Public arena is not to be considered a religious arena
Posted Monday, August 30, 2004
When are we going to get it right? The public arena is not to be considered a religious arena, but rather a secularist one. We Christians should not be offended by this case. Indeed, we should be heartened. A governmental entity that shows itself to be aligned with one religion or another is subject to just what Great Falls, S.C., received. What would we think if prayers were prayed in a Jewish, Wicca, Buddhist, Islamic or other faith practice? We’d be mad as can be and we’d rise up to have it stopped. The Constitution and the laws of this country are made to protect the minority, because the majority can protect itself and abuse the minorities.
David D. Duncan, elder Swannanoa, N.C., Black Mountain Presbyterian Church
Conservatives pick Republicans over Jesus
Posted Monday, August 30, 2004
This is in response to the Aug 27 letter by Burton Schindler, but it looks like his opinion on the General Assembly’s resolution condemning the Iraq war is nearly universal at The Layman. And it’s also dead wrong.
Let’s see … where have we heard that “giving aid and comfort to the enemy” phrase before? Oh yeah, to try to silence critics of the Vietnam war in the ’70s. How many more names did such people put on the Vietnam wall? How many more names do the people at The Layman want to see on a future Iraq war memorial? The resolution condemns the actions of the Bush administration, and the fact that you have to pretend that it attacks the soldiers in some way only shows that the resolution is correct.
I don’t know why the church insists on supporting any Republican it comes across, no matter how deceitful and immoral he is. We didn’t go to war to free the Iraqi people. We went because Saddam was supposed to be a grave and growing threat to national security. Clearly he wasn’t. He wouldn’t have been even if he had WMD. We had him very well contained and under close watch, and he was not a danger to our country – until Bush started lying to us.
When the choice is between Jesus and Republicans, why do conservative Christians always side with Republicans? Hey, I hear Bush wants more tax cuts for the rich. That should please readers of the book of Acts.
Phil Hamer
G.A. action on Israel was a mistake
Posted Monday, August 30, 2004
We agree with this petition. We need to have another meeting and reconsider this outrageous position that the church took when it voted on the Israel divestment issue. We are being seen as anti-Semitic. What a terrible mistake. Perhaps we will have to make it very clear when we give our tithe that it is only to go to our local church! Please reconsider this! Thank you for your help.
Lynn and Al McLaughlin Camarillo, Calif.
Concerning homosexual lifestyle: ‘I am with God’s point of view’
Posted Monday, August 30, 2004
I have been active with you for some number of years and was in the Presbyterian Church for over 33 years. I became disenchanted with the approach taken by the main church, the General Assembly, and the Baltimore Presbytery a number of years ago and left the church in 1999.
The very fact that the church “courted” the homosexual community for close to 20 years tells me they realistically deserve what they get at this point. The church “studied” the homosexual issue for three consecutive five-year periods, which made me ill.
God, in his infinite wisdom, has stated in several places in the Old Testament, and also in the New Testament, that this type of activity is a grievous sin. For the Presbyterian Church to spend the money for at least three major studies is also a sin, in my view.
While I commend your activities in attempting to be the conscience of the church, I am now at the point of no return – I cannot support further wasted effort in attempting to salvage the unsalvageable.
When the Presbyterian Church changes its direction, and it will have to decide that on its own, the nation’s Defense Shield will have been in operation for a millennium.
I am truly sorry that I can no longer support a church that considers the possibility that homosexual activity “might” have redeeming qualities as an alternate lifestyle. God does not believe so, and I am with God’s point of view.
Please note that I have condemned the lifestyle and the activity surrounding it, but I do not condemn the person, male or female. They are sinners that can obtain forgiveness through confessing their sin, and repenting that sin. Unfortunately, they do not see it as a sin and will therefore spend eternity in hell.
Sewell Marsh Heathsville, Va.
Love between two persons of the same sex may be mutual, affirming, equal
Posted Monday, August 30, 2004
Robert A.J. Gagnon’s latest letter is most interesting. He notes: “You agree that you must always and indefinitely ‘hear and respect all voices,’ including those strenuously advocating acceptance of homosexual behavior and – if we follow the logic of the argument – any other sinful offense (incest, bigamy, adultery, pedophilia, bestiality, racism, Nazi ideology, etc.) since ‘unity cannot be attained if the voices of some members of the body are ignored.'”
He makes a good point in this regard. However, I will note that in hearing all voices one uses what Christ taught us about love and respect for others. Does incest, bigamy, adultery, pedophilia, bestiality, racism and Nazi ideology reflect the love of Christ and to others? Of course not. They all involve power or disrespect over the other person or entity that is weaker.
On the other hand, love between two persons of the same sex may be mutual and affirming and equal. And if that is the case, I fail to see the relevance or similarity.
I think the Genesis account says it well where Adam and Eve decide to know better than God and try to have power over God. We know what a failure that was. Unfortunately this sin continues through the ages where humanity tries to assert power over God at times and in many cases each other. That is the sin that is the original sin and curse we all share. And it is the curse we must not extend to others as best we can with the grace of Jesus and God.
So my question to Mr. Gagnon and others continues to be how can the mutual love and affection between two adults of the same sex equate to incest, bigamy, adultery, pedophilia, bestiality, racism, and Nazi ideology? The fact is they are not the same. And I as a gay man and Christian stand with Mr. Gagnon in condemning incest, bigamy, adultery, pedophilia, bestiality, racism and Nazi ideology.
Earl C. Apel, deacon Mount Auburn Presbyterian Church, Cincinnati, Ohio
Family will not associate with Presbyterian church again
Posted Monday, August 30, 2004
Your article is being circulated all across the web and around the world by the true believers in Yehshua Jesus to demonstrate exactly what the Lord Jesus Christ so hated – the outright stupidity, pride, arrogance, hypocritical, divisive, Pharisee and Sadducee mentality that does anything but demonstrate the truth, revelation and knowledge of the Word of God and the promise to Abraham and his lineage.
Besides your take on what you refer to as “Christian Zionism,” other errors being propagated by this denomination, such as the abomination against the Lord God of supporting the homosexual lifestyle, any and all former connections to the Presbyterian church are now dissolved by my family and we will never step foot in nor associate with this devilish denomination again.
I pray that the Lord will have mercy on your souls and cause you to come to true saving grace through his precious blood shed for you on the cross, and that his Holy Spirit will have mercy upon you and give you wisdom, discernment and insight into the truth of his Holy Scriptures. May God have mercy on your souls.
Jackie Miller
Where is the PCUSA going?
Posted Monday, August 30, 2004
Re the article [California court rules against Methodist law on church property]: Of course we all know that the provisions in the PCUSA Book of Order (G.80201) are subject to individual church interpretation, just as are the ones prohibiting ordination of practicing homosexuals. Where’s the question, do what we want, to heck with the PCUSA and their rules.
Re the article [More Light ‘sadomasochist’ on presbytery committee considering pulpit candidates] God help us. This guy is not only a member of a Presbyterian Church but also on a committee passing on would-be ministerial candidates? Where is the church going? I’m afraid I know.
Dick Carter, inactive elder Covenant Presbyterian Church , Amarillo, Texas
PCUSA is becoming the church at Thyatira
Posted Monday, August 30, 2004
It is becoming obvious that the PCUSA is, in many ways, becoming the Church at Thyatira (Rev. 2:18-28). Our denominational leaders “tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols.”
In this case, Jezebel is the prevailing secular culture. The “food sacrificed to idols” is the false teaching as exhibited by the Accra “Confession.” The hope for our denomination is found in verses 24-26:
“But to the rest of you in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not learned what some call the deep things of Satan, to you I say, I do not lay on you any other burden. Only hold fast what you have until I come. The one who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations …”
Chip Blackshear, elder Grace Presbyterian Church, Lafayette, La.
Who is influencing whom more: the church or the sexual offender?
Posted Friday, August 27, 2004
I want to thank Rev. Alison Bucklin for her thoughtful Aug. 20 letter, “Pastor disagrees with Gagnon’s pessimistic analysis of task force report.”
Rev. Bucklin was responding to my piece in The Layman, “Open letter: Task Force report distorts unity/purity message of Ephesians,” posted on June 26. She was concerned that by temporarily removing from fellowship a person engaged in serial unrepentant same-sex intercourse we might do more harm than good. She says “our approach should be the one most likely to achieve the ultimate goal.”
I share Rev. Bucklin’s basic concern. In another piece in The Layman, “Robert Gagnon to Stacy Johnson: Two positions on homosexual practice, not six,” posted on Aug. 6, I provide a similar kind of qualification under the section “Peripheral concerns about the 1978 Definitive Guidance: Membership”:
- “Most people who hold what [Prof. Stacy] Johnson calls a position of ‘categorical prohibition’ do not believe that members who engage in homosexual practice in a self-affirming way should be immediately put on church discipline. Nor do they preclude all attendance at church meetings by persons engaged in homosexual behavior or any other immoral practice. There has to be some opportunity for adequate exposure to the gospel if people are to be influenced by that message. Nor do they advocate that homosexual persons not engaged in active, self-affirming homosexual practice be denied membership. Nor do they equate occasional ‘backsliding,’ followed by repentance, with willful, unrepentant, and serial participation in homoerotic acts.”
Because I have such concerns I carefully stated in my critique of the Task Force’s interim report that “no unrepentant sexual impurity is to be tolerated indefinitely” (stress on “indefinitely”) and that any temporary disassociation is reserved for persons who “persist unrepentantly” in “egregious” sexual sin (stress on “persist,” “unrepentantly,” and “egregious”). There does have to be a balancing act of sorts in which the church constantly has to ask itself who is influencing whom more: the church or the sexual offender.
I am not sure if Rev. Bucklin wants to do away with church discipline completely or just be extremely cautious about implementing it. Yes, Jesus associated with tax collectors and other sinners. But do we really want to do away with the instructions for church discipline in Matt. 18:15-20, to say nothing of 1 Cor. 5?
I would mildly caution Rev. Bucklin or any others to be careful about exempting sexual offenses from church discipline, particularly on the basis that Paul included other vices in the vice lists in 1 Cor. 5:10-11 and 6:9-10 that we seem to be ignoring. The church at Corinth had lots of problems but at one point only, a case of adult consensual incest, did Paul recommend temporary disfellowship. There are a number of reasons for this.
First, Paul believed, undoubtedly in agreement with Jesus, that sexual sins affect the body holistically and therefore are very serious offenses (1 Cor. 6:15-20).
Second, immoral acts of sexual intercourse are by their very nature conspicuous and easily identifiable, committed by only a limited segment of the population, and tend toward being self-affirming forms of conduct. If people are going to be evicted for greed or reviling, the cases would have to be easily provable, particularly deplorable, repeated, and self-affirming instances. It may look like sexual offenders are being singled out for severe discipline when the reality is that sexual sins are more likely to characterized by unrepentance (there are very few “self-affirming” greedy people, thieves, drunkards, and violent people).
Third, because of the intensely pleasurable character of sexual intercourse, exempting from discipline all immoral acts of sexual intercourse would have a particularly pernicious impact on the moral standards of the community of faith. Rev. Bucklin suggests that it is not likely that a “weaker brother” would engage in the same sexual act. But Paul’s leaven analogy (“a little leaven leavens the whole batch of dough”) in 1 Cor. 5:6-8 does not depend on the assumption that many at Corinth would immediately begin having sex with their mother or father if the church tolerated incest. Rather, there would be erosion over time of any sexual standards or structural prerequisites.
Fourth, there is no virtue to being more consistently disobedient to the will of God. And, as inconsistent as the church might be, we can all think of serious offenses, including sexual ones (hopefully man-mother incest among them), that even the PCUSA might consider temporary disfellowship or postponing of membership. Ironically, public opposition to homosexual practice will eventually become such an offense (and perhaps already has in some individual “More Light” churches).
Fifth and finally, let us not forget that temporary church discipline itself, when conducted appropriately (i.e. with humility, self-introspection, concern, and mourning), has the ultimate redemption of the offender in view, as Paul’s remark about saving the incestuous man’s “spirit on the day of the Lord” indicates (1 Cor. 5:5).
In closing, let me remind readers what you sign off to, if you endorse the Task Force interim report:
- 1) You agree that “Christians cannot even entertain the notion of severing their ties with sisters in brothers in Christ without also placing themselves in severe jeopardy of being severed from Christ himself.” So, even though the PCUSA is already institutionally severed from other Christian denominations, if you even contemplate the idea of amicable denominational separation you could lose your salvation!
- 2) You agree that you must always and indefinitely “hear and respect all voices,” including those strenuously advocating acceptance of homosexual behavior and – if we follow the logic of the argument – any other sinful offense (incest, bigamy, adultery, pedophilia, bestiality, racism, Nazi ideology, etc.) since “unity cannot be attained if the voices of some members of the body are ignored.” You must agree with this in spite of the fact that Paul insisted in Ephesians that “sexual immorality and impurity of any kind … must not even be named among you,” that it was “shameful even to speak” of such conduct, and that such conduct should rather be “exposed/refuted” (5:3, 11-12).
- 3) You agree that “union with Christ means union with all [stress on all] the other members of Christ’s body, including those with whom one would not ordinarily associate,” apparently even if such members are engaged in behavior, or in promoting beliefs, that risk exclusion of that believer and other believers from God’s kingdom. Taken at face value, this is a complete and unloving renunciation of role of church discipline in the New Testament.
If one agrees with what the interim report says on each of these points, then I can see why one might consider my critique “pessimistic.” But such an agreement would be at complete odds with the clear witness of Scripture, with the confession of Christ’s lordship (“you did not so learn Christ,” Eph. 4:20), and with a profession of loving one’s neighbor (which according to Lev. 19:17 includes rebuke). Jesus maintained both “if your brother sins, rebuke him” and “if he repents, forgive him,” even “if he sins seven times a day” (Luke 17:3-4; cf. Matt. 18:15, 21-22). We should do the same.
Robert A. J. Gagnon Associate Professor of New Testament , Pittsburgh Theological Seminary , Pittsburgh, Pa.
Kirkpatrick: Your job security does not depend on the economy
Posted Friday, August 27, 2004
Okay, Cliff. I wasn’t too offended when you and your minions called me a war criminal and forced me to apologize for the crimes at Abu Grahib. Nor was I all that bent out of shape when you implied that supporting the war in Iraq also made me, albeit indirectly, a war criminal. But now, the fact that I am a capitalist makes me the spawn of Satan? Well, then call me the Devil.
I know that as a pastor, missionary, church-type guy you haven’t had to hold down a real job in quite some time. Unlike most people in this country, your job security does not depend on the economy or the stock market. Because of your job title and education, you are pretty much guaranteed a job in any one of 11,000 congregations pending their approval. I wouldn’t suspect that capitalism plays much of a role in your life.
However, there are millions of us, those you would denounce as “capitalists,” who work hard every day for corporations, companies and small businesses. I can look out my window and see people going to work each day at places like these. But alas, they are really working for Satan because the “capitalist” pigs that run the companies are exploiting them. I am sure you would all have us working on subsistance farms on some hippy commune, hugging trees and helping one another.
Well, when you take off that suit and tie, refuse your salary (made possible by the donations of evil “capitalists” like me), and get to back breaking work, I’d be happy to follow. Until then, I’ll be happy to make money because my company makes money. Why don’t you just stick to religion? I’ll stick to what I know: working hard for an income so that my family and I can prosper with God’s blessing. Don’t worry, I’ll be thinking of you when I use my ill-gotten “capitalist” gain to support my local church.
Stew Bryant Charlotte, N.C.
Court decision offers comfort to the enemies of Christ and of this nation
Posted Friday, August 27, 2004
If Ms. Wynne would have prayers offered to a cafeteria of deities, as opposed to the One Deity, at meetings of the town council of Great Falls, S.C., she should organize her fellow “wiccans” and elect someone who would care to pray in the name of a god that is not. The Christian members of the town council pray to the “God who is,” the great “I Am” of the Bible, when they pray in the name of his son Jesus Christ. Apparently, Great Falls keeps electing Christians, and those darn Christians keep praying in the name of the Lord. The action of the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals is wrong because it seeks to impair the free practice of the faith of those elected to the Great Falls town council. I would suspect that were Ms. Wynne to get herself elected, and the town council graciously afforded her the opportunity to pray in the name of what ever spirit or power she misguidedly believes in, there would be but one voice speaking the “Amen” to her prayer.
What actions like that of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals accomplish is the comfort of the enemies of Christ and of this nation. For if the voices of Christians can be silenced by court edicts, it won’t be long before courts will seek to compel Christian officials like the town council of Great Falls, S.C., to respond to prayers to Krishna, or Allah, lest their non-support for non-Christian prayer be construed as a “passive-aggressive” attempt to establish Christianity. The Ayatollahs must love our judges!
Jim Wilken, pastor First Presbyterian Church, Marion, N.C.
It wasn’t discrimination, it was shameful treatment
Posted Friday, August 27, 2004
A couple of quick points to Mr. Davidson. It was not a question of discrimination, it was a question of shabby and shameful treatment. I am not certain of the source for Mr. Davidson’s information. The source for my information was Dr. Githii himself.
He may have in fact had access to shuttle transportation. Simple courtesy would have mandated that he be told that. He was not. He also was not told that his black-bordered credential entitled him to group meals.
You claim he was given the same expense money as everyone else. Wrong. The only funds he had were what he brought with him personally. And as for just being another commissioner, that is a specious argument. He is the moderator of a 4.2 million member faithful Presbyterian Church who was personally invited to the 216th General Assembly by Moderator Andrews.
Trying to pretend anything else just compounds the insulting and inhospitable behavior.
Trying to justify bad behavior doesn’t do anything but make it worse. This man was treated shamefully.
Rev. James C. Yearsley Pittsburgh, Pa.
A few words on the GA: ‘despicable,’ ‘cowardly,’ ‘degrading’
Posted Friday, August 27, 2004
May we offer a few words concerning the actions of recent General assembly?
- The resolution condemning the war in Iraq as “immoral and illegal” … the word is “despicable.” To degrade our soldiers and Marines in their dangerous duty is “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”
- The inability to end the interminable efforts to insert homosexual practitioners into the clergy … the word is “cowardly.” They ain’t “gay,” folks, they’re “sad.”
- To permit the continued activities of the off-beat, off-base and off-the-wall Sophians and Covenant groups to clutter Christian minds … the word is “degrading.”
A few more assemblies like this and the once-noble Presbyterian Church will be nothing more than an obscure and dying denomination – no longer a force for anything but contempt.
Burton Schindler Bella Vista, Ariz.
What Davidson sees as bias, may appear to others as great perspective
Posted Friday, August 27, 2004
It seems that Mr. Davidson points to an intriguing issue having to do with the reporting found in The Layman. Mr. Davidson closes his letter by stating: “I hope that I have impressed on you the fact that sometimes you do not do objective reporting. Please try to do unbiased reporting in your paper.” Is he implying that other Presbyterian news sources are not biased?
I argue that you will find that certain news outlets toe the denominational line, others tend to reflect a more liberal view point, while The Layman tends to reflect a conservative viewpoint. Of course all of this is up for debate, but the idea that The Layman (or any other news source) is capable of doing unbiased news reporting is absurd. I assume that Mr. Davidson’s objection to the more conservative tendencies of The Layman plays a large role in his statements. While I might disagree with The Layman’s interpretations of these events, the basic facts do check out: Dr. Githii’s hotel was far away, he received $200 for food and found it too little, he could not speak from the podium.
Personally, I have never met Dr. Githii nor did I attend G.A. The only way I would have even known about this man was through the pages of The Layman. Would any of the other news outlets picked up on this issue? Would they have covered re-Imaginers or Gay activists? Hard to say, though now they may be forced into doing so because of the “biased” journalists from The Layman. (In terms of basic journalism 101, this is called “getting scooped.”) The Layman is merely exercising the wonderful freedom of the press in writing articles that might offend some, but not others.
What appears to you as bias, may appear to someone else as great perspective. On the other hand, Mr. Davidson, don’t forget that exclusion is as much a form of bias as anything else.
Nick Lincoln Richmond, Va.
Problems with capitalism come from living in a fallen world
Posted Thursday, August 26, 2004
Capitalism is responsible for many freedoms and an increasing standard of living around the world. Oh the horrors! Is it without problems? Of course not. But it’s not the system per se. It is the fact that we live in a fallen world. The alternative would be less freedom and more power concentrated given to fewer sinners, as opposed to all sinners.
We’ve seen the results of that. It isn’t pretty.
So let’s all be equally poor and miserable. Let’s vote against capitalism. Let’s give away our economic freedom and the right to enjoy the fruit of our labors.
Geoff Robinson Haddon Heights, N.J.