out of the nursery. Threatening to start a sound check in the middle of our Christmas Eve service. Seriously You can NOT make this stuff up.
Fortunately this ugliness is coming from just a handful of the more ardent separatists. Members who went along with this ECO scheme initially, many of them friends of ours, are becoming disillusioned with the post-ECO atmosphere at Stanley. We hear from them all the time and they appreciate what we are doing. Eyes are being opened. One or two at a time. : )
Our congregation may look small, but most of our supporters won’t feel comfortable setting foot in the church again until the ECO circus leaves town. This is quite understandable, given the toxic atmosphere for those of us who aren’t “like minded.” But once the ECO people are gone and normal services and programs are up and running, folks will start to come back. We won’t have to start a new church from scratch as so many fear.
Things will never be the same again after this. Too much has happened, but there is a good chance things will be better than they ever were. Different, but better.
After all this lengthy discussion, maybe the 21% should take a page from Joshua and Caleb and stick with Moses and the LORD, (who apparently obeyed Presbyterian – Majority rules), or with Paul and Mark. Sometimes true believers honestly disagree on issues, and the only solution is to move on and put a little geographical space between them. Who knows, Maybe the LORD will work out things like he did between Paul and John Mark (Acts 14.36-40 and Col. 4.10).
I think this article is very helpful for us,it has solved our problem,thanks!