Confessing a radical catholicity

Our utopian visions of harmonious love for each other quickly dissipate when we are confronted with the gritty everydayness of our life together in Christ, whether we are talking about the church down the street, our own Presbyterian denomination, or the larger church. Left to ourselves, our attempts at loving each other fall apart quickly and spectacularly. We try this love thing Jesus was talking about, but when we inevitably fail, which is bound to happen in the hands of sinners, we retreat into more familiar communities of the like-minded. 

Perhaps that is the ultimate question hanging over our intramural disagreements and divisions in the Presbyterian church. Deep down, will our American Protestant proclivity for separation and schism continue to lead us into smaller and smaller enclaves of the like-minded, or can we move in a different direction? Can we be led to recover our catholic roots? Is the church, with all its faults and blemishes, still the church we have been given that summons us to live with our enemies and to share a common faith and life with them, even bearing with them in love and forbearance around the Lord's table? 

Loving chaos

The report of the Theological Task Force on the Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church is a winner. I support it enthusiastically. Then again, my enthusiasm is influenced by the fact that -- as one mystified parishioner asserted months ago -- I have a high tolerance for chaos.

Years ago I played college basketball, although not well. When our team fell behind by 20 points, with little hope of recovery except some drastic measures be taken, the coach would look long and hard down the bench. I knew his meditation: Should I put Massey in the game and hope that the resulting confusion will lead to new scoring opportunities? Early in my playing career my teammates hated to see me enter the game; I couldn't remember the plays or I would follow them slavishly. At best my personal style could be described as unorthodox. More than once a teammate hit me in the back of the head with a passed ball, or I would return the favor. But over time these same teammates--as much anxiety as I caused them--began to appreciate the chaos I created. It proved even more disadvantageous to our opponents, who could not anticipate what they were about to experience. Out of chaos came creative play, and sometimes surprising victory.

Pictures you won’t see in the papers

It was our privilege and responsibility to serve as moderator and vice-moderator respectively, of the Ecclesiology Committee of the 217th General Assembly meeting in Birmingham, Alabama. The Committee's primary responsibility was to recommend actions to the commissioners regarding the Report of the Theological Task Force On the Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church. The task before us was daunting; nonetheless, we came away from the experience inspired by the way in which we Presbyterians can come together, with all our inevitable differences of opinion, to seek common ground and unity in spite of disagreement. 

Beyond Birmingham: What Next?

In the aftermath of the 2007 General Assembly we have observed the controversies breaking out concerning the meaning and significance of the Assembly's actions. In particular, we have heard the criticisms and complaints that the Birmingham Assembly's action of adopting (with amendment) Recommendation Five of the Theological Task Force on the PUP of the Church has brought us less peace, unity, and purity than we had before. 

As two members of the Task Force who helped develop Recommendation Five, who now continue to work together, and who feel a responsibility to promote shared understanding, we want to do what we can here to set the record straight.  

We appreciate the grave concerns being expressed by critics of the TTF report. We esteem as brothers and sisters those who find themselves caught on the same side of the aisle as those GA commissioners who found themselves in the voting minority. One of the chief teachings of the Task Force, in fact, is that minority positions held in good faith need to be respected. Moreover, the Task Force urged the church to avoid situations in which the majority rides roughshod over minority concerns. Accordingly, we write these reflections in the spirit of ongoing dialogue. We believe that dialogue offers hope for mutual understanding and for moving the whole church forward together. 

Time will tell

Do not say "Peace, peace" when there is no peace. In the debate over the recently adopted report of the Task Force on the Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church, some have rushed to point to those words of prophetic denunciation, believing that they fittingly apply to the present-day Presbyterian Church.

But is it not likewise a serious error for God's people to proclaim "Doom and disaster" when there is no doom and disaster? It seems that certain individuals and groups within the church are so certain that doom and disaster are imminent that they apparently refuse even to consider the possibility that God might have something else in mind for our future.

Sending a kid to college

The headline on the cover of a recent Time magazine asked, "Who Needs Harvard?" The featured article was about students finding the right college. Not the school with the highest SAT scores or the lowest acceptance rate, but the one where your daughter, son, grandchild, neighbor, Sunday school pupil, or youth group member is most likely to succeed. The place where he or she will come away not only with a diploma but with a purpose in life.

Too much to expect?

Not if you help that young person choose a college wisely.

The “studied ambiguity” of a church-related college

During an orientation gathering, a parent of a first-year student raised the question: Is the school affiliated with a church? Pausing to formulate an answer, the complexities of the matter became much clearer to me. It brought into focus the question of how a college begun by a Presbyterian pastor and long (though loosely) associated with a Presbyterian congregation becomes an institution that now refers merely to its "religious heritage."  

The simple answer points to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Andrew Carnegie established the Foundation in 1905 to provide pensions for college teachers. The following year Coe College in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, keen to secure a pension for a retiring faculty member, turned to the Foundation. But there was a hitch. Sectarian schools were ineligible for Carnegie pensions, since they presumably received financial support in exchange for church control. Moreover, the Foundation discouraged sectarian education because of its supposed interference with the search for truth.

It IS easy being green: Possibilities in campus greening

Much has happened in the area of "greening" since Kermit the Frog first sang the woes of blending in, with his 1970's hit It's Not Easy Being Green.  The world has changed drastically since then, as has the meaning of "green."  Scientists have come to agree on the effects of human consumption on global ecosystems ... and the data are frightening and not easily ignored. Nationally, environmentalism has lost its radical connotations and finally joined the mainstream consciousness. Even the church now seems comfortable discussing sustainability and the need for balance between economy and ecology.