For example, PHEWA planned in 1999 to decorate the plenary and worship area of their biennial meeting with liturgical stoles representing particular Presbyterians who have been denied ordination in the PC(USA) because of their unrepentant homosexual behavior. When the PHEWA representative shared that plan with the National Ministries Division Committee, several committee members advised against the stole display since it would appear to be an act of defiance against the church constitution. PHEWA heard their advice and then displayed the stoles prominently throughout the meeting room. PHEWA has passed several resolutions supporting the ordination of those engaged in homosexual behavior and was a supporter of ReImagining.

The action of the General Assembly directing PHEWA to open its networks apparently was an effort to bring balance to the organization by allowing groups with a theology different from that expressed in decisions by the current membership, to join. PPL is frequently mentioned as one of those groups. But the PHEWA Board of Directors has constructed a set of membership requirements which ensure that organizations whose statements and actions are consistent with Scripture and our denomination's constitution, such as PPL, are blocked from membership.

For example, PHEWA requires its member networks to sign a Statement of Inclusion. PHEWA is on record supporting the inclusion of "gay and lesbian persons" as church leaders. There is not a single group listed in the PHEWA statement of inclusion that is excluded from membership in the Presbyterian Church. The statement was adopted in the context of the organization's support for a practice which is excluded by Scripture and our denomination's constitution.

Secondly, all PHEWA networks are required to "deposit all receipts at the PHEWA office in Louisville, KY, using the financial services of PHEWA...." "Financial management and services" of PHEWA include "budget planning, fundraising, grants, and proposals and accounting services such as check writing, budget management, deposits, monthly financial statements, annual financial statements." Independent organizations such as PPL manage their own finances, hire their own bookkeepers, arrange their own audits, and are accountable to their own boards of directors for budget development and expenditures. For an independent organization to submit its financial affairs to PHEWA would result rapidly in the dwindling of support for that organization to the level of the PHEWA networks, which are not able to meet their own expenses and instead rely on grants from denominational offices.

Third, "PHEWA will provide database management of membership rolls." The PPL mailing list is larger than the PHEWA network memberships combined. For an independent organization such as PPL to transfer management of its database to Louisville would clearly inhibit that organization's ability to communicate effectively with those who support their work.

Fourth, "The PHEWA Board will provide responsible oversight of the communications and programming of its networks through open dialogue with the networks' leadership teams. Material submitted for publication in ... newsletters, memos, Presbynet will be edited as needed by staff and newsletter editor." Independent organizations such as PPL have their own publications editors. PPL, for example, currently manages the development and editing of our own publications, and our own board approves PPL programs. An independent organization's ministry would be negatively affected by relinquishing editorial and program control to PHEWA.

Our current assessment of membership as a network of PHEWA is that any effort of a legitimate group within the denomination to help bring theological and moral balance to PHEWA would result in control of that organization, its finances and its editorial freedom, by PHEWA. Any such organization would be clearly a minority voice in decision making.

In a meeting with John Detterick, PHEWA leaders and me, John Detterick suggested that PHEWA set aside membership considerations and invite PPL to dialogue with them on the issues. He asked me if I would come if such an invitation were issued. I said I would eagerly attend. PHEWA leadership, in a letter to me, interpreted what Mr. Detterick suggested as a meeting in which they would lay out their membership requirements. PPL representatives attended that meeting. No invitation for dialogue on the issues has been issued.