Trying To Evolve

My Lovely and I are driving to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania tomorrow for General Assembly.   Following GA I will be in Louisville, Kentucky with our presbytery's youth mission trip.

I don't know if I will be blogging much from GA.  The whole deal looks exhausting.   I am on the Mid-Councils Committee and I wrote some initial thoughts on that.

You can follow the action at PC-Biz.  My committee is number 5.

You can also watch the plenary session live. 

It also might be fun to follow on Twitter.  The hashtag is #ga220.

I look forward to meeting old friends, making new ones, considering the business of the church and promoting Evolution Sunday and the Clergy Letter Project via this commissioner's resolution that I will present.   Here it is.  Watch for it on the big screen!

Here is my interview with the founder of the Clergy Letter Project, Dr. Michael Zimmerman on Religion For Life.


__________________________ overtures the 220th General Assembly (2012) of the Presbyterian Church (USA) to

1)  join with the General Conference of the United Methodist Church, the Southeast Florida Diocese of the Episcopal Church, the Southwestern Washington Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and with 12,794 members of Christian Clergy, 482 Rabbis of Judaism and 251 Clergy of Unitarian Universalists in endorsing the Clergy Letter Project and the Christian Clergy Letter printed below:

Within the community of Christian believers there are areas of dispute and disagreement, including the proper way to interpret Holy Scripture. While virtually all Christians take the Bible seriously and hold it to be authoritative in matters of faith and practice, the overwhelming majority do not read the Bible literally, as they would a science textbook. Many of the beloved stories found in the Bible – the Creation, Adam and Eve, Noah and the ark – convey timeless truths about God, human beings, and the proper relationship between Creator and creation expressed in the only form capable of transmitting these truths from generation to generation. Religious truth is of a different order from scientific truth. Its purpose is not to convey scientific information but to transform hearts.

We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth.

2)  to designate the 2nd Sunday in February as Evolution Sunday to recognize the influence that the Theory of Evolution has had in changing the world view of our natural environment.

Rationale:

This overture is brought in the spirit of faith that joyfully acknowledges
that God brings all things into being by the Word. (W-1.2001),
that God transcends creation and cannot be reduced to anything within it (W-1.2002),
that God created the material universe and pronounced it good, and
that the material world reflects the glory of God. (W-1.3031), and,
with the understanding that in prayer we earnestly thank God for creation and providence. (W-3.3613)

Evolution has been wrongly viewed in some Christian communities as contrary to Christian beliefs. As a scientific theory based solidly on extensive scientific evidence, it has shaped our thinking in the natural sciences and has become the underlying theory for numerous medical advances. As a scientific theory it does not contradict the existence of God, but can be seen as a natural, creative process in God's creation.

In a recent study of why young people are leaving the church, 29% of the youth reported being discouraged by the church's antagonistic view of science, and that many young people are “turned off by the creation-versus-evolution debate.” The research also “shows that many science-minded young Christians are struggling to find ways of staying faithful to their beliefs and to their professional calling in science-related industries.”

(Ref. You Lost Me: Why Young Christians are Leaving the Church...and Rethinking Faith. David Kinnaman, 2011, The Barna Group.)

The 214th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) has stated that it:

1. Reaffirms that God is Creator, in accordance with the witness of Scripture and the Reformed Confessions.
2. Reaffirms that there is no contradiction between an evolutionary theory of human origins and the doctrine of God as Creator.
3. Encourages State Boards of Education across the nation to establish standards for science education in public schools based on the most reliable content of scientific knowledge as determined by the scientific community.
4. Calls upon Presbyterian scientists and scientific educators to assist congregations, presbyteries, and the public to understand what constitutes reliable knowledge.

Other denominations have also recognized the compatibility of modern science and theology. For example, The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church - 2008 states, in part, "We recognize science as a legitimate interpretation of God’s natural world. We affirm the validity of the claims of science in describing the natural world and in determining what is scientific. We preclude science from making authoritative claims about theological issues and theology from making authoritative claims about scientific issues. We find that science’s descriptions of cosmological, geological, and biological evolution are not in conflict with theology."


The Clergy Letter Project, http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/ founded by Dr. Michael Zimmerman, and signed by nearly 13,000 Christian clergy has helped clergy and congregations present the scientific theory of Evolution in a manner that respects and engages a thinking faith. 

Thus it is fitting to endorse The Clergy Letter Project and to set aside the 2nd Sunday in February as Evolution Sunday to celebrate the importance of evolution by designating the birthday (12 February 1809) of the founder of evolutionary theory, Charles Darwin, as Evolution Sunday.

Thoughts on the General Assembly and the Mid Councils Report

I am preparing to go to the General Assembly of the PCUSA next week.   This is the first time I have been elected as a commissioner.   Even my election hasn't been without controversy, not any that I know of within my presbytery, but outside of it.   Parker Williamson of the LayMAN heralded my election.  Since then I have received a handful of letters and e-mails from people I don't know and who don't know me quoting from his article to scold me and to pray for my soul.    I think this is all great fun and I am looking forward to GA.

If I can figure out how to do it, I will make two commissioners' resolutions asking the General Assembly to support the Clergy Letter Project and to establish the day closest to Darwin's birthday as Evolution Sunday.  My presbytery didn't approve these overtures when they were sent up by my session, but I will give them a spin at GA.  Check them out.  

On the General Assembly agenda are recommendations from MRTI regarding businesses who profit from violence and human rights abuses.   Also, marriage equality overtures will be received, debated, and decided.   Wonder of wonders, I am on a controversial committee and I have an opinion.  

I have been assigned to the Mid-Councils Committee.   This committee will receive a report from the Mid Councils Commission.   The committee will also review a number of overtures to do away with synods and form non-geographic presbyteries among other things.  

I have read the information and will read it again.   I may not be clear on everything that is being proposed.  I am open to correction.   I am open to Spirit.  But before I vote "Yes" to accept the recommendations of the Mid Council Commission, Spirit has a lot of questions to answer.   Their recommendations include deleting synods and forming non-geographic presbyteries that will have the power to do everything existing presbyteries have except to buy and sell property.   This would include sending commissioners to General Assembly.  In this new scheme, you only need ten ministers and ten sessions to form a presbytery.   A presbytery such as mine with 65 churches could potentially divide themselves into six different presbyteries.  Each could send a minister and elder to GA.   Can you imagine how unwieldy that would be?   Is GA going to pay for six times as many commissioners?

Why these recommendations now?  I don't know the heart of those who advocate for these changes but I do know that lobbying groups who oppose the changes in ordination standards that have just gone into effect are in favor of non-geographic presbyteries and those who favor and have worked for ordination changes over the decades are against non-geographic presbyteries.   Why might that be?   This proposal amounts to redistricting.   Again, I know no one's heart, but a ready-made explanation is at hand:  "the majority of presbyteries finally voted in favor of removing discriminatory barriers so let's shuffle the deck so we can change the vote."  I certainly have no energy or desire to form a like-minded presbytery or depart to a like-minded denomination.   As we know, those who don't like the change in ordination do have this energy and desire.  Again, I don't know anyone's motivations but you can bet that if this were to pass the first overtures from these like-minded presbyteries will be to change ordination standards.   Non-geographic presbyteries will not lead to any kind of peace, of live and let live.  More energy, more money, and more time will be spent in power struggles.

Are we deathly ill?   That assumption comes up more than once in this report.  This report sounds a lot like the language from the new FOP/ECO group.  This report sees the decades long struggles over social, political, and theological issues as distractions from some idealized mission of the church.   There seems to be little knowledge let alone appreciation for the work of the larger church at the synod and GA level, or even at the level of the presbyteries as we have them.   It is as though everything we have done is irrelevant and we need to throw it all out and start all over.   I find this offensive.  I am proud of my denomination.   I am glad that we speak out and take on controversial issues.   I don't think the full citizenship of LGBT people is a distraction.  I don't think that theological exploration is a distraction.   I don't think advocating for the environment and for sustainability is a distraction.  I don't think taking on the Israeli lobby, advocating for economic justice, working for racial justice, and calling the powers that be to disarm are distractions from being "missional."   It may be that our denomination is being whittled down to the size of Gideon's army, but you know the rest of that story.

Is this a solution to membership loss?  The report brings out the statistics of membership loss that we hear again and again.  Rather than engage the complexities over what this might mean, the assumption is made that our structures inhibit congregations from growing.   When I hear other ministers blaming the denomination or their presbytery because their church isn't growing, I hear empty whining.    I have served three churches in three presbyteries.  There was nothing ever that any presbytery prevented me or my congregation from doing.    Blaming our structures for our own lack of creativity, imagination, or hard work is misplaced.   If you want to grow your church, do something for the neighborhood.  Further, if I want to partner with like-minded congregations, I can do so right now.   Nothing prevents me from doing that.

Aren't we supposed to be a family?  One might think that in my situation I would welcome non-geographic presbyteries.   I serve a liberal congregation in a conservative presbytery.  Wouldn't we be happier and get more done if the presbytery we were in was more like us?  After all, my presbytery voted down our evolution overtures.  Maybe we should pick up our marbles and find a presbytery more like-minded.   Let's imagine for a moment.  We are a More Light congregation.  If I want to form a More Light Presbytery, the nearest More Light congregation is in Nashville, over 5 hours away.   I am not sure if there are more than ten More Light congregations in the entire South.   My new More Light Presbytery is going to require a lot of driving.   I suppose I could chat with them on my iPhone (if I had one).   But we are not just More Light.  We are also a Peace Church.  We are a Green Church.  We celebrate Darwin's Birthday and we hold Jesus Seminars on the Road.   I would doubt that there are ten PCUSA congregations in the United States that are like us.    Who would be theologically incorrect enough even to have us?     Holston Presbytery, on the other hand, has to take us in.  We may be the odd step child, but we are family.

Do virtual presbyteries deny the body?  I care about my local area, East Tennessee.   I have to, I live here.  The congregations in my presbytery are connected to these mountains, to the people, the language and the culture.  As a presbytery we partner to feed hungry people in our region via the Five Cents a Meal program.   Those are people with real bodies.  They are not virtual bodies.  They are not avatars.    A large portion of our budget goes to Holston Camp.   That is a camp where children and adults with bodies actually get dirty, exhausted, wet, and discover something about who they are.   When our presbytery gets divided up and the congregations partner with like-minded congregations in Alabama or Ohio or wherever who is going to fund the camp?   Which one of those virtual presbyteries will take responsibility for this camp?   The congregations of Holston Presbytery have an obligation to this camp because it is family.  It is local and located where we live and do ministry.  A presbytery is its region.   We are neighbors.  We care for each other and we have to in order to survive.   The most conservative churches in our presbytery send kids to the same camp that we do.   Following this year's General Assembly, youth from my church will meet with youth from other churches in our un-like-minded presbytery for a common mission event.  They all come from congregations that have different views on many topics.  I don't think that is a bad thing.

Is this good stewardship?   The church is going to change.   As much as we think that the future is the internet and virtual chat rooms, it isn't.  This is a blip.   The real future--the future of real bodies sweating to grow real food--is local.   Those whose faces are buried in their Kindles and iPhones are blind to the planetary limits we are hitting.   We are now on the downside of Hubbert's curve regarding the production rate of conventional oil.  Those fancy phones are made from rare earth metals and petroleum products that will become more scarce and expensive as we go further down this curve.   Life for the next couple of centuries likely will be a long descent.   For the next couple of decades, the churches will have demands put upon them that will be increasingly local.  It is the absolute wrong direction for churches to purposely disconnect from our neighborhoods.   Now is when we need our presbyteries to be more local not less.    We need our presbyteries to help congregations work together on community gardens, health care, and emergency services.    We need advocacy for the most vulnerable in the midst of serious and severe economic challenges.   We need to work regionally and locally across ideological boundaries. The future is local.   The PCUSA and its councils would do well to prepare for it. 

So Long But Leave the Silver

It took me some time to figure out why so many fundamentalist congregations had the same complaints on their websites regarding the PCUSA.    I wrote about that in A Bullet Point in PCUSA History.   Since then I discovered that these documents all come from the same source, The LayMAN.

On the right side of their homepage is a link to Discernment Resources.

Click it and you will find all kinds of documents that ministers can use to manipulate and misinform their congregations regarding the "apostasy" of the PCUSA and strategies to steal the PCUSA's property.

One such document is entitled, "Five Solas."   (I am featured under the heading, "The Erosion of Authority.")  This replaces an earlier "Five Solas" (in which I was also mentioned).  But that first one is a little long for short attention spans and the new one gets you the "PCUSA is Apostate" message with less effort.    

I am a bullet point on the new "Five Solas."  To wit:

Those who deny key biblical doctrines remain unchallenged. For example, in a sermon on Pentecost 2012, Rev John Shuck denied that most of the events in the Book of the Acts of the Apostles ever happened.  Previously, Shuck has denied many of the central tenets of the Christian faith.

Funny, I don't ever remember being charged (let alone convicted) with such a crime as denying "the central tenets of the Christian faith," but if the LayMAN says so it must be true.    If you are curious about my recent (very recent, May of this year--are these people stalking me?) sermon, check it out.   For those interested in how higher criticism works, biblical scholars carefully conceal this information in books. 

What's even more bizarre is that right before the LayMAN tells falsehoods about me, it misrepresents the Confession of 1967.  

 - The Confession of 1967 states that Scriptural authority is determined not by Scripture but by the interpreter. In effect this means that our intellect is valued above the plain meaning of the text (C67 - 9.27)

This misrepresentation notwithstanding, do these clergy who think it is now time to leave the PCUSA not know that the Confession of 1967 has been in the Book of Confessions since 1967?    Anyone ordained as a clergyperson (unless they are over 70) took vows to uphold this confession.    Why the surprise now?   One of the breakoffs like the PCA would have been a far better choice for them a long, long time ago.

Interestingly, the PCA just finished their General Assembly deciding that Adam and Eve were historical people and reaffirming that no woman should be a deacon (or deaconness).    There you go.  The authority of the Bible at work.

Any PCUSA members who are convinced by the LayMAN's brand of fundamentalism have (in spirit) left the PCUSA long ago.    So long.  God bless.   Good luck in finding a fit for your fundamentalism.   But leave the silver here please unless you plan to pay for it.

Clergy With Conscience

Rev. Brian Merritt is a good minister and now a neighbor down the road apiece in Chattanooga.  Before he came to greenest state in the land of the free, he officiated at a wedding for a same-gender couple in Washington D.C.  

The LayMAN wrote all about it.  Brian made page 3! 

And along comes Mary Naegeli.

Brian made some nice responses to these folks, to Mary Naegeli here, and offered a bit of history regarding the LayMAN that all should find interesting.  Here is a piece.

While many in the church decry it for its obviously ill conceived social positions on homosexuality and it’s past’s wildly inaccurate reporting, the main problem with the Presbyterian Lay Committee is that its theology, ideology and history are for the furtherance of a few powerful people in society maintaining an unquestioned grip on the church’s future.  That is the power many of them have had in society as a whole, so why not the church?

Brian is right on.  Check out his post and while you are there, let him know you appreciate clergy who won't be bullied.

A Bullet Point in PCUSA History

A handful of fundamentalist congregations in my denomination are agitated.   They are agitated, stirred and shaken by their leadership who want to move their churches out of the PC(USA) and take the PC(USA)'s property with them.   To make the case, these leaders present papers and put them on their congregations' websites.  These papers are designed to tell the sordid tale of the PC(USA)'s apostasy in order to stir up the crowd to vote to leave the denomination.

They bring up events and personalities from the last thirty years or so that have embodied this apostasy.   There is the Re-Imagining Conference of course where uppity women feasted on milk and honey and offered praise to Sophia.   There is Dirk Ficca who asked "What is the big deal about Jesus?"   Some guy named Kaseman said he didn't think Jesus was God and the presbytery let him be a minister anyway.  Of course, there are the ever-present gays.   Why won't the denomination just send them to hell already?

That is the big problem apparently.  The PCUSA doesn't have a taste for silencing the free thinking members of the clergy and condemning people to hell.  Therefore, the true believers feel the need to shake the dust from their feet and form a more perfect union where they can police all the clergy and their blogs. 

I am somewhat honored actually.  Along with folks I admire like Janet Edwards, Jim Rigby, and others I have made it to the status of "bullet point."  I am a bullet point on the powerpoint of the sad saga of the PCUSA's descent into darkness.

Being a self-proclaimed narcissist, I quote the texts that mention me.   It is interesting how the material in these documents is discovered, shaped, and presented.  It has an urban legend feel to it.   Here are a few of these statements on websites of various congregations that are having conversations about leaving the denomination.   I have found a few of these statements (usually in pdf) and I offer them to you as an interesting study.  If you have the time, do read them through.  

This is Saddlerock Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Wenatchee, WA.  This church used to be in the PC(USA) but moved and changed its name.  It keeps its rationale for leaving on its website.  A Biblical Case (pdf)

• An excerpt from John Shuck, a Minister member in good standing of Holston Presbytery in Elizabethtown, [sic] Tenn. This is from his most recent Holy Week service message No More Crosses: “A few years ago a poster advertising Mel Gibson's movie, The Passion, featured an image of Christ wearing a crown of thorns. The caption read: Dying was his reason for living. The movie itself was about his supposed last hours cobbled together from the various fictional accounts in the gospels. The four gospels that made it into the canon of holy scripture all contain a version of Jesus' trial and execution. In fact over half the gospel material has to do with his death. Why are we so obsessed with this man's death? Dying was his reason for living. Really? The belief that Jesus died for us or died for our sins or died to save us has been Christianity's theological centerpiece. His death and resurrection are two parts of this mythology. That mythology has little to do with the historical person of Jesus. Details about the trial and crucifixion are literary memes taken from other sources. It isn't that the gospel writers observed what happened and wrote it down. It is what we would call, for lack of a more sophisticated word, fiction.”

These fundamentalists object to the reality that the gospels are not history.  The fundamentalist movement started in response to higher criticism of the Bible.  They have not moved past the 1920s.  Here is a well-written article on the controversy.  

Here are a couple of statements from Memorial Presbyterian Church at Palm Beach Atlantic University in Florida.  The first is from their clerk of session's town hall presentation.   This church either has left or is in the process of leaving the PCUSA.

At the same town hall meeting, one Presbytery representative was asked about John Shuck, a PCUSA pastor in Tennessee who denies the authority of Scripture. This representative said Shuck should be reprimanded by the PCUSA and that he would call the Presbytery Executive in Tennessee about this matter. Why should he be reprimanded? Here’s a quotation from his blog www.shuckandjive.org 

Take for example, me. I think the Bible is wrong about most everything. It is wrong about evolution, slavery, women, and gays. It has no authority on those topics. I think the Bible is wrong about cosmology, history, our future, Jesus, and God. The texts were all written by human beings without any supernatural or special revelation. Yet I preach in a PC (USA) pulpit. . . .The Bible contains no truth outside of what we can discover through public means of inquiry. Don't misunderstand. I enjoy the Bible. It is a marvelous human book. I read it and study it with all the critical means at my disposal. In so doing, I will do my part to undermine its Authority which I think is the next important step for religious freedom.

You should be shocked at this. But you should even be more shocked that within two weeks of that town hall meeting at First Presbyterian, North Palm Beach, John Shuck was elected by his Presbytery to be a commissioner to this summer’s PC (USA) General Assembly in Pittsburgh.

There used to be a day when this honor of attending General Assembly was reserved for pastors and elders who actually believed in the essential tenets of the Reformed faith. The fact that we do not have the courage as a denomination to name heresy and discipline those holding it is surely a sign of spiritual decay.

This is already starting to get a little creepy.  I don't know any of these people.  Yet I am being quoted and used as one of their reasons to justify leaving.  I appear to be popular with this particular church.  Also on its website, of the Top Ten Reasons that the Session is Unanimously Recommending You Vote Yes on April  29th (that is vote yes on leaving the PCUSA), I am reason number four!

4. We confess in the words of the Apostles Creed our belief in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ and our pastor’s preach that truth every Easter. Many PC (USA) seminaries who train our future pastors, do not agree.  To cite just one of many examples, Douglas Ottati who taught theology at Union Seminary in Virginia for 30 years and now teaches at Davidson College, affirms “the resurrection,” but what he means by that is “a continuing presence” of Christ in the lives of his disciples. He says that the disciples “experienced” Christ’s presence after his death, although it is not clear how he differentiates this experience from a residual memory.  Recognizing that his denial of the bodily resurrection might become a problem, Ottati wrote in a paper distributed among his seminary colleagues: “I am not insensitive to the fact that my interpretation yields few hard and fast rules for the preacher at Easter.” Ministers like John Shuck in Tennessee, James Rigby in Texas and countless others teach this doctrine from their pulpit. They rightly perceive that a culture of theological pluralism is firmly entrenched in the PCUSA, a denomination which by forfeiting clear theological boundaries has therefore welcomed a multiplicity of divergent and often contradictory faiths. They also know that binding PC (USA) case law [Hick, Kasemann] protects them and their heterodox views.

Notice the meme of rejecting the bodily resurrection, which is one of the fundamentals.  In this meme my name gets attached to theologian, Douglas Ottati, Jim Rigby, and others.   In this pdf, Five Solas, from First Presbyterian Church of Yakima, Washington, the church admits it copied this document from another church.   My name alone without any reference is sufficient to transmit the meme.

In recent years, several PCUSA ministers have publicly declared their inability to believe that Jesus rose from the dead. Among them are John Shuck in Elizabethton, TN, Rob Martin in Palo Alto, CA, Helen Dekker, in the Presbytery of West Jersey, and James Rigby, of Austin, TX. Says Rigby: “The resurrection took place when the community was born. What rose was the body of Christ. Maybe a body got up; I don’t care. That’s not the point … It’s a symbol of something deeper … What these symbols are talking about are not things that happened; they are things that are always true. The Resurrection is happening now. … Heaven is not another world someplace else. It’s a profound understanding of this world, of that which is not born and that which does not die.”...

The meme has been established.

Here is a lengthy rationale from the Fountain Inn Presbyterian Church in Fountain Inn, South Carolina.  This is from the blandly titled Questions for the Denominational Relations Committee.  I am listed under bullet point 38 along with others "who have made public statements that question the Divinity of Jesus, His bodily resurrection, and/or salvation only by His atonement."   Here is the list:

Rev. Mansfield Kaseman
Paul Capetz (former Professor of Theology at Union Theological Seminary at Richmond)
Rev. Helen Dekker
Rev. John Shuck
Rev. Robert Martin
Rev. James Rigby and one of his congregation’s members, Robert Jensen
Pearl S. Buck (novelist and Presbyterian missionary)
Rev. Dirk Ficca
Anna Case-Winters (Assoc. Professor of Theology at McCormick Theological Seminary)
Douglas Ottati (Professor of Theology at Union Theological Seminary at Richmond)

I am in good company including Pearl S. Buck!  I read The Good Earth when I was in 9th grade.   If this congregation needs to leave the denomination because of Pearl S. Buck, they are a bit long-suffering as she was a missionary in the 1920s.   That is just funny.

This is from Trinity Presbyterian Church in Satellite Beach, Florida.   This is a pdf, Michael's Reflections with a link on the church's website.

I am convinced that the majority of PCUSA leaders still believe in the Lordship of Christ, but it is disheartening to learn of how tolerant the denomination has become of heresy. Several months ago I discovered the blog of a fellow PCUSA pastor, John Shuck: www.shuckandjive.org. Because his blog openly denies the essentials of the Christian faith, and because he describes how his congregation—First Presbyterian of Elizabethton—celebrates pagan festivals, I initial thought the blog was satire, like Comedy Central’s “Colbert Report.” But after months of reading “Shuck and Jive,” his heresy is no joke. For example:

“I do not mean this as an insult, but I find much of our modern theological work little more than dealing in antiquities. The Trinity, the person of Christ, the sacraments, the authority of the Bible, eschatology, and so forth were invented in the pre‐modern era and are best suited for that time period.” (June 11, 2011)

We are enjoying some new rituals at your favorite little pagan church in the woods. Actually, we are a little bit pagan, a little bit Christian, and a little bit rock and roll. Sunday night at 6:15 p.m. we are having a ritual to celebrate Lammas…a harvest festival, marking the end of the period of summer growth and the beginning of the autumn harvest. (Aug 5, 2011)

I’m not surprised when I encounter non‐Christians with these views, but as tolerant as the PCUSA has become of heresy, John Shuck’s public denials of Christian orthodoxy are nonetheless shocking.

So why does Holston Presbytery (the body to which Rev. John Shuck is accountable) allow him to be a Minister of the Word and Sacrament? Apparently there aren’t enough elders and pastors in that presbytery who believe strongly enough about the Gospel of Jesus Christ or care deeply enough about the integrity of the PCUSA to shuck Shuck! While this is an extreme example, the trend towards accepting heresy is accelerating.

Our denomination’s loss of biblical authority, manifested prominently as confusion over sexual standards for leaders, will likely sink the denomination.

That was a colorful rant.  Most of the larger churches aren't quite as colorful and tend to be more measured in their criticism of the denomination.  But the smaller ones are more fun to read.  They retain the passion.  I think collecting and analyzing these statements would make for an interesting paper, a bullet point in our denomination's history.

Redwoods Presbytery Refuses to Rebuke Rev. Jane Spahr

Good on the Presbytery of Redwoods for refusing to impose a rebuke on Rev. Jane Adams Spahr.  Rev. Spahr was found guilty by the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission in February of violating her ordination vows by marrying 16 same-sex couples, even though doing so was legal in California at the time.   The presbytery stood up for her and said:

THAT the Presbytery oppose imposition of the rebuke as set forth in the decision of the Presbytery Permanent  Judicial Commission, dated August 27, 2010 (which was stayed by its terms until the present day), by declaring and resolving as follows:

WHEREAS, our primary ordination vow as Ruling and Teaching Elders is to be obedient to Jesus Christ, the Word of God, as the Scriptures bear witness to him, (F-1.02; W-4.4003(a);

WHEREAS, the love of God in Jesus Christ is for all people, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people;

WHEREAS, the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the constitution require that full inclusion and pastoral care be extended to all members of the church;

WHEREAS, this Presbytery called the Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr to a ministry in outreach to – and in community among and with – lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people;

WHEREAS, the 38-year ministry of the Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr has been faithful to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and to her calling;

WHEREAS, the decision of August 27, 2010, by its terms, acknowledges and apologizes (1) that the rules of the church “are against the Gospel,” and (2) that the decision and rebuke continue the grievous harm “that has been, and continues to be, done” by the church to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people “in the name of Jesus Christ”;

Be it RESOLVED that the Presbytery of the Redwoods opposes imposition of the rebuke set forth in the decision dated August 27, 2010, as inconsistent with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA), and the faithful life of ministry lived out in this Presbytery. 

Rev. Spahr points out that the issue is violence.  Whenever you treat people as second-class citizens you invite and encourage violence on them.  She said this a number of times in her interview with me on Religion For Life.  If you haven't heard the interview yet, check it out.  

Rev. Jane Adams Spahr and Marriage Equality

Here is an article about the decision in the L.A. Times.

I Am No Longer Standing, Crouching, or Fawning for Vice-Moderator

It was a quick campaign, but scrappy.

It appears that our five candidates standing for moderator of the PC(USA) have chosen their mates.    Yes, I know it is a shock, but none chose me.   I just want to thank all who worked so tirelessly for my campaign.  Please don't think your hopes are dashed.  There is always tomorrow.  We gave it a go, didn't we?  Yes, we did, Beloveds.  Yes, we did.  

I received an email from someone who thought I was mocking the church, its candidates and what all.  No.  I think the candidates are all fine folks and I like our system of government.   I am happy to be a participant and delighted to be a commissioner.

I was mocking something, however. 

This was all in response to Parker Williamson's trash talk regarding me and a candidate for moderator, Rev. Janet Edwards.   I don't know of a person who is more gracious, more willing to dialogue across divisions, and more sincere in her faith than Rev. Edwards.   She is more than qualified to be moderator and if elected will represent the PC(USA) well.   When Williamson has the gall to imply that the "once-esteemed office of moderator" is no longer esteemed because Rev. Edwards is standing for it, he needs to be called out.  

It would be good for the denomination if the other media outlets would call him out.   Since they won't, I guess I will.   The LayMAN is a multi-million dollar media enterprise.  By PC(USA) standards, an empire.  Williamson can afford to put his trash and slander in the mailboxes of every Presbyterian member.  He smears people and seeks to ruin careers.   He "parades with impunity" his meanness and bullying.   That is what I was mocking.

On to General Assembly.

My Hope for the PC(USA)

Now that I have been made famous by none other than Parker Williamson of the LayMAN, I feel it is time to put this fame to good use.    His editorial is not only on-line but in the print edition as well.  I have been collecting copies.  I might send one to my mother.   It is also listed under the LayMAN's links for information about the upcoming General Assembly.   This is so cool.  I am so tickled that I decided to crouch and fawn for vice-moderator!  Please pick me!

Parker wasn't writing about me.  He was writing about himself.  David Walters has it right.   He also tried to belittle my colleague and friend, Rev. Janet Edwards, who has more integrity in her little finger than Parker could hope for in a lifetime.  From what I have read of Parker Williamson over the years, he thinks there are two types of people in the world:  people who think like him and unbelievers.   With that typology there is little else that he can absorb.    He has mastered the skill of bullying.    Parker's divine mandate is to bully "unbelievers" into silence.

Sadly, this has had some effect.  There are people in our denomination who have been more careful than they wanted to be about speaking on issues theological and otherwise because of the way that the LayMAN operates.    Normal people don't like to be bullied, misrepresented, and used.   They will avoid that.  That avoidance can result in not speaking out regarding issues of importance.   Of course, I am not normal.   I love it.  I would love it if the LayMAN wrote about me every week. 

What is happening is that the LayMAN is losing its teeth.   Parker has become less and less credible to more and more people.     He can't even do anything about me, a loud-mouthed nobody right across the border in a neighboring presbytery, and a conservative presbytery at that.   I parade "with impunity [my] unbelief" and Parker is impotent to do anything about it.  That must irritate him something fierce.

Since, thanks to Parker, I have your attention, I invite you to explore this blog.   That is a pretty big task since I have been writing it for nearly six years.   Parker helped with that, though.   In his editorial, he quoted from two recent sermons (March 4, February 26) and from a blog post from two years previous.    Those are good places to start.

Here is the deal.  I put my sermons and my theological musings right out there.   I take seriously what I learned in my seminary experience as well as what I continue to learn every day.   I talk about it openly.   From Parker's perspective that is called "parading with impunity."   He is all about being punitive.    I think the denomination has had enough of Parker's punitive policing.   We can think for ourselves.

So, I read, write, and now host a radio program, Religion For Life, that tackles religious issues.    I recently interviewed PC(USA) vice-moderator, Landon Whitsitt, and this week I speak with Rev. Jane Spahr about the GAPCJ decision and what this means for the PC(USA) and for equality and compassionate ministry in general.

Within a few weeks WETS and WEHC will broadcast my interviews with Bishop John Shelby Spong, John Dominic Crossan, Bart Ehrman, and Robert Price.  The series will be called, "Will the Real Jesus Please Rise?"  It will be entertaining and thought-provoking.   For Parker, it will be further evidence of "unbelief."

I do have a belief.  I am not an "unbeliever."  I believe that God is a lot bigger than Parker Williamson's view of God.   God is certainly a lot bigger than my view of God.  So it would seem logical to expand my view.     That is what I try to do in my ministry.  That is what I think the church does when it is at its best.    I think that is the direction the PC(USA) is going.

These will be rough waters for some time as the LayMAN and others who think the denomination is sinking into apostasy and unbelief will write their articles and editorials from that point of view.    We will lose some people.  We have already.  We will gain some as well.  My congregation is an example of that.  My hope and my belief is that the PC(USA) will find its voice.    From my point of view that voice will be for open-ended inquiry, compassion, and justice.

In the meantime, I am looking forward to representing my presbytery as a commissioner to the General Assembly.   I thank my colleagues of Holston Presbytery with whom I serve and worship for this opportunity.  They are good people.   Even though we may disagree on certain things, overall, we are a community.   Parker's divisiveness will not end that.

I Want to be Vice-Moderator of the Presbyterian Church General Assembly

I am officially tossing my hat into the ring to be Vice-Moderator of the 220th General Assembly (2012) of the Presbyterian Church (USA).







Please pick me.









As I reported previously, Parker Williamson of the LayMAN heralded with trumpets my election as commissioner from Holston Presbytery.   He even included this grand pronouncement in the print edition!    I have been as giddy as a schoolboy ever since.

I now realize that this must be a calling from the Lord.

I humbly offer myself as Vice-Moderator.  
 
I know that candidates who run for moderator don't really run.  They stand for moderator.   What is the correct posture for a vice-moderator?  Crouch?  Limp?  Creep?  Waddle?

I just want you candidates for moderator to know, that whatever posture is required, I will serve.

For those candidates who have already chosen a crouching mate, rest assured that you can dump him or her.  It is OK.  I am in the race now.  Pick me.  God said to.