This was a very long day, which ended just before midnight. We caught up on some business that was postponed on day 5 & 6, but only after the afternoon session on the Middle East overtures for divestment, etc.
Let me just say that there was an overt bias to the entire day.
The ecumenical delegate or visitor allowed to bring greetings, was from the church of Syria & Lebanon, and while not mentioning the persecution of Christians in Syria, did mention the poor Palestinians.
Later on, some of the discussions were tilted with some speakers allowed to finish their talks while out of time, and questions from the floor that turned out more like advocacy speeches than questions.
The final straw was after the advisory vote from the YAADs, TSAD, MADS, and EADs, the Moderator called for us to gather around in a group and pray and say out loud the name of a Palestinian who was hurt because of the issues in the Middle East, and a Jewish friend who was hurt.
After that the vote was taken, and divestiture passed by only 7 votes. A body of over 620 or so, and it only passed by 7 votes. This says that the church is not of one mind on this at all.
After this passed the rest was anticlimatic, except for one overture which asked the PMA to create a study on the safety of children of both sides in Israel & Palestine.
The overture asked that the PMA, in association with the IPMN, create this study. The same IPMN who created the Zionism Unchained study that reeked of falsehoods, innuendo and outright anti-Semitism. The same commissioner that rose up on the marriage AI, rose up with an amendment to strike any mention of the IPMN from that overture. His rational was basically, we've already put a knife in our Jewish friends, why do we want to twist it too. This amendment passed overwhelmingly.
The rest of the evening was spent tweaking a lot of stuff on social justice and polity, but I was fried by that time, and two days later, would rather concentrate on recovering from the daily push and spiritual warfare of the GA.
.... and so it goes!!
Showing posts with label PCUSA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PCUSA. Show all posts
Sunday, June 22, 2014
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Day 4 at GA
We started off the day with Worship and Communion. Mark Labberton preached a great Sermon, unlike the previous day's sermon which was reported in the daily GA paper as "Post Christendom is cool, says UCC pastor", or some such.
Had to be in committee by 9:30am, however, at 9:20am I was still at Worship, and had to leave as the TE leading the Communion liturgy was talking as if she was giving a eulogy. Luckily, by the time I reached the back of the hall, the servers were ready so I was able to partake.
The rest of the day was somewhat of a disappointment. Over the years it appears that the conservatives do not do well in committee, but when they reach the plenary, things change.
I'll go give details tomorrow, but suffice it to say, there are a few minority reports from the orthodox side being brought forward. On committee 10, we had our heads handed to us, but very respectfully. Evidently at the 220th, there was some bad feelings at that committee, this year everyone understood that any change will cause pain, and potential loss.
However, right now I'm heading for bed, I'm fried and I need to get up at 6am to attend the PFR/Fellowship breakfast.
... and so it goes!
Had to be in committee by 9:30am, however, at 9:20am I was still at Worship, and had to leave as the TE leading the Communion liturgy was talking as if she was giving a eulogy. Luckily, by the time I reached the back of the hall, the servers were ready so I was able to partake.
The rest of the day was somewhat of a disappointment. Over the years it appears that the conservatives do not do well in committee, but when they reach the plenary, things change.
I'll go give details tomorrow, but suffice it to say, there are a few minority reports from the orthodox side being brought forward. On committee 10, we had our heads handed to us, but very respectfully. Evidently at the 220th, there was some bad feelings at that committee, this year everyone understood that any change will cause pain, and potential loss.
However, right now I'm heading for bed, I'm fried and I need to get up at 6am to attend the PFR/Fellowship breakfast.
... and so it goes!
Day 3 at GA
Today began bright and sunny. Skipped worship as it was going to be led by a UCC minister, who turns out, preached about (tada) how the UCC handled when it went to approve same-sex marriage. Surprise, surprise. Luckily, Mark Labberton is preaching tomorrow so I'll be able to begin the day in Worship. And trust me, as an evangelical at this GA, spiritual renewal is a requirement.
Today we started with Open Hearings, with most of the testimony being based on personal experiences, a lots of emotional tugs at the heartstrings. One person, a PR executive, looks at this issue as the PC(USA) brand is being sullied because of the ban on SSM. However, there was testimony from a young man who turned his life over to Christ, and that helped him work through his SS attraction, and who is now engaged to a very nice young woman.
Then came the Overture Advocates for amending the Book of Worship. Again, many personal stories, no biblical support. We even had one pastor claim that nothing in Scripture stood in the way of SSM. Another claims that 40% of homeless youth are LGBQT with no supporting documentation. The Advocates we heard after lunch for the AI, didn't have much more Scriptural support, only that Pastors are not able to be pastoral because they can't perform SSM.
After all the testimony, the Moderator asked to go around the room and have the commissioners give us an idea of where they are standing. It was sad to hear some of the justifications given for where some of the RE commissioners stood. I'm sure they are good people, and they are only using the information that they have been taught, but it was more eisegesis than exegesis. Lots of the 'Jesus I know' type of theology.
One REC stood up and told how he came into the Presbyterian church, that he studied and learned about the doctrine of total depravity, about the Authority of Scripture, how the Book of Order & Book of Confessions both came second to what the Word said about sin.
There were a few orthodox commissioners there besides this elder. A TEC told of how we're forgetting the elephant in the room, the fact that an passing an AI would cause pain for many, many others. He told of how the first church he pastored 30 or 40 years ago moved to the EPC. How 7 churches left his Presbytery in the past 12 months. That many more start the process if an AI or redefinition of marriage is passed.
Another TEC told of presbyteries he was in, having to merge as churches left to another, more conservative Reformed denomination. And so it went down the line... there doesn't seem to be much chance that something will not be passed this time around.
Tomorrow we start the deliberations.
... and so it goes!
Today we started with Open Hearings, with most of the testimony being based on personal experiences, a lots of emotional tugs at the heartstrings. One person, a PR executive, looks at this issue as the PC(USA) brand is being sullied because of the ban on SSM. However, there was testimony from a young man who turned his life over to Christ, and that helped him work through his SS attraction, and who is now engaged to a very nice young woman.
Then came the Overture Advocates for amending the Book of Worship. Again, many personal stories, no biblical support. We even had one pastor claim that nothing in Scripture stood in the way of SSM. Another claims that 40% of homeless youth are LGBQT with no supporting documentation. The Advocates we heard after lunch for the AI, didn't have much more Scriptural support, only that Pastors are not able to be pastoral because they can't perform SSM.
After all the testimony, the Moderator asked to go around the room and have the commissioners give us an idea of where they are standing. It was sad to hear some of the justifications given for where some of the RE commissioners stood. I'm sure they are good people, and they are only using the information that they have been taught, but it was more eisegesis than exegesis. Lots of the 'Jesus I know' type of theology.
One REC stood up and told how he came into the Presbyterian church, that he studied and learned about the doctrine of total depravity, about the Authority of Scripture, how the Book of Order & Book of Confessions both came second to what the Word said about sin.
There were a few orthodox commissioners there besides this elder. A TEC told of how we're forgetting the elephant in the room, the fact that an passing an AI would cause pain for many, many others. He told of how the first church he pastored 30 or 40 years ago moved to the EPC. How 7 churches left his Presbytery in the past 12 months. That many more start the process if an AI or redefinition of marriage is passed.
Another TEC told of presbyteries he was in, having to merge as churches left to another, more conservative Reformed denomination. And so it went down the line... there doesn't seem to be much chance that something will not be passed this time around.
Tomorrow we start the deliberations.
... and so it goes!
Monday, June 16, 2014
Day 2 at GA
I was going to do this day by day, but the realities of GA have hit. I'm not as young as I was, and by midnight on the 15th, I was totally beat. Then I wake up at 6am today, the 16th.
Hopefully I'll catch up on this to add my thoughts. One thing I will say, commissioners need to keep their wits about them. We were never notified about a vote on a standing rule change for this GA. It was brought up for a vote, half the commissioners were voting for it even though we had not gotten an electronic copy of the motion other than that which was displayed on the overhead screens for about 30 seconds or so.
By the time I awoke to what was going on, the vote was over, and all I could do was raise a Point of Order. The answer was not to my liking, so I asked for a Division of the House, which will force a poll of the commissioners. That said, research afterwards shows that this change is a debatable motion, that should have had someone speaking to it and against it. I have to say, the way this was brought up smells of smokey rooms, good ole boys, and back-room politics.
It may be too late to do anything about it unless I can find someone who voted for it, to request a Motion to Reconsider. I'll add more about this rule change later, along with the rest of the day in a few hours, I hope.
.... and so it goes!
Hopefully I'll catch up on this to add my thoughts. One thing I will say, commissioners need to keep their wits about them. We were never notified about a vote on a standing rule change for this GA. It was brought up for a vote, half the commissioners were voting for it even though we had not gotten an electronic copy of the motion other than that which was displayed on the overhead screens for about 30 seconds or so.
By the time I awoke to what was going on, the vote was over, and all I could do was raise a Point of Order. The answer was not to my liking, so I asked for a Division of the House, which will force a poll of the commissioners. That said, research afterwards shows that this change is a debatable motion, that should have had someone speaking to it and against it. I have to say, the way this was brought up smells of smokey rooms, good ole boys, and back-room politics.
It may be too late to do anything about it unless I can find someone who voted for it, to request a Motion to Reconsider. I'll add more about this rule change later, along with the rest of the day in a few hours, I hope.
.... and so it goes!
Day 1 at GA
Friday - Jun 13th
After a 5 1/2 hour trip from Cannoli, PA, we arrived at Detroit. The first issue was trying to figure out where you pull in to unload your car at the hotel. Once that was discovered, we had to wait until 3PM as that was the scheduled check-in time. OK, we got to the room, got the size bed we wanted, but then discovered if I wanted a tub or a larger shower, I should have asked for that too.
Oh yeah, one more thing. To those who are interior designers/decorators ... it is NOT a good idea to put a clear glass window in the door to the bathroom. I don't care if the glass is wavy or is extruded to look like glass piping, you can still see through it. I have a thing about privacy when I'm, um, on the throne. That said, the room was "OK", could have had more drawer space, and a fridge.
Arrived at COBO Hall amidst the hustle and bustle of hundreds of Presbyterians. There are people of all ages here, however most of those I've seen are a bit older. One lady I met in the elevator at the hotel was overwhelmed with it all, and she hadn't even gone over to the COBO center to register yet, it was her first GA. It appeared that it may have been her first trip anywhere without family.
Got checked in at the registration table, and went to visit some friends. Stopped by the Layman booth, along with the PFR, Presbyterians Pro-Life and One-by-One booths. Saw people I know in person, and finally met in person some I know from online.
The interesting part is that across from these booths, are the CovNet, Voice of Justice, and other liberal groups. Nice juxtaposition! The good news is that there are people who, while disagreeing, are otherwise great friends on both sides of that aisle.
Yet I have heard from one person manning the PPL booth that not all reactions to their being there was sweetness and light.
The first plenary meeting Saturday evening was devoted to orientation, and testing of the ethernet and WiFi internet connections. Sad to say, it did not go well. PC-Biz (the online repository of data for the commissioners) was down for a while, and both the wireless and wired networks were overwhelmed. I could say more about this, but someone who is here as an observer tells it much better here. As you can see on that page, technical issues abounded. They should have called in Cisco Systems at the beginning.
After dinner, we came back to see about the next order of business, electing a moderator. Again, I refer back to that previous link for more specifics. As a geek, all I can do is shake my head. Having been to conferences in my previous job position of computer programmer, I know that 1,000 people trying to use wire/wireless networks normally do not cause this type of problem. Then again, these are geek conferences, and they know who to use to setup their infrastructure. It could all boil down to the COBO Center not having the trunk capacity to handle this many. Yet, that answer doesn't explain what happened in 2012 at Pittsburgh. That said, the OGA staff had to go to plan B, the voting 'clicker'. There were a few tests, and not everyone was satisfied that the votes were reliably taken. It was determined to move on.
The three moderator candidates were brought up and asked questions by many commissioners for about 45 minutes. FWIW ... this year there wasn't a conservative candidate, I'm guessing that anyone who was willing to serve, just didn't feel that they'd have a chance. Two of the candidates did not impress me at all, both partisan on the left. One candidate was, at one time, on the board of one of the left's coalitions, the other is the pastor at a More Light church.
Heath Rada, who won the election came across as someone who respects the opinions of those on the conservative side. He may not agree, but he knows that conservatives are a needed voice at the table. What was more interesting, was that the Young Advisory Delegates (YADs) voted 3/5s in favor of Mr. Rada. I heard later that a friend asked one of the YADs about that, and that the YAD said that there seemed to be a consensus that having someone who is not so partisan was needed in that office.
Oh, forgot to mention. The aforementioned vote had to be done on paper ballots. Yep, even the clickers were not working as advertised. The YADs had to hold up their cards to reflect their advice, and the commissioners had to write down the name of their choice on paper. OY !!!
They have said it should be working by Wednesday !!
.... and so it goes!
After a 5 1/2 hour trip from Cannoli, PA, we arrived at Detroit. The first issue was trying to figure out where you pull in to unload your car at the hotel. Once that was discovered, we had to wait until 3PM as that was the scheduled check-in time. OK, we got to the room, got the size bed we wanted, but then discovered if I wanted a tub or a larger shower, I should have asked for that too.
Oh yeah, one more thing. To those who are interior designers/decorators ... it is NOT a good idea to put a clear glass window in the door to the bathroom. I don't care if the glass is wavy or is extruded to look like glass piping, you can still see through it. I have a thing about privacy when I'm, um, on the throne. That said, the room was "OK", could have had more drawer space, and a fridge.
Arrived at COBO Hall amidst the hustle and bustle of hundreds of Presbyterians. There are people of all ages here, however most of those I've seen are a bit older. One lady I met in the elevator at the hotel was overwhelmed with it all, and she hadn't even gone over to the COBO center to register yet, it was her first GA. It appeared that it may have been her first trip anywhere without family.
Got checked in at the registration table, and went to visit some friends. Stopped by the Layman booth, along with the PFR, Presbyterians Pro-Life and One-by-One booths. Saw people I know in person, and finally met in person some I know from online.
The interesting part is that across from these booths, are the CovNet, Voice of Justice, and other liberal groups. Nice juxtaposition! The good news is that there are people who, while disagreeing, are otherwise great friends on both sides of that aisle.
Yet I have heard from one person manning the PPL booth that not all reactions to their being there was sweetness and light.
The first plenary meeting Saturday evening was devoted to orientation, and testing of the ethernet and WiFi internet connections. Sad to say, it did not go well. PC-Biz (the online repository of data for the commissioners) was down for a while, and both the wireless and wired networks were overwhelmed. I could say more about this, but someone who is here as an observer tells it much better here. As you can see on that page, technical issues abounded. They should have called in Cisco Systems at the beginning.
After dinner, we came back to see about the next order of business, electing a moderator. Again, I refer back to that previous link for more specifics. As a geek, all I can do is shake my head. Having been to conferences in my previous job position of computer programmer, I know that 1,000 people trying to use wire/wireless networks normally do not cause this type of problem. Then again, these are geek conferences, and they know who to use to setup their infrastructure. It could all boil down to the COBO Center not having the trunk capacity to handle this many. Yet, that answer doesn't explain what happened in 2012 at Pittsburgh. That said, the OGA staff had to go to plan B, the voting 'clicker'. There were a few tests, and not everyone was satisfied that the votes were reliably taken. It was determined to move on.
The three moderator candidates were brought up and asked questions by many commissioners for about 45 minutes. FWIW ... this year there wasn't a conservative candidate, I'm guessing that anyone who was willing to serve, just didn't feel that they'd have a chance. Two of the candidates did not impress me at all, both partisan on the left. One candidate was, at one time, on the board of one of the left's coalitions, the other is the pastor at a More Light church.
Heath Rada, who won the election came across as someone who respects the opinions of those on the conservative side. He may not agree, but he knows that conservatives are a needed voice at the table. What was more interesting, was that the Young Advisory Delegates (YADs) voted 3/5s in favor of Mr. Rada. I heard later that a friend asked one of the YADs about that, and that the YAD said that there seemed to be a consensus that having someone who is not so partisan was needed in that office.
Oh, forgot to mention. The aforementioned vote had to be done on paper ballots. Yep, even the clickers were not working as advertised. The YADs had to hold up their cards to reflect their advice, and the commissioners had to write down the name of their choice on paper. OY !!!
They have said it should be working by Wednesday !!
.... and so it goes!
Friday, April 4, 2014
2014 Overtures on marriage
This year the elephant in the room is so obvious that no one will be able to ignore it. One overture requests to change the Directory of Worship to remove presiding over a legal marriage but leaves the definition including man and woman:
OVT-011 On Amending W-4.9000 Concerning the Church’s Role in Legal Marriage and Services of Christian Covenant—From the Presbytery of Lehigh.
Another wants to change the same paragraph to replace man and woman and substitute two people:
OVT-021 On Amending W-4.9000, Marriage—From the Presbytery of the Cascades.
Then you have one that will just change the paragraph to add that Sessions and Presbyteries can change their own definition of marriage as a civil contract according to the local state law:
OVT-033 On Amending W-4.9001, Christian Marriage—From the Presbytery of Midwest Hanmi.
My thoughts on these overtures are that while I may not agree with some of the rationale, I will respect the thoughts of those who are bringing them forward for possible referral to the presbyteries for approval.
However, the overtures that are calling for an Authoritative Interpretation (AI) to impose a total revision of what the church considers as marriage are outside of the normal polity of any Presbyterian church. If its one thing that the Westminster Confession recognizes is that councils ERR. This is why overtures passed at GA are sent to the lower councils for debate and approval/rejection. An AI bypasses all these checks and balances, and imposes an interpretation of the Constitution on the denomination that would force many to rethink their affiliation, and result in the loss of many more members and congregations.
This one replaces the existing AIs on marriage, with one that says that a Teaching Elder can perform a marriage for any couple, not mentioning gender.
OVT-024 On Issuing an Authoritative Interpretation of W-4.9000 to Affirm Pastoral Discretion in Performing Marriage Ceremonies—From the Presbytery of Heartland.
This overture requests an AI that basically does the same as above, but in different language:
OVT-027 On Issuing an Authoritative Interpretation of W-4.9000 to Affirm Pastoral Discretion in Performing Marriage Ceremonies—From the Presbytery of East Iowa.
This one just wants to remove the entire 1991 AI that currently exists on SSM:OVT-036 On Rescinding the 1991 Authoritative Interpretation Concerning Teaching Elders Performing Marriages for Same-Gender Couples and Sessions Permitting Such Ceremonies in their Facilities—From the Presbytery of New Castle.
The problem with the rationale in this overture is that is says this:
The United States Supreme Court, in United States v. Windsor, ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which allowed states where same-gender marriage was illegal to discriminate against such persons, was unconstitutional.
The reality is that the ruling held that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT must recognize the validity of SSM performed in states where such marriages are legal, it does not state that other states must recognize those marriages. The key part of the ruling is this:
Justice Kennedy noted that regulation of domestic relations is within states’ traditional authority, and that the sweeping nature of DOMA as applying to all federal laws had the purpose and necessary effect of treating differently a relationship that the state treated the same. This “demeans” the married couple that is treated differently. In concluding, the Court made it clear that “[t]his opinion and its holding are confined to those lawful marriages” under state law.
Will this legal nitpick hold any sway when this overture is debated in committee, I seriously doubt it.
I don't believe I missed any, but then again I may have. This year there will be another concerted effort at electioneering during the GA. Commissioners will be offered swag that will signal a preference towards a certain point of view, those who refuse such things may then be intimidated to go with the flow.
While I believe that any such indicators from any interest group should be banned from the hall, I don't see that happening as some may yell about free speech. I see it as the elimination of any external influences from the prayerful consideration of the work of the GA from any group left or right.
My previous thoughts on this issue are a matter of record, I see this is going to be an issue that keeps coming back again and again until those who are convinced that the traditional definition of marriage is correct either capitulate or have left the denomination.
.... and so it goes!
Update 05/16/2014:
PLEASE NOTE: these thoughts were written way before I knew where I would be serving at GA.
OVT-011 On Amending W-4.9000 Concerning the Church’s Role in Legal Marriage and Services of Christian Covenant—From the Presbytery of Lehigh.
Another wants to change the same paragraph to replace man and woman and substitute two people:
OVT-021 On Amending W-4.9000, Marriage—From the Presbytery of the Cascades.
Then you have one that will just change the paragraph to add that Sessions and Presbyteries can change their own definition of marriage as a civil contract according to the local state law:
OVT-033 On Amending W-4.9001, Christian Marriage—From the Presbytery of Midwest Hanmi.
My thoughts on these overtures are that while I may not agree with some of the rationale, I will respect the thoughts of those who are bringing them forward for possible referral to the presbyteries for approval.
However, the overtures that are calling for an Authoritative Interpretation (AI) to impose a total revision of what the church considers as marriage are outside of the normal polity of any Presbyterian church. If its one thing that the Westminster Confession recognizes is that councils ERR. This is why overtures passed at GA are sent to the lower councils for debate and approval/rejection. An AI bypasses all these checks and balances, and imposes an interpretation of the Constitution on the denomination that would force many to rethink their affiliation, and result in the loss of many more members and congregations.
This one replaces the existing AIs on marriage, with one that says that a Teaching Elder can perform a marriage for any couple, not mentioning gender.
OVT-024 On Issuing an Authoritative Interpretation of W-4.9000 to Affirm Pastoral Discretion in Performing Marriage Ceremonies—From the Presbytery of Heartland.
This overture requests an AI that basically does the same as above, but in different language:
OVT-027 On Issuing an Authoritative Interpretation of W-4.9000 to Affirm Pastoral Discretion in Performing Marriage Ceremonies—From the Presbytery of East Iowa.
This one just wants to remove the entire 1991 AI that currently exists on SSM:OVT-036 On Rescinding the 1991 Authoritative Interpretation Concerning Teaching Elders Performing Marriages for Same-Gender Couples and Sessions Permitting Such Ceremonies in their Facilities—From the Presbytery of New Castle.
The problem with the rationale in this overture is that is says this:
The United States Supreme Court, in United States v. Windsor, ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which allowed states where same-gender marriage was illegal to discriminate against such persons, was unconstitutional.
The reality is that the ruling held that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT must recognize the validity of SSM performed in states where such marriages are legal, it does not state that other states must recognize those marriages. The key part of the ruling is this:
Justice Kennedy noted that regulation of domestic relations is within states’ traditional authority, and that the sweeping nature of DOMA as applying to all federal laws had the purpose and necessary effect of treating differently a relationship that the state treated the same. This “demeans” the married couple that is treated differently. In concluding, the Court made it clear that “[t]his opinion and its holding are confined to those lawful marriages” under state law.
Will this legal nitpick hold any sway when this overture is debated in committee, I seriously doubt it.
I don't believe I missed any, but then again I may have. This year there will be another concerted effort at electioneering during the GA. Commissioners will be offered swag that will signal a preference towards a certain point of view, those who refuse such things may then be intimidated to go with the flow.
While I believe that any such indicators from any interest group should be banned from the hall, I don't see that happening as some may yell about free speech. I see it as the elimination of any external influences from the prayerful consideration of the work of the GA from any group left or right.
My previous thoughts on this issue are a matter of record, I see this is going to be an issue that keeps coming back again and again until those who are convinced that the traditional definition of marriage is correct either capitulate or have left the denomination.
.... and so it goes!
Update 05/16/2014:
PLEASE NOTE: these thoughts were written way before I knew where I would be serving at GA.
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Long Time No Blog !!
OK .. I haven't posted in a LONG, LONG time. Why ... good question. Its not as if there hasn't been anything to blog about. There have been many, many things occurring in today's culture that are forcing those who believe in the authority of Scripture into defensive postures.
However, its another General Assembly year, and the number of overtures sent to GA this year has been limited by the requirements to have two Presbyteries concur on the overture. This new requirement may have reduced the workload of a few committees by half.
Then again, there are about 7 or 8 different overtures to change the Book of Order's definition of marriage. If the committee thinks it over correctly, they can combine overtures into one. However, we also have a push to have the GA create an Authoritative Interpretation (AI) to change the definition of marriage If this gains traction it could cause a major uproar in the denomination, and the PC(USA) would see more departures, both by individuals as well as entire congregations.
Why ? Because an AI would bypass the normal way to change the Constitution by eliminating the voting by the presbyteries. This would force the will of a minority, a mere 340 or so commissioners, on the entire denomination of 1.8 million. But, but, but .. the regressives in the denomination would point out that one of the basis of our polity is that the Holy Spirit works in our councils. The problem is, the Westminster Confession (part of that pesky Constitution) also says that councils do ERR!!!
This is why an overture passed by the GA is sent to the presbyteries for approval, so that other councils can pray, think and say YEA or NAY on the overture. It provides a second chance for the Spirit to work to confirm or correct the action of the GA.
Over the next few weeks, I'll be going over the most controversial of this years crop of overtures.
.... and so it goes!
- Can't affirm same-sex marriage? You're a hater, bigot or homophobe * !!
- Don't want to take pictures or bake a cake for a SSM? Be prepared to be brought before a Civil Rights Commission and/or be sued for pain and suffering
- Believe that if Jesus didn't talk about it in the New Testament, its only because He already said His piece in the Old Testament? You're a bibliolater, one having excessive reverence for the letter of the Bible.
- Believe that the PC(USA) Constitution's two parts, the Book of Confessions and Book of Order, are equal in authority, and second only to Scripture? You're wrong, we can change anything with an AI, and we will.
However, its another General Assembly year, and the number of overtures sent to GA this year has been limited by the requirements to have two Presbyteries concur on the overture. This new requirement may have reduced the workload of a few committees by half.
Then again, there are about 7 or 8 different overtures to change the Book of Order's definition of marriage. If the committee thinks it over correctly, they can combine overtures into one. However, we also have a push to have the GA create an Authoritative Interpretation (AI) to change the definition of marriage If this gains traction it could cause a major uproar in the denomination, and the PC(USA) would see more departures, both by individuals as well as entire congregations.
Why ? Because an AI would bypass the normal way to change the Constitution by eliminating the voting by the presbyteries. This would force the will of a minority, a mere 340 or so commissioners, on the entire denomination of 1.8 million. But, but, but .. the regressives in the denomination would point out that one of the basis of our polity is that the Holy Spirit works in our councils. The problem is, the Westminster Confession (part of that pesky Constitution) also says that councils do ERR!!!
This is why an overture passed by the GA is sent to the presbyteries for approval, so that other councils can pray, think and say YEA or NAY on the overture. It provides a second chance for the Spirit to work to confirm or correct the action of the GA.
Over the next few weeks, I'll be going over the most controversial of this years crop of overtures.
Now .... for something completely different.
A few years ago, after a blog post where I copied a friend's Alternate Universe News Report, a comment was left that said:Why do you refer to yourself as a "reformed Catholic"? Why don't you just address yourself as a Presbyterian? As a Catholic, I find apostates like yourself hold on to the term "Catholic" as a means of currying favor with the world. It is always "recovering Catholic" or "lapsed Catholic", never a complete divorce from the Church. Is there any justification for the tag line "reformed Catholic"? Just be a Presbyterian, which is completely irreconcilable to Catholicism.I answered with this
Good question.
Why do I use the term, because, as many of the Reformers were, I was brought up Roman Catholic, and lost the faith.
I returned to Christianity as a whole, the church Catholic, when I started attending a Reformed church, a PC(USA)church.
I have no quarrel with Roman Catholicism, only with the man-made rules that were added after the period of the Church Fathers, starting around 900 AD.
In our basic beliefs, there is nothing that I believe that is different from the Roman Catholic. We both pray and believe in the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, as do most of Christianity.
And as far as you calling me apostate, there are two definitions for that term:
Definition of APOSTASY
1: renunciation of a religious faith
2: abandonment of a previous loyalty : defection
I do not recognize the first definition as applying, as I have not abandoned my faith in the Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There is only one way to the Father, and that is in Christ Jesus.
As far as the second definition, yes, I have abandoned my previous loyalty to the institution of the Roman Catholic Church, I'm not all that loyal to the PC(USA) for that matter.
There is only one loyalty I hold to, and that is my faith in my Savior.
Sola Scriptura
Sola Fide
Sola Gratia
Sola Christus
Soli Deo Gloria
And this is why I call myself the Reformed Catholic.
.... and so it goes!
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Disappointed, but not surprised.
I haven't blogged in a year, some would say that's a good thing. But after the 2012 GA I had decided why bother, the PC(USA) is going to hell in a handbasket, and nothing I say or type or gripe about will change the eventual demise. Evangelical friends are leaving, either by walking from their current congregation, or by moving with the congregation to the EPC or ECO.
As more and move evangelicals leave, the PC(USA) is becoming a mirror of the UCC. Proclamation of the Gospel takes second (or third) place to proclamation of the gospel of political correctness. Presbyteries are more interested in rooting out "schismatics", then in rooting out those Teaching Elders who proudly proclaim that Jesus did not rise from the dead, never ascended, and was basically a good person who had good ideas; kinda like a Jewish Confucius or Buddha.
Then there was the Pittsburgh GA. It wasn't all bad; there weren't any huge puppets at worship. However, there was the ruling that the BOO does not need to agree with the BOC, and the push for authorization of same sex marriage (SSM).
As I watched the live streaming from the Pittsburgh GA last year, I was wondering where most of the YADs (Young Adult Delegates) picked up their version of theology; today I was given a glimpse of one possible source.
A pastor friend received a text from a youth director who had taken a group of kids to one of the PC(USA) camps:
... and so it goes!
As more and move evangelicals leave, the PC(USA) is becoming a mirror of the UCC. Proclamation of the Gospel takes second (or third) place to proclamation of the gospel of political correctness. Presbyteries are more interested in rooting out "schismatics", then in rooting out those Teaching Elders who proudly proclaim that Jesus did not rise from the dead, never ascended, and was basically a good person who had good ideas; kinda like a Jewish Confucius or Buddha.
Then there was the Pittsburgh GA. It wasn't all bad; there weren't any huge puppets at worship. However, there was the ruling that the BOO does not need to agree with the BOC, and the push for authorization of same sex marriage (SSM).
As I watched the live streaming from the Pittsburgh GA last year, I was wondering where most of the YADs (Young Adult Delegates) picked up their version of theology; today I was given a glimpse of one possible source.
A pastor friend received a text from a youth director who had taken a group of kids to one of the PC(USA) camps:
I'm disappointed, but not surprised about this as I keep informed about what is going on in the PC(USA), but will this be a wake up call for any moderates?? Or for those evangelical institutionalists who believe that their staying in the denomination will act as a moderating force? That only works when you have access to actually do some moderation, and I don't see that happening real soon.
... and so it goes!
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Hyposcrisy !!!
Lets contrast the welcoming, inclusive & liberal More Light Presbyterian gathering being held in Rochester NY, with the evangelical Fellowship of Presbyterians gathering in Minneapolis.
Fellowship:
Access for all ?? - check!
All included in table conversations? - check!
Access to any and all seminars, breakouts? - check!
More Light:
Access for all? - no
All included in table conversations? - no
Access to any and all seminars, breakouts? - no
It seems that someone who was attending the Rochester meeting, an evangelical, was barred from workshops by the leadership of that "inclusive, affirming and tolerant" group. It appears that there are secret plans being developed for the next GA that they do not want publicized.
Contrast that with the openness that the Fellowship had in Minneapolis. No secret plans, nope everything that was being planned or talked about was out in the open, available for anyone to read, comment and publish.
And so it goes ...
Fellowship:
Access for all ?? - check!
All included in table conversations? - check!
Access to any and all seminars, breakouts? - check!
More Light:
Access for all? - no
All included in table conversations? - no
Access to any and all seminars, breakouts? - no
It seems that someone who was attending the Rochester meeting, an evangelical, was barred from workshops by the leadership of that "inclusive, affirming and tolerant" group. It appears that there are secret plans being developed for the next GA that they do not want publicized.
Contrast that with the openness that the Fellowship had in Minneapolis. No secret plans, nope everything that was being planned or talked about was out in the open, available for anyone to read, comment and publish.
And so it goes ...
Thoughts on the Fellowship
Its been a week since the Fellowship of Presbyterians gathering in Minneapolis. There was a lot of information to try to digest via tweets, so I waited for some attendees to put their thoughts together.
Here is a overview of the gathering from an attendee.
I plan to have a breakdown of the options posted over the next week.
Here is a overview of the gathering from an attendee.
The Fellowship gathering was defined by its worship. The first worship, the night before the conference began, had more than a thousand. Each day of the conference began and ended with worship. And the ballroom was packed – for all of them. Vic Pence, who spoke at the final worship, was prepared to make a joke about attendance at final worship as a lead in to his “the power of a remnant” presentation, but had to make a joke about his joke because worship was full. The singing, the prayers, the speakers, were all very powerful, and all focused on Christ. Speakers spoke on “the need to focus on where Jesus is leading”, “What do we need to do to be aligned with what God is doing?”, “Turning anger to grace”, and “the power of a remnant to make a difference”.
Seminars described the possible organizational options within the fellowship, ways to work within presbyteries, in spite of presbyteries, alternative forms of presbyteries, and the New Reformed Body. More on those in a moment. But did I mention the worship? And the general air of laughter, and friends calling out across the room. People meeting friends from seminary, from online, making new connections.
The informational presentations were done via video feed to every conference room in the hotel. Conferees were randomly grouped in tables of 10 (with the exception of EPs and staffers who were randomly grouped with each other, but not the general population). There was time after each briefing for the tables to discuss and provide feedback and questions (via email). A few folks had as their job for the conference, to sort through the emails and consolidate questions and prioritize based on frequency. Q&A times were built into the schedule for the organizers to answer some of these questions. This led to wonderful, meaningful conversations between the elders and pastors attending the conference.
An example table had 4 elders (all from large churches), 6 pastors: two from large churches, 3 from middlesized, and a pastor from a small town church. It helped people to process the information from multiple viewpoints. Some tables had folks who were against all that the Fellowship stood for, and were naysaying all that
they heard, but their influence was limited to the table(s) where they were. All in all it was upbeat, fast-paced, focused on glorifying God, and seeking answers both within and beyond the PCUSA.
The Fellowship seeks to be an order within the PCUSA. The Fellowship will be a covenanted community of churches and individuals who gather around a defined set of essential tenets (to be defined). The focus is on empowering and equipping the congregation: not a congregationalism, but a recognition that the primary agent of ministry is and should be the congregation. Jim Singleton defined a vision for a fellowship that includes Theological Clarity, Missional Passion, Covenantal Commitment to each other, Global Connections, and Leadership in a different way. Under the original Fellowship vision, this would all happen without any PCUSA structural adaptations. It would be much like More Light Presbyterians or the Confessing Churches. But the Fellowship has no interest in playing the politics of the PCUSA – that has gotten us nowhere. The Fellowship wants to renew the PCUSA one church at a time, by engaging in mission.
As mentioned, the Fellowship seeks to be an order within the PCUSA, but also with those in New Reformed Body. The NRB is for those who fear the coming Kenyonization (1) of GLBT ordination and the redefinition of marriage; those for whom the PCUSA has just gone too far afield, or those who are in hostile presbyteries. Although there is the possibility that releasing a church to the NRB will involve less resistance on the part of presbyteries than release to the EPC, there is still great risk here for local congregations, especially depending on the level of antagonism in the presbytery.
Other strategies proposed appealed to churches in different contexts: a congregation in a friendly presbytery who is able to accomplish their mission in an uncompromised way may continue on as they are. This was especially attractive to those in presbyteries such as San Diego and Santa Barbara. In other presbyteries, where it may become difficult to get any candidate through due to close voting habits, it was suggested that presbyteries take advantage of the latitude of nFoG to have more than one CPM/COM. Another alternative was to petition the GA to realign presbyteries or allow the creation of geographic overlapping presbyteries to avoid these stalemates. Obviously these options require the ability to get an overture through the presbytery. Some churches are in openly hostile presbyteries, although the options are presented, unless a national overture is passed and mandated, these churches have no recourse within the PCUSA.
Questions to ask ourselves:
What do we believe? To what extent are we comfortable with the diversity of belief in the PCUSA and to what extent do we believe the PCUSA has erred? Is the difference in theology sufficient to mandate or even warrant action? Should that action be a statement of difference, removal of fellowship, or something else? What should we be/do? Where do we believe God is calling us to mission and to action? To what extent is our mission currently influenced by our membership in the PCUSA – for the positive or negative? What about in the projected future? What are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats within the current structure for our church and its mission? What are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats within the various presbytery options or the proposed NRB for our church and its mission?
(1) Rev Kenyon was denied acceptance as a minister because women’s ordination violated his conscience; He was not permitted to declare it a scruple -- effectively making women’s ordination an essential belief.
I plan to have a breakdown of the options posted over the next week.
Friday, August 19, 2011
Well .. duh !!!!
The Presbyterian Outlook today posted an article about the Mexican Presbyterian Church's (INPM) voting to end its partnership with the PC(USA) after 139 years. It seems that, along with evangelical Presbyterian in the PC(USA), the INPM is upset with the recent change to the ordination standards in the Book of Order.
The Outlook reported
OK ... there are some differences over women's ordination, not a major issue as many orthodox, Reformed bodies share these differences. Some ordain women as TEs & REs, and others don't. However, most do agree that there is a tension between some passages in Scripture that that can support or deny women's ordination.
I don't call that a significant theological difference, if it really was significant, the INPM would have probably broke it off long ago.
No, the significant theological difference was the changes brought about by amendment 10A. It is a significant change in the covenant relationship between the denominations that the INPM could not ignore.
Yet the director of World Missions for the PC(USA) thinks that the social justice aspects of the relationship should keep us working as partners. In the above quote he says
The problem as I believe the INPM saw it was which Gospel?? The one the INPM believes is true where we're told to be in the world, not of the world, the one where God labels sin as sin; or the one now being espoused by the PC(USA) wherein the church conforms to the world and sin is what we say it is.
Many of our partners around the world are re-evaluating their relationship with the PC(USA) because of 10A, and this comes as a surprise to many in Louisville? Didn't the prophetic testimony of Archpriest Siarhei Hardun at the 2010 GA give anyone on the left pause?
And so it goes ....
Update: after reading some information about Hunter both online, and elsewhere, my kneejerk reaction was rather harsh. Going back to the Outlook article, I realize that the talk about differences that included women's ordination as one of the issues was not a direct quote from Hunter Farrell, and I do apologize for that mistake.
That said, whomever made that remark wasn't thinking.
The Outlook reported
"The PC(USA) representatives asked their Mexican partners to agree to a time of discernment, in part to see how they could continue to work together in mission despite differing views over issues such as ordaining gays and lesbians, or women’s ordination."
“Despite the significant theological differences that 10-A puts between our churches, the mission context of increasing violence on our borders, the precarious situation of the poor in both nations, and our own church's need for the INPM's help in sharing the Gospel with Spanish-speakers in the U.S. cries out for prayerful strategizing and increased mission collaboration,” Farrell (Editor's Note: - Hunter Farrell, director of PC(USA)World Mission) wrote after that meeting. “The truth is we need each other now more than ever.”
OK ... there are some differences over women's ordination, not a major issue as many orthodox, Reformed bodies share these differences. Some ordain women as TEs & REs, and others don't. However, most do agree that there is a tension between some passages in Scripture that that can support or deny women's ordination.
I don't call that a significant theological difference, if it really was significant, the INPM would have probably broke it off long ago.
No, the significant theological difference was the changes brought about by amendment 10A. It is a significant change in the covenant relationship between the denominations that the INPM could not ignore.
Yet the director of World Missions for the PC(USA) thinks that the social justice aspects of the relationship should keep us working as partners. In the above quote he says
... (PCUSA's) ... need for the INPM's help in sharing the Gospel with Spanish-speakers in the U.S. cries out for prayerful strategizing and increased mission collaboration
The problem as I believe the INPM saw it was which Gospel?? The one the INPM believes is true where we're told to be in the world, not of the world, the one where God labels sin as sin; or the one now being espoused by the PC(USA) wherein the church conforms to the world and sin is what we say it is.
Many of our partners around the world are re-evaluating their relationship with the PC(USA) because of 10A, and this comes as a surprise to many in Louisville? Didn't the prophetic testimony of Archpriest Siarhei Hardun at the 2010 GA give anyone on the left pause?
And so it goes ....
Update: after reading some information about Hunter both online, and elsewhere, my kneejerk reaction was rather harsh. Going back to the Outlook article, I realize that the talk about differences that included women's ordination as one of the issues was not a direct quote from Hunter Farrell, and I do apologize for that mistake.
That said, whomever made that remark wasn't thinking.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Severed Dreams
OK ... the title looks interesting, and it does have some background behind it. It is the title of a Babylon 5 episode where the commander of the Babylon 5 station declares its independence from Earthgov. Earthgov, directed by its power hungry president, has brutally suppressed any dissent from what the president, and his allies (both on Earth and in space) have decided. Capt. John Sheridan, commander of Babylon 5 has had enough, and declares B5 independent of Earthgov.
There are parallels within the PC(USA). Evangelicals are being repressed from speaking of Scriptural truth by those who label such beliefs as fundamentalist, bigoted and homophobic. The liberals, using the rallying cry of 'justice', year after year introduced proposed changes to the Book of Order in order to allow a practice what Scriptures call sin, to be allowable for ruling and teaching elders. All the while, slowly getting those who agree with them into positions on local presbytery committees, on synods and at GA.
The consistent pressure from those within, and from those outside the denomination to view sexual sin as natural, or given by God wore down many evangelicals to the point where they either withdrew in place, or left for a more Scriptural denomination. Those who were left proclaiming the truth of the Gospel were shouted down as old fashioned, bigots, or worse.
Finally, the passing of amendment 10A, and the uncertainty of nFOG has finally severed the dreams of many evangelicals for a Spiritual revival in the PC(USA). Groups on the left are already calling for a change in the Book of Order to call marriage a union of 'two persons' rather than one of a 'man and a woman'.
Its time to declare independence from the PC(USA). I hope many know of the Fellowship gathering occurring in Minneapolis on August 25th and 26th. It started as a gathering to try to do 'church' outside of the way it was being done. There was much distrust in the denomination at the beginning of the year, and this group decided to sit and figure a way evangelicals could work together outside of the denominational structures.
Since the votes on 10A and nFOG, it has turned into a gathering of evangelical Presbyterians looking for guidance in this new reality, and a way to declare their independence from the PC(USA); whether staying within the denomination, or moving outside of it.
There are over 2,000 people signed up. To give you an idea of the numbers that are attending, only 1,900 people were signed up for the biggest PC(USA) event this year, the Big Tent in Indianapolis. (H/T to the GAJunkie who has a few ideas about the gathering on his blog).
The total number attending, however, sounds like a drop in the bucket in a denomination of 2,016,091 members; but there are 800 churches being represented in a denomination of 10,560 congregations. That's close to 8% of congregations in the PC(USA). You can assume that perhaps another 2 or 3 hundred other churches couldn't send a representative, so lets assume that 1 in 10 PC(USA) churches are in support of the Minneapolis event.
That number of churches can make a definite change to the PC(USA). I'm praying that those who attend continuously ask the Spirit to guide them; that they deal with each other as brothers and sisters in Christ; that they can individually disagree on the specifics of the way forward, but all agree on the need to move forward.
I pray that our severed dreams are made whole.
There are parallels within the PC(USA). Evangelicals are being repressed from speaking of Scriptural truth by those who label such beliefs as fundamentalist, bigoted and homophobic. The liberals, using the rallying cry of 'justice', year after year introduced proposed changes to the Book of Order in order to allow a practice what Scriptures call sin, to be allowable for ruling and teaching elders. All the while, slowly getting those who agree with them into positions on local presbytery committees, on synods and at GA.
The consistent pressure from those within, and from those outside the denomination to view sexual sin as natural, or given by God wore down many evangelicals to the point where they either withdrew in place, or left for a more Scriptural denomination. Those who were left proclaiming the truth of the Gospel were shouted down as old fashioned, bigots, or worse.
Finally, the passing of amendment 10A, and the uncertainty of nFOG has finally severed the dreams of many evangelicals for a Spiritual revival in the PC(USA). Groups on the left are already calling for a change in the Book of Order to call marriage a union of 'two persons' rather than one of a 'man and a woman'.
Its time to declare independence from the PC(USA). I hope many know of the Fellowship gathering occurring in Minneapolis on August 25th and 26th. It started as a gathering to try to do 'church' outside of the way it was being done. There was much distrust in the denomination at the beginning of the year, and this group decided to sit and figure a way evangelicals could work together outside of the denominational structures.
Since the votes on 10A and nFOG, it has turned into a gathering of evangelical Presbyterians looking for guidance in this new reality, and a way to declare their independence from the PC(USA); whether staying within the denomination, or moving outside of it.
There are over 2,000 people signed up. To give you an idea of the numbers that are attending, only 1,900 people were signed up for the biggest PC(USA) event this year, the Big Tent in Indianapolis. (H/T to the GAJunkie who has a few ideas about the gathering on his blog).
The total number attending, however, sounds like a drop in the bucket in a denomination of 2,016,091 members; but there are 800 churches being represented in a denomination of 10,560 congregations. That's close to 8% of congregations in the PC(USA). You can assume that perhaps another 2 or 3 hundred other churches couldn't send a representative, so lets assume that 1 in 10 PC(USA) churches are in support of the Minneapolis event.
That number of churches can make a definite change to the PC(USA). I'm praying that those who attend continuously ask the Spirit to guide them; that they deal with each other as brothers and sisters in Christ; that they can individually disagree on the specifics of the way forward, but all agree on the need to move forward.
I pray that our severed dreams are made whole.
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Gobsmacked ... !!
gobsmacked
World English Dictionary
gobsmacked (ˈɡɒbˌsmækt)
— adj slang ( Brit ) astounded; astonished
My initial reaction to the Presbyterian Church (USA)'s General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission decisions this week not to make any decisions, was that of stunned silence. Having been to Scotland a few times, and a frequent viewer of BBC America, the British slang word gobsmacked came to mind. The term quite says it all as I've been pondering what to say, although I really can't get a fully themed thought together on the 'not decision'.
Some on the liberal side says that making a decision is not a good idea:
My first thought at reading that is, outside of the Scriptures, how can one learn to be of one mind with Christ. Christ who is the great I AM. The second Person of the Trinity, the Three in One. The One who is, the One who was, and the One who will be.
The One who has consistently said that sin is sin, in both Old and New Testaments. This is affirmed in the Hebrew, in the Greek, and in the English translations.
To be of one mind with Christ is not to be of many minds on many things. What exactly does that phrase mean anyway? For over 2,000 years the Church Universal has understood what the practice of sin is, its only in our enlightened 20th and 21st centuries that we call the practice of sin not sin. Yet, I'm to take this new enlightenment as a good thing, since it does not espouse one point of view.
As I have said, I'm gobsmacked. My only conclusion is that the GAPJC didn't want to offend anybody. Apparently, the only One offended will have the final say.
And so it goes ......
World English Dictionary
gobsmacked (ˈɡɒbˌsmækt)
— adj slang ( Brit ) astounded; astonished
My initial reaction to the Presbyterian Church (USA)'s General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission decisions this week not to make any decisions, was that of stunned silence. Having been to Scotland a few times, and a frequent viewer of BBC America, the British slang word gobsmacked came to mind. The term quite says it all as I've been pondering what to say, although I really can't get a fully themed thought together on the 'not decision'.
Some on the liberal side says that making a decision is not a good idea:
"If the highest court, in these rulings, is anticipating choosing a right and wrong between interpretations, it seems to me that we are in terrible trouble. The very fact that both these decisions prompted multiple jurors to weigh in with varied explanations of concurrence and dissent indicate that we have within the PCUSA different interpretations and points of view. We are not of one mind on this. It simply is the nature of the church to be of one mind only in Christ Jesus. Beyond our faith in Christ our many minds on many things enrich our lives together." -- Janet Edwards, More Light Presbyterians
My first thought at reading that is, outside of the Scriptures, how can one learn to be of one mind with Christ. Christ who is the great I AM. The second Person of the Trinity, the Three in One. The One who is, the One who was, and the One who will be.
The One who has consistently said that sin is sin, in both Old and New Testaments. This is affirmed in the Hebrew, in the Greek, and in the English translations.
To be of one mind with Christ is not to be of many minds on many things. What exactly does that phrase mean anyway? For over 2,000 years the Church Universal has understood what the practice of sin is, its only in our enlightened 20th and 21st centuries that we call the practice of sin not sin. Yet, I'm to take this new enlightenment as a good thing, since it does not espouse one point of view.
As I have said, I'm gobsmacked. My only conclusion is that the GAPJC didn't want to offend anybody. Apparently, the only One offended will have the final say.
And so it goes ......
Thursday, July 21, 2011
You've got to be kidding ......
I've not written much in the past month or so, even though there's so much that I could write about. The PC(USA) is in the midst of an upheaval that has not been seen since the days before the 'reunion' of the PCUS and UPCUSA.
However, that's not why I decided to write this post today ....
As many of you know, the PC(USA) finished voting on the amendments that were submitted to the presbyteries in June. The updated Book of Order was released on July 11th. Crimson-rock Presbytery ordered a bunch for its churches in order to get a multi-book discount; ok its only $1.50 off each book, but its a savings. At $10.00 a copy (8.50 with discount) its worth the cost, and the price of the book has not gone up in about 10 years or so.
At the same time a new BOO has been released, the PC(USA)usually makes available an Adobe PDF version for download. This has been a great help for those churches who can't afford to get each and every Ruling Elder their own copy. However, this time, the PDF is not available for download as of the date of this post. Its not as if it takes a long time to add the link, after all, they added a link to be able to directly purchase the hard copy of the BOO on the Constitution page of the PC(USA) website.
No, they could have done so, but instead they added a link to enable you to purchase a CD of the PDF for $10.00. WHY ??? They have a link to the Foundations portion of the BOO, but not the rest of it. OK you can copy the PDF for use by your elders, but why not have a link for direct download, why force members of the PC(USA) to have to buy a copy on CD ??
Do they need to generate income for some reason? Although, I fully expect per capita flowing to the Louisville headquarters to drop next year. I don't think that's it. After all, they spent a few thousands dollars (at least) printing and sending a full color brochure to each PC(USA) church telling them about all the great mission opportunities in the PC(USA) that are available for the churches to donate to.
OR ---
Are they trying to keep the Ruling Elders from seeing the actual changes that have been done to the Book of Order? OK, that does sound paranoid, but it doesn't mean it may not be true!
Seriously, why isn't the PDF available for individual download as the Book of Confessions is? Inquiring Presbyterians want to know!!
That said, I want to thank the Presbyterian Coalition for making the 2011-2013 Book of Order available for ordinary PC(USA) members to download
And so it goes ....
Update: it appears that the idea for charging for the download came from the Stated Clerk himself as a revenue source. This tends to confirm my speculation that they are looking for additional revenue to make up for lost per capita. Yet, the production of the Book of Order is something that SHOULD be covered by per capita funding, shouldn't it ?? As I mentioned, I have no problem with paying for the printed version, after all this would cover the costs of printing, etc. Yet why would they need a revenue stream with all the per capita being sent to Louisville, perhaps they should quit funding areas where the PC(USA) really should not have a presence, such as the Washington office.
However, that's not why I decided to write this post today ....
As many of you know, the PC(USA) finished voting on the amendments that were submitted to the presbyteries in June. The updated Book of Order was released on July 11th. Crimson-rock Presbytery ordered a bunch for its churches in order to get a multi-book discount; ok its only $1.50 off each book, but its a savings. At $10.00 a copy (8.50 with discount) its worth the cost, and the price of the book has not gone up in about 10 years or so.
At the same time a new BOO has been released, the PC(USA)usually makes available an Adobe PDF version for download. This has been a great help for those churches who can't afford to get each and every Ruling Elder their own copy. However, this time, the PDF is not available for download as of the date of this post. Its not as if it takes a long time to add the link, after all, they added a link to be able to directly purchase the hard copy of the BOO on the Constitution page of the PC(USA) website.
No, they could have done so, but instead they added a link to enable you to purchase a CD of the PDF for $10.00. WHY ??? They have a link to the Foundations portion of the BOO, but not the rest of it. OK you can copy the PDF for use by your elders, but why not have a link for direct download, why force members of the PC(USA) to have to buy a copy on CD ??
Do they need to generate income for some reason? Although, I fully expect per capita flowing to the Louisville headquarters to drop next year. I don't think that's it. After all, they spent a few thousands dollars (at least) printing and sending a full color brochure to each PC(USA) church telling them about all the great mission opportunities in the PC(USA) that are available for the churches to donate to.
OR ---
Are they trying to keep the Ruling Elders from seeing the actual changes that have been done to the Book of Order? OK, that does sound paranoid, but it doesn't mean it may not be true!
Seriously, why isn't the PDF available for individual download as the Book of Confessions is? Inquiring Presbyterians want to know!!
That said, I want to thank the Presbyterian Coalition for making the 2011-2013 Book of Order available for ordinary PC(USA) members to download
And so it goes ....
Update: it appears that the idea for charging for the download came from the Stated Clerk himself as a revenue source. This tends to confirm my speculation that they are looking for additional revenue to make up for lost per capita. Yet, the production of the Book of Order is something that SHOULD be covered by per capita funding, shouldn't it ?? As I mentioned, I have no problem with paying for the printed version, after all this would cover the costs of printing, etc. Yet why would they need a revenue stream with all the per capita being sent to Louisville, perhaps they should quit funding areas where the PC(USA) really should not have a presence, such as the Washington office.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
An Aside
As a Reformed Catholic in the PC(USA), I've tried to conform to the teachings of Scripture and the Book of Confessions. Yet, I've just skimmed most of the Westminster Confession of Faith, and read some of the shorter Confessions.
However, with the recent votes on adding Belhar to the list of Confessions in the BOC, I thought it a good idea to think about holding a Bible study on some of them. I picked up a copy of G.I. Williamson's The Westminister Confession of Faith for Study Classes, 2nd ed.. Needless to say it is a comprehensive study, and not one that will be done in 10 or even 20 sessions.
I'm finding the teaching to be fascinating, and not having taken the time to go through the Westminster Confession previously, very enlightening.
I find that Chapter 1, paragraph 6 is highly enlightening:
As ordained Elders (Teaching and Ruling) in the PC(USA), we vow before God and our congregation to conform to Scripture, the Constitution and the Confessions. Does this paragraph not tell us that Scripture is complete, and that what it says is not to be challenged?
The paragraph goes on:
Now this seems to give those who want to reinterpret scripture to say that sin is not sin an out, but does it??
Note, that is says there are some areas that can be decided by man, but always under the rules of the Word, .. always to be observed. In other words, we cannot change the fact that sin is labeled sin in Scripture. Yet, here we are in the PC(USA) doing just that.
And so it goes ....
However, with the recent votes on adding Belhar to the list of Confessions in the BOC, I thought it a good idea to think about holding a Bible study on some of them. I picked up a copy of G.I. Williamson's The Westminister Confession of Faith for Study Classes, 2nd ed.. Needless to say it is a comprehensive study, and not one that will be done in 10 or even 20 sessions.
I'm finding the teaching to be fascinating, and not having taken the time to go through the Westminster Confession previously, very enlightening.
I find that Chapter 1, paragraph 6 is highly enlightening:
The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.
As ordained Elders (Teaching and Ruling) in the PC(USA), we vow before God and our congregation to conform to Scripture, the Constitution and the Confessions. Does this paragraph not tell us that Scripture is complete, and that what it says is not to be challenged?
The paragraph goes on:
Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word ...
Now this seems to give those who want to reinterpret scripture to say that sin is not sin an out, but does it??
...and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.
Note, that is says there are some areas that can be decided by man, but always under the rules of the Word, .. always to be observed. In other words, we cannot change the fact that sin is labeled sin in Scripture. Yet, here we are in the PC(USA) doing just that.
And so it goes ....
Interesting Times for the PC(USA)
The Presbyterian Outlook yesterday (June 7th) came out with an online article proclaiming the passage of the New Form of Government by a majority of Presbyteries.
It also announced that the Belhar Confession, written for a specific time and place (apartheid and separate churches in South Africa) was voted down by over 1/3 of Presbyteries.
The way they phrased it, "the Belhar Confession has been approved by a solid majority – 89 presbyteries to 60 so far. However, this proposal to amend the Book of Confessions requires a two-thirds majority for adoption, so it only takes 58 negative votes to defeat it." Interesting spin ... a solid majority, why not say over a third of presbyteries did not approve of Belhar.
Finally, the article reiterates that amendment 10A passed, removing the so-called fidelity & chastity clause. Now presbyteries and sessions can, if they so desire, recommend for ordination and/or call to office sexually active individuals who are not married. Please note, I do not say sexually active homosexuals. While that clause had been characterized as targeting LGBTs, it covered all those who did not practicefidelity in marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness.
So what's the big deal? Why are the passing of two and the defeat of one so bad?
From the progressive, liberal side the defeat of Belhar removes a confession that was going to be used to justify the ordination of sexually active LGBTs under the new clause .. governing bodies shall be guided by Scripture and the confessions in applying standards to individual candidates ...
That said, you have the new nFOG's Foundations section that has a paragraph F-1.0403, which is nicknamed the diversity provision. It states:
Well, guess that tells us. If we believe that sin is sin and others don't we can't do anything about it. Don't believe Christ is Lord, so what come on in; otherwise we'd be discriminating against their theological conviction.
Preach that the Resurrection is just a myth, no worries .. you're OK. (Oh wait, that's already occurred under the current FOG ... nevermind .)
There are other parts of the nFOG that will trouble the PC(USA) in the future. No one knows the full impact of the changes affecting the independence of the local Session, Presbytery or Synod. There are paragraphs referring to the General Assembly, Synod and Presbytery as having authority and power to develop strategy for the mission of the church, the Session is left to lead the congregation in the mission of the whole church. It does sound like the Session is getting the short end of the stick.
In describing the problems with the nFOG at the day of the vote in Crimson-rock Presbytery, one speaker called a yes vote on nFOG " .. buying a pig in a poke ...". I think she got it right, we have no idea where nFOG is going to lead us. I fully expect a boatload of amendments to the BOO next year at General Assembly once individual Sessions (well, those that care to actually interact with others in their presbyteries) and Presbyteries realize the ramifications of the this change. Moving the PC(USA) from a connectional to a hierarchical organization.
So where do we go from here? There are a number of possibilities being talked about, but that's for the next rock.
And so it goes ....
It also announced that the Belhar Confession, written for a specific time and place (apartheid and separate churches in South Africa) was voted down by over 1/3 of Presbyteries.
The way they phrased it, "the Belhar Confession has been approved by a solid majority – 89 presbyteries to 60 so far. However, this proposal to amend the Book of Confessions requires a two-thirds majority for adoption, so it only takes 58 negative votes to defeat it." Interesting spin ... a solid majority, why not say over a third of presbyteries did not approve of Belhar.
Finally, the article reiterates that amendment 10A passed, removing the so-called fidelity & chastity clause. Now presbyteries and sessions can, if they so desire, recommend for ordination and/or call to office sexually active individuals who are not married. Please note, I do not say sexually active homosexuals. While that clause had been characterized as targeting LGBTs, it covered all those who did not practicefidelity in marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness.
So what's the big deal? Why are the passing of two and the defeat of one so bad?
From the progressive, liberal side the defeat of Belhar removes a confession that was going to be used to justify the ordination of sexually active LGBTs under the new clause .. governing bodies shall be guided by Scripture and the confessions in applying standards to individual candidates ...
That said, you have the new nFOG's Foundations section that has a paragraph F-1.0403, which is nicknamed the diversity provision. It states:
The unity of believers in Christ is reflected in the rich diversity of the Church‟s membership. In Christ, by the power of the Spirit, God unites persons through baptism regardless of race, ethnicity, age, sex, disability, geography, or theological conviction. There is therefore no place in the life of the church for discrimination against any person. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) shall guarantee full participation and representation in its worship, governance, and emerging life to all persons or groups within its membership. No member shall be denied participation or representation for any reason other than those stated in this Constitution.
Well, guess that tells us. If we believe that sin is sin and others don't we can't do anything about it. Don't believe Christ is Lord, so what come on in; otherwise we'd be discriminating against their theological conviction.
Preach that the Resurrection is just a myth, no worries .. you're OK. (Oh wait, that's already occurred under the current FOG ... nevermind .)
There are other parts of the nFOG that will trouble the PC(USA) in the future. No one knows the full impact of the changes affecting the independence of the local Session, Presbytery or Synod. There are paragraphs referring to the General Assembly, Synod and Presbytery as having authority and power to develop strategy for the mission of the church, the Session is left to lead the congregation in the mission of the whole church. It does sound like the Session is getting the short end of the stick.
In describing the problems with the nFOG at the day of the vote in Crimson-rock Presbytery, one speaker called a yes vote on nFOG " .. buying a pig in a poke ...". I think she got it right, we have no idea where nFOG is going to lead us. I fully expect a boatload of amendments to the BOO next year at General Assembly once individual Sessions (well, those that care to actually interact with others in their presbyteries) and Presbyteries realize the ramifications of the this change. Moving the PC(USA) from a connectional to a hierarchical organization.
So where do we go from here? There are a number of possibilities being talked about, but that's for the next rock.
And so it goes ....
Thursday, April 14, 2011
What happens now ?
Many evangelicals in the PC(USA) have thrown in the towel over the news that South Louisiana flipped their vote from supporting biblical ordination standards, to against this past weekend.
One blogger notes that since 2008 when the last go round happened and biblical standards were supported in S.L.P, about 7 or so churches left the denomination for a more biblically faithful denomination. He figures that those seven churches probably would had enough Presbytery representation to defeat the measure this time around.
So what happens now? The way I look at it is that those who are faithful to biblical standards of chastity and marriage must make an effort to attend the remaining presbytery meetings on the 10A vote, no matter what inconveniences you need to overcome. You just can't sit back and say that someone else will defeat it, there is no one else!!
You need to attend those votes on nFOG and Belhar. You need to understand that rejecting Belhar will make it harder to justify ordinations that do not conform to Biblical standards. For under the 10A language, Governing bodies shall be guided by Scripture and the confessions in applying standards to individual candidates. If Belhar is not in the BOC, it cannot be used to water down what the existing confessions say about sin.
Then there's nFOG, where language takes away much of the local church Session's discretion on contributions to higher governing bodies. That means that you could be forced (depending on the Presbytery) to pay Per Capita to support the headquarters in Louisville.
The same headquarters that created a 10 or 12 page, full color magazine touting all the good that the mission arm of the PC(USA) is doing. I'm wondering how much producing and mailing 10 or 12 copies to each congregation cost the denomination; probably would have paid for a few missionaries?? They could have done the same with a small pamphlet that contained a link to the online magazine.
Its not over, quit throwing in those towels. Consider this a wake up call to end all wake up calls.
And so it goes ....
One blogger notes that since 2008 when the last go round happened and biblical standards were supported in S.L.P, about 7 or so churches left the denomination for a more biblically faithful denomination. He figures that those seven churches probably would had enough Presbytery representation to defeat the measure this time around.
So what happens now? The way I look at it is that those who are faithful to biblical standards of chastity and marriage must make an effort to attend the remaining presbytery meetings on the 10A vote, no matter what inconveniences you need to overcome. You just can't sit back and say that someone else will defeat it, there is no one else!!
You need to attend those votes on nFOG and Belhar. You need to understand that rejecting Belhar will make it harder to justify ordinations that do not conform to Biblical standards. For under the 10A language, Governing bodies shall be guided by Scripture and the confessions in applying standards to individual candidates. If Belhar is not in the BOC, it cannot be used to water down what the existing confessions say about sin.
Then there's nFOG, where language takes away much of the local church Session's discretion on contributions to higher governing bodies. That means that you could be forced (depending on the Presbytery) to pay Per Capita to support the headquarters in Louisville.
The same headquarters that created a 10 or 12 page, full color magazine touting all the good that the mission arm of the PC(USA) is doing. I'm wondering how much producing and mailing 10 or 12 copies to each congregation cost the denomination; probably would have paid for a few missionaries?? They could have done the same with a small pamphlet that contained a link to the online magazine.
Its not over, quit throwing in those towels. Consider this a wake up call to end all wake up calls.
And so it goes ....
Friday, February 4, 2011
Arizona White Paper
A few weeks ago, a group of tall steeple pastors met in Scottdale, AZ to discuss the state of the PCUSA. All of these pastors are firmly in the moderate to conservative branch of the denomination.
A letter introducing the White Paper, along with the White Paper itself was published on the Presbyterian Outlook website
As expected there are a few responses, some for, most against. There is much railing against the fact that all the signers were pastors of tall steeple churches, and that they are all white males.
I'm not sure that I could tell that they are all white males from their names, at least one response agrees with me on that. However, they are all males, but why is that a surprise.
While it is true that the PCUSA and its predecessors found that there is a scriptural basis for the ordination of women, both as elders and as ministers of Word and Sacrement, it is hard for a biblically conservative woman minister to find a pulpit outside of a small to medium sized church.
A case in point, SWMBO, also known as the Pastor. Graduated from a conservative seminary, PTS in Pittsburgh. Born and raised in the PCUS as a child, affirms the Westminister Confession without quibble. That said, either did not get a response, or got a polite thank you, but after being listed as the required women's candidate.
There aren't that many women who are Senior Pastor's in any church over 1,000 members that I know of, if there are please enlighten me.
So the fact that .... the letter prompting this response was published by a group of white, male pastors of large churches, who were inviting the whole church to consider their concerns to quote from the Outlook, is nothing if not disingenuous, and a Red Herring to detract from what the White Paper actually says.
A response by the Stated Clerk, GAMC Exec Director, and the current Moderator of the GA is, according to Jack Haberer, In the process, they urge their fellow Presbyterians to pursue a course of unity, citing John Calvin’s resolve, “‘So far as I have it in my power, if I am thought to be of any service, I shall not be afraid to cross ten seas for this purpose, if that should be necessary.’”
But did Calvin really pursue Unity as the end all and be all, or was he pursuing to reform Christianity into what the Scriptures really said.
As you can probably tell, I can understand where these pastors stand. I fully support the ideas they espouse. I can also understand why there aren't other names there, pastors of smaller churches who do not have the security of a tall steeple. These pastors know full well that in some locales, to publicly say what the White Paper says could be a career breaker.
There is that kind of disunity and distrust in the PCUSA. Another blogger at Mountains and Magnolias talks about how the PCUSA has become almost episcopalian in scope, and that the tall steeple pastors are looking at congregationalism.
He has a point, but I don't believe the part about becoming congregational. That's already here with many large to small churches simply exiting the PCUSA in place. Yeah they're still listed, but they don't all pay per capita and many don't attend Presbytery meetings any longer. Why?? Its the same thing every year or so, we said NO once, why can't it stick !!
Is the new nFog, which appears to push unity as the main driving force and will if adopted will promote anything but; going to really ...engage elders and pastors in shaping a more responsive polity to paraphrase from the response letter?
Will the nFog be more responsive to those who see the PCUSA as heading down the road to biblical irrelevancy?
Does it give a voice to those who see that the current way we nominate representatives to GA does not allow for the diversity of opinion and theological views that should be the goal of GA?
You can probably quess the answer to all those questions, and more from the moderate/conservative side of the PCUSA. I think NOT!!
And so it goes ..... !!
A letter introducing the White Paper, along with the White Paper itself was published on the Presbyterian Outlook website
As expected there are a few responses, some for, most against. There is much railing against the fact that all the signers were pastors of tall steeple churches, and that they are all white males.
I'm not sure that I could tell that they are all white males from their names, at least one response agrees with me on that. However, they are all males, but why is that a surprise.
While it is true that the PCUSA and its predecessors found that there is a scriptural basis for the ordination of women, both as elders and as ministers of Word and Sacrement, it is hard for a biblically conservative woman minister to find a pulpit outside of a small to medium sized church.
A case in point, SWMBO, also known as the Pastor. Graduated from a conservative seminary, PTS in Pittsburgh. Born and raised in the PCUS as a child, affirms the Westminister Confession without quibble. That said, either did not get a response, or got a polite thank you, but after being listed as the required women's candidate.
There aren't that many women who are Senior Pastor's in any church over 1,000 members that I know of, if there are please enlighten me.
So the fact that .... the letter prompting this response was published by a group of white, male pastors of large churches, who were inviting the whole church to consider their concerns to quote from the Outlook, is nothing if not disingenuous, and a Red Herring to detract from what the White Paper actually says.
A response by the Stated Clerk, GAMC Exec Director, and the current Moderator of the GA is, according to Jack Haberer, In the process, they urge their fellow Presbyterians to pursue a course of unity, citing John Calvin’s resolve, “‘So far as I have it in my power, if I am thought to be of any service, I shall not be afraid to cross ten seas for this purpose, if that should be necessary.’”
But did Calvin really pursue Unity as the end all and be all, or was he pursuing to reform Christianity into what the Scriptures really said.
As you can probably tell, I can understand where these pastors stand. I fully support the ideas they espouse. I can also understand why there aren't other names there, pastors of smaller churches who do not have the security of a tall steeple. These pastors know full well that in some locales, to publicly say what the White Paper says could be a career breaker.
There is that kind of disunity and distrust in the PCUSA. Another blogger at Mountains and Magnolias talks about how the PCUSA has become almost episcopalian in scope, and that the tall steeple pastors are looking at congregationalism.
He has a point, but I don't believe the part about becoming congregational. That's already here with many large to small churches simply exiting the PCUSA in place. Yeah they're still listed, but they don't all pay per capita and many don't attend Presbytery meetings any longer. Why?? Its the same thing every year or so, we said NO once, why can't it stick !!
Is the new nFog, which appears to push unity as the main driving force and will if adopted will promote anything but; going to really ...engage elders and pastors in shaping a more responsive polity to paraphrase from the response letter?
Will the nFog be more responsive to those who see the PCUSA as heading down the road to biblical irrelevancy?
Does it give a voice to those who see that the current way we nominate representatives to GA does not allow for the diversity of opinion and theological views that should be the goal of GA?
You can probably quess the answer to all those questions, and more from the moderate/conservative side of the PCUSA. I think NOT!!
And so it goes ..... !!
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
PCUSA being sued !!
Caught this on Church and World (Presbyweb) today: Presbyterians sued over alleged sex abuse.
Now normally I wouldn't worry about this, as the denomination does not have a central authority. However; with all the litigation by churches trying to separate the PCUSA to another denomination while keeping their property; the PCUSA has been arguing with with provided legal assistance, or friend of the court briefs, that the PCUSA is a hierarchical denomination.
What does that mean to us in the pews? Well, it could mean that even though the Hostel where the alleged abuse occurred was owned by a church supported entity, not the PCUSA corporate body, the tactic used by the PCUSA against churches, may be turned around and used against the PCUSA itself. I'm not a lawyer, nor pretend to be one, but is this not possible ??
Interesting conjecture, no ?? The PCUSA could be facing multi-million dollar lawsuits, that could threaten its financial stability. What would happen to the PCUSA then ?? Perhaps something that would be a positive thing. Funding for all the different committees, and associated staff would drop. Many of the committees that make work for themselves would have to stop making work because there would be no one to do the work.
It would pare down the size of the national staff in Louisville. Just think, perhaps the work of the denomination would then be reduced to just one thing - saving souls for the Father and Lord of all.
And so it goes ... !!
Now normally I wouldn't worry about this, as the denomination does not have a central authority. However; with all the litigation by churches trying to separate the PCUSA to another denomination while keeping their property; the PCUSA has been arguing with with provided legal assistance, or friend of the court briefs, that the PCUSA is a hierarchical denomination.
What does that mean to us in the pews? Well, it could mean that even though the Hostel where the alleged abuse occurred was owned by a church supported entity, not the PCUSA corporate body, the tactic used by the PCUSA against churches, may be turned around and used against the PCUSA itself. I'm not a lawyer, nor pretend to be one, but is this not possible ??
Interesting conjecture, no ?? The PCUSA could be facing multi-million dollar lawsuits, that could threaten its financial stability. What would happen to the PCUSA then ?? Perhaps something that would be a positive thing. Funding for all the different committees, and associated staff would drop. Many of the committees that make work for themselves would have to stop making work because there would be no one to do the work.
It would pare down the size of the national staff in Louisville. Just think, perhaps the work of the denomination would then be reduced to just one thing - saving souls for the Father and Lord of all.
And so it goes ... !!
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
We're sorry but the page you are looking for cannot be found.
Have you been to the PCUSA website since they unveiled the remodel ??
The site looks great, although the proclamation on the main page I'm proud to be a Presbyterian because we are God-centered is a bit a farcical at this point in time, and shows a bit of hubris. There are other denominations who are Presbyterian also, but that's neither here nor there.
My main problem with the new PCUSA website is that you cannot find a bloody thing on the site. They did away with the old area based menu. You know, the one where you had five general areas of information, which then led you to another page that broke down the area into specifics.
The new site has everything listed by church department or office!!??!! You have to know which part of the bureaucracy oversees what you are looking for!! This is hard for the average Presbyterian to remember, let alone someone who is not a menber of the denomination.
Try looking on the main page for anything concerning Stewardship, you have to guess where it may be. Maybe Per Capita listed under the office of the General Assembly (OGA)?? Nope, it comes to a page listing the rates for the next few years, along with a definition (and justification) why we need to pay it. Maybe under Resources on the submenu on that page?? Nope, again more bureaucratic paperwork: the 2010-2011 budget (in PDF form), a downloadable brochure about Per Capita, where to obtain envelopes to grab, er collect Per Capita, and some opinions on why Per Capita is required, and if a church does not collect it and forwards it, why the Presbytery is required to pay in lieu of that church.
OK ... I get it, the PCUSA is all about the money. However, where is the area concerning STEWARDSHIP??
Its alright to want to get the Per Capita funds, but where is the denominational resources to assist churches in the yearly Stewardship drive ??
There is no where, I repeat NO WHERE you can get any idea of where to find Stewardship information. They list areas of information that may concern the staff in Louisville, but as far as the concerns of the average congregation of 100, not much. I finally had to use the main page's search function to find stewardship information.
Turns out Stewardship is listed under the General Assembly Mission Council (GAMC). Great ... but there is no direct link available on that page, nor is it available on any of the pages directly linked from that GAMC main page.
I hate to say it but you can see by the design where the staff in Louisville has their mindset, and again, its not the same as the church in middle America with under 100 members.
As you can see by this submenu that is on every page, the main mission of the PCUSA, at least according to the staff who assisted in creating the page, is Compassion, Peace and Justice. I'm glad to see that Evangelism & Church Growth is next, but then we get more Social Justice. We finally cover the areas where the church needs to concentrate: Theology, Worship & Education, Vocations, and World Mission.
However, once more, there is nothing for Stewardship, even under those broad topics. I went through every subheader and link on that GAMC main page to try to find something on stewardship. Zilch, Nada, Nothing.
I finally found Stewardship when I selected the Or By Title -> S-Z link. Lo and behold: STEWARDSHIP !! My quest was over, it only took 5 to 10 minutes of frustration. Did anyone talk to people outside of the headquarters on what was the area regularly visited by congregations? Was a website statistics package used to track page views ?? If this was a corporate page, and I were looking for a product, I'd be looking elsewhere.
Now, where did they put those online versions of the Book of Confessions and Book of Order ??
... and so it goes!!
The site looks great, although the proclamation on the main page I'm proud to be a Presbyterian because we are God-centered is a bit a farcical at this point in time, and shows a bit of hubris. There are other denominations who are Presbyterian also, but that's neither here nor there.
My main problem with the new PCUSA website is that you cannot find a bloody thing on the site. They did away with the old area based menu. You know, the one where you had five general areas of information, which then led you to another page that broke down the area into specifics.
The new site has everything listed by church department or office!!??!! You have to know which part of the bureaucracy oversees what you are looking for!! This is hard for the average Presbyterian to remember, let alone someone who is not a menber of the denomination.
Try looking on the main page for anything concerning Stewardship, you have to guess where it may be. Maybe Per Capita listed under the office of the General Assembly (OGA)?? Nope, it comes to a page listing the rates for the next few years, along with a definition (and justification) why we need to pay it. Maybe under Resources on the submenu on that page?? Nope, again more bureaucratic paperwork: the 2010-2011 budget (in PDF form), a downloadable brochure about Per Capita, where to obtain envelopes to grab, er collect Per Capita, and some opinions on why Per Capita is required, and if a church does not collect it and forwards it, why the Presbytery is required to pay in lieu of that church.
OK ... I get it, the PCUSA is all about the money. However, where is the area concerning STEWARDSHIP??
Its alright to want to get the Per Capita funds, but where is the denominational resources to assist churches in the yearly Stewardship drive ??
There is no where, I repeat NO WHERE you can get any idea of where to find Stewardship information. They list areas of information that may concern the staff in Louisville, but as far as the concerns of the average congregation of 100, not much. I finally had to use the main page's search function to find stewardship information.
Turns out Stewardship is listed under the General Assembly Mission Council (GAMC). Great ... but there is no direct link available on that page, nor is it available on any of the pages directly linked from that GAMC main page.
I hate to say it but you can see by the design where the staff in Louisville has their mindset, and again, its not the same as the church in middle America with under 100 members.
As you can see by this submenu that is on every page, the main mission of the PCUSA, at least according to the staff who assisted in creating the page, is Compassion, Peace and Justice. I'm glad to see that Evangelism & Church Growth is next, but then we get more Social Justice. We finally cover the areas where the church needs to concentrate: Theology, Worship & Education, Vocations, and World Mission.
However, once more, there is nothing for Stewardship, even under those broad topics. I went through every subheader and link on that GAMC main page to try to find something on stewardship. Zilch, Nada, Nothing.
I finally found Stewardship when I selected the Or By Title -> S-Z link. Lo and behold: STEWARDSHIP !! My quest was over, it only took 5 to 10 minutes of frustration. Did anyone talk to people outside of the headquarters on what was the area regularly visited by congregations? Was a website statistics package used to track page views ?? If this was a corporate page, and I were looking for a product, I'd be looking elsewhere.
Now, where did they put those online versions of the Book of Confessions and Book of Order ??
... and so it goes!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)