Layman Watch

Layman Watch

Layman reports minister’s “grassroots response” to withhold money from denomination [7-26-08]

Like, this is a new and creative idea?? Shouldn't the Layman claim some credit for pushing this for years?

Confession is good for the soul

... even in journalism

We live in the journalistic Reign of Error. Scribes great and small regularly goof on radio and TV and in print.

Bill Moyers and Parker T. Williamson, a pair of preacher-pundits, come to mind. Moyers ‘fessed up to his foul-up. Williamson didn't.

The two are not soulmates, theologically or politically. Moyers is a well-known liberal TV journalist. He was an ordained Southern Baptist pastor. Williamson, a Presbyterian minister, is CEO of the conservative Presbyterian Lay Committee. He is also editor-in-chief of the organization's publications. Moyers grabbed headlines after he gave a speech in which he repeated a quote often attributed to James Watt, Ronald Reagan’s loopy interior secretary.

Moyers quoted Watt’s purported prediction that "after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back." Watt was famous for nutty comments, just not the fool’s gold Moyers mined. Watt wrote a letter-to-the-editor of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, protesting that he said nothing about tumbling timber and the Second Coming. Moyers rechecked his source and found the quote was bogus. He apologized in a letter-to-the-editor to the Star-Tribune. Moyers also told Editor & Publisher that he telephoned Watt and faxed him a letter of regret.

The Witherspoon Society posted [a link to] the text of Moyers' speech on Witherspoon on the Web, the group's Internet site. "We regret our minor role in perpetuating what is apparently a long-standing distortion of Mr. Watt's views," wrote Doug King, webmaster. At the same time, King suggested that "given the Layman's refusal to retract what it said about Mark Achtemeier, Moyers' response makes an interesting contrast." Read this posting >>

King meant Williamson's controversial Layman Online article, which is still stirring the blood of Presbyterian cognoscenti. "The Rev. Dr. Mark Achtemeier, associate professor of systematic theology at the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary and a member of the General Assembly Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity (PUP), told a seminary class...that his position on homosexuality represents a 'departure from the Biblical tradition,' ” Williamson wrote.
More about the Layman article and debate >>

The Layfolk aren’t exactly gay-friendly. Evidently, Williamson took Achtemeier for a kindred spirit before his students outed him. Some people, Williamson wrote, had viewed Achtemeier as “an evangelical voice on the task force.”

Williamson didn't quote Achtemeier. His sources were “students who were in the classroom.” He didn’t name them. Williamson, playing the role of objective reporter, explained that "The Layman Online made numerous attempts ... to contact Achtemeier for clarification of his comments, but he did not return telephone calls."

In a PresbyWeb reply, Achtemeier dissed Williamson's story as "categorically false" and "grounded in distorted, hearsay reports." He demanded "that the editors of the Layman retract the article and issue a printed public apology." Williamson refused. Since, Lay Committee friends and foes have joined the fray, sizzing cyberspace with letters to one website or another.

I'll confess I'm a left-wing, card-carrying Witherspooner. But my problem with Williamson's story has nothing to do with his theology or his politics. It's his reporting.

Before I turned to teaching, I was a daily newspaper reporter for more than a dozen years. I suspect my editors would have sat on Williamson's story until he got Achtemeier on the horn. That would have been my call had I been riding the copydesk.

Williamson defended himself on The Layman Online. He said his article was held for seven days "during which the Layman's editorial office made daily telephone calls to Dr. Achtemeier's office, both to his voice mail and to seminary personnel." Williamson explained that “on the fifth day [nice Genesis imagery], the Layman reached Mrs. Achtemeier at their home telephone, explained the purpose of the numerous telephone calls, and learned that he had been informed of the Layman Online's attempts to reach him, but chose not to return the calls while he was out of town."

Like Williamson, this old reporter understands the frustration of trying to track down important sources for a story and coming up empty-handed. It's doubly difficult with deadlines looming and editors glowering.

But The Layman Online isn't a daily newspaper with daily deadlines. I doubt it needs scoops to beat the competition. Williamson should have waited and talked with Achtemeier. “A good reporter will get the story in its entirety, no matter how long it takes,” the Rev. Tom Armstrong, a former reporter and editor wrote PresbyWeb about the Williamson-Achtemeier feud.

Being one of the Frozen Chosen, I don’t usually do “amens.” But I’ll do one for Armstrong.

Had Williamson wrung nothing more than a “no comment” from Achtemeier, he could have put that in the story and saved himself considerable grief. To be sure, mainstream journalists often use unnamed sources who attribute controversial statements to subjects of news articles. Good reporters give subjects a fair chance to respond. If reporters initially don’t, editors make sure that they do. Otherwise, it’s bushwhacking like Williamson’s story.

Bottom line: Williamson’s story is hearsay, as the professor charged. By relying on unnamed sources exclusively, Williamson is guilty of shoddy reporting at best.

Armstrong suggested that Williamson’s response to Achtemeier’s criticism just made The Layman’s chief scribe look worse. “Let your journalistic practices stand or fall on their own merit,““ he wrote. “The more you have to justify yourself, the less professional you look.”

“Amen” again.

I screwed up my share of stories when I was a reporter. Like Moyers, I felt obliged to own up to my miscues and to try to make appropriate amends. Bill Moyers accepted his responsibility to James Watt. It’s a pity Parker T. Williamson won’t do likewise with Mark Achtemeier.

The author:

-- Berry Craig is a professor of history at the West Kentucky Community and Technical College in Paducah and a former feature writer and columnist for the Paducah (Ky.) Sun.

A modest correction [1-5-04]

The Layman Online has just posted an article by John H. Adams about the flood of letters they've been receiving - "94 percent in support of [Parker] Williamson" as he faces the possibility that his presbytery may not validate his ministry as chief executive officer of the Presbyterian Lay Committee and editor in chief of its publications.

Of the tiny pile of letters not expressing support for Williamson, which Adams labels "some of the most incendiary," the first is from Richard S. Hong, whose note he summarizes:

For instance, Richard S. Hong suggested that Williamson pack his bags, go find a real job and cease his 'attack-dog pseudo journalism.' Hong comes from a wing of the denomination that has been trying for decades to repeal the PCUSA's historical ban against ordaining practicing homosexuals and adulterers. He is the treasurer of the Witherspoon Society.

Not much we can add to that, except to offer a slight correction about mere facts: Mr. Hong did indeed serve as treasurer of the organization until a year ago, and we appreciate his service. He no longer occupies that position, however, as a new treasurer was elected last spring.

We wonder whether this will be added to the "incendiary" collection.

Lay Committee urges Presbyterians to consider redirecting gifts
[10-29-03]

In what may be its clearest move in a long line of recommendations that conservative Presbyterians give their money to anything but the denomination, the Presbyterian Lay Committee has adopted a "Declaration of Conscience."

The statement opens with a declaration that "spiritual schism exists within the Presbyterian Church (USA) because of a deep and irreconcilable disunion among its members over the person and work of Jesus Christ, the authority of God's Word written, and God's call to a holy life. We are two faiths within one denomination." The statement concludes that "without systemic change, the PCUSA will collapse."

In light of the coming collapse, the Lay Committee urges "those who remain committed to reform and renewal of the PCUSA and those who are seriously studying new forms of our connectional life ... to work together for the glory of God and the strengthening of His witness in the world."

The concrete way of doing this, of course, is the tactic that the Lay Committee has pressed for years: encouraging Presbyterians to use their dollars for anything but "the General Assembly per-capita budget or the unrestricted mission budget of the PCUSA."

Click here for the full text of the Lay Committee statement.

You may want to read the Layman Online report, too.

The Presbyterian Layman has been a matter of concern to many Presbyterians for years.

While the Witherspoon Society is not interested in attacking that journal for the beliefs it expresses, we do wish to offer occasional statements correcting what we perceive as distortions in some of their reports and articles.

Here is the first of those statements. If you see stories to which you would like to offer an informed correction, please feel free!

Just send a note to the Webweaver, and we'll do all we can to share it with our wider audience. Now's your chance to speak up for another version of the truth!

Presbyterian Paranoia?

It may help us to understand the current tensions in the Presbyterian Church if we see some conservative efforts as reflecting the larger picture of "the paranoid style in American politics." Witherspooner Berry Craig offers these reflections. He is an associate professor of history at Paducah Community College, and a member of Mayfield, Ky., First Presbyterian Church.

[1-21-02]

Jonathan Justice comments on a Layman editorial, disputing the notion that pastors should instruct their elder commissioners on how to vote at presbytery, and that any commissioner should feel compelled merely to "represent" his or her congregation. [3-7-01]

Check out other comments by attorney Doug Nave and elder Marcia Casais, each offering their own concerns with the Layman's notion of voting "in lockstep," as Justice calls it. [3-8-01]

Barbara Kellam-Scott, a Presbyterian elder and moderator of Semper Reformanda, is a professional writer. Out of that experience she does a careful analysis of the Jan/Feb 2001 issue of The Presbyterian Layman. Asserting that information matters, she urges that we take seriously the "misinformation" that is so influential in our church. [3-3-01]

Dean Lewis has shared with us his response to a recent article in the Layman, drawing on his own knowledge of and concern for the continuing witness of Presbyterians in Cuba. He wrote it originally as a letter to the Editor of the Layman, but offers it here as well.

Click here for more about Dean Lewis and the background
he brings to this concern.

The story by Celia Cejas on page 6 of the March-April issue of The Presbyterian Layman, supposedly recounting a "piece of history," contains several glaring errors as well as a wholly unwarranted attack on the integrity of the Presbyterian Christians who decided to stay in Cuba during the 1960s rather than abandoning their church and homeland as she did.

Ms. Cejas is certainly correct in describing La Progresiva as "one of the most prestigious institutions on the island" but it was not "for anyone in Cuba to attend." The Founder, Robert L. Wharton, was a son of the South and as long as he remained Director no Black Cuban could attend La Progresiva or any other of the network of Presbyterian schools. It was only after Emilio Rodriguez Busto succeeded him in 1941 that this policy changed.

It is a canard to suggest that this fine Christian educator abandoned the policy of religious services and spiritual formation that Celia Cejas rightly remembers as the pervasive ethos of La Progresiva. It was continued under his leadership up until the very day in 1961 on which La Progresiva and all other private schools in Cuba were nationalized.

Celia Cejas has it exactly backward concerning the participation of students of La Progresiva against the dictatorship in 1956 when she graduated. It is true that several took an active role and some died - but it was in the struggle against the US-supported dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista, not against "the communist dictatorship."

Perhaps the most startling assertion is that "The Presbyterians in Cardenas are no more." To the contrary, there has not been a time since 1900 when there were no Presbyterians in Cardenas. Along with numerous other Presbyterians from the United States, I have worshiped in that vital, committed and growing congregation several times in recent years. I assume that the confused reference by Ms. Cejas to "this Council of Reformed Churches" refers to the Presbyterian Reformed Church in Cuba. That church was organized in January 1967 after the Presbytery of Cuba overtured the General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church to be dismissed to form an autonomous national church as most other mission churches had already done. The overture was submitted in proper order, was approved by the General Assembly, and Stated Clerk William P. Thompson represented the General Assembly at the formation of the church in Cuba. It, by the way, is the only member of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches that confesses both its democratic governance (Presbyterian) and its doctrine (Reformed) in its name. It is willfully perverse to describe it "as an integral part of the revolution of Fidel Castro."

Ms. Cejas and many other Cuban Presbyterians decided to leave in the 1960s. Their decision has always been respected by the Cuban Presbyterians who decided to stay in Cuba. They have kept faithful Christian worship and made costly Christian witness as a small but tenacious church. It is difficult to understand why many Cuban Presbyterians in the United States, such as Celia Cejas, have not been willing to respect the decision - and the Christian faith - of their brothers and sisters who chose to remain in their native land to maintain a Presbyterian witness to the Christian faith.

I would not expect the Presbyterian Layman to edit Ms. Ceyas' uncharitable attitude toward the Presbyterians in Cuba, but you could at least have checked the facts.

DEAN LEWIS, Medanales NM
March 24, 2000
Internet address: dean_lewis@ecunet.org

The Rev. Dean Lewis says this about the background that he brings to this issue:

When I left the General Assembly staff in 1988, I had served for 20 years as the Director of the Advisory Council on Church and Society and its predecessor bodies. I was also serving concurrently as Associate Executive Director of the General Assembly Mission Council (both in the former UPC of course.)

In retirement, I am a member of the Presbytery of Santa Fe and serve as the convenor of its Cuba Work Group which manages the mission partnership between the Synod Council of the Presbyterian Reformed Church in Cuba and the Presbytery of Santa Fe, established in 1992. I have made 10 visits to the Presbyterian Church in Cuba since 1990, including participation in the last three meetings of the national synod of that church. I have visited in nearly all the congregations of the PRCC and repeatedly in the seminary it sponsors jointly with the Methodist and Episcopal churches of Cuba and in the national Presbyterian Camp and Conference Center. I have done research in the archives of the Presbyterian Historical Society in Philadelphia related to the history of Cuban Presbyterianism, and read in the original language both Rafael Cepeda's book on Presbyterianism in Cuba and Emilio Rodriguez Busto's book on the history of La Progresiva.

I was also one of the founders of the Presbyterian Cuba Connection, an unofficial network within the PC(USA), established in 1996 to inform Presbyterians in the US about the life and work of the PRCC and to generate financial support for its needs. I serve as the Executive Secretary of the organization.

Internet address: dean_lewis@ecunet.org