Letters
August 9, 2003
August 9, 2003
|
Letters
August 9, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
To the Editor: In Mr. Tilford's essay, he describes the differences between two groups that are dominating the agenda of our church: "conservatives" and "liberal-progressives." I believe his descriptions are generally correct.The problem with Mr. Tilford's approach is that it describes only the edge groups in the controversies that surround us. He implies that the division lines run right through the center mass of the Presbyterian Church, dividing all the members into sheep and goats, an implication I believe to be an incorrect description of reality. The lines he draws run far to the left and far to the right, so that the sizes of the advocate groups he describes are comparatively small. I believe the vast majority of the Presbyterian Church will refuse to accept either description as their own without significant qualification. I trust that Mr. Tilford may reply that this is not a popularity contest, but is a question of right vs. wrong, and that we are informed by an infallible Bible. I do not see it that way, since the Bible itself was adopted by the Church as authoritative after deliberation and vote, amended during the Reformation to exclude the Apocrypha. Furthermore, the Confessions, cited in G-6.0106b, are themselves products of the Church in deliberation. This conclusion is an uncomfortable one, because it leads to ambiguity. One would think that Almighty God would give us rules so pristine and clear that there would be no ambiguity, and no room for the kinds of interpretations Mr. Tilford decries. The difficulty is that God seems to want that ambiguity, for we are blessed with four Gospels that do not agree with each other, the Books of Kings and Chronicles telling the same story with substantial differences, two versions of the Ten Commandments that are not exactly the same, several descriptions of creation that just do not fit with each other. . . . The ambiguity must be addressed somewhere, and I believe it must be done by the Church. Which is also an uncomfortable proposition. Because the church just plain does not get it right always. Which means that the Church in its various manifestations and forms is always wrong in some part. A further ambiguity. The part of the description of the edge groups Mr. Tilford left out is the similarity between them. Both edges seek a church that is pure. On one side, purity demands no homosexual behavior; on the other hand, purity demands no injustice. Each edge group requires that the church be free and clear of the sin they abhor, the only difference between the two being the definition of what the intolerable sin might be. And each side refuses to accept the very presence of the other among the saints. Because the saints are pure and can have no sinner among them. I believe Mr. Tilford's essay is a pristine example of this battle of the purists. The camps are clearly defined with unambiguous criteria. The assumption is made that everyone fits into one camp or the other, and that there is no way the church can contain both camps. The result is that the entire Presbyterian Church (USA) is portrayed by each camp as being in danger of losing its soul to the forces of evil. I for one do not accept this characterization of the conflict we face. I for one am very weary of claims of righteousness made by folks from the edges. I for one am sorely grieved when edge groups assume that their beliefs and assertions are mine, or should be mine, or represent the majority of the members of the Presbyterian Church (USA). And I for one believe that as long as we let the issues facing us be defined by those who demand purity of action, or theology, or thought, or whatever, with no acceptance of the notion that the church is not defined by its purity, we can only be damaged. And the cause of Jesus Christ will suffer the diminishment of an effective and faithful and historic witness. Edward Koster Stated Clerk, Presbytery of Detroit Send your letter to:
editor@presbyweb.com back to Presbyweb's Home Page Copyright (c) 2003 by the author or Presbyweb. All rights reserved
|