Issue by Issue, Part 1

Belhar Confession and Heidelberg Catechism
Israel/Palestine, and with it denouncing/divesting Caterpillar
NFOG
Definition of Marriage
Benefits for same-sex partners
Ordination once again
Spain or The Netherlands
Denouncing Justin Beiber

These were the issues that featured the most debate in plenary. Of course nearly all of the issues were essentially about the ordination issue in some way, as was most everything at the General Assembly. From the rainbow scarves to poorly-designed slogan-laden t-shirts, to the painfully obvious “inclusive” prayers, we were reminded at every turn about the issue drove this and every other assembly for the past 30 years or so, namely, should we convert to the metric system?

If you have followed the General Assembly at all this year then you really need to find a less painful hobby, like self-tatooing or bull riding. But if you did follow it, you already know the issues and the results and the implications, so I’ll skip the review and just try to give a little personal spin on what I observed as we “worked together, unified in our diversity and also as a global community and also we are diverse. But unified.”

Confessions
As I’ve stated before, this is the committee of which I was a lucky enough to be a part. Just like I was lucky enough to be a part of Hurricane Ike. We had some whopper items up for discussion. The first was whether to continue re-translating The Heidelberg Catechism.

The Heidelberg Catechism is a series of questions used for teaching reformed doctrine, or possibly the history of the Bavarian sausage industry. The publishers, however, made the mistake of actually printing the answers RIGHT BENEATH THE QUESTION. And they couldn’t re-print, because it was the 16th Century and all Xeroxing had to be done by hand. This led to many people passing their reformed doctrine tests without really studying. This went on for centuries, leading to our present crisis in the Presbyterian Church--that no one knows the difference between knockwurst and bratwurst.

Things were going great for Heidelberg until someone reading the original 16th Century text and comparing it to the 20th Century translation noticed that there were a few errors. What that person failed to notice was that he was missing out on things that normal humans do, like watching SportsCenter, eating Cheetos, or having a date.

Even so, the last General Assembly decided that he was right and assigned a committee to figure out what other mistakes may have been made. Soon they found there were a lot of mistakes. For example, Question 7 asks “Where does this corrupt nature come from?” The current answer is “Bayonne, New Jersey.” This will likely be changed by the committee to the correct answer, which is of course “3.14159265.”

As an added bonus, the committee found that the translation in question 87 for “homosexual perversion” was wrong, too. It was originally more vague, and the committee would like to replace the phrase with “unchaste persons," living up to our motto: “Presbyterians—moving from specificity to vagueness for 500 years.”

Part of the discussion in committee concerned the difficulties to be overcome in order to do this type of work. The German language, like English, has changed through the years. Words like “transgendered,” “Jello,” and “Tiger Woods” didn’t exist in the 16th century. So the process was to translate the 16th Century German to 21st Century German, then to 21st Century English. Or at least English with a thick German accent, like in old World War II movies (“Vat does Gott's law require uf us? Schnell! Schnell!")

Another part of this issue is that the Catechism as it is published in our Book of Confessions has no scripture references as it does when published in other places. When asked if those references would be a part of the new translation, the committee members essentially said that it would be difficult since there were several Bible translations used at the time of its writing in 1563, both German and Latin, and that verse numbers were not used back then, and also, the committee was going to go get a haircut and maybe take a day to clean out the garage, so adding verses was a big step.

So we see that it is difficult to translate 16th Century German in to 21st Century English. And it is difficult to translate 16th Century Bible verses into 21st Century English. The committee has chosen to concentrate on the Catechism. The logical conclusion then is that it is more essential to re-translate the text of the Catechism than to discern the correct supporting scripture. When currently published with scriptural references, question 87 references I Corinthians 6:9-10. As always, there is no need to bring scripture into the discussion—it only makes it harder to pass an agenda.

The next confession we encountered was the Confession of Jimmy T. Gumbury, which was essentially an admission that yes, he did steal Myrna Flockner’s giant fruit-scented eraser in 4th grade homeroom and he was very sorry but he did it in order to get Myrna’s attention because he really liked her. It didn’t quite have the depth of some of the other confessions and was tabled until GA 220.

The Confession of Belhar, on the other hand is a little-known confession from the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa that was born out of the fight against apartheid and was also a “hidden track” on Paul Simon’s seminal “Graceland” CD. It is a document focusing on unity and reconciliation, thus making it extremely popular in some Presbyterian circles, including some that have actually read the text.

I read the text in preparation for GA and I honestly had no trouble with it at all, Mostly because there weren’t any really big words. It is an inspirational statement against heinous injustice. And that is part of my trouble with it.

This process of reviewing Belhar was the longest in our committee and we took the time seriously, stopping only to stretch, go to the restroom, get a drink of water and play in the giant inflatable jumpers provided by the local organizers. The one shaped like a dragon was by far the favorite.

Speaking against the majority in a small group is something I like just slightly better than slamming my hand in a car door. But there were things which I felt like I had to speak about, the major thing being the elder with a little bit of taco sauce on her chin which she wouldn’t wipe it off.

Briefly:
-Some argued against Belhar as not being Christocentric. Which was immediately construed by supporters who said things like “But Jesus is mentioned all though it,” not picking up the second half of the word “-centric.” Belhar simply isn’t about faith in Jesus Christ. Which, to me, is what a confession is supposed to be about. I believe that Ben and Jerry’s Cookie Dough Ice Cream is superior to Chunky Monkey, that Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, and that as soon as my wife and I save any amount of money a major appliance will break. But they are not the basis of my faith. To me, the only truly confessional parts of Belhar seem to be #1 and #5 and maybe #2. The remainder are statements of belief in unity and reconciliation, but not statements of faith, unless it is faith in a unified church.

-A desire to seek unity is stated in other confessions pretty straightforwardly, so why do we need an entire document? If you said what you wanted to previously, why restate it? This is why we are subjected to “Police Academy 2”, “Police Academy 3”, and so many “High School Musicals.”

-My pet peeve pro-Belhar argument is that there is no confession in our constitution from the Southern Hemisphere. If a confession is brought forth from our Korean brethren, will we immediately adopt it, because we have no Asian confessions? Do we include one from Marshall Islanders, and if so, will we also need to include those from the Solomon Islands? What about Lapland? Nunavut? Tatooine?

One minister commissioner during the hearing stage stated that he uses Belhar in his services because his congregation includes several Africans and they appreciated it. Adopting a confession because it makes people feel better about themselves seems insulting. If Africans or Koreans or emo kids or bad dancers or anyone else is unable to feel included without a special Confession to call their own, you have some serious problems—and it isn’t the Book of Confessions.

-Our church staff was blessed to have been visited recently by brothers and sisters from a sister church in Kenya for a few weeks. I may have learned more about faith and standing firm on the Word of God, and felt a better sense of unity by simply conversing with them for a few afternoons than by any confession I have read. If they could capture their deep, deep faith in their own confession at some point, I feel certain it would be a document worth holding up. Also, if they could be in charge of the energizers rather than the YADDs, that would help immensely.

-No one has read Belhar. Just this week at our Presbytery meeting, no one raised their hand when asked if they had read the Confession. Also, no one raised their hand when asked if they read Dan Brown’s last book, which was not surprising either. Is there a great cry to include this? I don’t hear it, but I often have my iPod on too loud. Also, no one can answer the question of whether “Belhar” is a person or a town or perhaps a small country or principality.

-Finally, it WILL be used for issues. The special committee stated that was not their intent, but the first person lined up at the hearing urged us to pass it to give her a tool to use in her homosexulist struggle. I brought this up, and the argument came back that we can’t NOT send it based on the fear that it may be misused and that we have to stand firm about things we believe in, like unity.

Later today I will let my kids stick a pen knife in an electrical socket because I can’t live in fear that electricity will be misused. Simply because it can be and will be used in that way, it doesn’t deserve to be called a confession, as confessions should be used to show one thing—our faith in Christ. And perhaps which Rolling Stones album is best.

More ponderings to come when there isn't something good on TV.