Dear Editor,

I would like to take a few moments to respond to the interesting
comments from Mr. Earl Apel. He states, "Nevertheless I think it
important to note these facts. First of all the PC(USA) does in my
opinion have a tradition of honoring ambiguity and the importance of
honoring the individual's walk of faith through Jesus Christ."

Having been a member of the PCUSA for not quite three years, I'm sure
there are many folks much more qualified than I am to address these
issues, but I'm going to make an attempt. First, based on my studies
of Reformed history, particularly that of the Church of Scotland (from
which American Presbyterianism is derived), I don't find "a tradition
of honoring ambiguity" anywhere. What I do find, however, is the exact
opposite: church leaders who are struggling to ensure that there is no
ambiguity whatsoever in what it means to be a disciple of Jesus Christ
and a leader in His church. The historical documents bear this out:
Knox's Book of Discipline (from which our own BoO descends - 1560), the
Scots Confession of the same year, the Canons of Dort (1618), The
National Covenant (1638), and The Solemn League and Covenant (1643).
Last, but certainly not least, is the Westminster Confession of Faith
(1647), in which the Divines spent the better part of a decade ensuring
that there was no ambiguity concerning the essentials of the faith. In
fact, many, many English and Scottish Reformers suffered tremendous
persecution and/or martyrdom in order to protect the people from
ambiguous theology.

Until the early 20th century, Reformed thinking in the United States
remained "unambiguous" in nature as well, which the lives and works of
our foremost Reformed thinkers prove: Witherspoon, Hodge, Edwards,
Dabney, Machen, and Leith, just to name a few. No, the historical
record makes it perfectly clear that the current "tradition of honoring
ambiguity" is a 20th century phenomenon that post-modern thinkers have
used to further their political agenda. Historically, the blurred
lines concerning the inspiration of Scripture, the person and work of
Jesus Christ, and the essential tenets of the faith do not occur in
PCUSA documentation in an official fashion until C67. I respectfully
challenge Mr. Apel to provide historical documentation that supports
his opinion.

Secondly, it appears that Mr. Apel has thrown the baby out with the
bath-water by attempting to divorce the individual's walk of faith from
the larger community of faith that the individual is a member of.
Historically, from the New Testament period to the present, the
Christian freedom possessed by the individual believer is never, ever
honored separately apart from the believer's relationship to the body
of Christ. Again, Scripture and Reformed writings support this view:
Jesus, Paul, Calvin, Knox, Rutherford, Guthrie, Dickson, Trapp, etc.

It grieves my heart to read about and hear so many "Presbyterians"
striving to glorify individual preferences to the detriment of the
whole church. This line of thinking is not Presbyterian, but rather
Congregational because it denies any sense of connectivity with a body
larger than ourselves. I again ask Mr. Apel most politely to provide
historical proof of this concept of honoring the individual's walk with
Christ, because I simply don't see it. My view, which I believe to be
biblical, is that spiritual growth is necessary for the edification of
the entire body, and not for the believer's own glory.

Best Regards,