A quotation from pastor Chris Iosso, however, displays one of the problems of statistics: false conclusions that come from wrong premises. Iosso is quoted as saying, “You’re looking at better than $10 million in right-wing giving against, it would seem at best, a million dollars in progressive money, almost all of that [progressive] money raised to make ordination more inclusive.” He also called the “right-wing” giving a “war chest.”
Iosso may have a correct figure for total income — what he calls “giving” — but I believe he fails to take into account three factors:
First, everything he calls “giving” isn’t necessarily donations. For example, when over ten thousand youth have had an opportunity each year to give their life to Jesus Christ through Presbyterians For Renewal’s summer youth camps, every dollar they paid in registration for hotels, meals, and program fees washed through the PFR budget, until 2003. Thus, of a reported $4.79 million “given” to PFR last year, only about $1.4 million was actually given as charitable donations for use in PFR ministries. That means that using corrected data related to just one renewal group of many, you can already remove $3.39 million from the reputed $10 million “war chest.” But that’s just a start.
Second, only a fraction of actual donations to renewal groups go toward the one issue of retaining our ordination standard. Although groups such as Covenant Network, That All May Freely Serve, and More Light Presbyterians exist for essentially one purpose only — to change our standard for ordination — renewal groups, such as Presbyterians For Renewal, have a number of tremendous ministries they fund, as well as a whole spectrum of other renewal causes they champion.
To say that every dollar each group receives for many uses stacks up against dollars received by self-titled progressive groups solely to change our standards is to display an amazingly parochial understanding of ministry. As one might say concerning a relationship: “It’s not all about you!” To be specific, PFR expects to spend less than $170,000 on all the national issues in 2003, far less than half of opposing Covenant Network’s $480,000, spent largely on the one issue of ordination standards.
Obviously, there is no mythical $10 million war chest, no 10:1 spending differential! Those enormously misleading figures and that war-chest image exist only in miscalculations. The renewal ministries I know are barely getting by, living by faith and the faithfulness of donors month by month. Only in their dreams are renewal groups sitting on a big chunk of change!
Third, even if renewal groups may receive somewhat more income (although that conclusion is not established), it would likely be a factor of the disparity of the numbers of people on either side of the issue. Renewal groups represent the broad majority of the people who believe in their Constitution, compared to the relative few trying to lower our standards. Would it not make sense (and hardly be unfair or sinister) that a lot of people would give somewhat more than a few people? In addition, Iosso’s “right-wing” characterization of the various renewal groups siding with the Presbyterian Church on ordination standards is a little absurd, not unlike someone in New York labeling anything west of city limits “the Far West.”
A quote variously attributed to Mark Twain or British politician Benjamin Disraeli states that there are three kinds of lies: “Lies, damned lies, and statistics.” While the Outlook article conveys interesting facts, Iosso’s maltreatment of numbers spreads … well, shall we say, statistics.
James D. (Jim) Berkley of Bellevue, Wash., is issues ministry director for Presbyterians for Renewal.
Send your comment to The Outlook. Please give your hometown.
