Yesterday on the Sacramento Presbytery web site I discovered that a Perfected Remedial Complaint & Request to Maintain Stay had been placed there. This is called "perfected" because according to Merriam-Webster it has been completed and put in a "final form in conformity with law." But given some of the other meanings of "perfected" I prefer to call this the hellenized version. That is not a Greek version but a "hell-in-ice" version.
This version borders on Dante's circle of hell that holds Satan in ice. Not only does David Thompson and his associate Pastors (I do not see Westminster Presbyterian Church's name on this complaint) explain in this paper how valuable the properties of Roseville and Fair Oaks are, they call for the churches to be placed under an administrative commission and a search be made for the 'true church.'
And speaking of Satan and hell and concern for property values one can only think of the three temptations of Christ when Satan has Jesus look out over the kingdoms of the world in an attempt to entice him. "Again the devil took him [Jesus] to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory; and he said to him, 'All these things I will give you if you fall down and worship me.'"(Matt 4:8-9)
Satan salivates over the Church wishing to conquer and control, to not only own its real estate but also its soul. As I have already written may God have mercy on the Presbyterian Church USA and may our Presbytery, Sacramento Presbytery, have peace in its attempt to release Roseville and Fair Oaks graciously.
Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Do not let your heart be troubled, nor let it be fearful." (John 14:27)
(There is another paper posted, Complainants' Response to Objection to Stay of Enforcement, but I have been unable to open it.)
8 comments:
Viola,
try this link:
http://www.sacpresby.org/Meetings/2008/Jan%2026/Complainants'%20Response%20to%20Objection%20to%20Stay%20of%20Enforcement.pdf
Thanks Reformed Catholic but that still isn't working for me, maybe its my computer.
Word's escape me, upon reading the 'perfected' complaint. I don't think these Rev. Drs. understand polity- requiring a session to 'pay back' their per cap- nor scripture- as it pertains to grace.
In regards to those three who brought the stay... one reaps what one sows... and, at the end of the day, I wouldn't want to be in the vicinity when this 'crush' comes.
Lord have mercy...
Yes, Dave I believe God's judgements are just as sure as his mercy. Something that can't always be counted on in the PCUSA. But one hopes.
To be blunt, this "perfected Complaint" stinks like the garbage on a Manhatten street in August.
Sounds like they could use some perfect contrition before the presbytery loses everything to attrition!
Viola
I've read this document before and suggest that there are a variety of legal problems in it in relation to the Book of Order and Robert's Rules of Order.
1. There can be no connection between failure to pay per capita and a congregation leaving the denomination. Per Capita is a gift, not a tax.
2. There can be no connection between the action of a congregation to leave the denomination and the pastor of that congregation, if he/she is a member in good standing in the presbytery, serving as a commissioner to a higher governing body.
3. Did any of the complainants seek to amend the terms of dismissal? If not the simple declaration of the chair of the Administrative Commission is insufficient grounds for complaint. Only a ruling by the body could make such grounds. The moderator of the presbytery would have to declare the motion out of order and the maker of the motion or some other member of the body would have to ask for a ruling from the body. If the writers of the complaint did not avail themselves of the relief available to them in Robert's Rules they can hardly argue that the presbytery did not actually allow them to amend the motion.
4. The suggestion that the presbytery disobeyed the order of the Synod PJC is pure speculation unless the chair of the Administrative Commission, the Moderator or the Stated Clerk explicity said that the agreement with the departing congregations was made using the policy that was declared out of order.
5. What is a temporary clerk in Sacramento Presbytery? If the temporary clerk is something like an interim clerk because the presbytery currently has no clerk that is one thing. If the title means something else the document was given to the wrong person and therefore has not been delivered to the appropriate person.
These folks need a remedial class in the Book of Order and Robert's Rules. They also need to stay current with the rulings of the GAPJC.
Hi Bob,
I read your letter with those comments on the Presbyweb. I thought and still do that it is an excellent set of observations. Here are some of my answers although I am no expert at all!
First, on number 4, the Presbytery used the guidelines in "Revised Guidelines for Churches Considering Leaving" which can be found on the Presbytery front web page. They did not use the no.4 resolution.
On no.2, the Moderator stated that there could only be an up or down vote, however, I do not remember Thompson or anyone else asking for a ruling of the body. And there were commissioners there who felt that the Presbytery Committee had been to hard on the churches leaving.
At the moment we are without a stated clerk and using an interim.
There are two extras that I can find (well there are several) added to this perfected version. One is more detail about the value of the property and one is the insistence on an administrative Commission and the search for a true church.
Post a Comment