For the Lord's Day and all the young people in my life.

For the Lord's Day and all the young people in my life. Thank you for your love. May you all find joy and safety in Jesus.

How a news agency, PNS, can affect voting in the General Assembly

Just today, May 7, 2010, less than two months before the General Assembly, the Presbyterian News Service offered a report by reporter Sue Boardman. The report is “Staying at the Table: Atlanta Presbyterians ponder Civil Unions/Christian Marriage report. The title would be okay but the report is one sided so the title is wrong.

It is really about one person’s view of marriage, civil unions and the majority report of the Committee to Study issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage. This is shaping opinion and outcome by a news media report.

The person the reporter focused on is Rev. Margaret Aymer, assistant professor of New Testament at ITC's Johnson C. Smith seminary, who is a member of the committee and advocates for the ordination of gays and lesbians as well as same gender marriage. Aymer led a conversation on marriage and civil unions at Atlanta’s Interdenominational Theological Center. The reporter, Boardman, wrote that it was a small gathering of “pastors, elders and students." (Italics mine)

So here are some questions for the reporter and the Presbyterian News Service, “Why was this a news worthy report?” Why if it was a news worthy report didn’t the reporter find a way to ask questions of people on both sides of the issues? Since the PNS has published this report will they now interview one of the writers of the minority report?

The minority report did come up in the conversation. Boardman writes:

“Responding to questions about the minority report coming from three members of the committee, Aymer admitted, "I haven't read it. Realizing that, despite all our efforts at covenant community, there was going to be a minority report was extremely painful but still, we all stayed at the table."

'The minority report,' Aymer added, "may consist only of things which were considered and voted down by the committee."

So here are some of the things that were voted down by many in the committee, it is of course from the Minority Report.

“Our starting place

Included in the mandate of this special committee was a directive that the PC (USA)constitutional definition of Christian marriage not be changed. In our confessions, marriage is
consistently defined as a lifelong covenant between God, a man and a woman, and the community of faith.

The PC(USA) Book of Order states: “Marriage is a gift God has given to all humankind for the well-being of the entire human family. Marriage is a civil contract between a woman and a man. For Christians, marriage is a covenant through which a man and a woman are called to live out together before God their lives of discipleship. In a service of Christian marriage, a lifelong commitment is made by a woman and a man to each other, publicly witnessed and acknowledged by the community of faith” (W-4.9001).

…

Regarding marriage, the PC(USA) Constitution consistently declares that:

Marriage “was instituted by the Lord God himself” (The Book of Confessions, 5.246; also 6.131, 6.133, 7.130, 9.47, and Book of Order, W-4.9001);
 Marriage is a “spiritual and physical union [of] one man and one woman” (The Book of Confessions, 6.131; also 5.246, 6.133);
 Marriage is “designed of God to last as long as they both [husband and wife] shall live” (The Book of Confessions, 6.133; also 6.131, 6.137, 9.47 and Book of Order, W 4.9001);
 “Marriage is a gift God has given to all humankind for the well-being of the entire human family” (Book of Order, W-4.9001; also The Book of Confessions, 6.131);
 Marriage serves purposes including "the mutual help of husband and wife; the safeguarding, undergirding, and development of their moral and spiritual character; the propagation of children and the rearing of them in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (The Book of Confessions, 6.134; also 6.131);
 “Marriage is a civil contract between a woman and a man” (Book of Order, W- 4.9001);
 “For Christians marriage is a covenant through which a man and a woman are called to live out together before God their lives of discipleship” (Book of Order, W- 4.9001);
 Christian marriages are to be “publicly witnessed and acknowledged by the community of faith” (Book of Order, W-4.9001);
 Christians are called to “continence” in single life or “complete love and concord” in marriage (The Book of Confessions, 5.245-246; also 4.108, 7.248-249).

Authoritative interpretations of the Constitution have established that:

 “Officers of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) who are authorized to perform marriages shall not state, imply, or represent that a same sex ceremony is a marriage because under W-4.9001 a same sex ceremony is not and cannot be a marriage” (Spahr case, 2008).

 Sessions “should not allow the use of the church facilities for a same sex union ceremony that the session determines to be the same as a marriage ceremony” (1991 General Assembly).”

Boardman writes that Aymer stated:

"It was eye-opening for many members to realize that people disagreed for biblical and theological reasons. We are called by our denomination to read the Bible, taking seriously the issues of language and structure of scripture, and the context of the texts. It was a little strange for me, being from the PC(USA)’s smallest and least remembered seminary, to be the only biblical scholar in the room!"(Italics Mine)

What was it Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to babes. (Matt 11:25)”

And there is the great theologian Karl Barth, who never once felt a fellow Christian was beneath the dignity of the name theologian or biblical scholar if they were serious and knew the subject and the word.

Barth wrote the introduction to a book, Cross and Swastika by a fellow Swiss, Dr. Arthur Frey, who was neither a theologian nor a biblical scholar.[1] Barth stated:

“One thing I do know, however, and that is that at the first encounter I realized I had become acquainted with a man who obviously had read and reflected to an astonishing extent on theological and ecclesiastical matters and who in this field had won the right to independent judgment—a man with whom I could converse on a basis on which it is possible to converse with not many theologians."

Another way that connects Barth’s thoughts about lay theologians and bible scholars to the Majority’s Report, in which they give no opinion, is his praise for the author of the book because Frey, when no one else in Switzerland had a decisive view about the church in Germany, was able to make a decision, to say a definite No to German Church ideology and theology.

The intellectuals among the Swiss, as Barth put it, “has to be as much as possible the cleverer, and therefore—has not to come to a decision!” That reminds one of the Majority Report, perhaps clever about unity but not at all pastoral. Not helpful to those who need biblical and confessional guidance.

Hopefully the PNS will interview a member of the Minority Report, perhaps Rev. William C. Teng whom I am sure Karl Barth would find capable of astonishing theological and ecclesiastical conversation.



[1] Barth writes: “The reader of this book would certainly never have suspected that the author’s thesis for his doctorate, published 1922, had for its subject: “Meat Price Policy in Switzerland during World War, 1914-1918.” Dr. Arthur Frey, Cross and Swastika: The ordeal of the German Church, (Student Christian Movement Press), 1938.

God confronting the nations through the Jews

As I flew to the Voices of Orthodox Women’s board meeting last week I sat by another Christian. She asked me what church I went to, and I barely got the word Presbyterian out of my mouth when she asked, “Why do Presbyterians hate Israel so much?” I stumbled over words as I tried to explain to her some of the things about my denomination.

I thought of this last weekend as I continued the class I am leading at church on issues coming before the General Assembly. The subject was the Middle East issues.

I gave out several handouts as I always do. One of them was simply a long quote from a book written by the Torrance brothers. Most people in the Presbyterian Church have heard of theologian Thomas F Torrance who translated Karl Barth’s Dogmatics. And many Presbyterians have enjoyed Professor James B Torrance as a teacher. I had Systematic Theology II from him. My all time favorite class.

But probably not that many have heard of Rev. David W Torrance who was not only a Pastor in Great Britain but like his brothers studied under Barth. The quote is from a chapter written by David Torrance, “The Mission of Christians and Jews.” The book is A Passion for Christ: The Vision that ignites Ministry.

This is the quote:

“In what way does God confront the nations and peoples of the world today through the Jews?

1. Their remarkable preservation through history, scattered as they have been across the world and persecuted time and again in the most horrific ways, points to the miraculous hand of God who has set them apart for himself and promised, ‘Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,’ declares the lord, ‘will the descendents of Israel ever cease to be a nation before me (Jer 31:36). Their preservation points to the hand of God.

2. The very presence of the Jewish people today recalls us to their origins-to the great things which God has said and done in Israel and which are witnessed to in the Old and New Testaments.

3. The continuing presence of the Jewish people today-particularly their presence back in the Promised Land-reminds us that we and the nations have to reckon with a living, personal God. He is a God who acts in space and time, a God of judgment as well as mercy.

4. Their presence in the promised land reminds us in this twentieth century [and 21st ]that our destiny is not in our hands. The nations do not hold their destiny in their own hands. It is not in the hands of their governments. Our destiny is in the hands of God who personally intervenes in history challenging the nations to humble themselves and to obey him, even as he challenged Pharaoh of old.

5. The modern history of Israel reminds us that God is over-ruling the continued sin of this world, as he fulfils his purposes of love and redemption. All history is leading up to the consummation of God’s purpose for this world, when he himself will come in Christ and the nations must meet with him and render account to him.

Israel’s return to the land of promise, following as it does an attempt under Hitler to obliterate everything Jewish, reminds us not only that God is the Lord of history but also that events seem to be moving on fairly fast toward the ultimate goal of history. Israel continues to be God’s covenant people and God continues to speak through the Jewish people and through them to show his glory to all who have eyes to see.”

David W. Torrance, “The Mission of Christians and Jews,” A Passion for Christ: The Vision that Ignites Ministry 123-124.

If you are interested in the book you can order it from The Layman on Line

Some excellent writing on the problems in the Middle East

To not stand alone is good. Sometimes one must do so but not now in the case of several Presbyterian (U.S.A.) organizations which are not only attacking Israel but also the Jewish people in the United States. Several good friends of mine are blogging about the escalating problem and although they are not PC (U.S.A) they have very good reasons for joining the fray.

Will Spotts

Will Spotts who was PC (U.S.A.) for many years but left the denomination partly because of the battering that Israel and the Jews have taken from this and other mainline denominations is providing his very logical and compassionate voice to the problem. Will had a blog at one point entitled Whatsoever Things. If you click on that now you will find that the Title has changed to, “The PC (USA) on Israel and Palestine.

His first posting is About: First Do No Harm where he explains why he has once again decided to defend righteousness by means of a computer. His second posting is MAP THING: Why Willful Ignorance Is Not an Option And in the third posting which is a series he begins to dig into the options the PC (U.S.A.) has. That one is Which Is It to Be – Pro-Palestinian, Anti-Israel, or Antisemitic? (part 1). He is writing in areas I have not explored or even touched.

For instance This:

“Most importantly, I have been amazed by the lack of reaction among ‘ordinary’ Christians. It is as if these ‘ordinary’ Christians – who are not themselves antisemitic, and who do not, themselves hold Israel to a double standard – remain perfectly content for organizations to which they belong to do so. It is as if they do not recognize their responsibility and culpability for the actions of churches where both their membership and their financial contributions are voluntary.”

And this:

“The word ‘antisemite’ itself was apparently coined by Wilhelm Marr when he formed the German ‘Antisemitic League’ (“Antisemiten-Liga”) specifically to combat the ‘Jewish threat to Germany’. Marr also used the phrase “Jew hatred” (Judenhass) in a pretty much equivalent fashion. Marr’s emphasis was placed on non-religious, race based opposition to the Jewish people. The word ‘antisemitic’ came to be preferred over ‘Jew hatred’ because it seemed to provide a thin, pseudo-scientific veneer for the whole concept.”

Please read all, it is worthwhile and at this time in our history very important.

David Fischler

The other person is David Fischler who a Pastor of an Evangelical Presbyterian Church and blogs at The Reformed Pastor. He just this year visited Israel and posted some wonderful pictures. David doesn’t always write about Israel and Palestine but when he does his posts are extremely thoughtful, logical and full of a Pastor’s good sense and care.

Just this week David read what I had posted on San Francisco’s latest overture, 08-09 On Referring “Christians and Jews: People of God” and “Understanding Christian-Muslim Relations” in which their diatribe is extreme. And here I am talking about the information they have added to the rationale. It is a paper provided by the Israel/Palestine Mission Network. David posted about the information here PCUSA Israel-Haters Rave Away. As a Reformed Pastor who is Jewish the IPMN must be extremely insulting to him, perhaps scary.

Here is a section from his post:

“I think at this point that it has become crystal clear what the IPMN stands for. Jews who are so foolish as to desire to live in the historic homeland of their people should be at the mercy of the Jew-haters who dominate most of the nations that surround them. The claims of the Jewish people on that homeland are to be rejected, Israel’s right to exist denied, and the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state advocated.”

Please use the material at both of these gentlemen’s blogs.

An overture filled with fury: anti-Semitism again

Anti-Semitism[1] is hatred of the Jewish people. It is not the hatred of all Semitic people but is instead a word designated for the Jews alone. With a great amount of fury the San Francisco Presbytery and the Israel/Palestine Mission Network as well as other Presbyterian (U.S.A) organizations, have exposed their great hatred for the Jewish people, not just the ones in Israel but also the ones in the United States. And they have also revealed their great contempt for God’s word.

Recently added to the overtures in the Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations Committee is 08-09 On Referring “Christians and Jews: People of God” and “Understanding Christian-Muslim Relations” This overture asks the General Assembly to postpone both of those reports until other more political organizations, such as the Israel/Palestine Mission Network, the National Presbyterian Middle East Caucus and the PCUSA partner churches and agencies in the Middle East can be consulted. (Keep in mind these are theology papers.)

The main problem for them is the Jewish paper. In the rationale section of the overture they have linked to a pdf file written by the Israel/Palestine Mission Network and referred to it in the text.[2] It is mostly about the paper “Christians and Jews: People of God.”

Lies !: Although the IPMN lists some things they like about the paper they in various ways take them back when they start expressing their dislikes. So I will begin with their complaints. Under “the fatal flaws” they first look at what they title “The Separation of Theology and Justice.” After arguing that not enough is said about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians they write:

“By neglecting the reality on the ground, this report would ‘make nice’ with certain American Jewish organizations to avoid unwarranted charges of anti-Semitism. These are the organizations that have provided financial and political support for the Israeli occupation and colonization of Palestinian lands since 1948, and used threat and intimidation to censor debates about Israel within and without the Jewish Community. A report that confesses Christian guilt for the past and calls for changes in our theology and practice but neglects to mention contribution of American synagogues to the oppression of Palestinians over the past six decades appears to us as inauthentic interfaith dialogue.”

There is a footnote with the line about threats and intimidation to censor by Jewish organizations. The footnote is, “The package (a bomb?) sent to 100 Witherspoon St in 2004, the fire in a Rochester Church, the picketing of the Presbyterian Peace Fellowship event at GA when Professor Norman Finkelstein was a featured speaker, and the many visits of teams of Jewish neighbors to local Presbyterian Churches are examples of these tactics.” The rest includes a Jewish web site that supposedly documents all of this. (But it doesn’t)

So let’s start unraveling all of this by insisting that the package was never linked to any Jewish organization. Nor was the fire. And arson and bombing are not American activities but picketing is. And visits to local Presbyterian Churches by Jewish neighbors-I hope the pastors preached about Jesus.

The first quote about how Jewish organizations have been helping Israel for six decades- I hardly know what to say. Have these authors ever heard of the Marshall Plan which helped Europe recover from the ravages of World War II. Many Jewish organizations in the United States started for the same reasons and function in much the same way. Others do fight bigotry and intolerance and of course just like the present Presbyterian Washington office the Jewish citizens of the United States also lobby for what they think is right. What could be more American?

The Jews cause anti-Semitism ?:The authors refer to many different issues in the Christians and Jews paper and one of its concerns, the rise of anti-Jewish rhetoric and actions is attacked by the authors of the IPMN paper, who state:

“This statement [about the rise of Anti-Jewish rhetoric and actions] needs to be contextualized. The ‘anti-Jewish rhetoric’ does not arise out of a vacuum, or some inchoate reservoir of anti-Semitism. In fact, the case can be made that it is a reaction to the actions of the state of Israel. And this is related to the American Middle East wars, which, combined with the U.S. defense of Israel internationally, fuels anti-Jewish stereotypes and some classic anti-Semitic beliefs.”

So those who defame the Jewish people are not at fault! Instead the Jews are! And the United States. That is a classic double bind. There is no defense against a double bind and when combined with classic anti-Semitism it is pure evil. The victim is made responsible for the crime. It is like telling a woman she was raped because of the way she dressed.

Jews as the people of God: Finally the authors turn to theology. They complain that, “Christians and Jews’ uses selected texts in the Old Testament and in Romans 9-11 to affirm the continuity of Jewish and Christian faith. It declares that both are ‘people of God.’ And ‘serve the same God.’” They go on to complain that the paper fails to show the differences between Christian and Jewish faith as the paper on Muslims does. But their real complaint here is “Muslims who compare the titles of the two reports may conclude that we believe they worship a lesser God than Christians and Jews.”

But here is the real problem: the paper Understanding Christian and Muslim Relations does speak of both Christians and Muslims worshiping the same God which isn’t true. The Christian Jewish issue is a bit different. I think it can be put this way.

The Old Testament is full of Jesus Christ, it is about him. The Jewish people do not accept that and yet their Scriptures are a beautiful and true picture of the God Christians worship. Without the Old Testament Christians would have no foundations for their faith in Jesus Christ. That is not true of Islam. Their holy text is a contradiction of what Christians believe.

Furthermore, God has, as the Christian and Jews paper points out, given promises that tie the Jewish people forever to God’s keeping power. “From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling are irrevocable. (Romans 11:28)”

While I wish the paper Christians and Jews had been clearer and more insistent that all peoples, including the Jewish people, need Jesus for eternal salvation it does state that “Presbyterians share a basic conviction that the Church is called to tell the good news of salvation by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord to all people.”

The Authority of Scripture or Not: Other problems with Israel/Palestine Mission Network paper is their view of Scripture and their misrepresentation of the Christians and Jews paper’s view of Scripture. Writing about biblical interpretation they suggest that the theological paper upholds historical critical methods which will “call into question the validity of anti-Jewish texts in the New Testament.” They state this about the Christians and Jews paper as an excuse to question the validity of Scripture themselves.

But this is not what the Christians and Jews paper does. Instead it states, “Inappropriate uses of the historical-critical method of studying Scripture can reduce the Old Testament to a mildly interesting account of what people used to believe long ago and far away. For Christians, the Old Testament is more than a record of ancient Israel’s faith; it is ‘Christian Scripture.”

The paper also states, “Unfavorable New Testament references to ‘the Jews’ do not refer to all Jews of the first century, and certainly not of the twenty-first.” None of this questions the validity of the Holy Scriptures. But the Israel/Palestine Mission network paper does. They write:

“We believe it is necessary to use historical critical methods to call into question biblical texts in Genesis, Deuteronomy, and Joshua that are used to support the Israeli treatment of Palestinians within Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.”

Land, Zionism, and a Jewish State; A few other problems: The authors of the IPMN paper complain about the section on land in the Christians and Jews paper. And yet, while the IPMN and other Presbyterian pro-Palestinian organizations always give a one-sided story about Israel and land, the theological paper constantly gives two accounts. They explain the merits and problems of connecting Israel to God’s promise of land. The paper Christians and Jews is extremely fair in this area.

The IPMN paper complains of the warning about anti-Zionism in the theological paper. Instead of heeding the warning, IPMN faults Zionism for seeking a Jewish State. As an example they write, “The push by the current government of Netanyahu for recognition of Israel as a ‘Jewish state’ is one example of this ideology.” And they footnote this with, “The common denominator of most forms of Zionism is the demand for a Jewish State.” Indeed!

And may it ever be a Jewish State.

Then the final request in the IPMN paper is that all the political entities in the Presbyterian Church who would like to see that Israel loses her status as a Jewish State be consulted when the Church writes a theological paper on Christians and Jews.

In the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) something evil this way comes-may God stand between it and his Church. Deliver us from evil.


[1] Anti-Semitism A Presbyterian Pastor, John Shuck, asked this question and I thought I would answer it.
[2] see- 111 Refer Papers Attachment.pdf

First Presbyterian Church of Roseville, Fair Oaks Presbyterian Church and the comfort of our Lord

I wanted to rant and rave. A friend wanted to curse them, something a Christian may not, cannot do. Here is the truth, forgiveness will bring healing to them or it will eat away at their soul. They, like the creatures, in C.S. Lewis’ essay, “The Weight of Glory” will progress toward a thing that if you saw it in reality would be a horror and a corruption that might be found in nightmares.

Yes, the sad thing is that just now, in the face of this, we will meet for worship and then a Presbytery meeting in the church whose former leader, I will not call him pastor, caused all of us, to not allow them to leave with their own gifts and works, their church buildings.

God is better than that. Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord …” a heavenly voice has said. Why? Because they not only “rest from their labors” but they carry their deeds, their works, with them. Those deeds truly belong to God, he prepared them ahead of time, but he allows the saints to carry them to heaven. (Eph 2:10; Rev 14:13)

Not so the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). First Presbyterian Church of Roseville California will pay half the court cost and “they will pay $810,000 (about 10% of their church's appraised value) over a 20-year period at no interest. (This would be a monthly payment of $3375.)” And Fair Oaks Presbyterian Church; they also are settling with the PC(USA). But will there be trust anymore?

In the beautiful passage of Isaiah which Jesus quotes, as he reads from the Prophets in the synagogue at Nazareth, his very being is expressed.

“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the afflicted; he has sent me to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim liberty to captives and freedom to prisoners; to proclaim the favorable year of the Lord” (61: 1-2a).

But the latter part of the sentence containing 'favorable year of the Lord' is not spoken by Jesus, that is, he does not say that he is sent to proclaim “the day of vengeance of our God.” But notice, within the text such vengeance is connected to God’s promise “to comfort all who mourn” granting to them an exchange of garlands for ashes and “the oil of gladness instead of mourning, the mantles of praise instead of a spirit of fainting.” And Jesus as the eternal Son of the Father and Lord of the Church pulls all of the promises and warnings of Scripture into himself.

It is all tied up together. The comfort is now, it belongs to God. In the same chapter in God’s written word is this, “Instead of your shame you will have a double portion, and instead of humiliation they will shout for joy over their portion. Therefore they will possess a double portion in their land, everlasting joy will be theirs.” While this undoubtedly has application to physical Israel in the midst of her history it also applies to spiritual Israel, the church.

As Dietrich Bonhoeffer has written about the church struggle of his time, “Trust will always be one of the greatest, rarest, and happiest blessings of our life in community, though it can emerge only on the dark background of a necessary mistrust. We have learnt never to trust a scoundrel an inch, but to give ourselves to the trustworthy without reserve.” (Letters & Papers from Prison)

The Lord Jesus Christ calls his church to obedience, patience, suffering and joy. And to wait for his sovereign will in all things.

The Belhar Confession, the Covenant Network and the Minority Report of the Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Unions and Christian Marriage

Using the language of Belhar, the Covenant Network, which advocates for the ordination of unrepentant gay and lesbian church members and also same gender marriage, slams the Minority Report of the Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage.
The minority report states:

“It is the intent of this report to represent the church’s biblical, historic, and confessional position that, among all varieties of sexual relationships, only marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God and blessed by our Lord Jesus Christ.”

In its criticism of the Minority Report, the Covenant Network, under the subject Marriage and Civil Unions, offers an article, Marriage and Covenant, which refers to the above statement as absolutizing one particular biblical way of interpreting scripture on the issue of same gender marriage. They write:

“However, three committee members chose to submit a minority report, which also acknowledges that there truly exist variant interpretations of Scripture, which in turn dictate different pastoral models and advocacy models,” yet proceeds to absolutize one of these and attempt to impose it upon all.” (Italics mine)

The problem passage in the Belhar Confession is “…we reject any doctrine which absolutizes either natural diversity or the sinful separation of people in such a way that this absolutization hinders or breaks the visible and active unity of the church, or even leads to the establishment of a separate church formation. …”

This should help those who want some clarity on how the Belhar Confession could be useful to those people who are advocating for ordination and marriage of those who are unrepentant practicing homosexuals.

However, it ought to be noted that the Majority Report does not say that any of the interpretations are correct it simply admits that there are different ways that people have interpreted the Scripture. And it fails to mention that both the Presbyterian (U.S.A.)’s Book of Order and Book of Confessions absolutizes marriage as between a man and a woman, and that absolute understanding finds its foundation in the word’s of Jesus:

‘Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh…’”