PCUSA’s politics do not further the faith
Posted Friday, June 29, 2007
Noticeably absent from the Washington Office’s position on immigration is any mention of Christ, faith or religious freedom. That is because its position is pure and simple politics.
Now, having said that, we must recognize that it is certainly proper for the church to engage in the political process, as being faithful does not abrogate one’s responsibility to participate in governance. But the question then becomes one of the purpose of the church’s participation, and its witness to the faith it seeks to further. Neither side of the immigration debate can lay claim to being theologically right.
It is clear that the Washington Office of the Presbyterian Church (USA) does not further either its position or the faith with any logical arguments or articulated faith-based position. It simply takes a political position for the sake of taking a political position.
Playing pure politics with faith dilutes the Gospel message, and is therefore a very dangerous game to play. While the church should not shy away from taking a political position, it should do so in a manner faithful to its membership and, more importantly, faithful to the faith. Nothing in the Washington Office’s actions accomplish either.
Forrest Norman Hudson, Ohio
The PCUSA no longer has a message
Posted Friday, June 29, 2007
Presbyterian Church (USA) churches are abandoning the PCUSA because the PCUSA no longer has a message.
The social Gospel has been a dismal failure for nearly 100 years, and the PCUSA will continue to lose PCUSA churches and members. The PCUSA is the blind leading the blind.
Lou S Nowasielski Wilmington, Del.
Increasing number of congregations leaving the PCUSA
Posted Friday, June 29, 2007
In the past year, you’ve reported what seems to be an increase in the number of Presbyterian Church (USA) congregations voting to leave the denomination.
Is anyone tabulating this data and comparing it to pre-PUP vote numbers? I haven’t seen any reports about the size of the exodus. I’m interested in both the number of churches and the membership population they represent.
Neal Humphrey Fruit Heights, Utah
A response to Christine Kooi
Posted Friday, June 29, 2007
There are some [Letters, June 28, 2007] who would question a church having 160 present of 400 members for a congregational meeting and would intuit some form of impropriety.
Well, let us look at the statistical report of the Presbytery of South Louisiana and the congregations there:
University Presbyterian (where Kooi is a member) in 2003:
Membership on Rolls = 373 – Worship attendance = 157
In fact, a great number of churches have worship attendance well under 50 percent of their membership. Conspiracy? Or the sign of a dying denomination? All of us know that statistics are dangerous.
Bill Crawford Pastor, First Presbyterian Church of Thibodaux, Thibodaux, La.
A response to Mark Karasek
Posted Friday, June 29, 2007
Mr. Karasek [Letters, June 25, 2007] made note of the 10 Commandments in response to my latest letter and the importance of following them. I could not agree more.
Yet, I think his remarks lead me to wonder if he is truly reading the Bible or watching the great Hollywood movie from the ’50s with Charlton Heston in the role of Moses throwing down the tablets and causing a mighty explosion, thus the wrath of God?
The fact is the Exodus account has some interesting statements. Look at Chapter 21. It notes (King James): “Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them. If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go free for nothing.”
In fact, in further reading, you get the drift that owning people is OK. Is it really? Well, maybe so. It’s there in black in white.
Does owning people make their bodies a holy temple to God or to the master?
Mr. Karasek also notes: “This nation was once blessed by God and was a light to the world in terms of missionaries, etc. Now, we are one of the largest recipients of missionaries from other countries.”
Well, I don’t think this is a surprise. The fact is America needs to wake up and smell the coffee, to use an old saying. We are too focused inward and somehow think we will save the world on our own, forget about Jesus Christ.
Yes, that is true. Just look at the current world today. America is going to save Iraq. Get real. In our boasting, we simply make fools of ourselves and claim to be the savior of the world. But, in fact, that is humanistic in putting faith into a obviously human system. It’s not liberal or conservative, just lack of common sense. We all know better.
We need the missionaries coming here now, for common sense, decency and love of each other is quickly fading.
This raises another interesting question. If Mr. Karasek truly believes that God loses patience, why would missionaries be coming to America? Actually, God should be sending an atomic bomb to America to wipe us out. I expect that would be easy for some crazy group out there to do.
Going back to the debate on same-sex relations, isn’t that amazing that it causes so much fuss? Mr. Karasek was right in challenging me that I did not include physical relations between persons of the same sex as sin. He may not have perceived my point in that the relations do not necessarily negate our body being a holy temple. I have yet to have heard concrete evidence that same-sex physical behavior in the context of love will not make our bodies holy temples when we know Christ as Savior.
I will add that I was fortunate to have two loving parents of the opposite sex who are still together and led me in my Christian faith. They certainly complemented each other and I am most fortunate in having the perfect role models Mr. Karasek notes for parenting. I’ve met many others who also complement each other in the same manner, yet they are of the same sex. But, in all cases, they are part of the Body of Christ. To believe that God will condemn love between two persons that is just as affirming as any other makes no sense.
Only Satan condemns love. Think about it.
Earl C. Apel member , Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church , Cincinnati, Ohio
Washington Office speaks for a minority of Presbyterians
Posted Friday, June 29, 2007
The call to action on amnesty for illegal aliens from the Washington Office is just another example of that office speaking for a minority of Presbyterians. It’s also another example of why that office should be abolished.
Joe Woods
EPC vote on transitional presbytery was ‘all-but-unanimous’
Posted Thursday, June 28, 2007
In your articles about the Evangelical Presbyterian Church’s approval of the New Wineskins Transitional Presbytery, you have stated several times that our 27th General Assembly approved it “overwhelmingly.”
Having served as a commissioner there, I think it might be an encouragement to your readers, as well as a testimony to the genuine difference in the EPC, to note that this isn’t exactly accurate.
This assembly – the largest in our history-approved the New Wineskins Association of Churches Presbytery with only one “nay.” And having done some sniffing around, it seems from what I’ve gathered that that single “nay” was not cast because that commissioner disliked the proposal in principle, but because he had some concerns about the precise details of the proposal.
I mention this because there is a difference between “overwhelming” (which could be 60, 70 or 80 percent) and “all-but-unanimous.” I hope that this vote illustrates to your readers that it is indeed possible to be Presbyterian and irenic. In this, the most significant assembly since the EPC was constituted in 1981, our denomination has exhibited (in my mind) the substance of what Jesus prayed for in His high priestly prayer of John 17 – that we would be one and that we would be one in love.
Rev. Austin Olive Faith Evangelical Presbyterian Church , Covington, La.
A response to the Quincy church story
Posted Thursday, June 28, 2007
If 162 out of 400 members voted to leave the denomination, then that, in fact, means 40.5 percent of “Quincy, Ill., congregation votes to seek dismissal.”
Your headline is imprecise and misleading since its wording implies that three-quarters of the congregation voted to leave, while the article reports that in actuality three quarters of those voting wish to leave.
Christine Kooi Baton Rouge, La.
Questions for the moderator
Posted Thursday, June 28, 2007
Kenneth W. Long of Wichita, Kan., [Letters, June 27, 2007] has requested questions to ask our moderator, Joan Gray. I have a couple.
When she visited First Presbyterian in Montreat (last January, I believe), she stated she had not read “The Louisville Papers.” She is something of a polity expert, holds a high elective office in the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the documents in question only added kerosene to the fires of discontent after the 2006 General Assembly. Why hadn’t (or hasn’t) she read them?
If she has read them, what are her thoughts?
Cindy Coleman Glen Alpine, N.C.
What would you ask the moderator of the PCUSA?
Posted Wednesday, June 27, 2007
The moderator of the Presbyterian Church (USA) is slated to visit First Presbyterian Church in Wichita, Kan., in early August. As one who has many issues with the PCUSA, I intend to ask some questions, if there is an opportunity to do so.
I am very unhappy with the PCUSA’s meddling in foreign affairs and domestic political issues through their Washington, D.C. lobbying office. To the best of my knowledge, they did not ask my opinion or the opinion of any other member about any of the causes that they promote. I resent being used and misrepresented in this way. I disagree with their promotion of abortion ( partial-birth abortion, especially), the ordaining of homosexuals and the general watering down of the values of the Presbyterian Church.
My ancestor’s must surely be rolling over in their graves at the current condition of the church. On my mother’s side of the family, I am descended from the Guthries of Scotland, some of whom were Presbyterian ministers, both in Scotland and the U.S.A. Many generations of the Guthrie family laid their lives on the line in the defense of liberty and the preservation of their religious convictions.
One question that I intend to ask of the moderator is: “Does the fact that the PCUSA has lost over two million members make you and other leaders of the church wonder if there is something wrong with what you are doing?”
My question to readers is, “If you were present at the moderator’s visit; what would be the questions that you would ask?”
Kenneth W. Long Wichita, Kansas
The flight from main stem Presbyterianism
Posted Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Now that the developers have installed a considerable amount of infrastructure, the flight from the main stem of Presbyterianism seems to have begun, as noted in recent articles.
Churches that are part of this movement appear to be looking for the stability of traditional and conservative Christianity enjoyed in a setting relatively free of the messiness of church politics and progressive theology. Like those who have moved to avoid the drug scene discovered drug dealers, they also realize the potential for business in pristine areas those who plan to affiliate with other Presbyterian systems will probably find the totters’ of progressive theology will soon be in their midst, too.
By leaving the Presbyterian Church (USA), conservatives have elected not to continue to address the messengers of progressive theology, perhaps thinking it will simply die as the former main church sinks into bankruptcy. Unfortunately, the powers that motivate progressive theology continue to be very determined to spread their gospel and will do so perhaps much more easily without the conservative churches that chose to leave. Therefore, one might conclude all Christians become more vulnerable to liberal thinking.
But how did we get to the point we are at now? In my opinion, we failed to guard the gate. We failed to remember that, in a democratic system of church government, anyone let in has the potential to rise to the top of the system. Because conservatives, like myself, tend to avoid controversy and embarrassment, we don’t like to closely question seekers or candidates for ordination or commissioners to higher political bodies; nor do we want to participate in litigation that might confer upon us the title of “witch hunters.” Therefore, we seem to wish bad things will simply go away by God’s command.
My interest in these matters was stimulated by being elected an elder commissioner by my presbytery to two general assemblies, where by lot I was assigned both times to serve on the Committee on Ministry. Each time, I worked with the Presbyterian Coalition and other similar groups to achieve the goal of defeating the overtures that would permit homosexuals to be considered for ordination. Although we were successful on both occasions, I must say the opposition was well organized and very boisterous in their lobbying. To me, it seemed like it would be only a matter of time – unless, of course, the Lord drastically interfered – they would win.
Although the Reformed organizations are well managed, they simply do not seem to have the obvious support of the rank-and-file conservatives in individual churches. These pew sitters would seem to rather just talk about the problem and then sit back and see what happens, with the thought that they can always leave if they get too uncomfortable.
One last observation: It was only after I became an elder commissioner to General Assembly that I discovered the vastness and the depth of the problem. Somehow, this awareness of the problem must be taught nationally to both the elders and pew sitters through laymen that have taken the time to study and understand the problem. Pastors, on the other hand, already have studied theology and usually have come to their own conclusions regarding the problem. Because they are our leaders, we tend to rely upon their conclusions and judgments. Therefore, unless church elders and pew sitters are highly motivated, the problem continues to be superficially understood, which can result in knee-jerk actions such as separation, leaving the problem out there to spread itself around even further.
In closing, we remember the Apostle Paul writing that we Christians should put on the full armor of God as we move about our tasks. And to me, it means we must fight progressive theology, which truly is, in my opinion, unsupported by Holy Scripture.
Donald Mitchell
Trickle Down Stupidity’
Posted Wednesday, June 27, 2007
The Presbyterian Church (USA) is promoting divestment in Israel and other American corporations. At the same time, the PCUSA is investing in the Baptist, Methodist and other religious organizations.
Good Christians are leaving the Presbyterian Church and joining other religious organizations and taking their pocket books with them.
This Presbyterian policy is called “Trickle Down Stupidity” and it starts at the top.
William M. Reeves Birmingham, Ala.
The PCUSA’s obsession with property
Posted Wednesday, June 27, 2007
I would like for someone to explain to me how Matthew 8:18-22, Luke 9:57-62 and 1 Corinthians 6:7 is compatible with the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s positions on property issues.
O.D. ‘Skip’ Slaughter Kingsport, Tenn.
Two words on Brownsville church case
Posted Monday, June 25, 2007
All I can say is: evil and greed!
Thomas R. Harms
About the Heartland Presbytery meeting
Posted Monday, June 25, 2007
I am an elder on session of a church within Heartland Presbytery, and I was a commissioner to the June 16 presbytery meeting. Thank you for your report of the meeting, and I offer here some data, unofficial but from my notes.
In the perfecting process, the vote on the amendment (brought by the Rev. Doug Burford) to the main motion (the committee on ministry motion) was 46-79 and the amendment failed. The vote for the substitute motion (presented by the Rev. Dave Moore) to become the main motion was 44-91, so the substitute motion failed. The vote to approve the main motion, the committee on ministry motion, was 91-39, so it was approved.
What was scheduled in the docket for less than 25 minutes (time allowed for the entire committee on ministry items) lasted well over two hours, but I did not record the time. As others have said, it is a shame the meeting was not videotaped. Beyond the fact that voting was orderly by the raising and counting of pink cards distributed only to commissioners, the committee on ministry portion of the meeting could have been used as a teaching tool on parliamentary disarray.
Let me also clarify the comment in the letter from John West [Letters, June 21, 2007] regarding the “substantial time” given for a pro-life presentation and presence in Heartland Presbytery.
First, yes, there is a pro-life presence generally at every meeting of Heartland Presbytery, brought by Heartland Presbyterians Pro-Life, a chapter of Presbyterians Pro-Life. Neither Heartland Presbyterians Pro-Life nor Presbyterians Pro-Life are official entities of the denomination. I am a member of both boards. The Heartland Presbyterians Pro-Life presence at meetings of presbytery dates back to the ’92 policy of our denomination and pregnancy resource centers and alternatives to abortion. Each year, Heartland Presbyterians Pro-Life complies with whatever policy is determined by the presbytery in order to be a visible witness and provide resources.
Although we have presence with our display table, it is extremely rare that something about pro-life activity is spoken on the floor. So, it was a rare thing indeed that at the June 16 meeting I rose twice to speak regarding pro-life. It should be noted, however, that neither time was specifically granted on the docket. The first was during the opening time in the docket for introductions. Presbyterians Pro-Life Executive Director Marie Bowen (Pittsburgh, Pa.) was in town and present at the meeting, so I introduced her. The second item was during announcements where I provided information on the abortion-recovery packet that Heartland Presbyterians Pro-Life has prepared for each congregation in the presbytery, and extended an invitation to a pastors’ luncheon and a ministry-equipping workshop that Heartland Presbyterians Pro-Life will hold in September. I was inviting all of our churches to be equipped to minister to those around their congregations affected by abortion.
During breaks, Marie was not overrun by folks flocking to greet her, and only a couple of people came by the table for their church resource packet. It could very well be that other things were on people’s minds with the committee on ministry report coming up right after lunch.
However, I appreciate Mr. West’s mentioning the pro-life activity. Heartland Presbyterians Pro-Life does, indeed, have many friends in Heartland Presbytery.
Di Lupton elder , First Presbyterian Church , Olathe, Kansas