First, reports of the meeting are quite different in The Outlook and the Layman. Understandably the Layman, which sees itself as under attack by an apostate church, is not going to report the out-of-control behavior of its supporters who attended the meeting, and who walked with hobnail boots over decency and order. The sound effects from the balcony, the shouting down of the moderator, and the lack of respect shown a governing body of the church do not recommend to anyone the Christian purposes of the organization’s defenders. Instead such behavior betrays a need to win by any means necessary, and sadly demonstrates the cultural captivity of those who press similar charges against the PC(USA).
More lamentable is that the “Declaration of Conscience” from the Presbyterian Lay Committee’s board of directors says, “We urge all who share continued commitment to Holy Scripture as the infallible rule of faith and practice to work together for the glory of God … .” How is the glory of God served by such bizarre behavior at a meeting of presbytery? How do they understand the word of our Lord in Matthew 7:23 about the good works of those who add up to nothing on the last day because they are “evildoers”? That is a translation of anomian (Greek), and applies to those who are destroying the church.
Calvinists who use the tactics of antinomians discredit the cause they espouse.
Second, I suggest that the Layman, claiming to be a Christian organization, needs publicly to seek the forgiveness of those they have slandered. The most visible and egregious instance (mentioned in the reasons for disqualifying Williamson’s ministry) was the 1989 attack on Syngman Rhee, calling him a communist dupe when he was working in for the Global Mission Ministry Unit and with the National Council of Churches for the reunification of Korea.
The clear requirement of Scripture is that if we go to the Lord’s Table without being reconciled to our sisters and brothers, we are, at the very least, liable to judgment (Matthew. 5:22 ff.). It is one thing to question, forcefully, even stridently, the judgment or action of the church, church agencies, or sisters and brothers in Christ. We may always disagree respectfully and criticize them harshly or even satirically. On several issues the Layman has voiced trenchant and needed criticism. Yet among Christians, it is wrong to demonize individuals or church agencies and heap scorn and personal attack on fellow believers, or to hold others and the church hostage through a “ministry of fear.”
Rhee long ago forgave the Layman. Has the Layman admitted that it did him wrong? Even the Richmond Times Dispatch, a secular newspaper, confessed that its support of massive resistance to integration of public schools in the 1960s harmed thousands of citizens in Virginia. They have said they were wrong, and did others wrong. And each week we say “believe in the holy catholic church and the forgiveness of sins. . . . ” Do we?
Third, while the courts decide the legality or illegality of “separating Parker Williamson from his ministry,” this action by Western Carolina Presbytery opens a long-needed invitation to assess the meaning and nature of validated ministry. Bob Boell, a classmate of mine and Parker’s at Union Seminary (now Union-PSCE) praised The Outlook for its coverage of this matter. And while he is not on the same page as the Layman on many issues, he writes, “I am incensed that presbytery would not validate his ministry. I have known some presbyteries that have validated ministries with far less credibility — like, being an insurance salesperson.”
That is the deeper matter that touches on so many aspects of what it means to be an ordained, installed minister of the Word and Sacrament. I serve in a presbytery where the number of installed pastors and associate pastors is less than half of the total, which theoretically gives non-pastors control over a budget they do not help to raise. A favorite curmudgeon of mine years ago opined that if you can’t gather a congregation and, through the contributions of its members, support your own retirement, you have no business being ordained. My bias is emerging. Except for military chaplains who have congregations — all other ministers of the Word and Sacrament ought to be preaching, teaching and practicing pastoral care in a local congregation — and building up the church of Jesus Christ. Why else be ordained?
Hospital and institutional chaplains, ministers on the staff of our national church, and seminary professors ought to be in pastoral ministry in a local congregation also. It is the practice in developing countries, where even the Presbyterian Church is exploding with new members. Why does an insurance salesperson need to retain ordination? And when we ordain ministers to vocations that lay people perform quite well, what unspoken signals does that send to the whole people of God, who share with ministers of the Word and Sacrament the vocation of discipleship conferred at baptism? How does the church order its ministry? These are questions worth far more time and energy than the current ordination debate that consumes the Presbyterian Church.
For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love becomes slaves to one another … If, however, you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another (Galatians 5:13 and 15).
It is time for us to end acrimonious, crippling debate in the PC(USA), and to resolve our conflicts after the manner and example of our Lord Jesus Christ, who did not think equality with God a thing to be seized by right, but in humility took the form of a slave. Pray God that we can do so — and that we will.
Posted March 16, 2004
O. Benjamin Sparks is interim editor of The Outlook and pastor, Second church, Richmond, Va.
Send your comment on this editorial to The Outlook.
Please give your full name and hometown and state.
