Things are heating up again in the Presbyland. Today's letter to the churches from the Stated Clerk and Executive Director of the PCUSA, posted under the title "Unwavering Confidence Expressed in Letter to Congregations" in fact expresses no such thing. Although Kirkpatrick and Valentine fail to name it, the letter is clearly written in response to fears that the New Wineskins Association of Churches meeting in Orlando later this week will be followed by more than "a few" congregations seeking to leave the PCUSA.
Why be so coy? The New Wineskins published a plan whereby congregations leaving the PCUSA would join a non-geographic presbytery of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church for a period of five years as a transition into that denomination. That is on the agenda. There have been a few churches leave for the EPC already, and clearly this convocation is (and ought to be) a serious concern in Louisville. Presbybloggers Toby Brown and Bayou Christian will be in attendance, so check their blogs for their reports and observations if you'd like to read a first hand account.
Why be so coy? The New Wineskins published a plan whereby congregations leaving the PCUSA would join a non-geographic presbytery of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church for a period of five years as a transition into that denomination. That is on the agenda. There have been a few churches leave for the EPC already, and clearly this convocation is (and ought to be) a serious concern in Louisville. Presbybloggers Toby Brown and Bayou Christian will be in attendance, so check their blogs for their reports and observations if you'd like to read a first hand account.
Sharing this letter will raise more questions than it answers for most people in the pews. It is past time for straight talk, not more tedious smokescreens and pious blather. The letter reveals an inability to acknowledge and deal with the very real division in the church, and further undermines whatever confidence in GA officials remains.
10 comments:
QG - I was very critical of this letter - for much the same reason. (Though I also objected to the tone that dismissed the concerns of many who stay as well as those who leave.)
I have to admit, though - from their point of view, I understand the motivation. And I can't really offer them a good answer - e.g. something that could help defuse the volatile situation. Personally, I think an honest approach - that just laid out the problems would be better. There are a lot of people with real concerns in our denomination who are not (at least at this time) headed for the exits - but their patience is not unlimited.
I had a completely different response to the letter. I see it as an understated and generous response to the likelihood that some congregations will leave.
But then, I understand the issues behind it, and perhaps it *would* be merely vague and obfuscating to people hearing about them for the first time. Perhaps.
The letter does clearly identify the two major issues, and does clearly state (without identifying the parties) that the New Wineskins, et al. interpretation of the GA actions are inaccurate. I suppose I might be angry, too, if I felt that Louisville was the body doing the misinterpreting. But I wouldn't expect them to make my case for mke.
I'm with Gannet Girl on this one. The possibility of what New Wineskins will probably start (or continue, depending on your point of view)is spelled out in the second sentence.
As for the vagueness, if anyone in the pew is just now hearing about this issue for the first time, that cannot possibly be the responsibility of people working in denominational offices. The onus of that lies on lazy (or uninformed, disinterested, distracted) local leadership, IMHO. But then again, as someone wise once told me when I expressed dismay that a certain church I was interviewing with seemed out-of-touch with denominational wrangling: "Some churches have other things going on, like trying to find Sunday School teachers, or paying for winter fuel oil, or providing hearing aids so the elders in thr pews can hear the sermon."
One person's pious blather is another's hopeful response. Such is the church. :)
If they really wanted to be honest in the letter, check out BayouChristian.blogspot.com for his interpretation of what an honest letter from Louisville might look like.
We should always expect our leaders to be open and honest. Unfortunatly, this has not been happening for some time. (Secret memos, legal strategies, etc.) So why now? What is their motivation? To beat the press that will be generated by NWAC meeting in Orlando, most likely. This way they can come out and say, "Hey, at least we told you about them."
I've been in the pews for for quite a while and only gotten into the denominational politics the last few. Even though its been a short time, I've learned to take anything from Louisville with a huge grain of salt and a sceptical eye.
-KG
Like Gannet Girl and Cheesehead, I think the Stated Clerk's letter was quite mild in tone, especially in comparison to the vituperation coming out of some conservative circles (including the two bloggers you cite). In their paranoid hysteria conservatives have taken to invoking "Louisville" as the source of all the denomination's travails and acrimonies, but they should not cast stones. Their demonization of Clifton Kirkpatrick in particular has been appallingly unchristian. Scandalmongering publications like the Layman (the National Enquirer among Presbyterian periodicals), with their snide invective, only fuel the heated rhetoric. More than once I have heard from the floor of presbytery meetings the Layman invoked as if were gospel instead of the partisan publication it is. Meanwhile the New Wineskins strategy report vilifies the denomination's perceived failings in language that is intentionally provocative and hurtful. If conservatives perceive themselves to be in a hostile environment within the PCUSA, part of the blame for it lies at their feet because of the overheated rhetoric they use so recklessly. Conservative congregations who have fundamental disagreements with the PCUSA should be free to leave, but if New Wineskins is their means of departure their separation will be anything but gracious.
Maybe Louisville doesn't want to roil the so-called 'great middle of the church'. Wonder why the GA Moderator, Joan Gray, didn't sign this?
300 years of Presbyterian history in the US has not been w/out significant divisions. A chart I saw once titled 'The Presbyterian Family Tree' looked more like a plate of cooked spaghetti than not...quite convoluted, indeed.
'Old Side' v 'New Side', 'Old School' v 'New School', 'Old Light' v 'New Light'. No wonder we're referred to as "the split P's"!
Personally, I like the the idea of a more de-bureaucratized, nimble, quick response denominational structure...however, it may be 'a day late and a dollar short', the rate things are moving.
We shall see...the 218th GA ought to be interesting if many churches leave before then...
PresbyG
meepsy pretty much covered my views.
Having said that, the timing of this is rather suspect. The letter looks panicky. A better course for the folks in L'ville would be to ignore the NWAC folks. After all, they are less than 2% in terms of number of members and number of congregations (per their own document). Let them be the radical fringe and move forward confidently, with them at our sides or not - their choice.
GG and Cheese--thanks for your gracious presentation of a different point of view from mine.
I join PresbyG in wondering why Rev. Joan Gray didn't sign this letter, too. I was impressed with her at the Moderator's Conference and would like to hear from her about this.
As a simple member sitting in the pews I really don't care about these politics. All I need is sound teaching from the local pulpit and God's grace to life a Christlike life here and now. I wonder if we're getting too involved in politics and forgetting why we are really here!
"I wonder if we're getting too involved in politics and forgetting why we are really here!"
There's a perfect quote for the folks in Louisville. When they change ordination standards, install Sophia up with the Trinity, which is no longer God, and do away with the resurrection and atonement, it's only a matter of time before the teaching from the pulpit will no longer be sound. We indeed need to keep in mind and heart why we're here.
Post a Comment