Reformátusok Lapja, 1970 (70. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)
1970-04-01 / 4. szám
REFORMÁTUSOK LAPJA 15 Our very existence is in question. The crisis of our churches, the name and character of our Federation, the pressure on smaller insurance companies and the revolt of our younger generations should raise the question: what to do as a church and as a Federation? We refused the option of careless selfishness: to continue as we are, in growing alienation and blind unconcern, using our institution as a sacred cow providing milk for us while we live and bequest a lot of troubles for the oncoming generations ... The merger and Americanization idea was also rejected because we realize that it did not help e.g. our Presbyterian churches. Thus we agreed that we should continue our present course with enlarged vision and renewed vigor. Of course, this would necessitate better understanding between the Federation and our churches. Therefore, we envisioned three steps to enhance our cause in this order: 1. Increased mutual trust; instead of partisan strategy between lay people and ministers, between “Független” and “Csatlakozott”, we should strive to accept one another in trust and put common good before group interests. 2. More realistic communication: the Federation should include church leaders in the policy making and planning process, consultation rather than command should be the key-word of the new partnership spirit. 3. Better cooperation: promotional gimmics will no longer work, we should rediscover what Hungarian Reformed Fraternal Ministry is, not only in America but all around the world. These were some of the highlights of the New York meeting. We were ready to discuss the problem of the Bethlen Home as well, but partially because we had no time and partially because we wanted to include the representatives of the other church bodies in this discussion, it was agreed that the leaders of the Federation and the representatives of the three church bodies will have another meeting to discuss the new concept of the Bethlen Home and our Youth work so that notice for the election of the new Superintendent would be phrased according to the new terms. This was our hope in February 1969 but it failed to materialize. The meeting was never called and the election notice was phrased in terms debated since. [Although the task of the Superintendent was redefined in a proposed amendment, churches had no opportunity to discuss it as we received it literally hours before our departune to Li- gonier. No wonder that our Conference Council was puzzled between February and September, nevertheless it took its promises so seriously that after soul-serching discussions the Synod President was endorsed for the position of Bethlen Home Superintendent.] The election of the new Superintendent is well known to you. We contend its legality as our attorneys consider the decision an act contrary to the history, structure and present by-laws. Whether you listen to our arguments or not I am convinced that you must face this issue as soon as you implement the decision of coordinating the laws of Pennsylvania and the By-Laws of the Federation. Whether you make a decision now or not, you have to make a decision then: whether you agree with the legal opinion of Mr. Ferguson that “the Federation is an entirely independent legal corporate entity and has no legal power or authority over the activities of the Bethlen Home Corporation,” or whether you agree with Mr. Moor who insists that “the Convention of the Federation has the power of highest governing authority over the Bethlen Home in every respect and relation.” But beyond the legal interpretation I must inform you that the moral consequences of your attitude can be fatal to the Federation as it can deepen the alienation in these critical moments when trust, communication and cooperation are desperately needed. You can see the writings on the wall in the decision of those 27 pastors who endorsed the Conference Council decision to investigate the legality of the September decision. (The number is not 40 or 50 only because other members of our fellowship were not present on October 20, 1969.) I would be able to enumerate these disturbing signs (charter, Bethlen Freedom Press, etc.) but why should I enumerate these trivial things of alienations? Either we are aware of it and ready to be concerned or we are not, and not even a multiplication of arguments would convince us. Let me come to the conclusion then! I feel that this Board of Directors is the proper jurisdiction to answer our letter of November 29, 1969 positively. Paragraph 34 of the Federation By-Laws speaks of the Standing Committees of the Board of Directors of the Federation. One of them is the Executive and Fraternal Committee whose duty it is to examine the President’s office and affairs of the Bethlen Home. These examinations should be made once a year at the spring meeting of the Board of Directors. Furthermore, to quote Mr. Eger, “Paragraph 5 of the By-laws of the Federation states that the Board of Directors shall govern during the interim between conventions,” even in regard to the Bethlen Home. I would like to plead with you, therefore, to exercise your constitutional responsibility on this meeting and remedy the situation in Christian brotherly love, mutual respect and cooperation so that we would be able to turn our wholehearted attention to our common tasks of serving God with a clear conscience in our churches as well as in our public life. Rev. Francis Vitéz, Editor 493 Amboy Avenue Perth Amboy, N. J. 08861 Please enter my subscription for the Reformátusok Lapja Megrendelem a Reformátusok Lapját for one year ( ) or ( ) years ($3.50 per year), egy évre ( ) vagy ( ) évre Subscription enclosed $........................... Előfizetés mellékelve. Renewal ( ) New Subscrition ( ) Change of address only ( ) enclose old label. Name ....................................................................................... Street City (Please Print) State Zip
