In one of my three articles on Presbyterians and Marxism, Presbyterians Dancing With Karl Marx! Part 2 , I made a very bad, but un-intended mistake, concerning Sherry Flyr and a statement attributed to her. For that reason I am apologizing. I am posting here a letter I sent to Ms. Ann Ferguson, Presbyterian Women Program Coordinator, asking her several questions. Her reply to me, in which she pointed out the error I had made. And finally the apology I wrote to Sherry Flyr.
My Letter to Ms. Ann Ferguson:
Ms Ann Ferguson
Program Coordinator,
Presbyterian Women,
Dear Ann,
I am not sure you will remember who I am. I write for Voices of Orthodox Women and well over a year ago spoke with you on the phone about being a part of NNCPW’s leadership conference which included older women. I did attend and found the meetings generally comfortable and helpful.
I am writing you today because of a series of articles I have posted on my new blog, www.naminghisgrace.blogspot.com. The series is entitled “Presbyterians Dancing with Karl Marx,” and goes well beyond matters connected to Presbyterian Women. However, this series did raise some questions related to Presbyterian Women. Since I will write a smaller and hopefully less complicated article for VOW, I do have some questions.
There are three main areas where I have mentioned PW in my articles. The first, under “Affiliations,” your site states, “Presbyterian Women works in partnership with various secular and faith-based organizations on issues of faith and social justice.”
The group Agricultural Missions is one of those affiliations. This particular group supports many rural groups. However they seem to be focusing on several groups which are either rooted in or have strong ties to Marxist groups including the World Social Forum and the United States Social Forum.
Additionally they state that they are supported by, among other religious and service groups, the Presbyterian Church USA, with PW listed along side Presbyterian Hunger Project. I searched your budget and giving projects and found no record of such giving. Can you point out where that is listed and the amount given?
The second concern is Ms Sherry Flyr who is both a board member of Agricultural Missions and Vice Moderator of Missions Relationships for Presbyterian Women. Is Ms Flyr's relationship with PW and Agricultural Missions a conflict of interest?
Here are a couple of examples that raise some concern about Ms Flyr serving these two organizations in a leadership capacity. Ms Flyr was one of the representatives AMI sent to the United States Social Forum to present seminars. As I have shown in my articles, this USSF is a decidedly far left Socialist group. The organization, World Social Forum, and its offshoot USSF does not promote PW’s goals, “to support the mission of the church worldwide,” or “to work for justice and peace.” That is, justice and peace are not attributes of Marxism, and surely neither is the mission of the Church.
In one other instance Ms Flyr is seemingly out of step with the mission of the Church. When describing the various workshops presented at the United States Social Forum she in her description of capitalism described that economic viewpoint as “Homophobic Patriarchical Violent Capitalism.”
This may be Ms Flyr’s own personal viewpoint; however, she holds a position on the National Coordinating Team of Presbyterian Women. In order “to build an inclusive caring community of women that strengthens the Presbyterian Church (USA) …,” I think it would be wise not to alienate the National Leadership of PW from women in the Pew who believe capitalism is certainly not perfect, but is a solid economic system.
In the same manner, in a Church which upholds the biblical standard of marriage between a woman and man, Ms Flyr’s use of the word “homophobic” as a descriptive word is alienating.
The final concern is with the promotion of the Brazilian Landless Workers Group (MST). As you undoubtedly know, the Editors of Horizons in their March/April 2006 edition featured three articles on MST. As you will see, from my articles, the first article, “Promised Land: The Landless Rural Worker’s Movement (MST) and Democracy in Brazil,” written by Miguel Carter, was taken from a much larger article in which Carter was defending MST from its critics who believe it to be a Marxists organization. The Editor’s of Horizons seemingly chose not to tell their readers of this conflict. Can you explain the reason for that decision?
I am inserting the three postings I have written so that you will be better able to understand some of the questions I have asked.
Presbyterians Dancing With Karl Marx! Part 1 .Presbyterians Dancing With Karl Marx! Part 2 .Presbyterians Dancing with Karl Marx Part 3 .
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter and answer the questions I am asking.
Sincerely in Christ,
Viola Larson
Board of Directors,
Voices of Orthodox Women
Ms. Ann Ferguson's letter to me:
Ms.Viola Larson
Board of Directors, Voices of Orthodox Women
October 4, 2007
Dear Viola,
I have pasted below your letter to me to ensure that those copied on this response have your complete communication. If any of this email communication appears on your weblog or on Voices of Orthodox Women's website, I expect to see the entire communication and not excerpts from it.
I do remember our conversation about your desire to be part of the NNPCW leadership conference held in conjunction with the 2006 Churchwide Gathering of Presbyterian Women. I'm glad you were able to be a part of the intergenerational event and found it comfortable and helpful.
In your letter, you raise three areas of concern. My response to each concern follows.
Presbyterian Women’s (PW) Support of Agricultural Missions, Inc. (AMI)
Agricultural Missions, Inc. is an ecumenical organization supported by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Presbyterian Women supports the mission of the PC(USA) and participates in those ecumenical bodies with which the PC(USA) relates. You do not find a budgeted item for AMI in the PW triennial budget because no funds are allocated to its support nor has it received either a Birthday or Thank Offering grant. To date, the only PW-based monetary contribution to AMI has been a portion of the 2006 Churchwide Gathering offering. Interpretation for the offering was provided prior to and during the Gathering. Gathering participants contributed as they felt called to give.
AMI Board Participation
AMI invited Presbyterian Women to send a representative to serve a board term. The Churchwide Coordinating Team assigned Ms. Sherry Flyr, vice moderator for mission relationships, to the task as part of her duties and is fully aware of her role there. There is no conflict of interest.
Magazine Editorial Decisions
The editors asked Miguel Carter, an expert in the landless movement in Brazil, to provide an article about the movement. The article he provided was accepted.
My Concern
Viola, you mention that you intend to write a short article for Voices of Orthodox Women (VOW). I have copied Ms. Sylvia Dooling with VOW. Though our opinions may differ at times, I have come to know Sylvia as a woman concerned about the veracity of the facts in VOW’s publications. In reading the series of blog postings to which you referred me, and your September 26, 2007, email letter to me, I find that both your blog and your letter contain serious factual errors. It concerns me that you would make public allegations about someone without verifying your statements. Out of respect for ethical journalism, I strongly encourage you to check your sources and verify your statements before submitting the article for publication by VOW.
In your September 26 communication that you find copied below in its entirety, you attribute to Ms. Sherry Flyr statements made by others, not by her. The Agricultural Missions newsletter article about the U.S. Social Forum from which you draw your information was written by Stephen Bartett. In the article, he lists Sherry Flyr as a member of a panel in a workshop during the U.S. Social Forum entitled "Migration and Racism in the Domincan Republic." Sherry’s contribution to the workshop was to read the definitions of the terms "race," "prejudice," "social power" and "racism" that are used in PC(USA) antiracism training.
You question the phrase "Homophobic Patriarchical Violent Capitalism." That phrase appears in the writer of the article's listing of plenary sessions during the U.S. Social Forum. The words are not Sherry’s.
In my experience, I have found that agreeing on definitions for emotion-packed words like racism and racist, or Marxism and Marxist opens the way for dialogue. Describing the verbal and nonverbal behaviors generally associated with a particular concept avoids hurtful labeling that may lead others to draw inappropriate conclusions. These descriptors allow civil and respectful discussion of highly charged topics.
In service to Christ,
Ann
Ann Ferguson
Presbyterian Women Program Coordinator
100 Witherspoon St.
Louisville, KY 40202
My Apology to Sherry Flyr:
Ms. Sherry Flyr
Vice Moderator for Missions Relationships
Presbyterian Women
Dear Ms. Flyr,
I wish to apologize for giving out unintended false information about you in the article I wrote, “Presbyterians Dancing with Karl Marx.” I mistook this sentence, “Yours truly, Sherry Flyr, and Luckner Millien of the Farm Worker Association of Florida were the panelists to get the ball rolling:…,” to mean that the “yours truly” was you and so I attributed the following quote to you: “At the US Social Forum there were major plenaries on Katrina, the War, Gender and the struggle against Homophobic Patriarchical Violent Capitalism, Immigration Rights, Worker Justice and Indigenous Peoples and their Prophetic Struggles and Cosmovision.” I certainly should have written and asked you if you had actually written those words. I will change that part of my article.
I agree with Ms. Ann Ferguson that this was a factual error and I need to remedy it. I will post this apology on my blog. Please do forgive me.
Viola Larson
Cc Ms. Ann Ferguson
The Rev. Dr. Rhashell Hunter
Dr. Susan Jackson-Dowd
Ms. Sylvia Dooling
6 comments:
Way to go Viola and Ann. Way to model straight communication and owning mistakes. Blessings on you.
Thanks Michael,
Painful but the only way to go.
Viola,
Your articles have been great. I have become very concerned with the habit with the PC(USA) to get involved with orgainizations that opposed the Church, but advocate radicale social liberalism. It seems that many are more concerned with "social justice," than with the cause of Christ. I think that if we would consentrate on serving Jesus, our Lord and Creator, then the rest would fall into place. But, as long as we seek to make social change, whithout spiritual change, then mankind will never truly change, and the violence will continue. It is only through the will of God that we will achieve true peace, and only in His time.
May God bless you and your work,
Tim
Hi Tim,
I almost missed you. I totally agree with you. However, I do see a real need for advocacy, for instance, like the Aids crisis in Africa or sexual slavery, etc., etc. The problem is that some of the organizations in PCUSA (and notice I said some) cannot be trusted use my money for just that cause that I am interested in. That is why I would rather give in other ways. It is too bad that PCUSA doesn’t have a women’s advocacy group that only promotes biblical causes. The two above of course are biblical causes but pushing Marxists groups is not.
Hi Viola,
It was great to see you last night. I wanted to clarify my statement concerning advocacy of social issues.
I do not have an issue with supporting social change. i think that we must be advocates for humanitarian efforts. The issue that I have with the PC(USA) is that they advocate social justice in stead of the gospel in many cases. What we need to do is advocate for society along with the gospel, but the presentaion of the gospel must always be the primary goal.
By this I don't mean that we should preach to the sick before we care for them. But, we must care for them and preach the gospel. If we do not share the plan of salvation through Christ Jesus, then it does not matter if we have made one well, or ended another's hunger, accept that we have chalked up a few brownie points.
I believe that anything that the church decides to get behind must be able to be supported by Scripture, or it should not be supported.
I think that the reason that we see marxist groups being supported is that the PC(USA) has no standard that they are willing to uphold.
I have been speaking to a few pastors and students from different reformed denominations, while I am attending City Seminary, about some of the issues that we are facing in the PC(USA). one thing that stands out is that each of their dinominations (at least 5-6) has a written standard concerning the qualifications for being ordained, as a minister, elder or deacon. We do not, and have not for quite some time. Since we are not williing to set a standard for the leaders within our church, then there is no way that we are able to set a standard for our sister groups such as the PW.
On a side note, I thought that your comments last night were very well reasoned and explained the situation very well. I think that you are right about some being called to stay, and some to leave. unfortunately it seems that more and more are being called to leave, and I wonder what will be left when they are gone.
Blessings,
Tim
Hi Tim,
Thanks for more comments. You know I agree with them all. I enjoyed seeing you and talking to you Sunday night also. I thought Don Baird did exceptionally well on his part. There were some questions I wish we had gotten to that we didn't, but God knows why.
See you in Dec. if not before.
Post a Comment