| Conference will open doors to a 'new Reformed body' but immediate departures from PC(USA) may be few |
| Written by Leslie Scanlon, Outlook national reporter | ||||||||||||||||
| Monday, 16 January 2012 23:36 | ||||||||||||||||
|
At the Fellowship of Presbyterians gathering this this week in Orlando, Fla., it's unlikely that participants will vote on the spot to create a new denomination, or that a huge number of congregations will decide to leave the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) en masse.
Your Responses (8)
![]()
Geoff Robinson
said:
|
|
Haddon Heights, NJ I'm reading Fred Wollerman's response. The irony is that if the PC(USA) took the confessions and the Bible as seriously as he takes his vows then this wouldn't be happening. |
p.w. gregory
said:
|
lambertville, nj Jim from Kansas City; Yes we do live in a free country, from a Constitutional and rule of law perspective, we have freedom of both religion/worship and freedom of association. Meaning that the secular state cannot mandate, compel, or coerce whom one chooses to have religious or faith relationship/associations with. Religious associations, denominations, religious societies are thought of in law as voluntary associations where one affiliates or joins either by confession, affirmation or creed, which by definition is outside of the State to either judge or manage. And the State will never judge when and how one chooses to walk out the door. This is why the church property issue is such a dicey propostion when taken to secular state courts. The State is well aware that the lines of church/state demarkation is established in presidence and are very reluctant to engage in these inter-church food fights. The Supreme Court recently ruled 9-0 that the State cannot judge religious groups in whom they define as "ordained" and who is not, to carry out religious activities. But a religious denomination runs the risk, for the law cuts both ways, of trying to use the force of the secular State/law to mandate or otherwise coerce a relationship through church property or other assests, when clearly the intent of those seeking redress is to be released from such associaitons. Which is why on the state and local level congregations are at times successful in courts of law over the property matter, other times the denominations. It is hit and miss proposition depending on location. Individuals, groups, entire congregations of course are free to leave their property and turn the keys over to the EP, and no one will bat an eye. The PCUSA has bleed people and money for decades, the PCUSA has never seen this as a crises or even a matter of concern, given the lack of study papers and policy papers on the subject out of either New York or Louisville. They do not go to court to force people to remain members of the denomination. Again this is why the whole per capita issue will never see the light of day in a secular court, or even a religious one for that matter. The Church does not have the power to force or compel remittance of funds, nor will the secular State ever grant them such. Real estate, property, real assets of course they take a different tack too. Again, I think it all when all is said and done, the end will come when some one on either side talks cash compensation or settlement of outstanding issues on a national level. And folks go where they want too. Yes I agree that as adults we should be able to come to a peace and understanding of these matters. But that is why God made lawyers, when adults stop talking. |
Rev. Paul Masters
said:
|
Council Bluffs, IA Here we are on this side of the paradigm shift. Mission happens at the congregational level. Presbyteries are gatherings of congregational leaders committed to aiding each congregation succeeding in its God given mission. Synods and General Assemblies are relevant to congregations to the degree that they enable, empower and provide resources to presbyteries to fulfill their God given mission. We are a connectional people, not an institutional people. The days of congregations defining their mission by financially supporting without question the centralized managed missions of the national denomination are over. This is nothing new; we have been going down this road for years. While there will always be a need for the legitimatizing functions of the denomination (what is a legitimate congregation; who is a legitimate pastor) the adoption of the New Form of Government, now our Book of Order, opens the door for those functions to evolve along local lines. The reason that most are not looking to leave the PC(USA) is that leaving does not significantly change how we live our covenant lives at the local level |
Jim Stearns
said:
|
Kansas City, KS What if we just admit that the denomination is dead, disband the property clause, and let people live in true relationships rather than forced relationships? |
FRED WOLLERMAN
said:
|
Denver CO When I was ordained in the PCUSA in 1957 part of the ordination questions and pledge was for us (me) to "be subject to my Fathers and Brethren" and I believe that is still the rule. If you are are not willing to accept the decisions of the General Assembly and the Judicial Commission...even if you don't like some of them, you can either stay and work for the changes you would like to see, or you can leave. To atay and work to divide the denomination is not one of your options. You are NOT in fact holier than the rest of us. I join my friend Forrest Gump in saying, "That's all I have to say on that subject." |
Michael B
said:
|
Detroit, MI Coming from a curious youth perspective, Is there any way that one will be able to watch or listen to this Conference online ? “Editor’s response: We have contacted the organizers of the Fellowship of Presbyterians conference. They tell us that live streaming of presentations will not be provided. However, they will be posting written versions of the major addresses as soon as possible. Also, we also understand that the official Twitter hashtag will be #fellowshippres. --JHH” |
John Toillion
said:
|
Mililani, HI It seems to me this is an attempt to be all things to all people. How can we as Presbyterians, when asked by an outsider, respond to the question: "What does PC(USA) believe in? How is PC(USA) dealing with the elephant in the room - ordination of active gays and lesbians?" No easy answer to either as any response would have to be qualified by stating, "Well, it's up to each individual congregation to decide." In my congregation, Session has intentionally chosen not to address these long standing issues with our congregation - which by the way is made up of less than 50 percent who claim PC(USA) as their denomination. Also, we're in the process of calling a new pastor and my question to Session is, "How you going to address in the CIF what our church's position on the gay issue?" This must be addressed early on to preclude calling a pastor who is of the opposite position. I really think many in our denomination will simply walk over to a neighboring church that is already committed to one position or the other rather than stay a member of a denomination that is trying to be all things to all people. |
Rev. Bob Thomson
said:
|
Woodland Hills, California I am an ordained PC(USA) pastor and support the work being done by the Fellowship of Presbyterians. Even though I cannot be in Florida this week I will sign the covenant and wish to be counted in that number of supporters. |














