PCUSA property claims are laughable
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008
Overall, I liked the article, and I felt it was long overdue. There are some facts that are missing. First, I would like to state that Londonderry Presbyterian Church (LPC) is the oldest continuing Presbyterian Church in New England, founded in 1735 (source http://www.londonderryhistory.org/townhist) this predates the first general assembly of the historic PCUSA in 1789 (source: http://www.history.pcusa.org/pres_hist/briefhist.html & http://www.history.pcusa.org/pres_hist/connection2_900.jpg) by 54 years. I am mentioning this for a reason, and I must state that I am not a lawyer (so this is not to be taken as any form of legal advice).
The claims of the PCUSA being the trustees of any property are laughable for churches that predate the trustee clause. Let me put this into modern terms most people can understand. Let’s say you join a club, or are a member of a club, and you really like it. One day the club decides to amend its laws to say that it owns your house and you are just holding it for them. You don’t ever sign over control to them, so the house should still be yours.
Eventually, you decide that you are no longer interested in that club, so you leave. The club is mad at you, so they come and try to seize your house by trying to change the locks and declare themselves owners because of the amendment to their laws. Unfortunately for them, you never did sign over the ownership of your house to them, so they have no case. This is the basic idea, and problem, behind the PCUSA’s trust clause. What is sad is that they have allocated a lot of money to fight for the property of churches that leave the PCUSA under the false claims of the trustee clause.
Another point left out of the article is very important as it defines the character of the Presbytery of Northern New England (PNNE) and the those who wish to remain in the PCUSA (LPC-PCUSA for now). As the saying goes, actions speak louder than words. After the Londonderry Presbyterian Church (the corporation) filed the lawsuit to seek clarification of the ownership of the property (this included the restraining order to protect the status quo), the LPC-PCUSA congregation filed a separate lawsuit which sued each of the elders personally who were on session (they are the members of the Board of Trustees of the LPC Corporation) at the time of the vote to leave to recoup losses to the LPC and claim official ownership of LPC. I should note that the best guess I have about the size of the LPC-PCUSA congregation is about 86 (based on another article), and they were in the minority by a big margin in the vote to leave. Later, the new elders of session that were added this year were added to the lawsuit. A little while after the lawsuit against the individuals on session was filed by the LPC-PCUSA group, both lawsuits were combined because they were similar.
This action that puts the personal property of the members of our session at risk of being taken is despicable and low! How low is the PCUSA willing to stoop? What actions will be next? Is this how we are to act? LPC didn’t sue the PNNE or LPC-PCUSA members individually. If this is how the PCUSA plans on fighting for the properties, then the stakes were just raised. When you do something against what the PCUSA thinks is right, does this mean that they sue individual members? Technically, the LPC-PCUSA group sued the individual members, but they are acting on behalf of the PNNE and PCUSA since they view the PCUSA as a hierarchical denomination. This is scary with long term repercussions.
Joe McCay
Marks of a cult: sex, money and power
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008
Expanding on what Dave Anderson said, there are three things that generally mark a “cult” – sex, money and power. When it gets to be about one or more of these, the group is on a slippery slope to being called a cult.
Let’s see, we’ve got the sex part. Homosexual practice is no longer to be considered sinful. What’s next? Perhaps we all break out the salad oil and plastic tarp, get naked and jump in a pile. If we’re “loving and committed,” God and the church have to bless it, right?
Money? Let’s collect a couple of million to fight for the property we have declared that we own.
Power? Take the property of faithful congregations that want nothing to do with us by taking them to court using the two million we collected. And, oh yeah, one of the other hallmarks of cultism is coercion. Make anybody who wants to leave the group lose something they hold dear. That way we keep them in line.
Hmmm … If it waddles and quacks, reckon it could be a duck?
Charlie McFarlin
Promulgate the truth
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the beliefs that are the foundation of our faith. There are several issues that cannot be compromised.
I implore you to continue to promulgate the following: Jesus Christ is the only Savior and Lord, the Bible is the Word of God written, marriage is exclusively the union of one man and one woman, practitioners of homosexual behavior will not be ordained to office, and the church will work to preserve life. I am a member of Faith Presbyterian Church in Cranston, Rhode Island.
May we be faithful to the Confessions, the Bible, and to the Lord Jesus Christ.
Martha Rekrut
Three misspoken defenses
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008
I must have missed this first time around. The Rev. Tom Tewell had an affair but said it was not consummated. Maybe I’m missing something here: an affair without sex? “Why” comes to mind, but “how” is a better question. This sounds familiar. Let’s see, William Jefferson Clinton smoking marijuana but not inhaling. Why bother? It gets better when he proclaims he “did not have sex with that young woman.” Bill we understand, since he is lexically challenged. “Depends on what you mean by ‘is'” says it all about Bill’s approach to lexicography.
In the end, Tewell lost his prestigious position at Fifth Avenue Presbyterian, resigned from the chairmanship of the Trustee Board at Princeton Seminary, and is involved in a lawsuit for something he says he did and then did not do. Sounds like Senator John Forbes Kerry voting against it before he voted for it or – whatever he meant. These three have a common thread: they are individuals without a foundation, a standard, those who do not think language means anything. The final contempt they have for us is that they fully expect us to believe them. Believe what – their spin on their behavior or their behavior? Recalling the ancient aphorism “Actions speak louder than words,” this writer finds their actions telling us who they really are.
Don’t fret for these gentlemen, they have all made out rather well in the coinage of the realm. Bill went from being the homeless president to a centi-millionaire. Kerry is still a senator married to the mega rich Theresa “57 Varieties” Heinz. And Tewell is now going to renew pastors to the tune of $275,750 annually. I can only wonder to what he is renewing pastors.
David A. Medeiros, elder Londonderry Presbyterian Church, PCUSA
Bravo for Layman article
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008
About Jack Adams’s article about Don Stroud, I am compelled to say an enthusiastic “Bravo and amen!”
Jim Berkley Director of Presbyterian Action
Keep politics out of PCUSA coverage
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008
What does the statement that the presbytery vote in 2001 “looks much like the divide in a presidential election” have to do with the price of tea in China?
Certainly the presbyteries located in urban centers do vote more in favor of homosexuality (With many exceptions). Our urban centers also tend to vote Democratic. (With many exceptions) But as someone who supports the positions of The Layman, I resent the implication that Democrats support repeal of standards and Republicans do not. That is the implication of the headline and the one sentence where you mention the past presidential elections. Why else would you mention the past presidential elections other than to have your readers make that connection. Ask yourself. Why did you put the sentence in your story? What purpose did it serve?
I am a Democrat and do not support repeal of biblical standards. John H. Adams, I am sure you are a Republican. That’s fine. But you shoot yourself in the foot by offending thousands of Democrats who read The Layman. Leave partisan politics out of The Layman and focus on what matters – the decline of biblical authority in the Presbyterian Church. Again, I support the Layman’s positions on scripture and on the reasons for the decline in the PCUSA. Paul Strand
Mr. Adams, a contributing editor to The Layman, has been a Democrat for 42 years. The editors
Church holds ‘Solemn Assembly’
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2008
If it’s of any interest to you, First Presbyterian Church in Lake Jackson has already had a Town Hall meeting. Last Sunday evening we held a Solemn Assembly, based on Joel 2. A transcript of the message given that night is on the church web page at www.fpc-lj.org Keep up the good work. Alan Trafford First Presbyterian, Lake Jackson, Texas
‘Cult’ has taken over PCUSA
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008
Having read the many letters about the GA, it is easy to see that this is a cult that has taken over.
Why do I say that? There are two elements here that you see in a cult: One is that sexual immorality is usually a part of the cult. Two, cults always use fear and intimidation to keep their members.
I’m glad we left the cult, even though it was at great expense. Dave Anderson Allison Park, Pa.
‘When did the EPC secure an injunction?’
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008
“The Evangelical Presbyterian Church, from my experience, secured an injunction prohibiting the Presbytery of Northern New England from exercising its Book of Order pastoral nature.” – The Rev. Tom Woodward (letter, July 15)
When did the EPC secure an injunction? As far as I can tell from this Layman story, Londonderry Presbyterian Church secured the injunction. Would someone enlighten me as to the correct lawsuit by EPC that Tom is speaking of?
Jim Welch Oklahoma
(Editor’s note: The EPC is mentioned in the lawsuit, but is not a party in the lawsuit that is to go to trial July 28.)
Legal war chest is wakeup call
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008
Were I still contributing to the PCUSA, this misuse of “up to 2 million dollars” would be ample reason to stop. I hope that a large proportion of those still financially supporting the bleached sepulcher that is the PCUSA will see this as the wakeup call they need to stop their support, also. Warren B. Howe Bellingham, Wash.
PCUSA unclear about homosexuals, sex
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008
Jim Berkley notes in his letter (July 15) that Janie Spahr and others have lost their cover with the removal of the authoritative interpretation of 1978 and the fact that G-6.0106b is still in place and may still be in the future.
However, I think it is important to take a look at what G-6.0106b actually says and does not.
It states: “Those who are called to office in the church are to lead a life in obedience to Scripture and in conformity to the historic confessional standards of the church. Among these standards is the requirement to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman (W-4.9001), or chastity in singleness. Persons refusing to repent of any self-acknowledged practice which the confessions call sin shall not be ordained and/or installed as deacons, elders, or ministers of the Word and Sacrament.”
G-6.0106b does not address homosexuals or so-called homosexual practice at all. In fact, it notes there are standards (more than one) and notes that among those standards is one that would obviously apply to heterosexuals (men and women) since marriage does not apply to homosexuals in the PCUSA. So if there is more than one standard, it makes perfect sense that there are also standards for homosexuals not stated here that include loving, committed relationships that, in fact, can be blessed in the PCUSA and so are not sin. And there are numerous other standards not explicitly stated by G-6.0106b.
G-6.0106b, of course, does note obedience to Scripture and conformity with the Confessions. It should be no surprise to anyone that in the PCUSA, there are various interpretations of Scripture. And while one of the Confessions may use the term “homosexual perversion,” I as a homosexual have to ask, “Just what does that mean?” I do believe there are cases where homosexual activity is perverted, just as heterosexual activity can be. But there are also cases where homosexual activity is loving and not sinful (or not perverted), just as heterosexual activity can be.
Needless to say, the underlying problem has been the lack of clarity in the PCUSA as to what it, as a body, really thinks about homosexuals or even sex in general. And it is certainly not easy or simple, as I think these many years have proved. Earl C. Apel Deacon, Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church, Cincinnati, Ohio
‘The momentum is too much to overcome’
Posted Monday, July 21, 2008
I had a front-row center seat to participate in the disaster that unfolded on the Friday of GA 218.
To Jim [Yearsley, letter, July 18], I would say: yes, I filed a dissent. Yes, I would call for a recall of the assembly, if I believed that it would matter.
The assembly was unbalanced from the beginning; anyone watching votes knew that the progressives held a 60-40 majority. No one with any political sense on Sunday night could believe that we were not about to receive a painful beating. The fact that the vote was as close as it was demonstrates that there are sane people in the progressive camp who know that driving the ship into the rocks is not in anyone’s best interest. But the momentum is too much to overcome.
So, God’s hand must be in our destruction. There can be no resurrection without crucifixion; perhaps it is time for the PCUSA to hang from the nails it has forged and driven home all these years. But Christ is not imprisoned by death – and His Church will arise from this death. Somehow. Rev. Clay Allard, Senior Pastor Oak Cliff Presbyterian Church, Dallas, Texas
The PCUSA is no longer great
Posted Monday, July 21, 2008
I have been reading The Layman and visiting this Web site many times this year and have grown more concerned with the increasingly successful effort on the part of an arrogant minority to successfully subvert the witness, direction and fidelity of the PCUSA. The last GA meeting really takes the cake!
De Tocqueville correctly stated that the core of the goodness of America is dependent on the righteousness emanating from its pulpits. As de Tocqueville wrote, “I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there; in her fertile fields and boundless prairies, and it was not there; in her rich mines and her vast world commerce, and it was not there. Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness, did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good. And if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”
The same thing can be said for the PCUSA, in which the majority of its members are still good, practicing evangelical Christians. However, a church that is good does not allow a small minority to impose their unholy and apostate view of Scripture on the majority. A church that is good does not permit her Lord and Savior to be demeaned. A church that is good does not permit any group to corrupt the sacrament of holy marriage by allowing people of the same sex to claim the right to be either legally or sacramentally wed. A church that is good does not permit unrepentant, practicing homosexuals and adulterers to hold high offices within the church. A church that is good does not support the murder of unborn children during partial-birth abortions. A church that is good would never admit that it is powerless to enforce its own constitution. The majority of Presbyterians are good people, but good Christian people do not stand by while their deepest beliefs and traditions are literally and figuratively trashed!
The PCUSA has ceased to be good, and is no longer great! I, frankly, am tired of all the politically correct, polite and flaccid responses to heresy! We need another John Knox – now! John W. Blaikie Centereach, N.Y.
‘May God have mercy on the PCUSA’
Posted Monday, July 21, 2008
This message is for Covenant Network churches, More Light churches, That All May Freely Serve, GLBTs, the moderator, the stated clerk and most of the 218th GA commissioners:
Many of you are cheering now that the ordination of homosexual officers is the approved policy of the PCUSA. You may find comfort in knowing that the ordination policy will discourage evangelical, Bible-believing Christians from uniting with PCUSA churches. You are also delighted at the prospect of presbyteries defeating the “fidelity/chastity” provision in the Book of Order.
You did not disapprove of the Peace, Unity and Purity report, which gave us anything but. You are unconcerned that this report caused tens of thousands of church members and several churches to leave the PCUSA in the past year.
Many churches would be happy to leave the PCUSA, but don’t want to engage in property disputes. Our pastor, his staff, over half the session and half the congregation split to another denomination rather than engage in a legal property battle with the Presbytery of Tampa Bay. Many longtime friendships were broken. We have not had a full-time pastor in a year and a half. Our church is struggling for survival.
You can rejoice over one of your spokesmen who proudly announced that homosexuality is not a sin, or another who said the PCUSA has ended discrimination against GLBTs. God gave us His laws to live by, yet you have proved that leaders in the PCUSA can disregard the laws of God when it conflicts with personal sexual desires. To those who strictly abide by God’s laws, you call homophobes.
You remained silent when a same-sex marriage was conducted at the 218th GA. You believe that “full inclusion” embraces those who flaunt sexual misconduct. Read Colossians 2:8 (NIV).
May God have mercy on the PCUSA.
Jack Vanderbleek Northeast Presbyterian Church, St. Petersburg, Fla.
Writer ‘hardly an unbiased observer’
Posted Monday, July 21, 2008
While the Rev. Jim Yearsley (letter, July 18) is very astute in his response to the very Rev. Thomas Woodward (letter, July 15), the main point is missed at the outset.
Woodward has a bias to suing local congregations. Failing his ability to raise local funds for suing local congregations, he has gone to the General Assembly for “mo’ money.” Woodward is hardly an unbiased observer of the 218th General Assembly.
The Rev. Tom Woodward has initiated action to have greater denominational funds pay his presbytery’s costs of litigation against a local congregation. The way it is worded, it appears more like a proposal for a new profession.
Perhaps he should find another church to pastor, or failing that, get a job selling used cars.
His resolution will gain legal expense aid from the General Assembly to sue congregations for their church properties and accounts. Eating out of the substance of families, widows and orphans … you shall know them by their fruit.
R. Scott Linton Past deacon and children’s Sunday school teacher, Orinda, Lafayette and Moraga, Calif.