The PCUSA Elite Today (7)

multicultural-jesus

The Progressive Jesus Created Out of Whole Cloth by Our PCUSA Leadership

How to Respond?

I have been researching the beliefs and actions of our PCUSA leadership for over three years now.  I have also had direct experience based on my three year term as a Presbytery Commissioner.  That’s a total of almost seven years, spanning 2011 through 2018.  What has occurred over that time and how should we respond?

Since 2011 the PCUSA lost well over one-million members (1,070,777) and gained far less than a half-million (469,739).  That amounts to a net loss of over 600,000 Christians.  Over the same time period over 1,200 churches have exited the denomination or ceased to exist.  These cold statistics point to the devastation of human relationships and to the destruction of a once vibrant community of Christian faith.  These are people and churches who have given up on the PCUSA as a Christian home.  Their tragic testimony is utterly ignored, but the consequences exist regardless.

And what of those of us that choose to remain in the PCUSA who worship our Savior Jesus Christ as revealed in the Scriptures and interpreted by our historic Confessions?  We are a shrinking minority who are expected to either bow down to the false progressive god or to silently suffer humiliation as supposed racists, homophobes, you name it or to get out already.

But there is another choice.  We need not bow to their false god or slink around in humiliating silence or get out.  No, regardless of our declining numbers or receding power we can yet trust that “if God is for us then who can be against us?” (Romans 8:31b).  The elite leaders of the PCUSA have not one-tenthousandth the power of the ancient Roman Empire or the current People’s Republic of China.  It thus should not require super-human faith or courage to stand up to them.  And yet we fail to do so.

PCUSA-I-Don't-Know-This-ManIts time to start confronting these self-presumed theological, intellectual and moral betters.  We should demand that they answer for their reign of denominational destruction.  Why do they ordain atheists and reward heretics?  How do they justify denying the Christian God?  How do they explain the virtually perfect correspondence between their Christian “social justice” positions and those of the secular Progressive political movement?  How do they explain the direct contradiction between Christ’s definition of marriage and their policy on Christian marriage?  Why do they continue to feign allegiance to our historic Confessions while utterly ignoring them?  Why do they exclude Scripture’s testimony? Why do they have a boutique ideologically-tainted “theology” for every identity group and progressive political position? How do they know that Jesus Christ would support each and every position of a godless secular political organization? Why do they reject Biblical truth but demand that we submit to their admitted arbitrary human “truths”? Why do they make a mockery of their ordination vows and teach others to do the same? Why do they deny Biblical sin but embrace the concept of secular ideological sin?  By what right do they pretend to a moral superiority that their actions show to be utterly unwarranted?

To sum up all of the above apostasy, dishonesty and destruction, why do they pretend to be pious, orthodox Christian leaders?  If this seems extreme then you are living in a state of denial.  For, if a PCUSA member can get through the above material (which only scratches the surface) and still trust that our leadership has the slightest loyalty to orthodox Reformed Christianity then the only option is denial.

The fact that the Rev. Kershner so openly rejected the Christian God suggests that she believes the denomination to now be comprised only of supporters or deniers.  Thus she brazenly made her statement in the sure knowledge that no one in Fourth Presbyterian, the Presbyrery, Synod or General Assembly would rise to object.  And, that silence would allow her to go on pretending to be a pious, orthodox Christian pastor doing her level best to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  I single her out not because her’s is an extreme case, but rather because she is a contemporary and unmistakable representative of our denominational leadership.

Well, I object, and will not silently accept any of this.  I don’t care if no one or thousands join me.  My responsibility lies in being true to what Jesus Christ has done.

I understand that each of us has only so much time, energy, knowledge and skills.  I contribute in what I believe to be the best use of the gifts that God has given me.  Others will choose to contribute in their own ways.  But the point is that we are called to testify to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as God has given us the specific gifts to so do.  If we, each in our own way and time, choose to stand on that holy ground then we can remain in the PCUSA without shame or fear.  And, by God’s providential power we will make a difference even if we don’t see it in our lifetimes.

These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.

Hebrews 11:39 – 12:3 (NIV)

 

Advertisements

The PCUSA Elite Today (4)

Christian-GodThe Rev. Shannon Kershner Interview (3)

When I first came across the Sun Times article, Prominent Presbyterian pastor: ‘God’s not a Christian . . . We are’, I couldn’t initially digest the enormity of this statement.  In fact, I set it aside for months.  Only recently did the full force of the implications become apparent, thus leading to this series of posts.

Denying the Christian God

The context for the Rev. Kershner’s statement is straightforward.  At time 34:20 the interviewer suddenly (as in out of the blue) asks the following question.

Interviewer: Is Christianity the only way to get to heaven, if heaven exists?

The Rev. Kershner’s initial response is immediate and forceful.

Rev. Kershner: No!  God’s not a Christian, I mean we are.

Then there is a bit of verbal fumbling as she attempts to formulate a theological rationale for her assertion.

Rev. Kershner: … For me, the Christian tradition is the way to understand God and my relationship with the world and other humans and it’s the way for me to move into that relationship but I’m not about to say what God can and can not do in other ways and with other spiritual experiences.

The simple fact is that there is no possible way for a Christian pastor to justify such an initial response.  Had she simply followed up by saying that she had misspoke; this and previous posts would have never been written.  However, by immediately justifying her statement Rev. Kershner makes it clear that this is indeed what she believes.

And, what she believes is an explicit and unmistakable denial of the Christian God.

I’m confident that, were an exhaustive analysis of Scriptural and Confessional norms conducted, the number of violations would be at least in the many dozens.  There is simply nothing in the New Testament or in the interpretation thereof from our Confessions that supports such an assertion.

The Christian God is the Trinity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as defined in the Nicene Creed.  There are no other gods in addition to the Trinitarian God.  There is no conception of God other than the Trinitarian God.

Christians believe that Jesus Christ is simultaneously all human and all God.  He is the irreplaceable and eternally existing Second Person in the Trinity.  Thus to believe in Jesus Christ is to believe that God is Christian because Christ is God.  Although I had considered delivering an exhaustive Biblical and Confessional proof of these doctrines, I have concluded that so doing is a gross insult to the Christian faith.

However, I will comment on a couple additional aspects of her statement.

Visualizing the Non-Christian god

Another way to conceptualize the Rev. Kershner’s idea of a non-Christian god is to reduce it to concrete forms.  My consideration led to two (I’m sure there are more) distinct possibilities.  In the first, god becomes the summation of the gods of all cultures / civilizations.  Thus, each god or set of gods constitute a part of the total god.  The following figure shows this option (the numbers are estimates of the number of gods in a given set).

all-gods-2

The Non-Christian god as the Summation of all gods

Eagle-eyed readers may detect that in addition to the Chinese, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Pagan gods I have also included ancient idols and Satan.  Inclusion of the idols should be self-explanatory from a multiculturalist perspective.

However, many might consider the inclusion of Satan as going way too far.  It may or may not be comforting to know that I took this step based on guidance from “The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop and Primate, The Episcopal Church.”  In a sermon preached on May 12, 2013 in Venezuela on Acts 16:16-24, The Most Reverend Jefferts Schori comments thusly on the Apostle Paul’s exorcism of a demon possessed girl:

But Paul is annoyed, perhaps for being put in his place, and he responds by depriving her of her gift of spiritual awareness.  Paul can’t abide something he won’t see as beautiful or holy, so he tries to destroy it.  It gets him thrown in prison.  That’s pretty much where he’s put himself by his own refusal to recognize that she, too, shares in God’s nature, just as much as he does – maybe more so!

There you have it!  The concept of Christian inclusion means that a demon possessed girl’s spirituality is likely of a higher quality than that of the Apostle Paul’s.  It must be frustrating to our PCUSA elites to be behind the Episcopal Church in the inclusion sweepstakes.  However, they will surely redouble their efforts to catch up.

universal-god

The Universal Non-Christian god.  I have no idea where we are.

The other concrete instantiation of a non-Christian god is a universal god that transcends  cultures and civilizations.  In this case all human conceptions of god are partial and imperfect.  However, all in their own faltering way ultimately point to this same universal god.

If I had to choose which of these two conceptions is closer to the Rev. Kershner’s meaning it would be this second option.

Considering the “Christian Tradition” Explanation

The Rev. Kershner ties her concept of the non-Christian god to the “Christian tradition.”  Given that there is no Christian tradition as found in Scripture or our Confessions that supports her idea, one has to wonder to just what tradition she is pointing.

My best guess is it’s the “tradition” of post-modernist theological innovation that has occurred in the PCUSA since the Confession of 1967.  As foreseen by Dr. Van Til in an essay on the Confession of 1967:

The God and the Christ of this contemporary theology have very little in common with the God and the Christ of historic Christianity.  There is good reason to believe that the new theology has virtually manufactured a new Christ, a person who is essentially different from the Savior of the Scriptures.

I would say that this is a fair description of the “Jesus Christ” that Rev. Kershner has demoted to barely demi-god status, if not a mere human, now long dead and dust.

only-traditionOne last bit of bitter irony.  During the Reformation the Catholic church argued for the combination of Scripture and tradition for the source of their doctrine.  The Reformers countered that doctrine must be based upon Scripture alone.  Now, our most elite progressive Christian leadership is reduced to arguing that doctrine must be based on tradition alone, and a tradition that is ever changing to keep up with the fads and fancies of post-modern secular progressive ideology.  So, out with the “Five Solas” and in with the one Sola (i.e., Sola Traditum) that rules them all!

I believe that the “Scripture plus tradition” doctrine of the Medieval Catholic Church was far closer to the truth about Jesus Christ than is our contemporary elite’s “Tradition Alone” doctrine.  What a sad, pathetic situation.

iBooks Publish Announcement

For those of you living in the Windows and/or Android worlds, you can download the PDF version from my blog site here.

Christ and CorneliusChrist and Cornelius

I have published an eBook on iBooks.

Christ and Cornelius: The Biblical Case Against Christian Pacifism

Is Jesus Christ a pacifist?  Many Christians believe this to be the case.  However, unless this position can withstand careful Biblical scrutiny it cannot be considered true.  I have subjected this claim to that very standard in this book, and, have found it to be unsupported.  Along the way important issues regarding Biblical interpretation, the person and purpose of Jesus Christ, the application of King David’s life to our own times, the first Gentile convert to Christianity and Western Civilization’s crisis, among others, are discussed.

Occasional Confirmations (2)

green

Political Islam Replacing Gays at the Progressive Pyramid’s Topcurrent-top2

In a February 21, 2017 post on The Progressive Pyramid of “Moral Authority,” I stated that:

There can be legitimate debate on when Political Islam was raised to the Progressive pyramid’s top position.  However, in 2016 the reality of this elevation became crystal clear.

After having given the issue great thought and carefully considered the evidence, this conclusion did appear to be “crystal clear” to me.  However, I had some apprehension as to if my readers would agree that the evidentiary bar had indeed been exceeded. After all, as I admitted:

In fact, even the holders of the 2000+ pyramid’s peak were gobsmacked when events revealed that this demotion/promotion had certainly occurred.

Thus, if actual members in top standing of the Progressive Pyramid had not seen this event coming, then there was enough ambiguity to make an objective observer wonder.

2010-11-22-iran_gayexecutionI no longer have these doubts.  For, a bisexual man (and thus a man who identifies as gay), has come into direct conflict with Political Islam’s murderous treatment of homosexuals, and was put in his place by a Progressive “Pyramid positioning officer“.

A bisexual male student at the University of Texas–San Antonio said during an informal conversation outside class that he was uncomfortable with Islam because people still receive the death penalty for being gay in 10 Muslim-majority countries.

For expressing this thought, the student—Alfred MacDonald, who no longer attends the school—was instructed to meet with the chair of the philosophy department, Eve Browning. Prof. Browning told MacDonald in no uncertain terms that he had committed the crime of “offending” someone, and she warned him that his habit of saying what he thinks could bring down the entire program. She threatened to call the Behavior Intervention Team and refer MacDonald to counseling. She did everything but send him to Room 101.

Unfortunately for Browning, MacDonald secretly recorded their conversation. The transcript, first publicized by Gay Star News, is incredible.

Note that it is not some conservative organization that has reported on this incident, but rather the Gay Star News.  I also pointed out this appalling situation early in the series of posts leading up to my conclusion regarding Political Islam’s top pyramid position.

Professor Browning, as a Progressive elite in good standing, made it absolutely clear to this bisexual student that he had no right to state a fact that might offend adherents of the Muslim faith.  Although there is a complicating factor concerning the context for the student’s statement, there is no doubt about the outcome.  Here’s a key point in the transcript:

ALFRED MACDONALD: Nothing. I wasn’t talking about the engagement to the Muslim. I was talking about Islam in that particular moment.

EVE BROWNING: Well, let me just say that kind of thing is not going to be tolerated in our department. We’re not going to tolerate graduate students trying to make other graduate students feel terrible for our emotional attachments.

The issue isn’t the truth of falsehood that Political Islam commits practicing homosexuals to death in at least ten countries, but rather the impact of stating that fact on the feelings of a Muslim person.  In fact, as the conversation continues, it becomes clear that the student will submit to this Progressive idol without question or need to understand (emphasis added).

EVE BROWNING: Those are things that would get you fired if you were working in my office. The Islam comment would get you fired.

ALFRED MACDONALD: …Would it really get me fired to say that I could be killed somewhere?

EVE BROWNING: In that situation as you’ve described it, absolutely yes.

ALFRED MACDONALD: How?

EVE BROWNING: Don’t even ask. It’s clear you’re not taking my word for it. I don’t care to convince you. If I can’t persuade you that it’s in your interest to behave in ways that other people don’t find offensive and objectionable, then at least I’ve done my job.

ALFRED MACDONALD: Well I know that it’s in my interest. I’m just trying to understand the reasoning.

EVE BROWNING: You don’t have to.

ALFRED MACDONALD: Well, this is a truth-seeking discipline!

greenNote that this transcript also confirms (that’s two!) my belief that Progressives’ primary strategy for getting their way is by intimidation as opposed to persuasion.  Thus, this incident is now a “dual-confirmation” event.

greenNo, Mr. MacDonald, you are terribly mistaken to believe that Professor Browning is part of a “truth-seeking discipline.”  She is a member in good standing of the Progressive hyena pack, a heartless enforcer (wow, that’s three confirmations!) of whatever is currently the Progressive party-line.  However, I salute your foresight in recording this discussion and your courage by daring to share it in spite of the certain Progressive mob blowback.  Perhaps you will eventually draw conclusions as to who actually supports humane policies and who only pretends to in order to achieve their true ends.

And finally, I’d like to acknowledge Professor Browning’s incredible achievement of confirming not one, not two, but three of my conclusions regarding Progressive ideology and practice in a single amazing incident.  It’s hard to imagine someone ever managing four such significant confirmations.  Your achievement casts an impressively dark shadow over human decency and wisdom.

King David: Warrior and Poet After God’s Own Heart (14)

King Saul and David (1 Samuel 18)

In the previous post I introduced the concept of narcissism.  Perhaps a working definition is needed prior to  proceeding:

extreme selfishness, with a grandiose view of one’s own talents and a craving for admiration, as characterizing a personality type.

John_W._Waterhouse_-_Echo_and_Narcissus(1903)

Echo and Narcissus* – John W. Waterhouse (1903)

The Narcissism of our Present Age

The core conceit of current narcissism is this:

The evidence-less presumption that I and my like-minded comrades stand at the absolute pinnacle of human virtue.  Therefore, anyone who deviates from my worldview, regardless of if they are my contemporaries or lived centuries earlier, can be motivated only by a combination of inexcusable stupidity and evil.

man-selfieAlthough the above description is useful in a general sense, there remains a significant gap between it and a compelling explanation of its application to our particular time and place.  I finally ran across a passage, from a piece discussing the current situation in France (by Christopher Caldwell) that excellently fills this need (emphasis added):

Upwardly mobile urbanites, observes Guilluy, call Paris “the land of possibilities,” the “ideapolis.” One is reminded of Richard Florida and other extollers of the “Creative Class.” The good fortune of Creative Class members appears (to them) to have nothing to do with any kind of capitalist struggle. Never have conditions been more favorable for deluding a class of fortunate people into thinking that they owe their privilege to being nicer, or smarter, or more honest, than everyone else. Why would they think otherwise? They never meet anyone who disagrees with them. The immigrants with whom the creatives share the city are dazzlingly different, exotic, even frightening, but on the central question of our time—whether the global economic system is working or failing—they see eye to eye. “Our Immigrants, Our Strength,” was the title of a New York Times op-ed signed by London mayor Sadiq Khan, New York mayor Bill de Blasio, and Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo after September’s terrorist bomb blasts in New York. This estrangement is why electoral results around the world last year—from Brexit to the election of Donald Trump—proved so difficult to anticipate. Those outside the city gates in la France périphérique are invisible, their wishes incomprehensible. It’s as if they don’t exist. But they do.

Yes, there is no doubt in my mind that these “fortunate people” are deluded to a degree that is nothing short of scandalous.  That they occupy the pinnacle of power in our nations can only be explained by a monumental failure of the temporal Christian church, parenthood, government, education and media, among others.  This is what civilizational failure looks like.  In the following post I will address the central delusion that has resulted in this sorry situation.



*Echo and Narcissus is a myth from Ovid‘s Metamorphoses, a Latin mythological epic from the Augustan Age.

“The Strange Persistence of Guilt”

38cb7cf1a3608458634fI recommend this profound meditation by Wilfred M. McClay on “The Strange Persistence of Guilt.”  Over the past few years I’ve been struggling to understand what appears to be ever increasing levels of troubling, even bizarre behavior within Western Civilization.  This article comes closer to providing a workable hypothesis than anything I’ve seen.
And yet, in the end, even this inspired meditation appears to fall short.  For, after making a powerful case that Western Civilization is failing due to rejection of its Judeo-Christian foundations, Dr. McClay ends by, apparently, recommending a “social utilitarian” perspective for rediscovery of religion’s value.
I argue that the PC(USA) and many other denominations have already pursued this path to utter failure.  That is, we have argued that the value of Christianity is its usefulness as a tool (only one among many others) by which to identify and then advance the social good.
What Dr. McClay may not understand, and many of our denominational leaders certainly do not understand, is that Christianity’s power for advancing the social good is a consequence of actual, real belief.  And, without that real belief as a first thing, Christianity can’t be anything more than a derivative, inefficient and unreliable vehicle for social change.
It is only through real belief in Christianity’s foundational truths made available to flesh and blood people that there is any hope for humane social change.  Neither you nor I can presume to know or control the paths of God’s providence working through a Christian community.  I attempted to explain this point in a recent blog post.

The ensuing events that built Western Civilization were filled with violence, cruelty and injustice, which is not surprising to a Reformed Christian.  But, somehow, by a Divine Providence that transcends human understanding, out of this chaos of sin there yet emerged a culture that began to affirm the value of each human being as an individual, unique creation of a Sovereign God.  And, from that affirmation grew a civil tradition that, incompletely and imperfectly, sought to advance those humane values.

And so, we come to the crux of our current predicament, that being the increasing inhumanity in our supposed pursuit of social good (as profoundly explained by Dr. McClay).

What makes the situation dangerous for us, as Fredriksen observes, is not only the fact that we have lost the ability to make conscious use of the concept of sin but that we have also lost any semblance of a “coherent idea of redemption,” the idea that has always been required to accompany the concept of sin in the past and tame its harsh and punitive potential. The presence of vast amounts of unacknowledged sin in a culture, a culture full to the brim with its own hubristic sense of world-conquering power and agency but lacking any effectual means of achieving redemption for all the unacknowledged sin that accompanies such power: This is surely a moral crisis in the making—a kind of moral-transactional analogue to the debt crisis that threatens the world’s fiscal and monetary health. The rituals of scapegoating, of public humiliation and shaming, of multiplying morally impermissible utterances and sentiments and punishing them with disproportionate severity, are visibly on the increase in our public life. They are not merely signs of intolerance or incivility, but of a deeper moral disorder, an Unbehagen that cannot be willed away by the psychoanalytic trick of pretending that it does not exist.

May God bless and empower us in these troubled times.

What does the Bible Teach on Immigration and Refugee Policy (2)

bible-bordersThe Reverend Gradye Parsons’ Letter

I’ll begin the careful scrutiny of this issue by discussing the PC(USA) “Stated Clerk issues letter to Trump on refugees, immigrants” (dated October 2, 2015) that was introduced in my previous post.  The value is that a high officer is here explaining the denomination’s policy positions in an official capacity.  Thus, what is said, implied and unsaid is of great significance.  The Biblical interpretative, philosophical and communication strategies utilized are also important aspects of the analysis.  All text from the letter is included in order as quotes, with my commentary inserted as regular text.

Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
725 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10022

Mr. Trump,

I am the Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the denomination of the congregation in Queens, New York, where you were baptized. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) develops its policies through councils of teaching elders and ruling elders. At the national level it does that through the General Assembly. I would like to share with you the Presbyterian policies on refugees and immigrants.

There was a time in my living memory when such a preamble would have elicited an expectation of Christian profundity.  I detect a sense of chastisement here, as Rev. Parsons deigns to educate Mr. Trump on the refugee and immigration positions of his own denomination.  I must say that on this point we are in agreement.  However, whereas the issue at hand elicited this response, for me it began when Mr. Trump said “I’m Presbyterian.  Boy, that’s down the middle of the road, folks, in all fairness.”

Presbyterians profess a faith in Christ, whose parents were forced to flee with him to Egypt when he was an infant to save him from King Herod. Knowing our Lord was once a refugee, faithful Presbyterians have been writing church policy urging the welcome of refugees and demanding higher annual admissions into the United States since the refugee crisis of World War II.

Here we find the one and only Biblical reference, summarizing Matthew 2:13-20.  What startles is the unexplained logical leap from our Lord’s specific experience to an apparently general application.  Does the fact that Jesus Christ was once a refugee mean that any and all who claim that status have been automatically bestowed with His sinlessness?  Is it possible in Rev. Parsons’ ideology for someone who claims refugee status to yet harbor evil intent?  And, if this is a realistic possibility, would a sovereign nation be obliged to welcome that person into their population?  Note that these real and pressing issues don’t even warrant acknowledgment let alone serious consideration in this authoritative statement of the PC(USA)’s positions.

Presbyterians have a mission presence in many refugee-sending countries, including Syria and Lebanon, where we have been present since 1823. Our relationship with people of faith and communities in these countries gives us knowledge of the root causes of the flight of refugees and further cements a commitment to welcome.

1983-beirut-bombing-by-hezbollah-iran-e1404967583363

1983 Hezbollah Bombing of the U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut Lebanon

These two sentences manage to encompass the decadence and irresponsibility that defines our national denominational leadership.  Here we have mentioned two countries, one having experienced and the other currently embroiled in bloody, brutal civil war, held up as places from which blameless refugees are guaranteed to originate.  Who, I wonder, has been doing all of the killing in Syria resulting in almost 500,000 dead?  Weren’t upwards of 150,000 killed in the Lebanese Civil War (1975-90) by someone?  Isn’t Syria the home of ISIS and Lebanon of Hezbollah, both vicious, genocidal Islamic terrorist groups who target the United States?  Is it not possible that someone complicit in or directly responsible for this mass murder might seek to enter the United States as a refugee?

isis-san-bernardino-terrorists

2015 San Bernardino ISIS Terrorist Murderers

And yet, in the face of this absolutely obvious set of circumstances, the Rev. Parsons bestows blanket innocence upon all refugees from these troubled countries because of the PC(USA)’s supposed “knowledge.”  What can possibly account for the existence of this level of moral blindness?  The Rev. Parsons, speaking for the PC(USA) General Assembly, is more than happy to signal their supposed superior virtue while ignoring the real and present danger to their fellow citizens from uncontrolled entry of refugees.  That is, they will happily claim all of the virtue points for their “compassionate” stance on refugees but deny any culpability for associated crime and terrorism because “their intentions were good.”  This is not virtue, it is its opposite, and, it’s long past time that we ceased allowing our national leaders to have it both ways.

Presbyterians through decades of policy have demanded humane treatment of people of all nationalities and faiths who find themselves within our borders.

This sentence is a masterpiece of obfuscation.  On the surface it appears to be undeniable.  Yes, absolutely, we in the United States should treat all within our borders humanely.  And yet, what if someone finds “themselves within our borders” because they have entered illegally?  Is it inhumane to deny them social services, welfare, work?  Is it inhumane to deport them?  If they commit a felonious crime, is it still inhumane to deport them?  All of this is left unaddressed.  One has to dig a little to uncover the true position of the PC(USA).

We have challenged our government when it neglects to acknowledge the refugee status of those fleeing persecution.

Has the PC(USA) ever supported laws or policies that ensure careful vetting of refugees?  Unless information to the contrary can be presented, their position on vetting refugees from lawless, violent nations appears to be that it shouldn’t be done at all.

We have pushed for due process at the border and we continue to petition for immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for undocumented persons.

I believe that “due process” likely means that a non-citizen of the United States should be given all of the Constitutional rights as has a citizen even when outside of the country.  Were this position to be accepted then the ability of the United States to control entry of non-citizens would be at the very least severely damaged.

As a Presbyterian I acknowledge my immigrant ancestors and my new immigrant sisters and brothers. I also respect that we came uninvited to a land already occupied by people. This creates a sense of humility about my citizenship that shapes my views on those who seek a place here.

This is an excellent example of the Jonathan Gruber school of political discourse: “lack of transparency is a huge political advantage.”  For, obscured behind all of the virtue signaling is effectively the demand for “open borders.”  Yes, the Rev. Parsons doesn’t explicitly say this.  However, since he admits guilt for his ancestors coming “uninvited to a land already occupied by people,” the most reasonable conclusion is that anyone who seeks “a place here” should be allowed in.  Of course to say so outright would create yet another reason for members to exit the denomination.  So, the position is only tacitly communicated.  However, I have little doubt that “open borders” is both what is meant and what is being pursued by the PC(USA) leadership.

I hope you will find this helpful. I especially hope it will inform you on your policies going forward.

In Christ,

The Reverend Gradye Parsons
Stated Clerk of the General Assembly
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

It certainly was helpful, but not necessarily in the way intended.  This letter helps by exposing the unsupported logical leaps, lack of theological seriousness, irresponsible virtue signaling, disdain for the safety of our citizens, obfuscation and purposeful ambiguity of the PC(USA)’s national leadership.  Only a leadership clique hermetically sealed inside an alternative-reality ideology could be capable of generating, approving and releasing such a defective statement.

Loving All Our Neighbors (Part 7)

Reltavism

I would normally not have published this post until next Tuesday.  However, the recent events in Paris make it of particular relevance.

The Case for Purposeful Irrationality

I believe that a compelling objective case for the United States as a tolerant, even welcoming nation to minority religions, including Muslims, has been made in this series of posts.  However, this result is in direct contradiction to the Presbytery of Chicago’s Interfaith Solidarity Network (ISN) position, which follows.

… provide support to the religious communities in the Chicago area if they are threatened, made fearful or hurt by expressions of hate. Responses may be in the form of written letters, press releases/conferences, or public response (demonstration or counter-demonstration.)

The fact that the ISN charter is written in this manner suggests that the United States is so saturated by inter-religious hatred by the majority population that they must regularly and aggressively counter this clear and present danger.  If I’ve convinced you that this conclusion is false, then the key remaining question is why the ISN choses to pursue an irrational policy.  As I asked in Part 4, “Is this simple irrationality, or is it irrationality with a definite purpose?”

I believe that it is irrationality with a definite purpose.  As I said in a recent post, that purpose is the destruction of our civilizational confidence.  However, we need to go back a couple of steps in order to understand what’s going on.

The people behind this movement are true believers in multiculturalism.  It’s easy to find numerous PCUSA organizations that trumpet adherence to this ideology (e.g., here, here, and here).  It’s important to note that many of the goals and actions of these groups are laudatory.  Christianity is indeed a faith that values all of humanity, it invites all individuals from all cultures to find salvation in Jesus Christ.  It indeed does integrate all people and cultures into Christ’s Body, the Church.  But this truth is used by the radical elites to obscure goals and actions that have nothing to do with the Gospel of Jesus Christ and everything to do with the advancement of a narcissistic, destructive ideology.

That ideology is the radical multiculturalism described in this series’ first post.  In order to understand ISN’s actions we need to first realize that, to these people, ideology comes before objective facts.  In fact, if there appears to be a discrepancy between their ideological beliefs and the existing objective facts, it is the facts that must be wrong.  Thus, when confronted with the cognitive dissonance from (a) their belief that the United States is saturated by inter-religious hatred and (b) persistent low levels of hate crimes, and, high levels of welcoming behavior, they react with angry assaults against the objective facts.

Thus, the motive for their hateful attitudes towards Morton Grove and Lombard in particular, and, Western Civilization in general, is that they are deviating from the ideological “reality” that “must be true.”  And, to these narcissistic people, the worst sin possible is to threaten their sense of intellectual, moral and spiritual superority.  Therefore, they consider themselves to be operating on the highest possible moral plane when they slander whole communities.  For, they are simply telling the “deeper truth” derived from their ideology and feelings.

That “deeper truth” is that all cultures are equal, except for Western Civilization, which is the source of all that is wrong in the world.  So, these narcissistic elite Christians have a powerful need to attack and destroy the West’s civilizational confidence.

Margot Wallstrom is the Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs (Social Democratic Party). She has also served as Commissioner for the Environment at the European Union and at the UN.  She is a typical left-of-center European politician.  And yet as reported by The Spectator, she recently said the following non-typical thing for such a person.

A few weeks ago Margot Wallström, the Swedish foreign minister, denounced the subjugation of women in Saudi Arabia. As the theocratic kingdom prevents women from travelling, conducting official business or marrying without the permission of male guardians, and as girls can be forced into child marriages where they are effectively raped by old men, she was telling no more than the truth. Wallström went on to condemn the Saudi courts for ordering that Raif Badawi receive ten years in prison and 1,000 lashes for setting up a website that championed secularism and free speech. These were ‘mediaeval methods’, she said, and a ‘cruel attempt to silence modern forms of expression’. And once again, who can argue with that?

And, how did the Saudis and Arab world respond?  By throwing Europe’s suicidal multiculturalist ideology right back into their faces (also from The Spectator, emphasis added).

Saudi Arabia withdrew its ambassador and stopped issuing visas to Swedish businessmen. The United Arab Emirates joined it. The Organisation of Islamic Co-operation, which represents 56 Muslim-majority states, accused Sweden of failing to respect the world’s ‘rich and varied ethical standards’ — standards so rich and varied, apparently, they include the flogging of bloggers and encouragement of paedophiles.

Wallstrom has not received support from the Swedish or EU political establishment.  Although the thought surely has never entered her mind, she shouldn’t expect any support from the PCUSA elite either.  For they have decided that the West’s enlightened views on women must be subjugated to multiculturalist ideology.  The following quote is from a 219th (2010) General Assembly approved  report “Toward an Understanding of Christian-Muslim Relations.”

Christian women may also need to listen with particular care and to consider the need to accommodate different standards and mores when engaging with women and others in the Muslim community.

Thus, the multiculturalist PCUSA elite are working to make sure that no mother or father in Morton Grove, Lombard or anywhere else in the United States has the civilizational confidence to preserve for their daughters the blessings of equality achieved in Western Civilization.

This is just one issue among many.  I could have written similarly about gay rights, religious rights, free speech, etcetera.  So, make no mistake, if you ever align yourself with this group’s actions or rhetoric, you are participating in their purposeful destruction of Western Civilization.

Loving All Our Neighbors (Part 6)

Who are Our Neighbors?Reltavism

It is striking that, even after the 9/11, Fort Hood and Boston Marathon attacks (among others), hate crimes against Muslims in the United States are at lower levels than are those against Jews. We must be concerned about increased persecution of all peoples, as has occurred to our Muslim neighbors after September 11, 2001. However, the hate crime data speaks better of the tolerance and good will of the vast majority of Americans towards Muslims, including those living in Morton Grove and Lombard, than the ISN  is assuming.

My concern is that it doesn’t appear to be showing Christian charity to neighbors by assuming the worst about them without clear, compelling evidence. I do not find information even remotely approaching this standard in the Our Common Ministry, Chicago Tribune and other articles.

When Jesus told the parable of the Good Samaritan, was he teaching that our “far off” neighbors are of greater value / concern as compared to those “near by?” Or, was he teaching that our neighbor extends to those “far off” to the same extent as those “near by?” In my view it is clearly the latter. My concern is that the ISN may be behaving as if it is the former.

I have become concerned that, in their desire to befriend and support our Muslim neighbors the ISN has lost perspective regarding their non-Muslim neighbors. In particular, they have demonstrated a troubling presumption with regard to the beliefs and potential actions of non-Muslim Americans.

I can’t help wondering what unfair actions taken by churches in the Presbytery of Chicago do to harm our ability to spread the Gospel. When we accuse whole communities of “hate” and “violence,” based on the “fears” of our members, my guess is that many will simply close their ears to the Presbyterian Church (USA).

It would be comforting if the above discussion completely explained this behavior.  For many Christians involved in these incidents that is the case.  However, for those who set the strategy and tactics, I believe that something far more troubling and destructive is at work.

Loving All Our Neighbors (Part 5)

LombargIL

The Lombard, IL IncidentReltavism

The Lombard incident is described in the OCM article as follows (emphasis added).

Screen Shot 2015-10-28 at 5.25.12 AMOn August 12, The College Preparatory School of America (CPSA), a fulltime Muslim school in Lombard, had a bottle full of acid thrown at the school during Ramadan Prayers. The following Saturday, ISN members, plus members from two United Church of Christ churches, visited the school to express support and concern. They met with the teachers, then greeted parents as they arrived for school orientation, holding signs that said, “We are concerned,” “Hate has no place in Lombard,” and “Our hearts are with you.” One of our Presbyterian pastors spoke to the assembled group, saying “You are not alone” and presented a prayer shawl to the principal.

Note that the culprit has not been identified. Thus, we have no information about the perpetrator or the motive.

The Daily Herald published an article on August 14, 2012 that described the incident and interviewed numerous individuals. Of particular relevance are statements made by Mohammed Saeed and Imaad Shaikh, both board members of the school. Their statements from this article are excerpted below.

Saeed said the Lombard school opened about 22 years ago and has never before come under physical attack, other than instances of minor vandalism. About 400 students attend the school, which is used for prayer services and other activities during summer break.

Shaikh said the school has a good relationship with its neighbors and is looking to expand because of increasing enrollment.

And yet, in spite of these statements from the school’s board members the OCM article describes protestors:

… holding signs that said … “Hate has no place in Lombard.”

So, when the PoC participated in actions against “hate” and “violence” in Lombard, whom were they speaking against? Were I a passerby or resident, I might reasonably conclude that these pejorative labels were being applied to the community in general.

As of this writing, the perpetrator(s) of this incident remains unidentified. Thus, since the identify and motivation of those responsible were and continue to be unknown, the Presbytery of Chicago’s tying of the word “hate” to the Village of Lombard is both unjustified and irresponsible.

What possible rational purpose could a Christian organization have to so cruelly slander an entire community?