The Presbyterian Coalition has issued the following response to the Special Committee's Report and Covenant to which I responded in my last blog. I have posted the response in its entirety (with permission) as an example of how we ought to be thinking about these issues from a mature Christian faith perspective...

Special Committee Must Not Evade Biblical Decisions on Marriage:
An open letter by the Presbyterian Coalition
“[W]e do not allow all possible interpretations (2 Peter 1:20).”
Book of Confessions, The Second Helvetic Confession, 5.010

Members of the Special Committee on Marriage and Civil Unions disagree on how to interpret Scripture. Thus, their recently released report draws its conclusions based primarily on that failure to agree. And because of that fundamental failure, the committee’s weakened conclusions fail to adequately serve the Church, members of the Church, the world at large, and God’s truth itself, as revealed in Scripture.

A primary obligation of any committee preparing to offer authoritative Christian leadership on a matter of theological and moral importance is to the integrity of the message of Scripture. God has lovingly instructed us through the Word, and our obligation is to heed that clear instruction above all else. In addition, each minister and elder on such a committee has taken a vow to “receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith as expressed in the confessions of our church as authentic and reliable expositions of what Scripture leads us to believe and do, and … [to] be instructed and led by those confessions as [they] lead the people of God.” (BOO, W-4.4003c)

Further, it was the express responsibility of this special committee to come to terms with our scriptural understandings of marriage. Precisely because the General Assembly appeared at a loss to make such a decision, it gave the special committee the salutary task of providing clear and decisive recommendations. Thus, the special committee was constituted and funded precisely to come to a difficult decision, not to waver in indecision.

For these reasons, the committee report, as it now stands, fails the church. It draws no solid conclusions. It makes only the feeblest attempt to speak from a scriptural or confessional basis. It reduces a matter of faith and moral practice on which both Scripture and our confessions have spoken clearly to a level of human social consensus, the mere seeking of peaceful co-existence among parties with differing views. In doing so, the committee errs by giving novel, unbiblical, unproved viewpoints equal weight with the settled, biblical, enduring moral practice of the Church.

The biblical and historical witness of the Church throughout history and around the world is clear and unequivocal. It is expressed in the Creation mandate of Genesis 1:27 and 2:24, which was used as the foundation for Jesus’ instruction on marital monogamy and permanence in Matthew 19:4-6 (= Mark 10:6-9): In response he said, “Haven’t you read that the Creator from the beginning made them male and female [Gen 1:27]? And he said, “Because of this a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh [Gen 2:24]. So they are no longer two but one flesh. What then God yoked together, let no person separate.”

Jesus did not merely affirm Genesis 1:27 and 2:24. Rather, he based his limitation of two persons to a valid sexual relationship on the twoness of the sexes. In Romans 1:23-27, Paul intentionally echoed Gen 1:26-27 in rejecting homosexual practice because it was a violation of the male-female prerequisite for sexual relations ordained by the Creator at creation, not because of how well or how badly it was done in his cultural milieu.

Scripture and our confessions alike condemn same-sex sexual relationships and indeed any sexual relationship outside the bond of marriage sinful relationships and behaviors that God seeks to redeem and transform, not accommodate.

We urge the Special Committee on Marriage and Civil Unions to come to terms with the biblical and confessional teachings and to bring to the General Assembly of 2010 a clear, compelling report and recommendations that reflect a profoundly biblical and confessional understanding of marriage. An inchoate and unclear consensus statement that struggles but fails to join irreconcilable opposites would not serve the Church.

We further urge this committee to help the church reach out in ministry to all of us who are in need of the transformation of the Gospel in the expression of our sexuality, that that sexual expression may conform to the Word and the will of God. “The one sufficient revelation of God is Jesus Christ, the Word of God incarnate, to whom the Holy Spirit bears unique and authoritative witness through the Holy Scriptures, which are received and obeyed as the word of God written.” Book of Confessions, The Confession of 1967, 9.26

link to original site

I finally got the news that my computer was ready to be picked up and made the trip to Williamsport to do so. Took a while (as everything seems to with the Geek Squad at Best Buy) but I have finally returned home and find a great opportunity to spout off again with some more rantings...

The Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage has submitted the draft of their preliminary report and one is left with a major "Huh?" While the report seems to meet the mandates given the committee by the General Assembly, as I read it I was struck by the glaring omissions, twisted interpretations, and strange assumptions made throughout the document.

1. The paper as a whole seems to base it thoughts and conclusions on misinterpretations of scripture and our confessions. It is therefore, at its core, misguided. Take for instance the statement that the "Old Testament assumes a Semitic understanding of the institution of marriage". This very comment betrays the secular anthropological approach to scripture which seems to have pervaded the committee members' thinking. People of faith have confessed scripture (both OT and NT) to be the word of God for centuries. A more appropriate and confessionally accurate comment would have been that the "Old Testament reveals God's understanding of the institution of marriage to be between a man and a woman..."

2. So too the committee seems to take its stand based more on the social reality in which we live, (and with which the church has wrestled, and to which the church should speak) than on the word of God. The unstated assumption apparently being that if something is happening in culture it must be God moving through culture (God is doing a new thing amongst us mentality); that the social reality in which we live is the basis for our knowledge of God rather than the Word of God revealed to us through the word of God.

3. The other tension is the twisted form of inferred logic contained in such statements as:

We agree that God alone is the source of all blessings. By the grace of God and through the power of God's Spirit, individuals and congregations are able to bless God, receive God's blessings, and praise God's glory. Contrary to popular piety, neither a minister nor the church blesses a person or relationship. When ministers conduct services of blessing, they bear witness to the blessing of God on that couple and testify publicly to that blessing in the congregation of believers.

Note especially the use of the "services of blessing" wording inferring that the services of blessing currently being done with same gender unions are bearing witness to God's blessing of that couple. I argue that such is not, cannot be the case. God cannot bless that which he clearly declares to be sin. Unless , of course, our understanding of God comes to us pantheistically and narcissistically rather than biblically.
Yet one more twist in this document is the covenant which the G.A. is ask to approve implying that they act on behalf of all members of the PC(USA) in stating:

We acknowledge and confess that the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) displays Calvin's marks of the true Church (the gospel is rightly preached and heard, and the sacraments are rightly administered). Christ has chosen each one of us here as has called us to this place. Those whom Christ has joined together, let no one separate.

By the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, with the love of God, and in the communion of the Holy Spirit we covenant together:

to honor the truth that Christ has called and God works through each member;

to listen to one another with openness and respect;

to support and pray for each other and for one another's minsitries;

to earnestly seek and carefully listen to each person's discernment of God's will found in the scriptures;

to struggle together with perseverance to find God's will for us even when the way is difficult;

to love one another even when we disagree, and to commit ourselves to the reconciliation of any broken relationships we have with one another;

to honor who we are as Presbyterians by respecting the fallible discernment of the body bearing in mind that individual conscience cannot be bound.

Now right out of the gate we are binding ourselves to the statement that the PC(USA) bears only two of Calvin's three marks of the true church without even a mention of the third mark - to wit discipline is rightly administered... Wow! What a confession - that while claiming we are a part of the true church we deny it by ignoring one of the very marks which define the true church - right discipline - and isn't that the very core of this issue, the lack of proper church discipline on the persons, congregations and judicatory bodies who are so clearly acting outside of the bounds of reasonable Christian faith?

The first bullet point then claims as truth that Christ has called and God works through every member of the PC(USA). I'm sure I don't agree with that. I think we have a huge number of members who have made the decision, on their own, to "join a church" rather than respond to the call to faith which leads to affiliation with a congregation.

But the stranger bullet point is the last one which commits us: ">to honor who we are as Presbyterians by respecting the fallible discernment of the body bearing in mind that individual conscience cannot be bound. This seems to be an upfront admission and apology to any who on either side of the issue might take offense. But to make a covenant which concludes by saying you don't have to agree and this might be a mistake is very strange... Not to mention that the very act of binding our consciences to this document contradicts the intention of the Book of Order provision which is quoted. Had the entire quote been used here we would have understood the paradox - that God has freed us from binding our consciences to anything which is contrary to his word or beside it in matters of faith and worship. Hence we are not bound to any such statement or position which is contrary to his word.

So General Assembly, be ye warned that this document is indeed flawed, fallible, and inappropriate. We cannot bind what God has left free, and that is our conscience when it is properly guided and informed by his word...

Carmen Fowler, President of the Presbyterian Lay Committee has recently written about her experiences in Africa, particularly Malawi. Inasmuch as Malawi was the first country I visited on the continent, I was immediately smitten by the people and the culture. But, like Carmen, I was surprised at the way I found myself examining my own assumptions. It brough back such great memories and makes such good points, that I have asked (and received) permission from her to reprint it in its entirety. Enjoy!

More is available at: http://www.layman.org/Carmensblog.aspx

Report Out of Africa, Part 6: Seeing myself through other eyes

Carmen Fowler

8/18/2009 8:52:47 AM

“Identity” is a profoundly theological and deeply personal issue. As a culture, we have been engaged in a conversation about “identity politics” surrounding the seating of the newest Supreme Court Justice. As a denomination, we have long been engaged over the issue of how one’s sexuality influences one’s sense of personal identity. Alongside that conversation, we have been in a debate about the nature of ordination and the identity of those who are ordained. Much of the runoff from these conversations has been nothing short of toxic to our common life.

Identity matters. But it is time to elevate the conversation from “the way I see it” and seek to see it the way God sees it. Again, it is a matter of perspective and new perspectives are gained when we begin to see ourselves through other eyes.

There is an expectation in the African church that those who hold ordained office in the Church of Jesus Christ dress to reflect that reality. That means that you wear a clerical collar and a suit. So, in preparation for my time in Malawi, I ordered two clerical shirts. I laughed at myself in the mirror the first time I put them on. My friends laughed the first time they saw me in what felt at first like a costume. But all of these were American eyes. Through African eyes the view was profoundly different.

People saw me differently because of the way I was dressed. The Church is held in high esteem and pastors are revered. Honor is paid to those who have committed themselves to serving God by serving the Church. To my colleagues in ministry, I was finally appropriately dressed. To the common person on the street, I was an authority, a witness, someone to be acknowledged, greeting with favor, and appreciated. To the congregation at Kaning’a, I was to be respected as a teacher of the Word.

And then there was the little girl in the bathroom at Steer’s. Steer’s is a pizza place in a strip mall at Crossings in Lilongwe. Kelvin Kalonga and I had returned from our meetings at the Nkhoma Synod offices and were sharing a late lunch. I was washing my hands in the restroom when a little girl entered the bathroom. She was transfixed. She literally could not take her eyes off me. She looked from my face to my collar to my hands in the sink. She smiled expectantly. I was clearly supposed to do something but knew not what. I returned her smile and said hello. She giggled and said simply, “Bless me.”

I laid my hand on her bowed head and said, “God bless you, child of God.” I instinctively made the sign of the cross on her forehead and when she looked up, she was literally beaming. She had “received” what God was offering. She understood herself to be His child and she believed that in that moment she had received His blessing – through these hands.

These hands that have taken in life more than they have given. These hands that have surely been too idle when it comes to reaching up and reaching out. These hands that have not been folded often enough in prayer nor opened often enough in service. These hands …

Through the eyes of a little Malawian girl, whose name I do not know, I began to see myself differently. I looked up into the smeared and cracked bathroom mirror and I saw what she saw, the collar. Certainly she had seen the warmth of my smile and heard the joy in my voice when I greeted her. But what she responded to was the collar. There was no question in her mind that I was an ambassador of Jesus Christ, an agent of grace, a minister of reconciliation.

She got me thinking: what effect might wearing the collar at home have on people’s perception and response to me? Maybe even a more profound question, what effect might wearing the collar at home have on my perception of myself? Identity.

I know that I belong to Christ. I commit myself every day to the spirit of Galatians 2:20, “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who lives, but Christ who lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.” And yet, I have to admit that although it defies logic, putting on a clerical collar and wearing it throughout the day actually does make a difference in how I perceive my identity. It provides a physical reminder that I am a witness, what I say and what I do is actively revealing Christ to others.

I walked out of the bathroom with an acute sense of weightiness and when I turned the corner I nearly ran into a traditionally dressed Muslim family. The man, who was walking ahead of the son, followed by the mother and girls in full black burkas, “condemned me” with his eyes. I do not know how else to describe it. If looks could kill, well, I’d be dead. I am fairly confident that was his intent. Not because I was white, not because I was American, not because I was a woman, but because I was wearing what I was wearing, representing the Christ in whom he did not believe.

It was five minutes that I hope never to forget – seeing myself through other eyes.

If you are a Christian then you are witness. It’s not an option. Jesus says very clearly to his disciples just prior to his ascension, “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). According to Jesus, as his disciple, the Holy Spirit is on you powerfully and you are, right now and in every moment of every day, bearing witness in the world. That is our primary identity – in Christ, with Christ and for Christ.

There is no federal witness protection program in which Christians get to hide their testimony and live incognito in the midst of the world. You are a witness. Jesus says so. The question is what kind of witness are you?

When you line up the testimony of your thoughts to the mind of Christ, how reliable is your witness to Him?

When you weigh the testimony of your words to the Word of God, how trustworthy is your witness?

When you compare the content of your character to the character of Christ, how well conformed is your witness to Him?

When you honestly evaluate whether or not you speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God, how does your testimony measure up to the One who is the Way and the Truth and the Life?

We are witnesses to Christ and for Christ in the midst of the world that he lived to love and died to redeem. What are others seeing of Christ when they look at us? What are others hearing of Christ when they listen to us? What is the perception that others are forming of Christ when they encounter our witness?

I admit that since returning to the States, I have not worn the clerical collar again. But I am more aware of what I “put on” every morning before I walk out into the world as Christ’s witness. I commend this exercise to you …

Ephesians 4:17-32 Put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.

Colossians 3:3-14 Put on Christ;

put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator;

as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience;

and over all these virtues, put on love, which binds everything together in perfect unity.

Ephesians 6:11-18 Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand …

Romans 13:11-14 Put on the armor of light;

clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ.

I Peter 5:5 All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another.

I was reading, in Scott Sunquist's and Caroline Becker's: A History of Presbyterian Missions: 1944-2007, about the Presbyterian Order for World Evangelization. One of its two main foci is:

"the cultivation of a 'wartime lifestyle' by which individuals reduce their living costs and free up funds for the priority of world evangelization." (p. 121)

It hit me hard... It really was an epiphany... but it wasn't the "wartime lifestyle" or the "reduced living costs to free up funds". These were all matters of my heart already. What hit me like a ton of bricks was the fact that for WWI and WWII the entire nation got behind a cause and moved, sacrificially and enthusiastically.

When, O when, will the Church of Jesus Christ do likewise? When will our congregations stand up to be counted and say Jesus Christ matters - so much so that I am going to adopt a "wartime lifestyle" because we battle for the hearts, minds, and souls of people whom the Lord desperately wants to live with Him eternally, and I'm committing my every last dollar to that cause, not for a concert, not for an ice cream cone, not for a new car or a special educational event to enrich my life...

I wonder when the church will receive the new clothing for their rummage sale and the family retain the old, or a donation will be made to the church equal to the cost of a new car while the old car is kept for another five years, or when the extra house or land or inheritance will be brought and laid at the foot of the apostles so that each might receive in accordance with their needs... for the most just and noble case of Christ. When will the church of Jesus Christ develop a wartime lifestyle?

I remember hearing my parents talk about how hard it was growing up in the midst of the depression, which followed WWI and which was followed, in turn by WWII. I heard from my grandparents and parents about rationing, sacrificial giving, neighborhood collections, and an unprecedented level of support for our country's military. I'm certain that some of it was both generational and experientially conditioned. But it was felt. It was experienced. It was seen as an absolute necessity.

Do we see the church in the same light? Do we fight for the souls of those under the sway of anthroposophy, or wicca, or new age philosophies which mimic biblical gnosticism so closely? Or even agnosticism? Is the local congregation so necessary to the lives of its members that people see a "Sunday off" as a problem? Where is the passion? Where is the commitment? How and when will the church truly become the priority for people? I suppose it is when we realize that we really are engaged in the longest running battle in history.

Have you ever heard of someone's grandmother, or sister, or father going to hell? Have you noticed how everyone that seems to die is in a "much better place?" Really? Do we think this way in order to avoid the consequences of understanding that God does judge us and that we are not universalists? It seems that we have become so enamored of comfort and niceties that we dare not suggest someone could be wrong. We have so compromised the Christian faith on the alter of sociological or psychological altruisms that we have lost our passions.

This extends, certainly even to our view of war. Afghanistan seems to be wrong (at least to those who haven't had to deal with the daily life of the average Afghan. Iraq seems to be a problem for those who haven't had to endure the lack of freedoms the average Iraqi endured and continues to endure. Or even worse, we are unable to identify with our Christian brothers and sisters in those countries for fear of appearing to be anti-American. (Interestingly enough, one of the largest evangelical churches in the middle east used to be on a corner in dowtown Baghdad.) We're a culture that has fallen in love with ideas rather than reality. And the church of Jesus Christ has suffered greatly.

But rest assured passions are alive in the hearts, minds, and souls of Korean, Nigerian, Burmese, and Sudanese Christians alike. Those who have lived in these worlds from which we are so insulated are arising and taking charge. In fact the heart and soul of the Christian church no longer resides in the west at all. It is a dying presence here. And a living vibrant reality there.

In Asia and Africa the faith is thriving. And Asians and Africans are moving out in droves. And their march is militantly missionary. Take the photo at the right from the Outreach Foundation of the Presbyterain Church (USA)'s report that the Presbyterian Church of East Africa is growing at the rate of approximately 300,000 members per year. (Last year the PC(USA) lost over 48,000 members...) They, who are used to living without or giving up so much, are ready to sacrifice everything else for the sake of the gospel. Now to be sure there are charlatans there, just as there are here, in education, in medicine, in ministry, in law and in virtually every walk of life. But there are also sincere people of God who are living on less so that they can give more to the cause. They are maintaining a "wartime lifestyle" because they perceive the realities of the day not for America or for any other country, but for the Kingdom of God. And that is where the church is growing in unprecedented ways. Thanks be to God for raising up those who are ready to sacrifice everything for the Kingdom of God. Wanna join 'em? They're coming...

Shameless Hustling

How 'bout this million dollar view?

Communing with nature on a no motors lake? Fishing for pike and walleye? Loons in the mist? It can all be yours for a shamefully low price of just $149,000. We need to sell.

My parents poured a lot of love and thirty years into establishing what was intended to be their retirement home. Both died early from differing forms of cancer while we were in the mission field. My sisters and I are unable to justify the expense of keeping it up and so it's up for sale. Check out the pics...









Great views overlooking a privately owned lake (Property Owners Association membership included)
















Recently built (1997), LP heat and wood stove, well, and septic field...
















Fully furnished, furniture, sheets, towels, pillows cookware, tableware, all appliances...





































































A great swimming lake and we'll include...a canoe, a paddle boat, fishing equipment...



















mower, trimmer, blower. 200 amp electric service, a two car garage... Everything. Move in ready.






Surrounded by Lake Superior State Forest adjacent to Hiawatha National Forest in the Land of Longfellow's Hiawatha. Just 20 minutes north of Manistique, Michigan, get this, on White Tail Lane.

For more information and pictures check out: http://www.groverrealestate.com/details.php?number=8281 and dream of a cool summer's evening on a quiet lake in the north

And the Annoying Award goes to…
Northumberland Presbytery!!!

Let me just say what an honor it is to receive this award! Seriously. Apparently Northumberland Presbytery is considered by some as annoying because of its habit of sticking to Biblical principles with regard to the ordination of Deacons, Elders, and Pastors.

Just when I thought it was over, the Layman has come out with an article reflecting on articles written by those who seek to overturn the Biblical standard and establish a sub-cultural standard on this issue see link (http://www.layman.org/news.aspx?article=26112).

On the blog “http://yeson08b.blogspot.com” a recap of the voting is regurgitated, again trying to get some sort of special spin on the defeat… The language used is clearly change oriented with Presbyteries being targeted as “target flips”, “bonus flips” and “unexpected flips”. The language goes further to announce the votes as “pro-equality” (i.e. those who would have us ordain GLBTQ persons – Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual, Transgendered, and Queer) and “anti-equality” (i.e. those who would oppose such).

Here is one week’s segment:

“…SUMMARY FOR THE WEEK:

Yes votes: 5
No votes: 5
No-to-yes flips: 3 out of a target 3 (plus Mackinac as a 4th bonus flip)
Previous "yes" presbyteries held at "yes": 1

Presbyteries shifting pro-equality: 8
Presbyteries shifting anti-equality 2

Nasty surprises: 0
Amazingly positive surprises (unexpected flips): 1 (Mackinac)
Annoyances: 2 (Grand Canyon, Northumberland)

…ANNOYING:
Northumberland
2001-2 01-A: 28 yes, 51 no --> 35.4% YES
2009 08-B: 20 yes, 58 no --> 25.6% YES (-9.8%)

Northumberland wasn't likely to shift from "no" to "yes", and it didn't, but it makes the "annoying" category this week due to its nearly 10% anti-equality vote shift. Given the small turnout numbers, percentage swings like this can be common. However in general, most of the presbyteries that started at 30%-or-higher levels of support have increased their support for equality, so it's annoying to see the shift down to under 30% this year.”

Anti-equality is the label… Interesting. How ‘bout Biblical. It isn’t about equality. It’s about obedience. It isn’t even about what the people of the denomination want although they continue to speak very clearly: (54-65%) of members of the PC(USA) are opposed to the ordination of GLBTQ persons (according to a Presbyterian Panel summary of 2008 views of members ordained persons). That percentage varies from the low of 54% as regards the ordination of Deacons to 55% for Elders and 65% for Pastors. The percentages change a bit amongst members who are ordained as Elders or Pastors but not significantly. The biggest variation is between Elders who oppose the ordination by 59% (for Deacons) 60% (for Elders) and 70% (for Pastoral Ordination of GLBTQ persons) and the Pastors who responded to the survey where opposition to ordination of GLBTQ persons as Deacons is 52%, as Elders 53%, and as Pastors 56%.

The real wildcard in all of this is amongst Specialized Clergy (ordained pastors in Hospital, Military, and other Chaplain roles as well as other ministries (like “That All May Freely Serve”). The support for the ordination of GLBTQ persons is strongest here where 68% of Specialized Clergy support ordination of GLBTQ persons as Deacons, 67% support ordination of GLBTQ persons as Elders, and 64% as Clergy.

Annoying, yes we are apart of the annoying segment of the church. I wear that l label proudly. Let’s even be more annoying and love our brothers and sisters into obedience to God’s plan for their lives. But if their ears listen but do not hear and their eyes see but do not discern, so be it.

The Presbyterian Church (USA) has a wonderful department of Research Services which puts together The Presbyterian Panel. The following description is taken directly from their Summary:

"The Presbyterian Panel consists of three nationally representative samples of groups affiliated with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.): members, elders (lay leaders), and ordained ministers. For most analyses, ministers are split into two groups based on current call: pastors, serving congregations, and specialized clergy, serving elsewhere. New samples are drawn every three years. These pages summarize major findings from the initial survey completed by the 2009-2011 Panel, sampled in the fall of 2008."

I had the honor of serving two consecutive three year terms on the Panel in the 80's and 90's and have long enjoyed the material produced. It shows a much more accurate picture of the PC(USA) than we often hear about in the news, for instance:

• Most laity consider themselves theologically “very conservative” or “conservative” (members, 34%; elders, 42%) or “moderate” (41%; 36%); only about a quarter choose the labels “very liberal” or “liberal” (24%; 22%).

or:

• More pastors consider themselves theologically“moderate” (37%) than “very conservative” or“conservative” (31%) or “very liberal” or “liberal”(31%), while among specialized clergy, the corresponding numbers are 28%, 18%, and 53%.

There are a host of other fascinating figures at the following site. One interesting one pertaining to the congregation I currently serve (which is in the middle of their annual Stewardship Campaign - fiscal year July to June) has to do with giving patterns:

• At least seven in ten members (73%) and elders (83%) report that they or another household member made a financial pledge to their congregation for 2008. Median “regular giving” to congregations in 2007 by Panel households is: members, $1,920; elders, $2,600; pastors, $4,800; specialized clergy, $3,000.

There is also a related section on income levels:

• Median annual family income in 2007 was $81,904 for members, $84,856 for elders, $76,869 for pastors, and $88,510 for specialized clergy.

• Few panelists have annual family incomes of less than $20,000 (members, 6%; elders, 3%; pastors, 1%; specialized clergy, 2%), while many have incomes of $100,000 or more (38%; 40%; 26%; 39%).

There is much more available and data is currently being updated. I'd recommend the site to anyone who wants a more accurate glimpse at the nature of the PC(USA) than what we frequently "hear tell". The most recent publishing on these and other matters is available at:

http://www.pcusa.org/research/panel/summaries/08fall-summary.pdf

There is also a review of findings on a study conducted for the Board of Pensions reviewing Pastors:

• This report presents findings from a survey sent to 1,000 pastors in Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) congregations. A total of 725 pastors responded, for a response rate of 73%.

You'll find that one here:

http://www.pcusa.org/research/downloads/bopfindings2008.pdf

For more findings just visit and visit and visit:

http://www.pcusa.org/research/

Happy reading!!!