Oct 21, 2010 | Comments 0
Buster Hodges was the toughest little boy in Miss Alsaps’ fourth grade class in the Eloise Elementary School in Eloise, Florida. Buster was not his given name, but Buster was the name that his seven siblings called him. Buster was what he called himself, and no one, not even Miss Alsaps, was going to dispute his name with Buster.
Buster should have been in the sixth grade, but school was not a high priority for Buster or anyone in his family. Buster was scrawny, but he was tougher than a pine tree knot. Buster was a ferocious fighter. Even Patsy Whitlock would not mess with Buster, and she could outrun, out-marble-shoot, and outfight most of the boys in the sixth grade. She said Buster was crazy.
There were two fourth grade classes in the Eloise Elementary School. Mrs. Collins taught the other class. Mrs. Collins was older, married, and much more experienced as a teacher and as a warden than Miss Alsaps. Mrs. Collins was given the responsibility of Bowie Nethercutt. Bowie was a combination of Jason from Halloween and something scary out of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Patsy Whitlock said that Buster was crazy, but Bowie was even crazier. He was big. He was strong. He was mean. He spit poison. He could cuss like a man. Sixth graders feared Bowie. When Bowie was twenty, he was killed in a car and train wreck. One Saturday night, he decided to play “chicken” with the Silver Comet passenger train. Bowie lost. But that is a story for another day.disc
One early afternoon during lunch recess, Buster and Bowie got into a fight. Today, no one can remember why they got into that fight; however, it took Mr. Nichols, the school principal, and Coach Duncan to get the boys apart. It looked as though Bowie was going to beat Buster to death. But, remember, Buster was a tough little fellow. Buster was also resourceful. From his pocket, Buster pulled out a sharp number two pencil. Before Mr. Nichols and Coach Duncan could part the boys, Buster turned Bowie into a well-used pincushion.
Bowie was taken home and maybe even to a doctor. He must not have been hurt too badly. The next day Bowie was back in school. Bowie said that pain was his friend.
Buster was taken to the office to await execution.
In those unenlightened days of the 1950s, corporal punishment was the rule of the day at the Eloise Elementary School. It was also administered in public. The administrators and teachers wanted to see the condemned cry and howl in front of his schoolmates. Indeed, a good spanking was a magnificent spectacle.
Mr. Nichols and Coach Duncan escorted Buster back to Miss Alsaps class. In front of the entire class, Mr. Nichols administered the spanking. After ten hard licks with a big, red paddle on Buster’s bottom, Mr. Nichols stopped and looked at Buster. Buster did not cry. Buster did not howl. A bit nonplussed, Mr. Nichols asked Buster: “Are you sorry that you stabbed Bowie with a pencil?” Buster said: “NO! I’ll do it again! Next time I’ll kill the (expletive deleted)!”
The silence was so intense that it can still be heard today by those who were present!
Needless to say, the spanking continued; however, Buster never did cry or howl. His arrogance, his anger, his sense of self-justification, and his pride blinded and numbed him to the pain. We were astonished! The children of Miss Alsaps’ fourth grade class had never seen anything like that!
However, it is said that years later when the judge sentenced Buster to life and a day in the Florida State Prison at Starke, Florida, that Buster cried a lot that day.
As we leave the story of Buster Hodges for a consideration of the meeting of the Fall Meeting of First Presbytery, note that the story of Buster is just a story. If there are any parallels to be drawn, the Editor will make them very clear.
The Fall Meeting of First Presbytery has taken place and First Presbytery has acted a bit more nobly than Second Presbytery in the matter of ARP elders suing the ARP Church in civil court. At least, in First Presbytery, the matter of Mr. Parker Young’s flagrantly and arrogantly suing the ARP Church is still before the presbytery.
At the Summer Meeting of First Presbytery, First Presbytery took jurisdiction from the Pinecrest ARP Church over the matter of the investigation of Mr. Parker Young in his suing of the ARP Church. The matter was turned over to a special committee for investigation. Below is the report of that committee.
Charge and Specifications
In the name of the Holy catholic Church of Jesus Christ and the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, First Presbytery Moderator’s Committee upon completion of its investigation hereby requests First Presbytery to charge Dr. Parker Young of the Pinecrest A.R. P. Church with the following sins:
- Disregard of God’s Word,
- The breaking of his ordination vows.
These charges are serious and grievous but the evidence supports the conclusion. We bring to this Court these charges in full knowledge of our own sin, and we repudiate all of them in repentance to our Lord Jesus Christ. We submit this report without prejudice or malice. Although the lawsuit has been dismissed, Dr. Young has refused to acknowledge his sins or repent of them. He continues a willful obdurate refusal to submit not only to Christ and His authority, (1 Corinthians 6:1-8), but also to the authority of the General Synod and First Presbytery in this matter. Dr. Young told the Chairman “He had no regrets about his actions because he felt it was an emergency situation and he would do it again.” He said, “he did what he had to do and stands before God with a clear conscience.” He said that he “believes Erskine would have lost its accreditation had he not brought the lawsuit.” He said his action “has made it easier for others to take similar legal action on other future matters within the denomination should the need arise.” He said “he resigned as elder because he was not willing to be a part of any investigation.” He said “he has taught law for 35 years and he stands by his testimony that he made in civil court. He said “men had come into the ARP denomination who were intolerant and something had to be done to stop them and the law suit accomplished that.” Dr. Young said “he believes the majority of the A.R.P. Church agrees with what he did and most are appalled that 1st Presbytery would try and discipline him .” He said “he had to break the law in order to bring about good for Erskine.”
In summary, Dr. Young sinned against God and His Church by disregarding the Word of God found in 1st Corinthians 6:1-8. He sinned against God and His Church by breaking his ordination vows connected to the Authority of the Word of God, and he did those things not only as an elder but also as a member of the Pinecrest A.R.P. Church.
- As a member He violated his vow to question 3 of Chapter V, C, FOG “Do you believe the Scripture of the Old and New Testaments to be the written Word of God, the only perfect rule of faith and practice?”
- As an elder he violated his vow to question 2 of Chapter IX, D, FOG “Do you reaffirm your belief in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the Word of the living God, the only perfect rule of faith and practice, to which nothing is to added or from which nothing is to be taken at any time or upon any pretext.” I Corinthians 6:1-8 does not list any exceptions for filing a lawsuit against fellow Christians, much less the Bride of Christ, but Dr. Young has not only denied the truth of the Scripture, he has transgressed it.
- Dr. Young violated his vow as a member of the A.R. P Church to question 5, Chapter V, C, FOG “Do you accept the doctrines and principles of the A.R.P. Church so far as you understand them, as agreeable to and founded on the Word of God?”
- He violated his ordination vow as an elder to question 3 Chapter IX, D, FOG “Do you accept the doctrines of this Church, contained in the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, as founded on the Word of God and as the expression of your own faith and do you resolve to adhere thereto?”
- L.C. Question 132 asks: What are the sins of equals? Answer: “The sins of equals are besides the neglect of the duties required, the undervaluing of the worth, envying the gifts, grieving at the advancement or prosperity one of another, and usurping pre-eminence one over another.”
- L.C. Question 142 asks what are the sins forbidden in the eighth commandment? Answer: …. “unfaithfulness in contracts between man and man or in matters of trust…vexatious lawsuits.” The civil lawsuit brought before an ungodly civil court by Dr. Parker Young because of his disagreement with the actions of our General Synod was vexatious and is condemned in those answers.
- He violated his vow as a member of the A.R. P. Church to question 7 Chapter V, C, FOG “Do you submit in the spirit of love to the government and discipline of this Church and seek the peace, purity, and prosperity of this congregation so long as you are a member of it?”
- He violated his ordination vow to questions 4, 6, and 7 Chapter IX, D, FOG respectively “Do you accept the government, discipline and the worship of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church? And do you promise to submit in the spirit of love to the authority of the session and to the higher courts of the Church? Do you promise in all things to promote the unity, peace, purity, and prosperity of the church?” Dr. Young by his attitude and actions has not accepted the government of the A. R. P. Church or its authority over him, and although he has access to our FOG that contains written procedure for addressing complaints and disagreements, he chose to ignore them and appeal to the civil court. Our FOG has in place ways to address complaints and disagreements among brothers, but most importantly it is the Word of God that gives us adequate direction. All actions by a Synod can be changed at the next Synod Meeting if it is the will of that Synod. It was proved this past June 2010, when the Synod voted to recognize the present Board and agreed to mutually take certain measures if the Plaintiffs would drop their lawsuit.
- Dr. Parker Young has transgressed the Ninth Commandment “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” See LC question 145 “What are the sins forbidden in the ninth commandment?” At least the following portions apply, Answer: .… “ Prejudicing the truth and the good name of our neighbors as well as our own, especially in public judicature…wittingly appearing and pleading for an evil cause…the calling of evil, good and good, evil, … envying or grieving at the deserved credit of any…breach of lawful promises….thinking or speaking too highly or too meanly of ourselves or others.” Attached is a partial copy of the official court record and the words sworn under oath in civil court by Dr. Parker Young.
From Page 43.
Mr. Devlin: “Why are you bringing this lawsuit Dr. Young?”
Dr. Young: “I have grave concerns about the college itself being changed. I have concerns about the college becoming something other than a Christian Liberal arts institution. Because you see, what the Synod did was unlawful, I think unethical, and it was certainly not Christian.” (Committee emphasis in bold).
The Committee reviewed the 2009 Manual of Authorities and Duties for Officers and Agencies and Rules of Order pgs.9-10, 1st Corinthians 6:1-8, Calvin’s Commentary on 1st Corinthians 6, Calvin’s Institutes Of The Christian Religion, Book 4:XX:17-21, the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms and the complete record of transcript (especially pgs 43-44 and 65-67) from the Court of Common Pleas 2010-CP-10-080. Chairman Fleagle spoke with Dr. Young by telephone.
Specifications: That on March 25, 2010 the said Dr. Parker Young was a member of Pinecrest A.R.P. Church and an ordained Elder and he did willingly bring into civil court, the Church of Jesus Christ, represented by the A.R. P. General Synod, and he testified against the Synod of the Associate Reformed Church. Therefore:
The Moderator’s Committee upon completion of its investigation recommends First Presbytery to:
- That the Presbytery direct the Moderator to appoint a Commission to begin the trial procedure on the above named charges against Dr. Parker Young as prescribed in the Book of Discipline Chapter V, Section 5 ( c ) and that the report of this committee be used as the “charges for presentation against Dr. Parker Young by First Presbytery as stated under Chapter V Section 5 ( c ).
- That the preliminary report and this full report be approved.
- That this Moderators Committee be excused from further duties on this issue.
Respectfully Submitted by First Presbytery’s Moderator’s Committee, 10-12-2010Rev. Mr. Edward Fleagle, Chairman Rev. Mr. Robert Hunter Elder Dr. Charles Smoak
The motion was made and passed by a narrow margin that the matter be remanded to the Session of the Pinecrest ARP Church for disposition. At this time, First Presbytery is not willing to proceed in the adjudication of this matter. No matter what the Pinecrest Session does, this matter will again be on the Table at the Spring Meeting of First Presbytery.
What is to be noted is Mr. Parker Young’s superior and arrogant behavior that would cause a fourth grade juvenile to blush.
- It is reported that Mr. Parker Young refused to meet with the committee of First Presbytery. Did an Elder in the ARP Church really do that? In other Presbyterian denominations, that would constitute a censurable offense. What is wrong with the ARP Church?
- Mr. Parker Young rejects 1 Corinthians 6:1-8 as authoritative and normative in the life of the Christian.
- Mr. Parker Young is not concerned that he has defied the actions and will of our General Synod. In effect, he has shown that he believes that his ideas are superior to those of his brothers; therefore, he is not bound to submit to his brothers, whom he considers to be inferiors, no matter the ordination vows that he has willingly and freely sworn to uphold.
- Mr. Parker Young holds the “agency” of the ARP Church (that is, Erskine College and Seminary) over the ARP Church, which elected Mr. Parker Young as an Erskine trustee.
- Mr. Parker Young arrogantly boasts that his actions made it easier for others to sue the ARP Church in civil court.
- Mr. Young stated that he had taught law for thirty-five years and understood the legal implications of all his actions.
All the parts of the story of Buster Hodges do not fit, but, in disposition, there is not much difference between fourth grade juvenile Buster Hodges and Parker Young. Their actions of arrogance, self-justification, and contumacy are astounding! No sir! Parker Young is not going to cry!
Is there anything, one wonders, that could make Parker Young cry? Perhaps, if reformation did occur and Erskine College and Seminary actually did stand for Biblical faith and integrity, that would make Parker Young cry and howl!
These are my thoughts,
Charles W. Wilson
Filed Under: Newsletter