|
VOW
|
PW SAYS ARTICLES MISLEADING
Recently, Voices of Orthodox Women teamed up with Presbyterians Pro-Life to purchase and evaluate a series of videotapes (Love — All That and More) that were produced using monies collected as part of the 1997 Presbyterian Women’s Birthday Offering. The critiques were published online and in the VOW newsletter. Shortly thereafter, The Presbyterian Lay Committee “picked up” one of the VOW pieces and ran it as a full-page essay in their newspaper, The Presbyterian Layman. Both VOW and Presbyterians Pro-Life wrote unfavorably about the videotapes because although paid for with Presbyterian mission money, they endorse an understanding of human sexuality that is neither biblical nor in accord with our Presbyterian standards. VOW ended its assessment of the videotapes with the salutary advice to “make it your business to know how your mission dollars are used.” Evidently, a large number of you took our advice and began to ask questions. In fact, there were enough questions asked that PW found it necessary to write a memorandum to its Coordinating Team, as well as to PW moderators in the Synods and Presbyteries. Signed by Ann Ferguson, PW Program Coordinator, and Jean Cutler, PW Mission Interpretation Associate, the memo reads in part: As a result of critical and misleading (emphasis added) articles recently published by The Layman (June 2002), Voices of Orthodox Women (Broken Trust) and Presbyterians Pro-Life (http://www.ppl.org/PW_Apr2002.html), the PW office has received a number of questions about the 1997 Birthday Offering grant to The Societal Violence Initiative, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).Attached to the memorandum was a one-page fact-sheet that describes the mechanics of the decision making process, and that continues to maintain that the videos describe “healthy” relationships for young people — notwithstanding the fact that it never disputes VOW’s assertion that the videos endorse both homosexual and pre-marital relationships. (click here to read the factsheet for yourself). The fact-sheet also doesn’t answer the pivotal theological and ecclesiastical question raised by VOW — why was Presbyterian mission money used to finance the production of a curriculum that undermines our biblical and constitutional understanding of human sexuality. Nor does it ever explain what was misleading about VOW‘s editorials. So, I decided to call Ann Ferguson and ask. As always, my conversation with Ann was pleasant and forthright. When I asked her to tell me what she considered to be misleading about the VOW article, she said, “That’s easy. Some people thought VOW was writing about the 2002 Birthday Offering.” With that, I explained to her that I would soon publish a piece about the PW memorandum, and about its allegation that our articles were misleading. I also invited her to write a more comprehensive answer to my question, gave her until the end of last week to do so (August 9, 2002), and promised her that VOW would publish it as part of our series. To date, however, VOW has received nothing from Ms. Ferguson, or anyone else in the PW office. But, the offer to PW still stands. Tell us what was misleading about our critique and we will publish your answer. In the meantime, our previous advice is still relevant — “make it your
business to know how your mission dollars are used.” And, don’t stop
asking your questions until you receive answers that make sense.
|