From Buddhist meditation to C.S. Lewis' The Hideous Strength: Advent 1

The wonderful time of thankfulness celebrated by families and friends feasting together has ended. Reading the Presbyterian News Service during this Thanksgiving I was troubled by an article, “Food Justice Meditation, placed in the side box by the Presbyterian Hunger Program. It is an article about thanking others for what we have received.

It wasn't that I did not want to thank anyone, rather I was troubled over the author's push towards Buddhist meditation, even offering a link to her Buddhist meditation teacher's site. I felt sad that the author was not lifting up meditation on God's word as a means of loving others including God's creation. Listening to his word is after all what Jesus calls the “good part,” and the only “necessary” act for his followers.(Luke 10:42)

Now it is the season of Advent. As we sit at his feet waiting and listening may we be open and worshipful, receiving with grateful welcome his first coming—his incarnation. And may we be eagerly waiting for Jesus' second coming when he shall bring to the fulness the business of his kingdom welcoming his children.

Thinking of Christ's coming, C.S. Lewis also uses a Chinese philosophical and religious idea, he looks back to the French revolution with its goddess Reason and he reminds his readers of the myths of King Arthur—but he is pointing the reader toward Jesus Christ who fulfills all righteous metaphors in ways that the subjects, not even Arthur, can fulfill. Lewis does not offer religious technology but faithful metaphor.

 He writes, “When Logres [Arthur’s kingdom] really dominates Britain, when the goddess Reason, the divine clearness, is really enthroned in France, when the order of Heaven is really followed in China—why, then it will be spring.”  This is the Christian's hope which is centered in Christ and his word. “Your Kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven ...”

The quote is from Lewis' The Hideous Strength, which also, in a wonderful way, depicts a conversion pointedly placing a new member in the house of Ransom. June who has found joy because of Ransom who is a metaphor of Christ expresses her joy:

She saw from the windows of the train the outlined beams of sunlight pouring over stubble or burnished woods and felt that they were like the notes of a trumpet. Her eyes rested on the rabbits and cows as they flitted by and she embraced them in heart with merry, holiday love. She delighted in the occasional speech of the one wizened old man who shared her compartment and saw, as never before, the beauty of his shrewd and sunny old mind, sweet as a nut and English as a chalk down. She reflected with surprise how long it had been since music had played any part in her life, and resolved to listen to many chorales by Bach on the gramophone that evening. Or else—perhaps—she would read a great many Shakespeare sonnets. She rejoiced also in her hunger and thirst and decided that she would make herself buttered toast for tea—a great deal of buttered toast.

 It is because of Jesus that we love all that we are given and have the hope of his coming. Not a Christmas song for this but a reminder that as sinners we need Jesus:

Two different faiths in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)?

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is certainly divided despite calls for unity. Some of the division can be seen in a commentary that Carmen Fowler LaBerge of the Presbyterian Layman wrote and her detractors counter arguments. LaBerge's article, "Commentary on a Comment: People are going to hell while you're playing at Presbyterianism,” was supposedly answered by teaching elder, John Vest, with his article, “Playing at Presbyterianism,” and teaching elder Marci Glass' article “More Lines in the Sand.”

Evidently the troubling thought in LaBerge's article was this, “You cannot reach people with a love you have not experienced and you cannot invite people into a relationship with a God you do not really know.”

LaBerge suggests the problem with the divisions is not that there are two different focuses but two different faiths. Of course, both Vest and Glass resent the implications. But is this so, are there two different faiths operating under the name PC (U.S.A.)? I think the answer is yes and no. The division is not complete. But last night as I was reading a historical biography of pastor Paul Schneider, the first martyr of the Confessing Churches during the Nazi era, I couldn't help thinking of some of the similarities surrounding that question in Schneider's time.  

The early ideological bent of the German Christians was not apparent to many in the German church in the early years after 1933. Even Paul Schneider, at the very first, aligned himself with the movement. However many moderates within the German church movement clung to the hope that there could be unity in the German church if the political infighting would cease. For them compromises were possible. They believed that all sides in the 'church struggle,' as it was called, were orthodox in their faith. And then the famous Berlin Sports Palace rally of German Christians occurred. 20, 000 German Christians listened as Dr. Reinhold Krause spoke. [1]

Not only did Krause insist that the Old Testament should not be included in Christian scripture, he also wished to do away with some of the New Testament. Of Paul and various passages and doctrines of the New Testament, Krause stated:

It also will be necessary that our National Church proceed to remove all plainly distorted and superstitious passages from the New Testament and that a firm renunciation of the scapegoat doctrine and inferiority-complex teaching of the Rabbi Paul be announced, for Rabbi Paul distorted the happy and simple good news of “Love your neighbor as yourself:” Regard your neighbor as brother and God as your Father.[2]

This was a renunciation of original sin and the need for Jesus' redemptive death. Krause, defaming Paul and Barth in one breath, went on to proclaim what he and the more radical German Christians believed was the proper connection between God and humanity:

It is indeed correct that the entire development of dialectical theology, from Paul to Barth has made a cerebral game out of our God and Father. Theology has always sought to segregate God and man, to justify its existence by proving the curse of original sin and the role of the Church in redemption from the fall. We know of no segregation between God and man, if man by his own decision, does not segregate himself from God. The Savior demonstrated this truth to us in the parable of the lost son. We are fallen only when we depart from God, and if we have the will to say, “I will return to my Father,” then we are saved. Kant is correct; each person is responsible for himself. No one can release me from my sins.[3]

As for Jesus, he was simply a heroic example. “We must return to the heroic Jesus whose life serves as an example for us and whose death was the seal to that life, the conclusion of a life lived in heroic struggle in fulfilling the task assigned to him by his Father.” Krause goes on to warn the German Christians against “an exaggerated preaching of the crucified one” and suggests that they needed , not a leader in heaven, but one on the earth.

Earlier in his speech, Krause had suggested that Martin Luther followed Meister Eckhart in his mysticism and had freed himself from the bondage of monasticism by arriving at “a subjective inner experience of God,” and that he had achieved “union with the Deity which has been achieved by the Nordic seekers after God.”[4] 

Finally, many moderates in the German Christian movement understood that this was not Christianity and fled the movement. They did not all join the Confessing movement that was developing but they all kept a wary eye on the German Christians. And some who never became Confessing Church members used their positions to aid their brothers and sisters in the Confessing Church. [5]

Intertwined in all of the heresy was a dark racism, nationalism and a particularly vile and aggressive anti-Semitism. But it was the heresy that finally reached the hearts of some of the moderates. They finally understood that another faith was operating in their midst. So one can ask is that kind of heresy evident in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). But lets point out the precise heresies first.  
 

1. The rejection of some scripture; the loss of scriptural authority.
2. The rejection of the doctrine of original sin.
   
3. The rejection of the redemptive work of Jesus Christ on the cross.
   
4. The pelagian heresy that one can accomplish one's own salvation.
   
5. Unity with God is acquired by seeking for an experience rather than through Jesus Christ.
   
6. The demoting of Jesus from redeemer to simply a heroic example.
   
7. Although not predominate in this speech the German Christians also promoted a second and new revelation-supposedly given by the “Spirit”
   
   

Have any of these heresies been advocated in the PC (U.S.A.)? And I am not here asking if any of the confessions of the church teach any of these heresies; the three denominations which formed the protestant church in Germany during the time of Hitler also held Reformation confessions as well as the ecumenical confessions. Nonetheless, the German Christians existed and espoused doctrines which belonged to another faith. And for awhile they became the political leaders and theological leaders in the church. In fact many of the professors in the seminaries backed them and their theology, ideology and anti-Semitism.

We wait. Not nationalism, but a desire to be relevant to the culture under girds the heresy that is in the PC (U.S.A.). Not racism, but a disregard for the moral sensibilities of many of our various immigrant communities is connected to the heresy. Not anti-Semitism, and yet its odor drifts through some of the heresy. We wait and pray for salvation.

Picture by Penny Juncker

[1] Claude R. Foster, Jr., Paul Schneider: The Buchenwald Apostle, A Christian Martyr in Nazi Germany, A Sourcebook on the German Church Struggle, (West Chester, PA: SSI Bookstore, West Chester University 1995) 299.

[2]Ibid, 302.

[3]Ibid.

[4]Ibid, 300.

[5] Kyle Jantzen, Faith and Fatherland: Parish Politics in Hitler's Germany, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press 2008).

Time for family: our seventh great granddaughter and so much more ...

Because I have a new great granddaughter, Maxine June Tregilgas, (she is my seventh great granddaughter) I thought it was time to post some family pictures. Here is our newest who was delivered by her father since no one else was there. And after all he had already delivered two calves while interning as a farmer in Maryland: )

Maxine lives with her Mom & Dad and two sisters Molly and Adele, close to a dairy where he works as a milker. It is about an hour away from Hollister California. Here is a picture of Molly sitting in what she calls her castle:

 

 

And here is Adele playing in front of their home:

 

 

 

 Living close to home, actually just down stairs are three more beautiful great grandchildren. Here is Luna holding one of the last flowers of fall:

 

 

And Liberty contemplating some important idea:

 

 

 

 

And our sixth great granddaughter Jade Sequoia with her mama and Liberty in the corner. Jade is dressed for Halloween: 



 

 

And then there is our beautiful fifth great granddaughter Rosalie who we all think is going to be a great musician like her mother Katie:

 

 







I must do another posting with pictures of grandchildren but I will end this with a picture of the area while Maxine's parent's Melissa & Spencer are now living since some have followed Melissa's blog while they traveled on their many adventures. I think it is ruggedly beautiful, a term I have used too often in this post--but they are all beautiful and wonderful gifts from God.

 

 

The picture is taken from Claravale Dairy where Spencer works. Their raw milk is the best!

Stephen Sizer, Mitri Raheb, the Israel/Palestine Mission Network & the legitimacy of contemporary Jews

The idea that the Jewish people today have no connection to the ancient Israelites is a type of anti-Semitism and it has been used in both the 20^th and 21^st century to tear the Jews away from their history and their sacred texts. It is an idea meant to destroy the very identity of the contemporary Jewish community. Using that idea in advocacy negates any attempt by any person or organization to promote the Boycott, Divestment or Sanction movement against Israel since it uses a classical anti-Semitic argument to discredit not Israel but contemporary Jewish people. As a matter of fact it  negates any serious discussion about problems in the Middle East. 

I am writing about two people and one organization who are advocating for the BDS movement and who use the “not Abraham’s physical descendants” idea. They all move in the same circles and promote the same lie. All of their other advocacy is discredited by their use of this kind of anti-Semitism. 

The first person is Stephen Sizer who I have written about before. Sizer is a British Anglican priest who blogs, and speaks at various conferences and churches. He has also spoken on Iran's Press TV. Just recently Sizer debated Dr. Michael Brown a messianic Jew and a Christian Zionist. Here are the two statements he made which show that he holds the idea that contemporary Jews are not connected to ancient Israel.

“Dr Brown is equating Israel in the Old Testament, with a racial group that we would identify today as the Jewish people and I think that this is incorrect.”

In another section of the debate, Sizer states:

“The term Jew in the Old Testament does not mean racially descended from Abraham; just give you one example, Esther 8 verse 17. After the glorious deliverance of God's people out of the hands of those who want to destroy the Jewish people verse 17 says many other nations became Jews out of fear of the Jews; recognizing what God was doing. So at the time of Esther the Jewish people were made up of many nationalities and I would suggest from that verse that those who could trace heir physical descent back to Abraham were already minority within the Jewish people so its not surprising when we get to the New Testament in Romans chapter two and Romans chapter 9 that Paul defines Jew in spiritual terms and he defines Israel in spiritual terms.”

First, Sizer has exaggerated the actions in the Esther text; it does not state that many nations became Jewish, rather it states that “many among the peoples of the land became Jews, for the dread of the Jews had fallen on them.” Furthermore, although it is doubtful that gentiles who converted to Judaism out numbered those who were Jewish by birth, nonetheless, they joined the people of Israel and would them be considered Israelites so one can say they belong to those who are the descendants of Abraham.

Referring to chapter 2 and 9 of Romans, Sizer is attempting to change the subject. When he speaks of the Israelites in Esther's time he attempts to use physical events to prove that most of those called Jews or Israelites during that time were not descendents of Abraham. When he moves to Romans he tries to use his conjured up ideas about a Jewish minority to fit with Paul's statement that “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh, but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that which is of the heart, ...” (Romans 2:28) and Paul's statement that “...they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendents ...” (6b-7a) The truth is, in Romans, Paul is doing two things, as far as the Israelites are concerned.

Paul is describing the actual physical people, the Jews, writing of his desire for their salvation and then he is including the gentiles among that greater spiritual Israel (made up of both Jews and gentiles) that the New Testament sees as the church. But in doing this he has not made some historical notation that suggests that most of the ethnic group, the Jewish people, were at that time not physical descendents of Abraham. If one reads the first five verses of chapter nine it is very clear that Paul recognizes a real people called the Jews who are his kinsman.

The next person is Rev. Mitri Raheb of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Bethlehem.

I have also written about him and my posting included his statements made at what is called the Checkpoint Conference. That is a Christian Palestinian conference which mainly attempts to draw in American Evangelical Christians to speak for Palestinians. While there have been some good speakers at the conference, it seems that Sizer is always a speaker. And Raheb spoke, at least, at the first conference. This is where he stated:

I’m sure if we were to do a DNA test between David, who was a Bethlehemite, and Jesus, born in Bethlehem, and Mitri, born just across the street from where Jesus was born, I’m sure the DNA will show that there is a trace. While, if you put King David, Jesus and Netanyahu, you will get nothing, because Netanyahu comes from an East European tribe who converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages.

 As I pointed out in the posting on Raheb:

“Raheb is referring to the Khazars when he writes of an East European tribe that converted to Judaism in the middle ages. And there was such a tribe that did convert. In fact the European Jews were proud that a whole tribe had converted to Judaism. But that does not make every Jew living in Diaspora a member of the Khazars.

All anti-Semites use the Khazars as a means of insisting that the Jews are not the Jews. Some white Americans who belong to anti-Semitic groups related to the KKK use the Khazars to insist that the supposedly 10 lost tribes of Israel are the Caucasian peoples of Europe and the United States. Those groups are referred to as “Christian Identity.” Raheb uses the Khazars to insist the Palestinians are the only peoples, plus a few Jews, who have a legal right to the Holy Land.”

The organization which uses the idea that contemporary Jews are not connected to the ancient Israelites is the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

I wrote about this several years ago. The IPMN published a booklet entitled Steadfast Hope which contained the idea. The booklet is always advertized on their front web page. Here is the quote:

“The founding narrative of the State of Israel links the modern-day Jews’ claim to the land of Israel/Palestine to their direct genealogical descent from the ancient Israelites. Recent anthropological scholarship shows that this widespread belief is very likely a myth, not historical fact. Shlomo Sand an expert on European history at the university of Tel Aviv, and author of When and How Was the Jewish People Invented? posits that the Jews were never exiled en masse from the Holy Land and that many European Jewish populations converted to the faith centuries later. Thus, he argues, many of today’s Israelis who emigrated from Europe after World War II have little or no genealogical connection to the ancient land of Israel.”

Sand has been discredited by other historians, but the point here is that all three of these entities, two persons and a PC (U.S.A.) organization have used this anti-Semitic idea to discredit Israel and in doing so they are actually attacking the Jewish community. As I stated above they are tearing away the Jewish identity and disconnecting them from their sacred text.

To listen to any information Sizer, Rehab or IPMN provide concerning the BDS movement is foolish. The IPMN will attend the next P C (U.S.A.) General Assembly in Detroit, they will fill the committee room that debates the Middle East issues. And they will do this with their preconceived idea that the European Jews that escaped Hitler and made a new home in Israel have no connection to that land or its ancient people. They will not tell the commissioners that is what they believe but it is written in their material. And it is one of their reasons for pushing divestment overtures.

There is a better way. Ignore Stephen Sizer, ignore Mitri Rehab, ignore the IPMN. Recognize the history of the Jews and their sacred text. Care for both the Palestinians and the Israelis—love them as peoples and bless them with positive investment and hopefully with peace.


Picture Wikipedia Commons

Assistant Stated Clerk, Laurie Griffith's response to my question about the Tecumseh AC Commission Report

Toward the end of October I posted an article, The Polity Conference, the Tecumseh Administrative Commission Report & a sign, about the handout given out at the Polity Conference for leadership in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). I wrote this:

"One of the workshops was entitled “Workshop A4 - Dismissing Congregations to a Reformed Denomination - A Panel Discussion” It was led by Laurie Griffith, Manager of Judicial Process and Social Witness of the Office of the General Assembly. One of the handouts was The Tecumseh Administrative Commission Report from the Maumee Valley Presbytery.

The report is written by those who participated in an AC which oversaw the dismissal of the First Presbyterian Church of Tecumseh, Michigan. The outcome of that process was that the larger body of First Presbyterian was required to leave without the church property. While there are always problems and sin on all sides in such disputes, I found the report troubling and wondered why this particular report was used for such a workshop. The implications are many, and for that reason I have written an e-mail to Ms. Griffith asking her why the paper was used, and will report on her answer if I receive one."

 I sent this e-mail:



"Laurie Griffith

Manager of Judicial Process And Social Witness
Office of the General Assembly

 Dear Ms. Griffith,

 I have read the two handouts for the panel discussion/workshop you facilitated for the Presbyterian Polity Conference, "Workshop A4 - Dismissing Congregations to a Reformed Denomination - A Panel Discussion.' I am interested in the second handout "Tecumseh Administrative Commission Report," and am wondering why that was chosen as a handout and how it was used. Was it considered a good model?  I am very interested in the report because it reminds me of how the case for my former church Fremont Presbyterian in Sacramento was first approached. (I now attend Journey Church in Folsom, a PCUSA church.) The approach to Fremont was changed and they are now EPC with a small PCUSA church nested in their campus.

 I write about many Presbyterian issues on my blog Naming the Grace and will be writing about the handout; because of that I hope you can provide me with relevant information.

 Sincerely in Christ Jesus,

Viola Larson

Ruling Elder, Sacramento"

I waited a week and then once again wrote to Griffith. She returned my e-mail stating she had not seen my earlier e-mail, and asked if I could resend it. I did so providing her with a link to my article. I waited until today, November the 18^th, and once again e-mailed her. Griffith has finally answered and here is her e-mail.

“Hello Viola,

 This was a conversation, not a how-to workshop,  among persons from Presbyteries that are or have been discerning their mission regarding whether or not to dismiss a congregation to another reformed denomination.  The conversation was begun by short presentations from three presbyteries in different stages of their discernment with particular congregations.   This was an example of a presbytery that had concluded a discernment of mission that resulted in a dismissal.   

 Thank you for your interest in the process that presbyteries take when discerning their mission for organizing, merging, dividing, dissolving or dismissing congregations.

 Here are the guiding principles around this process as found within the Book of Order the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.):

 A Presbytery has the power to establish plans and rules for the worship, mission, government and discipline of the church and to do those things necessary to the peace, purity, unity and progress of the church under the will of Christ.  G-3.0102.   Mission determines the forms and structures needed for the church to do its work.  Administration is the process by which a council implements its decisions.  Administration enables the church to give effective witness in the world to God’s new creation in Jesus Christ and strengthens the church’s witness to the mission of the triune god. G-3.0106. A presbytery has the responsibility to coordinate, guide, encourage, support, and resource the work of its congregations for the most effective witness to the broader community.  In order to accomplish this responsibility, the presbytery has authority to a. develop strategy for the mission of the church in its district; b. control the location of new congregations and of congregations desiring to move as well as to divide, dismiss, or dissolve congregations in consultation with their members.  G-3.0303, G-3.0303a and b.

 I hope that this is helpful to you.

 Laurie Griffith

Assistant Stated Clerk

Coordinator of Judicial Process and Social Witness

Office of the General Assembly

Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

100 Witherspoon Street

Louisville, KY 40205


First, I will have to confess, I did not know that Laurie Griffith was the Assistant Stated Clerk. In a sense, Griffith, without stating it, has given me a yes to my question, “Was it considered a good model?” because if this was an example of a presbytery that had reached the end of the dismissal process it would be a model—the only model described in a handout. I do not believe that the Office of the Stated Clerk is working toward peace among Christians. If anyone was a part of the process and would care to expand and/or contradict my statement I would be happy to hear from them in the comment section.

The ACSWP, physician-assisted suicide, and leaving the individual to their own value system

The Presbyterian News Service in their article, ACSWP continues work on reports to GA 221, reported that the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP), was preparing, among other reports, a paper on “End of Life” issues for the P C (U.S.A.)'s General Assembly. Some of the reports were mandated by previous GAs, however, the “End of Life” paper was not a mandate but a paper the committee felt was necessary.

As PNS reported, Christian Iosso, coordinator of ACSWP, stated that, “The church has said nothing since physician-assisted suicide was legalized by several states and countries.” So this will undoubtedly address that troubling issue. PNS also reported that, “ACSWP member Gloria Albrecht of Detroit, said the drafting team “is looking for a pastoral, not academic, paper because pastors and families are dealing with this every day. Our goal is to give counsel about what’s at stake and to help people faced with these excruciating personal issues make informed decisions based on their values systems.” (Italics mine)

Although it is important for people to be aware of all the facts surrounding end of life decisions, biblically, leaders in the church must point God's people to Scripture rather than letting them flounder in their own value systems. Giving out factual information about physician-assisted suicide, (which could possibly be nonfactual given the values of today’s postmodern society) and then turning away as God's people function within their own private value systems is reminiscent of ancient Israel when she ignored God's laws.

Two times in the book of Judges the text clarifies the atrocities committed by the people with the words, “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in their own eyes.” The first of these verses (17:6) comes in the midst of a tale of apostate Israelites creating their own god, their own religious system and their own religious leaders; the story contains theft and murder. The second text, (21:25), comes at the end of a long sordid tale of rape and inter-tribal war But there is a King over the church, the Lord has given the word to his people, therefore no one has the right to live by their own personal standards, which no matter how virtuous, in the end, will undoubtedly evolve into sin.

Another Old Testament text, among many, reverses the people's movement toward greater and greater sin. In 2 Chronicles one of the good kings of Judah, Jehoshaphat, send both levites and kingdom officials to teach the people from the book of the law. “They taught in Judah, having the book of the law of the Lord with them and they went throughout all the cities of Judah and taught among the people.” Always it is the leadership of the people of God proclaiming God's word that shapes and molds their lives. Without God's word they are forsaken and left to their own brokenness.

The truth is physician-assisted suicide includes two people—maybe more—the person who kills herself and the other who assists in the killing. So in reality there is the one who commits suicide (who truly needs help but not help to die) and the one who helps—the killer. The commandment is simple, “You shall not murder.” (Exodus 20:13)

There are, of course, other end of life issues that are important, but physician-assisted suicide trumps all because without its rejection society slides deeper into a dark maze as it has in the Netherlands and Belgium. [1] (There disabled babies who have no say can be killed.) When the church becomes infected because individual human centered values are honored over the word of God it is a dark world indeed.

The members of the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy are preparing to open one more ghastly door in all that troubles the PC (U.S.A.).

[1] See New European coalition formed to fight euthanasia laws


picture by Penny Juncker

The "Ordination Guidelines" of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians: changed? Update

On November 9^th, 2011, I wrote about the Covenant Network of Presbyterian's new ordination guidelines in a posting, “The Covenant Network: disqualifying orthodox candidates.” I followed that posting with an analysis of the Guidelines: “Contradictions aplenty: an analysis of the Covenant Network's “Guidelines for Examination of Church Officers.” I was concerned about many problems with the document but basically it was this paragraph that was the biggest concern:

“ … a person who wishes to engage in ordered ministry must be prepared to carry out the functions of office. General Assembly has affirmed that an examining body “cannot excuse a candidate’s inability to perform the constitutional functions unique to his or her office (such as administration of the sacraments).”28 Consistent with this, a series of judicial cases has made clear that a presbytery may not ordain or install someone who declares that he will not participate in the ordination of women.29 Indeed, it is fundamental to our polity that the responsibility for assessing the fitness of officers-elect is vested in councils (sessions and presbyteries), not in individuals. Accordingly, the pastor who officiates at an ordination thereby performs a ministerial act that is required by the Constitution (not a discretionary one), and the act of officiating indicates neither approval nor disapproval of the congregation’s choice of leaders and council’s approval of them.30 This point pertains primarily to pastors, who must officiate at child baptisms, ordination and installation of church leaders, and the like. While candidates who cannot agree to perform such functions in conformity with Presbyterian polity may be fine Christians, they may not be ordained or installed in the PC(USA).” [1]

I believed that the Covenant Network felt they had found a way (or a polity) to eventually purge the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) of all of its orthodox members since few would stay if they knew that other orthodox members would not be ordained if they felt they must refuse, on scriptural grounds, to ordain practicing homosexuals or those who were committing fornication. Anyone who will not ordain a woman cannot be ordained in the PC (U.S.A.), and because most of the Guidelines were focused on the right of practicing homosexuals to be ordained the paragraph above pointed to those who could not do so.

Ever since writing both of the postings I have asked, either on the CN's site, or by e-mail, how they could press for unity and still have their guidelines. I have not received an answer until today. I posted the usual question on the comment section of Tricia Dykers Koenig's article, “General Assembly Preview.” I once again quoted the paragraph having stated, “I have asked this question many times without receiving an answer, and once again you are speaking about concern for the unity of the church. How can you speak of unity with this in your guidelines.” My comment is still awaiting moderation but today I got an e-mail from Koenig:

"Viola,

I assure you that your assumption is incorrect. 

Recognizing that the wording that appeared briefly in the Guidelines contributed to misunderstanding of our commitments, we changed it long ago: http://covnetpres.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/2011-Guidelines.pdf.

Tricia Dykers Koenig”

This is the new paragraph:

“ … a person who wishes to engage in ordered ministry must be prepared to carry out the functions of office. General Assembly has affirmed that an examining body “cannot excuse a candidate’s inability to perform the constitutional functions unique to his or her office (such as administration of the sacraments).” 28 Consistent with this, a series of judicial cases has made clear that a presbytery may not ordain or install someone who declares that he will not participate in the ordination of women.29 Indeed, it is fundamental to our polity that the responsibility for assessing the fitness of officers-elect is vested in councils (sessions and presbyteries), not in individuals. Accordingly, the pastor who officiates at an ordination thereby performs a ministerial act that is required by the Constitution (not a discretionary one), and the act of officiating indicates neither approval nor disapproval of the congregation’s choice of leaders and council’s approval of them. 30 This point pertains primarily to pastors, who must officiate at child baptisms, ordination and installation of church leaders, and the like, and are not permitted to substitute their own judgment for that of the council.”


The difference is that the last sentence, “While candidates who cannot agree to perform such functions in conformity with Presbyterian polity may be fine Christians, they may not be ordained or installed in the PC(USA).” has been removed. The guidelines have not really changed, instead a sarcastic sentence has been removed.

Update: A friend has pointed out that I missed the addition to the last sentence "are not permitted to substitute their own judgment for that of the council" which definitely "retains the prohibition."


[1] The numbers in the quote are for footnotes in the original paper.