NOTE:  This is a personal statement from the manager of this Witherspoon website, and not an official statement by the Executive Committee of the Society.

To The Layman:

As a member of the board of the Witherspoon Society, I was interested to discover in your report of September 26 ( "Baltimore Presbytery approves overture to allow gay ordination") that Witherspoon is "another gay activist group."

As our mission statement states pretty clearly, "we are a society of justice-seeking Presbyterians," and among our specific missions is "advocating for peace, justice, the integrity of creation, and the full inclusion of all God's people in church and society."

As one part of that mission - and only one part - we strongly support all efforts to bring some measure of justice and inclusiveness to our church in the matter of ordination.

If working for peace and justice makes us "another gay activist group," well, we're proud to be counted among their number.

May the peace of God be in your minds and hearts.

Douglas King

Mr. Schroll has sent this letter of correction to the Layman regarding an earlier version of their report on their overture. The Layman has since corrected one of the errors, mentioned in the third paragraph of this letter. We guess one out of three isn't bad.

To The Layman:

Your September 18, 2003 Online article regarding the overture before the Baltimore Presbytery contained several misleading and incorrect statements. The lead sentence gives the impression that this overture is the work of "activists" only. In fact, the motion to approve the overture was sponsored by the sessions of nine churches - one-eighth of the member churches of the Presbytery. While there may be "activist" elders and ministers among those sessions, the overture was brought before Presbytery by the action of a wide range of concerned Christians. Incidentally, the overture was approved by sixty-seven percent of the commissioners attending the presbytery meeting, again indicating widespread support.

The third paragraph states that "emboldened by the Episcopal Church, USA's ordination of a homosexual bishop, they also want the General Assembly to frame a new 'authoritative interpretation' ". In fact, the overture (which was completed before the action of the Episcopalians) does not ask for a new authoritative interpretation. The overture itself reads "The Presbytery of Baltimore overtures the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) to: Direct the Stated Clerk to transmit to the presbyteries for their vote the following proposed amendment: Shall G-6.0106b be stricken from the Book of Order?"

Further into the article, there is a claim that "the presbytery approved a policy - which never became effective - of advising church sessions that they did not have to obey church law." This, presumably, refers to an action taken in June 2002 in which Presbytery asked it's Council to consider a wide range of possible responses to G-6.0106b. In fact, Presbytery has never given the advice that you claim.

The debate regarding ordination standards is contentious enough without the spreading of misinformation. The Layman could best aid that debate by getting the facts straight.