Monday, September 19, 2005
Presbyterian Issues
My Mormon ally - Hedgehog Blog - is passing on some Presbyterian issues and asking for comment.
A little background - PCUSA is very democratic. Overtures, the equivalence of "bills" in the legislature, are proposed by congregations who must them shepherd them to be approved by their local Presbytery that then brings them to the highest body -- the General Assembly, where they are voted to become part of the church or not. Lowell's friend comments on 4 overtures coming our of his Presbytery in preparation for the summer '06 GA.
The first one, concerning divestment of church investments in Israel, is shaping up to be the hottest issue at the GA. At the last GA the church quite ignorantly voted to divest from Israel based on the usual leftest propoganda favoring the Palestinians. In other words, supporting terrorists over nations, justifying their terrorist acts. Not a bright idea. I am not hesitant to pick sides in the Middle East, but if the church chose to take a neutral "peacemaker" role I would not object too strenuously, but this is just choosing the wrong side. This overture, or one like it -- there will be dozens -- simply has to be passed. Hugh Hewitt is getting into the middle of this fight. I spoke to him about it a few weeks ago. This is very important.
The second overture calls on the church to stop any backing on either side of the abortion question. That's a punt -- it is the church equivalent of "don't ask, don't tell." All it will do is delay a discussion the church will have to have at some point for later. Likely wise given the fact that there are bigger fish to fry right now, but it pains my soul to say that.
The third overture would, in essence, amend the church's constitution radically and remove one of the greatest barriers to schism in the church. It would tone down the rhetoric, but fracture the church hugely. Congregations would begin breaking off right and left based on whatever issue was important to them. In my opinion, it would stop the fighting, by essentially ending the PCUSA -- there would be nothing left after a few years. If it passed, I would be first in line to move to take my congregation elsewhere just because it is easier than the fight for the church. This is a bad move.
The last overture seeks to reapportion voting in the church to be more "representative." I am not sure it is that skewed right now -- I'd need to see serious data before I 'd take a stand on this.
There is no mention of homosexual issues in the post which is surprizing. That is likely to be the other big item at the next GA. But then for conservatives, there is nothing to do but defeat overtures brought by the left, so given that this post was to posit overtures, I can see why it was not mentioned.
Ain't it grand to be Presbyterian -- all the political fun of being an American, with genuine biblical concerns added in.
A little background - PCUSA is very democratic. Overtures, the equivalence of "bills" in the legislature, are proposed by congregations who must them shepherd them to be approved by their local Presbytery that then brings them to the highest body -- the General Assembly, where they are voted to become part of the church or not. Lowell's friend comments on 4 overtures coming our of his Presbytery in preparation for the summer '06 GA.
The first one, concerning divestment of church investments in Israel, is shaping up to be the hottest issue at the GA. At the last GA the church quite ignorantly voted to divest from Israel based on the usual leftest propoganda favoring the Palestinians. In other words, supporting terrorists over nations, justifying their terrorist acts. Not a bright idea. I am not hesitant to pick sides in the Middle East, but if the church chose to take a neutral "peacemaker" role I would not object too strenuously, but this is just choosing the wrong side. This overture, or one like it -- there will be dozens -- simply has to be passed. Hugh Hewitt is getting into the middle of this fight. I spoke to him about it a few weeks ago. This is very important.
The second overture calls on the church to stop any backing on either side of the abortion question. That's a punt -- it is the church equivalent of "don't ask, don't tell." All it will do is delay a discussion the church will have to have at some point for later. Likely wise given the fact that there are bigger fish to fry right now, but it pains my soul to say that.
The third overture would, in essence, amend the church's constitution radically and remove one of the greatest barriers to schism in the church. It would tone down the rhetoric, but fracture the church hugely. Congregations would begin breaking off right and left based on whatever issue was important to them. In my opinion, it would stop the fighting, by essentially ending the PCUSA -- there would be nothing left after a few years. If it passed, I would be first in line to move to take my congregation elsewhere just because it is easier than the fight for the church. This is a bad move.
The last overture seeks to reapportion voting in the church to be more "representative." I am not sure it is that skewed right now -- I'd need to see serious data before I 'd take a stand on this.
There is no mention of homosexual issues in the post which is surprizing. That is likely to be the other big item at the next GA. But then for conservatives, there is nothing to do but defeat overtures brought by the left, so given that this post was to posit overtures, I can see why it was not mentioned.
Ain't it grand to be Presbyterian -- all the political fun of being an American, with genuine biblical concerns added in.
