Something to tell, Rev. Chambless?

http://www.pcusa.org/news/2011/5/11/pcusa-rel...

I've been bothered about this for quite a long time, but somehow today, Christmas, the Spirit moved me to give a gift of information to the people of Ruidoso and also a gift to myself, that of relieving my conscience of knowing a vital bit of information that most folks in Ruidoso are unaware of.

Something very important happened this year in your church, The First Presbyterian Church (USA)of Ruidoso, didn't it Rev. Chambless? Did you forget to make this announcement in the paper, or did I miss it? PC (USA)'s 219th General Assembly Stated Clerk Gradye Parsons told the Presbyterian News Service, "Clearly what has changed is that persons in a same-gender relationship can be considered for ordination."

Gay ministers and ministries, including those that involve our kids, youth and young adults, are now copacetic in YOUR church? Is this why you wanted to shut people up from speaking their minds anonymously on the blogs, referencing your September letter to the Editor entitled "Dumping Topix Was The Right Move"?

I should think this would be welcomed news to you, Sir. Were you not the Education Coordinator, San Angelo AIDS Foundation in 2001? Did you not state in your bio for that agency that at that time you had "spent the last fifteen years in the field of social work with children and adolescents"? I don't know about others, but I am definitely NOT comfortable having a minister of a gay church, who has a history of teaching gay sex education to children -- which is what the AIDS Foundation includes, does it not?-- ministering to MY kids. Didn't you give a lecture on April 18, 2001 at the 13th Texas HIV-STD Conference, entitled "HIV: A Youth Problem Needs Youth Solutions"? Didn't you further state, "The YOUTH involved in this program...have educated themselves about intimate and stranger violence, abuse reporting law, ethics of confidentiality, SEXUALITY, and social activism"?I've NEVER heard anyone refer to AIDS as a "Youth Problem," and I question why any man who accepts homosexuality would want to TEACH kids about it.

And, Rev. Chambless, will you kindly explain to all the people of Ruidoso exactly what you mean in your bio when you say you "promote(s) the support of families in their many forms"? Does this imply, Reverend, that you support Heather having two mommies or Lilly having two daddies?

I was raised in the Presbyterian Church, Sir, and I profess to everyone who reads these blogs and wish to protect not only the integrity of our churches but the safety of our children that your kind of ministry is not safe for children. Your church does not require gay men and women to be out of the closet, does it? No, it does not. It is not so much the proudly professing gays who pose a problem in any area of society, including churches. We know who they are, they respect us enough to be honest with us so that we can rightfully decide if we want to entrust our children to their care. I worry about that closeted gay person who pretends to be straight and gains the trust of parents and their children while freely moving around in a congregation such as yours that welcomes them to worship free of negative judgment. I know this from my own experience. Let me tell you about Chuck. Chuck was an elder in MY Presbyterian Church. He was married with four boys, sang in the choir, lead the Boy Scout troop, helped coach the High School football team, and was eventually arrested for soliciting an undercover vice officer in a local park restroom. Do you have any idea how many families were turned upside down when they realized this man had intimate contact with their young sons, yet none of them had a clue he was gay? But Chuck would be welcome in your church, wouldn't he?

This is truly sickening. I can't help but wonder if this is the reason you wanted the blogs shut down, before YOU became the target of criticism.

As I recall there was some bad info about the Church being used for a rally,and Chambless offered anyone to call him on the phone.I think If this is your "gift" I think it should be regifted!I think what you are doing is rotten by using this forum the way you did.I was raised in the church as well,and while I don`t pretend to know much about the Bible,I remember the one about"thou shall not bear false witness"!The way you mixed subjects and used inuindo is wrong and amounts to character assassination.

Cope wrote:

As I recall there was some bad info about the Church being used for a rally,and Chambless offered anyone to call him on the phone.I think If this is your "gift" I think it should be regifted!I think what you are doing is rotten by using this forum the way you did.I was raised in the church as well,and while I don`t pretend to know much about the Bible,I remember the one about"thou shall not bear false witness"!The way you mixed subjects and used inuindo is wrong and amounts to character assassination.

It certainly doesn't seem that Jennifer has ruffled too many Ruidoso feathers with her "gift" does it? I guess no one's interested.

I went to a Unitarian service once because Jeff Smith, a noted journalist and speaker was guest speaker that morning. I never heard one word spoken about God, Jesus or anything relating to the Bible during the entire service. That sect may have been the first denomination (if that's what you'd call them) to allow gay ministers. I'm not sure of that, and I'm not even sure that I care whether a minister is gay. But I think I'd want to know.

"I'm not even sure that I care whether a minister is gay. But I think I'd want to know."
If you feel the need to know, then you care. Interesting take from someone glorifying transvestism.

Ok, I tried posting a better response, but it wouldn't post, so I will abbreviate my original statements.

Thank you to Ms. Covington for doing research before making her comments and asking questions. More people on Topix should follow her example. I only wished she had contacted me with her questions beforehand. I would have been happy to answer them, and I could have avoided (maybe) having a member of the congregation come to me yet again about something posted about me on this forum.

Since the questions were directed at me by name, I will answer them. Yes, the Presbyterian Church, USA changed its ordination standards this summer. I did not announce it in the news media because the media did that themselves. It was not a secret. I thought everyone knew. We had a congregational meeting here at the church to address the issue. I thought that covered everyone concerned with the change. No one else asked until now.

I didn't shut down any blogs. I mean, here we are. I have been slandered on Topix before, and complained to the paper. I was not the first to do so, and from the calls I received, I was not the last. My objection was that a forum that permitted anonymous slander, inuendo and rumor, should not be accessible from the paper's website. Topix is still here and so are its users.

The letter I wrote was to the editor, personally, for following through with his committment to put a stop to it. He called and asked if I would mind it being printed. I said I had no objection. The title was his idea. I would have chosen something less inflamatory, but that is a personal issue and nothing more.

The individual Ms. Covington talked about did something that was clearly wrong. He violated the covenant he made with his wife and tore his family apart. There is no excuse for such behavior. His family did not deserve the suffering he put them through. Had he been a member of our congregation, he and I would have had some serious discussions about sin, repentance and atonement. That kind of betrayal is not to be tolerated by the church, or by anyone else. The sad fact is that I have counseled a number of families in crisis, and I still do.

Do I think it is ok for children to have two Mommies or two Daddies? I don't care. A family in distress needs support. No family should suffer alone, and it is our Christian call to see that they don't. I would also add that no person, or group of people deserves to be persecuted or marginalized.

Would a gay person be welcome in our church? I know some members of our congregation would be uncomfortable with it. In the end, though, this congregation knows that we are all sinners in need of God's grace and redemption. Even the smallest sin is a grievous offense against God. I believe that our congregation is very good at suspending judgement in favor of loving everyone, as God has commanded.

Yes, I was the Adolescent Outreach Coordinator for the San Angelo AIDS Foundation. That is a matter of record, and I am proud of my work there. A "minister of a gay church teaching gay sex to my children"? We are a Presbyterian church. I am not sure how we are a gay church. I never taught gay sex, and certainly not to children. Our mission at the Foundation was to educate the community about the realities of a fatal disease and its prevention, and to care for those who were infected. We did it well and with integrity.

My primary job description was to educate youth and families. I do not know the figures now, but when I made my presentation to the State Conference one fourth of all new HIV infections were being reported among people between the ages of 13 and 19. I stand by my presentation and its title. I taught youth about it because youth were getting infected.

How is my kind of ministry unsafe for children? What do you know about my ministry? It is obvious that you don't know me, so how could you know about my ministry? This congregation knows me very well. They know my background. They checked my references, as did the Presbyteries of Sierra Blanca and Tres Rios. I do not keep secrets from them, and will share this blog and my responses with them, unedited. The only way a minister can be effective is to gain and keep the trust of the congregation they serve. Trust is built through honesty, even when it is painful.

As Cope pointed out, I am at the Church, and I am happy to talk with anyone about their concerns. I will be polite and kind, and if when you leave, you still don't like me, that's ok. You did me the courtesy of speaking with me directly and hearing me out. I extend the same invitation to anyone who reads your blog and my responses. If you have concerns, come see me, or bring them to our Session of Elders. You will find here a minister and a congregation who are ready to listen.

Rev. Chambless, I thank you for your direct and candid response to my posting. At the outset, let's set the record straight on what our friend Cope alleged was slander on my part. Slander is the speaking of something that is knowingly false. I did no such thing. As you pointed out, I did research before I commented and you have held me up as an examply. Again, thank you. As has been pointed out by the man himself in blog comments long ago, Mr. Cope struggles a bit with his writing, even gets things twisted a bit, which he attributes to some sort of past head injury, I believe he said. We'll pray for him.

Regarding your role in the AIDS/STD conference, anyone wishing to read the text of your abstract and your bio can go to: http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/hivstd/conference...

Now, I am so glad you have agreed to share in this discussion on Topix. You see, fresh information was brought to the public's attention and is being openly discussed, not covered up...and that's a good thing for everyone. I am shocked to learn that words were put in your mouth by Editor Terrance Vestal of the Ruidoso News, and that HE penned the title to your letter to HIM opposing the blogs. It would appear that it is the Editor of the paper who fomented the war on Topix by publishing your letter with his incendiary heading in support of his very own mission to end the blogs. What a worm. Again, we'll pray for him.

I read the former G-6.0106b and the new version (at the link provided by Jennifer Covington) and am dumbfounded by how far the PCUSA has fallen from the historic Christian faith.

I'm frankly surprised that the new version contains the phrase, "Governing bodies shall be guided by Scripture...". Perhaps PCUSA has also removed Leviticus, Romans, etc..., from the Canon; or, much more likely, they have re-interpreted applicable passages.

Sin destroys and does not build up. I pray that the local PCUSA congregation will instead seek truth and life and take appropriate measures to distance themselves from such blatant error.

God will not be mocked.

spelling correction: "example"

Rev. Chambless, you have alluded to the fact that we are all sinners. Indeed. All sin and fall short of the glory of God. But wickedness is not to be tolerated, particularly in our churches and church leadership. Our Bible exhorts those of the church to "expel the wicked man from among you," I Cor. 5:12. Specifically, the Apostle Paul is writing to THOSE IN THE CHURCH, NOT OUTSIDE THE CHURCH. And what defines "wicked"? I Cor. 6:9-11, "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived:neither the sexually immoral or idolators nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders...will inherit the Kingdom of God." Expel the wicked man from among you! That is the word of God! And, of course, Lev. 18:22, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." So says the word of the Lord. Do you skip over these passages of scripture in your sermons?

Without a doubt, there is to be no tolerance of homosexuality in our churches, let alone our church leadership. I am aware of the Calvinist doctrine (once saved, always saved); I was born and bred to it. But as an adult, I became friends with Shirley Dobson and joined her in her worship and ministry, which is following the Armenianist doctrine. It was through her that I learned that one can lose their salvation by deliberately disavowing the imperatives set down by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Gays being accepted into the ministry flies in the face of what our Bible commands.

Thank you Ms. Covington for acknowledging my response. I agree that having things out in the open is the best way to deal with questions of character. Perhaps getting things opened up could have been handled differently. Had a member of our congregation not informed me of your post, I would not have had an opportunity to respond. Your assertion that I taught gay sex to children and your questions about my morality in that regard would have been present forever on the internet, and I might never have known it. Had you come to me with your concerns, I would have been happy to answer your questions. We might have ended our conversation with an agreement to disagree, but we certainly would have understood each other better. I would not characterize your post as slanderous, but I do feel that it was unfair to post those allegations in such a way that I might never have known about them.

I am not seeking apologies. I am not chastizing you for speaking your mind. I have a problem with the way it was done, and would ask you for the courtesy of a conversation before posting accusations that could destroy my ministry and my life.

Rev. Chambless, am I correct in understanding that you agree that the matter of allowing gays in PCUSA is a matter of character; thus, I was correct in bringing this to a public that knew nothing about this new change in PCUSA policy? Why would I bring it to you behind closed doors when the issue is clearly a matter of public record, including your own bio, both at the Ruidoso Presbyterian US website and at the State of Texas AIDS/STD conference site? Then there's your Internet records of your time spent in leadership of the Boy Scouts. And the only comment you make on your own family is that you have one adopted son. You put that out on the Internet.

You cannot stop people from questioning your character, Reverend, particularly as you continue to command the pulpit of a church that now caters to gays. Here's a news flash for you: that alone has destroyed your ministry and your reputation.(To say it has ruined your life is a little dramatic, don't you think? And, by the way, that's the second time I've read in these blogs that you have claimed to have had your reputation destroyed by others. A bit sensitive, I believe, since nobody has mentioned your name or the name of your church in a pejorative manner in the past that I have uncovered.)

Sir, you are very much a public figure in the community. You became so when you put on the vestments of the Presbyterian Church. I was appauled by your letter to the Editor of the Ruidoso News condemning the blogs in your pursuit to chill the exercise of public, free speech. You are again doing it now with your continued appeals that you and I have a private conversation. You used your status as "Reverend" to give "ordained direction" to the Editor of the newspaper as well as to those who enjoyed freely commenting on the blogs that they should stop it. Shame on you! This is tantamount to abuse of process.

I have taught my children to never go behind doors with anybody other than me or their father. Whenever somebody suggests, "Come inside my office, let's keep this between ourselves," that's the time to say NO, NO, NO. There is absolutely nothing you have to say to me that you can't say out in the open. Period.

I don't get it, Reverand Tony. Back in the day when I was studying the covenants and doctrine of my Christian denomination in order to be confirmed, dogs didn't go to heaven and homosexuality was still a sin, along with casual sex and gambling. What changed? Were passages from the Bible somehow misinterpreted? If not, how can there be ministers whose sexual preferences are verboten per the Bible? It seems hypocritical, to say the least.

I am not a gay basher and have some wonderful friends who are gay. However, I just don't think they should be at the helm of a church congregation. Your posts seeem to raise as many questions as they answer, although I doubt that was your intent.

Ok, then. I have not requested a private meeting. I have suggested that before you post inflamatory information, that the polite thing to do is talk with me and see if your conclusions are correct.

I have no problem with people questioning my character. It goes with ordination, and I knew that well. And I don't mind criticism about something that I really did or said. Neither your posts nor the ones that led to my meeting with the editor have ruined my life. I said they could. But we both know that things don't have to be true in a small town, they just have to be said. I also looked for the previous posts about me, and could not find them. They were by a person calling him/herself Working Girl. I don't know what happened to them, but I am glad they are gone. My reputation is not destroyed, but the potential is there.

The rest of your comment does not bear on the subject.

Finally, do I have a problem with the ordination of gay or lesbian ministers? If they are qualified in every way that is expected of a person who is not gay or lesbian, then no, I don't have a problem with it. If it is a sin to be gay or lesbian, and based on my studies of the greek and hebrew texts I do not think that it is, and if we are going to disqualify candidates for ministry on the basis of sin, then we have to disqualify all human beings from the ministry. I fail to see how one sin can become THE determining factor among sinful people.

Again, my offer still stands. If you would care to get to know me, I would be happy to meet you and I will not be offended if you wish to bring someone with you for safety. They will be welcome, too.

My advice to you when confronted with a badger is to back away slowly, because you can't win against a badger.

Rev Tony Chambless wrote:

Ok, I tried posting a better response, but it wouldn't post, so I will abbreviate my original statements.
Thank you to Ms. Covington for doing research before making her comments and asking questions. More people on Topix should follow her example. I only wished she had contacted me with her questions beforehand. I would have been happy to answer them, and I could have avoided (maybe) having a member of the congregation come to me yet again about something posted about me on this forum.
Since the questions were directed at me by name, I will answer them. Yes, the Presbyterian Church, USA changed its ordination standards this summer. I did not announce it in the news media because the media did that themselves. It was not a secret. I thought everyone knew. We had a congregational meeting here at the church to address the issue. I thought that covered everyone concerned with the change. No one else asked until now.
I didn't shut down any blogs. I mean, here we are. I have been slandered on Topix before, and complained to the paper. I was not the first to do so, and from the calls I received, I was not the last. My objection was that a forum that permitted anonymous slander, inuendo and rumor, should not be accessible from the paper's website. Topix is still here and so are its users.

The post you complained about was this one by Michael Morris, I think (but I see no slander here):
Michael Morris

#87

That is not exactly correct. The big church by the hospital sponsored a pro tax event. Churches are essentially political clubs with most members attending for appearances or because of one kind of hate or another sponsored by their particular church. Good examples of Christian policy makers include Oral Roberts and his need of millions to pay god a ransom. Ted Haggard. The list goes on. The sheep look to their obese preacher for advice on sin while his heavily made up wife smiles. The sheep are easy to fleece. They suspect nothing.

GladysSmith wrote:

<quoted text>
The post you complained about was this one by Michael Morris, I think (but I see no slander here):
Michael Morris
#87
That is not exactly correct. The big church by the hospital sponsored a pro tax event. Churches are essentially political clubs with most members attending for appearances or because of one kind of hate or another sponsored by their particular church. Good examples of Christian policy makers include Oral Roberts and his need of millions to pay god a ransom. Ted Haggard. The list goes on. The sheep look to their obese preacher for advice on sin while his heavily made up wife smiles. The sheep are easy to fleece. They suspect nothing.

This is the reference that was incorrect and Rev.Chambless offered to talk to people on the phone to clear up any rummors.The Remarks that made me so mad was to state that the Presbyterian Church is a "Dangerous"Church.Fo r that reson I responded.

Mr. Chambless, your single sentence "If it is a sin... I fail to see how one sin can become THE determining factor among sinful people." speaks volumes about your theology. In fact it reveals, in its purest form, the deceitfulness of sin.

The "modern" theology of the last 150+ years does not abrogate thousands of years of Jewish and Christian understanding of homosexuality as explicitly revealed by God through Scripture. I would refer you to, "Homosexuality - A Biblical View", by the late Greg Bahnsen, which considers both the Greek and Hebrew (and there are many other resources for a historic Christian understanding).

"It is the summit of evil when the sinner is so void of shame that he is pleased with his vices and cherishes them.... Not only those who perform acts of homosexuality but also those who give approval to them have gravely offended the Holy Creator.... Modern churchmen have instead learned to mirror the trends of the world. We could soberly conclude that modern society as well as the modern church are both dangerously close to divine retribution as they continue to tolerate and approve of homosexuality.'Gay liberation' is symptomatic of a culture abandoned by God to destruction and a church provoking the Lord with abomination." (Bahsen)

May the light of God's truth triumph in darkness.

There was something troubling me about your posts, Ms. Covington, beyond the obvious, I mean. There were a number of things that did not make sense to me. And then, after visiting with members of the church, I figured it out. Now, bear with me. This will take a minute or two.

You found a lot of information about me on the internet, but you didn't know how outdated it was. It was at least 12 years old because I have two adopted sons now. You knew my oldest grandaughter's name, but not how to spell it. You may have known that I have two gradaughters, but you didn't know the younger one's name.