tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post115526630362802375..comments2023-04-12T04:13:00.415-05:00Comments on Tom's Thoughts: In Their Own WordsTomGrayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06578393509662485657noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1156641864723852442006-08-26T20:24:00.000-05:002006-08-26T20:24:00.000-05:00Dear Tom,Praise God for your courage and faithfuln...Dear Tom,<BR/><BR/>Praise God for your courage and faithfulness to the authority of Scripture. We will be praying for you and the people of Kirk of the Hills as you face the pending attack. If only more of the conservative PCUSA churches could exhibit your level of integrity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155858043956679142006-08-17T18:40:00.000-05:002006-08-17T18:40:00.000-05:00My prayers are with you Tom, Wayne and the congreg...My prayers are with you Tom, Wayne and the congregation. Phil. 1:3.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155610340602977322006-08-14T21:52:00.000-05:002006-08-14T21:52:00.000-05:00Well, I must say I am underwhelmed with the poor a...Well, I must say I am underwhelmed with the poor advice most seem to be giving here. Jesus did not command us to "turn the other cheek" in response to evil. We are called to "resist Satan and he will flee." <BR/><BR/>In the Book of Revelation, God's command is for His people to come out of Babylon, not to embrace her. We are commanded early in the very same book to take a stand, not to be nauseatingly tepid. This is not the time for milquetoast pseudochristianity. <BR/><BR/>Jesus also said that wise kings count the cost before engaging in battle. This should be a time of planning and strategizing with other likeminded congregations. <BR/><BR/>We are called to be salt and light -- these are disinfective and preservative media. <BR/><BR/>God is trustworthy. He did not abandon His Holy One to decay. His church is founded on that Rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail.Joe Colanninohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04301974805509641526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155522816388683382006-08-13T21:33:00.000-05:002006-08-13T21:33:00.000-05:00Tom, I am not a forever Presbyterian. In fact I ...Tom, I am not a forever Presbyterian. In fact I became a Presbyterian several years after I became a Christian.<BR/><BR/>The entire fight seems unreal in terms of the scripture, except for guarding against false prophets and the supreme liar, the devil himself.<BR/><BR/>Gather good counsel about the leaders of the Kirk and you. Move forward in haste to spread the Good News of Our Lord and Savior. May Godspeed your mission. Call if I can help.<BR/><BR/>Your brother in Christ,<BR/><BR/>Phillip J. OwingsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155400977743247842006-08-12T11:42:00.000-05:002006-08-12T11:42:00.000-05:00Tom, something that many folks miss is that when t...Tom, something that many folks miss is that when the denominational leaders have tossed out the Scriptures, then the less-important books (e.g., Book of Order) become hugely less significant. The imporant thing is Scripture, which is God's Word. The Book of Order is, frankly, man's word. Which shall we follow? Let us first follow the Bible. Then we can talk about following the Book of Order.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155352889540984912006-08-11T22:21:00.001-05:002006-08-11T22:21:00.001-05:00Tom,Are you arguing for a selective use of the Boo...Tom,<BR/>Are you arguing for a selective use of the Book of Order - it applies on ordination to ministry, but not on the power of presbytery to own its constituent church property, install and remove pastors, in rare cases disband sessions and install its own appointed leadership? Sounds like you want "local option" on property. Hmmm? <BR/><BR/>Confused,<BR/>Presbyterian ParsonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155330078813875022006-08-11T16:01:00.000-05:002006-08-11T16:01:00.000-05:00Jodie wrote, "Dan Rather was sacked for reporting ...Jodie wrote, "Dan Rather was sacked for reporting on exactly that kind of literature." A couple of corrections. First, Dan Rather was not sacked. Some of the producton staff who worked on the story were sacked, but Rather was allowed to stay on. He chose to resign.<BR/><BR/>Second, the issue was not reporting on confidential or first draft documents. The issue was reporting on bogus, counterfeit documents. The reporters failed in their professional duties not becuase they made confidential documents public, but that they treated false documents as if genuine. They should have checked to be sure the documents were the real thing, not clever fakes. <BR/><BR/>A lot of modern reporting is based on information (documents or comments) leaked by people who know things other people don't want told. Every time you read or hear phrases like "a source close to" or "confidential documents we obtained," you're hearing things like what the Layman's reporting here. We the reading public must trust that the reporters for the Times or CNN have done their work to intependently verify the authenticity and accuracy of the documents or information obtained.<BR/><BR/>Several times over the past decades, at the request of PCUSA leaders, the Layman has submitted its journalistic practices to investigation by outside bodies like the Evangelical Press Association. Each time, their journalistic practices have passed the test. Are they perfect? Is anyone? Have they ever had to retract a story? Certainly, but then so does the mainstream press from time to time. People died in riots provoked by a Newsweek story on abuse in Guantanamo Bay -- a story Newsweek later had to retract.<BR/><BR/>The concusion of this matter is don't criticize the messenger for reporting on these documents. Rather, ask if these documents represent the kind of spirit you want to see in your church leaders.<BR/><BR/>PaulAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155329313406406082006-08-11T15:48:00.000-05:002006-08-11T15:48:00.000-05:00Dear Jodie - the Layman may have said that they go...Dear Jodie - the Layman may have said that they got the documents anonymously, but should you like to confirm that they are indeed PCUSA endorsed documents log onto http://www.pcusa.org/constitutionalservices and look at the Advisory Opinion on Church property...Note 11. They (PCUSA) advise you that the document is so long that it is provided in a downloadable Adobe pdf format. So the content is there for you to confirm in all it's glory.<BR/><BR/>As for your other scenerios if the "denomination" is anything like the PCUSA is currently ...I say let the folks sell the property, I'm sure they'll put the money to better use than "it" will.<BR/><BR/>Sincerely - NancyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155312863593453232006-08-11T11:14:00.000-05:002006-08-11T11:14:00.000-05:00In reading about the "Louisville Papers," includin...In reading about the "Louisville Papers," including a document entitled "Church Property Disputes," I found it hard to get too incensed. I was reminded of Romans 2:1: "Therefore you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others; for in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, are doing the very same things."<BR/><BR/>The Layman advertizes on its own website a booklet about dealing with church property laws: "This book offers an indispensable guide to navigating the troubled waters surrounding potential court disputes over local church property ownership and use."<BR/><BR/>Everyone's way too concerned about bricks and mortar. We all need to be reminded that the church is the people. If a church desires to leave the denomination and the presbytery wants their property then give it to them--maybe even throw in a little extra ("and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well;").<BR/><BR/>Both sides could take a lesson from someone who once said, "learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart."Ray Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17255937262006971239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155312825563750202006-08-11T11:13:00.000-05:002006-08-11T11:13:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Ray Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17255937262006971239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29364304.post-1155291640190848592006-08-11T05:20:00.000-05:002006-08-11T05:20:00.000-05:00Dear Tom,I’m not sure why I feel compelled to resp...Dear Tom,<BR/><BR/>I’m not sure why I feel compelled to respond to your blog. I don’t have time for this, and I have no stakes in the outcome. <BR/><BR/>Did you notice that ‘the Layman’ said they got this document from an anonymous source and have no independent verification as to its origins and validity? They put you on notice that it is gossip! They spun you up but they covered their tracks so that if it turns out to be false, a bad first draft, or even just a contingency somebody thought about then threw in the trash, they have already warned you that they assume no responsibility for its veracity. Even if they are unethical, they are not stupid. Dan Rather was sacked for reporting on exactly that kind of literature. I for example, would be summarily fired from my job if I got caught using or even so much as reading a document with proprietary markings from a competitor. If an employee released such information, it is grounds for immediate dismissal regardless of content. There are federal laws that prohibit commercial espionage. <BR/><BR/>Regarding the practices of keeping church properties under the trust of a presbytery, consider the following scenario. Suppose there is an old dying church sitting on a property bought and paid for 50 years ago. Why not have the congregation secede from the denomination, sell the property, and split the proceeds among the members? Should that be legal? Say there were 100 members left, and the property was in downtown LA, or Chicago, and was worth say 20 million dollars. Couple hundred thousand dollars a head might be pretty tempting. Maybe there are members that have been around for 40 years and members who joined last month. Do they get the same cut?<BR/><BR/>Have you really thought this property thing through? I worry that ‘the Layman’ is not looking out for your best interest. What would be the long term consequences of being able to just split on a whim? Maybe you should get out in front of it and declare that if you choose to leave, you will not try to take any property with you. That will free you to focus on the theology of your movement rather than on the mammon of it. If you get the content right, land and buildings will not be a problem. Jesus left specific instructions on that matter.<BR/><BR/>Just a thought,<BR/><BR/>JodieAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com