How true yet how sad. Denominationally we continue on our merry way, “fiddling while Rome burns,” either ignoring or oblivious to such critical statistical fact. Instead of intelligently taking such information to heart and strategically adjusting our strategies to meet these obvious challenges we proceed to endeavor to “retread” our aging, sagging congregations where numbers and dollars are a diminishing resource.

Is it any wonder that our problems persist or that we continue on our downward slide?

Jim Babcock

Bozeman, Mont.

Dr. Wardlaw writes, “’Wise ones still seek Him.’ They go these days to midnight candlelit services and sing beloved, grateful hymns. Or they stare, open-mouthed, into the mysteries of space from which, by the grace of God, all of us were spawned.” I don’t know whether he intended to issue a call to humility, but I hear in Dr. Wardlaw’s words an affirmation that God’s grace is infinitely grander than we can perceive — and that God’s purposes won’t begin to fit in the paltry little boxes that we construct for them.

In an age that craves black-and-white certainty, in which culture and church alike place the loudest know-it-alls on the highest pedestals, Dr. Wardlaw’s essay is a welcome reminder: It’s awfully hard to be wise without also being humble.

Dwight Christenbury

Hendersonville, N.C.

It seems to me we begin at the wrong end of things when we want to create ... Only God, through the Holy Spirit, can create.

Consider the revival of the Korean Presbyterian Church way back when. It began in a General Assembly worship with a mutual confession of opposing parties, after a time of deep prayer. Read about it.

Maybe we could lay aside the GA agenda and pray for the church and pray for ourselves. Confession is good for the soul and spreading the gospel is still our individual and collective responsibility.

I learned this in the UPCNA.

Robert Woodworth

Harrisonburg, Va

G-2.0501 clearly states that Teaching Elder is “(also called Minister of Word and Sacrament).” The changes brought about by the new Book of Order merely seek to lean our emphasis toward the meaning of teaching elder. I believe this is to get us to remember the priesthood of all believers and the parity of our lay/clergy leadership, which is often forgotten by lay and clergy alike.

In no way does the term “teaching elder” supplant or negate the terminology of “minister of word and sacrament.” If that language is customary and helpful, it may still be used (such as in a military chaplaincy situation).

To make this a substitution rather than an emphasis completely misses the point of the reform and overreaches the Book of Order.

Kyle Walker

Bryan, Texas

Genesis 37 begins the tragic and redemptive story of the children of Israel. In a few brief paragraphs, a vivid picture is painted of a family rife with conflict.

I motored my way from my home in Annandale, Va. out to the congregation I’d soon be serving part-time in Poolesville, Md. I had an 11 a.m. meeting scheduled with the clerk of session of the wee kirk there, to sign my first contract and talk about how things at Poolesville Presbyterian work.

It is not news that the Emergent Church Movement has been shaking up American Christians who identify themselves as evangelical.

Normally mature Christians do not wonder much in the new year if they kept the faith minimally enough in the past 12 months to get by. More likely, they feel guilty that they have failed to serve Christ with consistent commitment and worry more about the things left undone than what they did that offended God.

IN AN EARLIER COLUMN (4/10/11) I pointed out our denomination’s shocking lack of available pastoral calls, in comparison to the large numbers of pastors seeking calls. The column’s conclusion was a series of encouragements for entrepreneurial strategies to address the call shortage.

Grace, peace and love to all! I am a lay theologian, non-denominational, moderate evangelical here in Kansas City, and I must say I found this story very encouraging as it mirrors my own concept of what it means to be open and ready to reach out to our fellow men (and women!) beyond the sometimes stifling confines of our churches. I think it was Thomas Aquinas who said, “You cannot give what you do not have”; those of us who profess Christ must live Christ. I have often heard it said that unbelievers may not always know what Jesus was like, but they can tell you what he isn’t like! Thank God that Presbyterian minister could show that Muslim gentleman the face of Christ. Since I’m semi-retired, I patronize the City Center Square Starbucks daily; I grab a “venti” tea, lay out my Bible, notebook, cellphone, etc., and for a couple of hours I have the most awesome ministry opportunities! People stop by to talk, listen, teach me, have a cup of joe, whatever. In my small way I try to show the “in-breaking” of Almighty God’s present/coming Kingdom. So ... thanks again for this!

Laurence Charles Ringo

Kansas City, Mo.

Luther is the most important figure in church and secular history since St. Paul. Luther accomplished two history-changing events in his lifetime. In his Reformation he told the laity once and for all to take responsibility for their church. A message even today lost on Catholics dealing with clergy sex-abuse fallout, and Protestants who deal with who really owns their property.

And he also put to death the notion of “divine-right” of leaders, be it popes or kings, to do as they please when they please. Apart from Luther, (there) is no modern, secular nation-state as we understand it today. Apart from Luther, there is no Declaration of Independence, or 1776.

His impact in the world is best proved by the null hypothesis. “What if Luther never existed?” That can be seen by all the turbulence, death, suffering in modern Islam, as Sunni/Shia go at (it) with guns, knives and worse. Islam has never had a Martin Luther. Communism never had a Martin Luther. One is a dead ideology and the other a toxic faith for many.

Without a Luther, 500 years would have passed, but in many ways we would be in the darkness. As far as how he would view the modern world and all the fuss in the PC(USA), I doubt he would give much thought to it. The inner political/ideological issues in a minor religious sect never concerned him in (the) 15th century. Doubt it would now.

Peter Gregory

Lambertville, N.J.

NOVEMBER 2008, GREEN ZONE,

BAGHDAD, IRAQ

Every day when my chaplain assistant and I drove around the Green Zone, we went by the 215 towers.

I  just received a year-end greeting from a Web service that I tried briefly last summer and then forgot about. And while I was writing that sentence, another arrived from a service that I stopped using over a year ago.

I was fortunate to spend the week between Christmas and New Year’s in Switzerland, visiting a dear friend who, sadly, has had her cancer return with a vengeance. A pastor in Zurich, Denise and I met years ago at a Reformed theology conference sponsored by the Office of Theology and Worship. Later her daughter became our exchange student here in the States, and a big sister to our only child. Our families have stayed close.

Comment:
Will those wanting and participating in "non-geographic" presbyteries be recommended to continue and be active in their "geographic" presbytery life? That is, will their presence still be asked at Presbytery meetings, or are they just kind of "let go?"  I hope in an effort to of providing space and differentiation, there is still an encouragement for connectedness.

EDITOR COMMENTS:  The recommendation does encourage an ongoing relationship.  It specifically recommends that the non-geographic presbytery churches continue to have voice in their presbyteries of origin.  They would also retain the power of vote on the matters specifically affecting them (dismissal of property, etc.).  They would not be required to attend the meetings, but they'd certainly be encouraged to do so.

On congregational decline.
In re-reading more carefully Leslies very cogent article on the statistical and financial decline in
US congregations I noted one area which needed more clarification as well as programatic
attention.
“ Congregations grow older and smaller, many feling the financial pressures of having fewer
people to give “ and “churches are failing to connect with young people “ To those points I
would like to comment.
A great number ( certainly this is true of the PCUSA ) of these congregations are located in rural,
relatively small communities where the young people are leaving the community for a different
life and opportunities in an urban environment....However....conversely the urban congregations
are failing to connect ( perhaps identify ) with these young people, attracting them to their
worship and mission, so in effect we are two time losers because regardless of domain, rural or
urban the dynamics are identical...older age and diminishing finances... which should point to the
fact that we need to re-tailor our entire ministerial approach to a new social dynamic not simply
endeavor to “ retread “ a diminishing resource ....

Jim Babcock, Elder

Bozeman, Montana

PC(USA) did not vote to take sin out of the Bible, really. I have read the changes in the 2011-2013 Book of Order. This idea is not there. There was no vote to limit new or old pastors, head of staff, etc, to only homosexuals. There was no preference expressed for homosexuals.

God used a lot of imperfect people to do his work and Jesus never had a litmus test for disciples. Neither asked, "Are you a homosexual?"

Instead, the adopted language expresses an effort to get Sessions and Presbyteries to become serious with their responsibilities for examining and ordaining candidates for ordination and to do a thorough job. Candidates who agree they can meet the examination and ordination questions with affirmative responses and who are now or become homosexuals will have to answer later at some point to the whole church and the Trinity. This is especially so, since these last 30 years of arguing about the general issue.

Resisting our own chance at improving the way Sessions and Presbyteries do that job is not helpful. Abandoning the PC(USA) now is a rejection of hope of future improvements. Reintroducing overtures to reinstate the language that was taken out of the Book of Order only perpetuates the parts of the argument that we have an opportunity to discontinue.

What is needed are some teaching elders who will learn what the General Assembly really did and report it accurately without adding descriptive phrases that are not in the words that were adopted. If writers would prepare a two page summary of the opportunity we have to get Sessions and Presbyteries to improve the ordination process, under the new language, this may be helpful in educating those whose righteous indignation has gotten the best of their thinking. I am praying for hard work by Sessions and Presbyteries.

Where should announcements about church and community be placed in a Presbyterian (Reformed) service of worship? This question needs to be asked since, although they provide essential information about the mission of the church, they may also seriously disrupt the flow of the worship of God by injecting the trivial into contemplation of the eternal.

There we were, Mark, Barbara and I, our arms stuck out a second-story window, trying to tie knots in ropes to secure a newly printed AIDS awareness banner to our church building so people passing by could see it.

Whatever your church situation, you will find a vacation Bible school curriculum that will fit your need. Below are some of the ones we found available. You’ll need to explore for yourself the material and determine if it is suitable for your church.

With Living Waters for the World’s vacation bible school (VBS) curriculum, “Clean Water for All God’s Children!,” attendees will not go on safari or to the rain forest or on a sea cruise or have a space adventure. What they will do is learn about the miracle of clean water. And have the opportunity to provide clean water for some of God’s children.

As Jack Haberer noted in his editorial of November 28, 2011, the Covenant Network of Presbyterians Board of Directors supports the efforts of several presbyteries to address the complex issue of same-gender marriage in a balanced way, by proposing an authoritative interpretation (AI).

Haberer criticizes this approach as divisive. We respectfully disagree. Marriage is not a settled matter in church or society. Our goal is to avoid forcing one “all or nothing” view on the PC(USA) when there is such great diversity of conviction.

In some congregations in the states that have legalized same-gender marriage, some latitude is urgently needed for ministers and sessions to respond to the pastoral needs of their own members. This proposed AI affords some breathing space for such ministers and sessions, while at the same time reaffirming the freedom of ministers and sessions to say no to any request for the church’s involvement in a marriage ceremony. The fact that this AI is a middle-ground measure has been widely recognized, and the Covenant Network Board has received many comments from conservative friends who appreciate the fact that we are not pressing toward a change in constitutional language. This AI, rather than fomenting further conflict within the church at this fragile time, will, we believe, provide some release of pressure as we continue to work toward mutual forbearance on this and other matters of conscience on which Presbyterians differ.

Mary Lynn Tobin

Davis, Calif.

David Van Dyke

St. Paul, Minn.

(co-moderators, Covenant

Network of Presbyterians)

Reading your comments on the contributions of Tom Gillespie to the PC(USA), as well as those noted in other news stories, one of his signal contributions to the church was not mentioned. It is his authorship of what was Chapter 2 of the Book of Order (now Chapter F.2 in the new Form of Government) — the chapter entitled “The Church and Its Confessions.” It is one of the real treasures of the book, in my judgment as well as in the minds of many others. Tom wrote that chapter and deserves the gratitude of the whole Presbyterian family for this important contribution.

This came about as a consequence of my concern to have some new theological statement as the 120-plus years of disunion between the two Presbyterian denominations came to a close. I had in mind something like the “Brief Statement of Faith” of the PCUS, which was a short summary of Presbyterian doctrine. The Union committee agreed with the idea and a group of outstanding theologians spent a long weekend in an attempt to produce such a document. Everyone who was there tried his or her hand at writing on some major Presbyterian doctrines. At the close of the meeting all the material was entrusted to Tom Gillespie, who had agreed to try to pull it together into one statement.

After a few weeks Tom sent the committee the document that would become Chapter 2 , “The Church and Its Confessions.” It clearly was not a “Brief Statement of Faith” but it was also far too valuable to discard. Our decision was simply to incorporate it into the proposed new Book of Order which has served the church so well since reunion in 1983. As you know, it took another eight years and a great deal of work to produce the “Brief Statement of Faith” which is now in our Book of Confessions.

I felt that, as one who knew of this overlooked gift of Tom Gillespie to the PC(USA), I needed to share it. He was a good and great man and his authorship of “The Church and Its Confessions” is one of his signal gifts to our denomination.

M. Douglas Harper Jr.

Houston

I miss Tom Gillespie because he was a great man in each of his ways of greatness. He was a wise and skillful preacher of the gospel, a brilliant N.T. scholar, the inspirational president of Princeton Theological Seminary through decisive years. He was always fair-minded and even-handed as a leader and guide for faculty and students. His smile was contagious, and best of all he was at the core a good man who knew Jesus Christ as Lord and friend! Tom loved pastors and their congregations. He had the integrity of strong convictions mixed with humor and grace. He treasured his family and modeled a wholeness of character that is now for us an enduring legacy.

Earl Palmer

Seattle

I have to say that the author’s illustration on the differences between Paul’s position and that of Santorum’s was stupid. Clearly Mr. Stewart agrees with Ron Paul, and thereby views Santorum’s position as stupid. Yet this is merely an ad hominem (and stupid) attack. Nowhere is there any indication of why Senator Santorum is wrong (and being stupid) in this article.

Clearly these men have a difference of opinion on how the term “at war” is to be applied in our relationship with Iran. Senator Santorum’s view seems to be that our intrusion/support in removing the shah is not an act of war, while [Rep.] Paul believes our actions in this arena are indeed an act of war. I believe both positions are simplistic (probably for the sake of a debate) …referring to this as war or not war. The politics of those events were extremely complicated, involving major British holdings in oil, changes in presidents and presidential policies in the U.S., the imposition of a pro-Nazi shah in 1941, the subsequent involvement of the Soviet Union, etc. Clearly Mr. Santorum’s position has some merit as the Islamist leadership that came about in 1979 was extremely anti-Western/U.S. from that time forward based upon religion and deep resentments … [T]he idea then that they were at war with us from that moment forward has merit. Paul’s position also has some merit in that our actions in working with the British did add to the anti-Western sentiments that were already in existence. But is this a beginning of “war”?

The author’s position of claiming that Senator Santorum was stupid, I believe is the most blatant example of stupidity to come from the article. I don’t believe either of the candidates was “stupid.” I believe that Paul’s position stems from a very strong libertarian/separatist philosophy, which has some merit (though I do not agree with its application), while Mr. Santorum stands as a strong defense hawk, which also shows much merit. Labeling one stupid, because you agree with the other, is the most vivid example of stupidity.

Adel Thalos

Hixson, Tenn.