Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: math1h3@ELROY.UH.EDU (David H. Wagner) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: A pastoral letter to the members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Message-ID: Date: 21 Jun 91 09:36:01 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Houston Lines: 56 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu I applaud (what appears to be) our moderator's appeal for consistency and honesty in dealing with the laity of 'liberal' churches. A church should not represent itself as standing in the 'Sola Scriptura' tradition of the reformation when it manifestly has left that tradition. People should know what they are supporting with their offerings of time, talent, and treasure. Is the 'priesthood of believers' still alive in 'liberal' churches? Does anybody still believe that an ordinary person should be able to read the Scriptures and understand them? There was an interesting dipole between points made in the 'Pastoral letter' and in Chuck's comments. The letter noted that 'people seem to distrust the General Assembly,' whereas Chuck noted the disparity between what is taught in seminaries and what is taught to lay people. Isn't this the real source of 'distrust?' If the people want a conservative church, shouldn't they focus their attention on the seminaries, rather than the peripheral issues that (as a consequence of false teaching) are always appearing before their General Assembly? And shouldn't they learn to practice doctrinal discipline? I hope this General Assembly marks the beginning of a movement to bring back Scriptural Christianity in the PCUSA. While I know a few 'conservatives' in the PCUSA, they appear to me to be very lonely (and under-nourished) Christians in this church. Charitably yours, David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran (WELS) and ex-Presbyterian. My opinions and beliefs on this matter are disclaimed by The University of Houston. [I'm not sure the people in the PCUSA do in fact want a conservative church. Certainly some of our members do, but I don't think most of them are really fundamentalists. What is clear is that they have very strong emotional reactions to homosexuality, and that once these are raised, they are probably not going to be able to hear much discussion on the subject. That doesn't mean that in the long run nothing is going to happen. You are absolutely right that if the membership wants a conservative church they should take steps to make sure that conservative standards are used in choosing leaders. (In the PCUSA this would have to be done in ordination exams, not in the seminaries. There are essentially no seminaries left under the control of the church. There are several with nominal ties to the church, but the church has stopped supplying more than a symbolic amount of money, and I don't think they have control either.) This is the battle that was fought earlier in the century, and the PCUSA is the "liberal" side of the resulting split. I'm not yet convinced that the membership wants to reverse that. I'm just not sure they've yet realized the full consequences of the earlier decisions. You obviously think that once they do see all the consequences, they'll change their mind. That remains to be seen. --clh]