Okay, some days I just get a little crazy.
The question occurred to me last night, actually in the middle of the night. “Why don’t we just take it back?” Take what back? The Presbyterian Church (USA).
Right now, the PC(USA) is in the hands of those who are taking it in the wrong direction. They are not especially bad people – no worse or better than us. They are either lost (without the Spirit) or misguided (living in or by the flesh). Regardless, they (including the combined presbytery, synod and General Assembly paid and voluntary staff) are “strangers” to the will of God.
Friends of God cannot follow “the voice of strangers” without departing from the will of God. We cannot say that Jesus is our Lord and still follow those who do not know our Lord and do not honor His holy word, the Bible. So, the solution is simple. Stop following them! Better, replace these unfaithful leaders with those who are faithful.
Some of you, who are in the Renewal Movement “in-crowd” are saying, “What do you think we have been trying to do every GA!” Sure, you run faithful candidates for moderator. You try to hire stated clerks and GAC chairs who are faithful. You fail. Why? It is because the stock of the commissioners is packed with those who are strangers to Christ.
They don’t have any money of their own. They spend, unwisely, monies earned by folks who died decades and centuries ago. What? Maybe, seventy percent of the GA mission budget comes from “non-living donors.” (Interest income.) This is the only asset they have – take that away, they go away to join the Unitarians or Scientologists or some Wicca coven. Places where their worldview is far better expressed. (Maybe, I’ve gone a bit too far with my rhetorical rank, but you get my point.)
Certainly, I am not the first person to think of this. Yet, I have never heard it seriously considered, publicly. How do we storm the Southern bank of the Ohio and retake the Fort Witherspoon?
8 comments:
The first step would be to starve the beast. No faithful congregation should send per capita any longer. Let liberals pay for the church they have purloined. Yes, let's do that for the next decade and see where things stand.
I've saying this for several years now, Gary, and I'm with you 100% ~ we need to "take back" our denomination!
Good points, Gary. The "demon" here is not GAMC or the "Head Office" as some would have us worry, but it is the very Presbyteries themselves. Starve the "Beast" of the Presbytery first - those whose Presbytery has failed them in this vote.
We need to empower and encourage congregations within the belly of those Beasts to give their Beast a good does of indigestion. And those of us in Presbyteries who rejected 10-A (and still do) need to help the struggling congregations, encouraging them, lifting them up in prayer, and assisting them in missiological outreach.
Presbyteries as a body bring the amendments, send the reps to G.A. and approved the Amendments sent back down for ratification... Look to the Presbyteries and outflank them... That's the way to retake the Fort!
This can't work. While the PCUSA can deal with a few congregations protesting, if all the churches that voted against 10-A fail to pay per capita, there will be no choice but to do a split and downsize the organization.
I point out that the churches who voted *for* 10-A have been in exactly this situation for the last 14 years, and didn't take this approach, but I understand that elementary fairness is not relevant in this situation.
If you can't support the PCUSA, please have the decency to leave.
It's an interesting thought, Gary. I can't remember if you were at the gatherings in Dallas many years ago. I remember how people like Jack Haberer kept urging people to stay, fight and win. There's too much good about the Presbyterian Church to give up on it, they said. I still have the book Paul Achtemeier co-wrote on one of the covenants adopted at those evangelical rallies…
I caught up with Jack Haberer at a convention a couple of years ago, though after the PUP report. I asked him if the PUP report was what he was urging us to fight for at those gatherings, because that report didn't look like winning to me. He admitted they were a little vague about just what "win" meant in "stay, fight, win" -- but the PUP report was his vision of what the coalition was fighting for.
It is, I suppose, a cautionary lesson from recent history. Be sure you know what you're fighting for before you invest a lot of energy in the fight. How, specifically, would things be different if you did "take it back"? Who will go with you on this struggle?
Charles,I think your only sincere comment was your last one. It comes across a scream. If you can't support me and my kind, then leave us alone! That is what we have been hearing for thirty years.
PJ. I have run across Mr. Haberer over the years. He is my image of those who, for whatever reason, mislead those around them and, I suspect, even themselves. The leadership of the Renewal Movement has a very poor vetting process. This is been proven so over and over again.
A piece of fiction:
"Hey, Jack, you got my back." "I sure do" he says, as he slips out the blade he had hidden under his coat and takes careful aim at the part of my back just where the heart is located. As he plunges knife in he grins considering the book deal, the committee assignment and new position he just accepted."
I know it is time to back off to emotionally and spiritually regroup when I make such a vitriolic comment. (See above - "Hey, Jack . .")
I need to seek the peace of Christ. Excuse me for a while.
Post a Comment