I’m just an ordinary PCA pastor (not to be confused with Erik Raymond, The Ordinary Pastor, who is not in the PCA). I don’t pastor a big church. Or even a medium sized church. I haven’t published any books (this is part of God’s providence to humble me). I am fairly anonymous in the PCA.
While I was in the ARP, I was not. It is a smaller denomination, and in my youthful exuberance (aka pride) I thought I had something to say about nearly everything. I was a chairman of a Presbytery committee, and therefore on the denominational board. There was an appearance of influence. At times I probably thought I had to save the denomination from “those guys”.
I miss the ARP and my many friends there who put up with me. There is much about the PCA I appreciate and enjoy, including the many friends who put up with me. I am a tiny fish in a lake now. There is much that goes on that I am not aware of here in the desert. But some things get through way out here on the periphery of the PCA. The news of the National Partnership was just such a thing. And so was the backlash, or push back.
I am concerned about confidential groups that seek to guide or alter the course of the denomination thru confidential coordinated work on committees. This seems to be an unfortunate extension of some of the ways the PCA was started. Conservative men formed organizations that engaged in theological discourse to gain access to the minds of young men in ministry. There were discussions about how to work through the church courts toward revitalization and return the PC (US) to his theological roots. But I never got the sense they were confidential. And this time they are more left of center. I’m not sure, it is cloaked in confidentiality.
But on the other side, there are the conservatives who represent the final way in which the PCA was formed. They talk about when it is time to leave– as if they are in a bad marriage and are looking for an excuse to leave without getting in trouble with the Session. Except they aren’t just thinking about it, they are talking about it in front of the spouse they hope to leave. That certainly builds a sense of commitment, trust and love.
In between these groups are the ordinary guys in the PCA- guys like me. Who am I? Theologically I am typically quite conservative. I’m a 6 day creationist, for instance. I count myself as one of the men greatly influenced by Tim Keller. He helped me to preach in a more consistently redemptive-historical, gospel-centered way. He also preaches that gospel to me on a regular basis. But I don’t follow him everywhere. I disagree with his position on creation and ambiguity on the extent of evolution. For a presuppositionalist, he doesn’t seem to be examining the presuppositions of evolution. We all have our blips and blind spots. I sure do.
I am also greatly indebted to R.C. Sproul and his ministry. He led me to Luther, Calvin and Edwards. He led me to RTS Orlando. I was not a Presbyterian, nor a paedobaptist nor covenantal at the time. I was a clueless Calvinistic Baptist who had recently rejected dispensationalism.
I am similarly indebted to Sinclair Ferguson who displays godly character as he communicates solid, heart-moving, intellectually deep theology. And John Frame has helped me learn even more how to think, how to process information balancing the normative, circumstantial and existential in my ministry. This is why I can appear very right of center to some, but far less so to others. It depends on how I think my theological convictions are to be applied in my context.
So, you can begin to see why all this push and shove makes no sense to me. My relationships aren’t based on toeing theological lines. I have friends who disagree with me (though I worry about some of them, and they probably worry about me).
I do not share the words of Rodney King with these factions in the PCA. I don’t say “Let’s all just get along.” What I want to say is the words of Paul to the Corinthians- “Don’t say ‘I don’t need you’.” The Body of Christ is not monolithic. The PCA shouldn’t be either. That is because we seek to bring the gospel to a wide variety of people. There are 5 PCA churches in the city I serve. 4 of them are pretty close geographically. But they are not interchangeable. How they do ministry is different. They reach different people. At times the relationships between the churches have been strained (and in some ways still are). But all of us are necessary to reach all the people we reach.
The various groups in the PCA not only reach different people with the gospel, they hold one another accountable if we let them. The right keeps the left from going too far left and the left keeps the right from going too far right. Those of us in the middle need both groups. Historically, when the conservatives leave a denomination that denomination’s leftward progress speeds up greatly. The check and balance disappeared. The ARP, on the other hand, returned from the brink because some conservatives stayed even though things didn’t seem to be going “their way”.
Do things have to go “our way”? Do we have to act like 6-year olds who pick up there toys and go home just because a vote didn’t go their way? Are we that immature? We still need to learn what it means to bear with one another, in our immaturity. Paul would tell us, like the Ephesians, that we have not arrived. Our theological disagreements are proof of that. So continue to speak the truth together in love (!) so that we can grow toward maturity.
We are also forgetting our ecclesiology, as well as our history. One element that contributed greatly to the downward trajectory of the RCA, CRC, PC (US) and PC (USA) among others is the lack of church discipline for those who denied fundamentals of the faith. I am not asking for all out ecclesiastical warfare. Not all lines are equally important. For instance, with regard to creation the PCA identified acceptable beliefs. Men who move beyond those boundaries should be admonished, instructed and corrected by their brothers. And if they refuse to return to within the limits of orthodoxy they should be removed. Yes, the process doesn’t work perfectly. But too often we don’t even work the process but resort to confidential groups, attack blogs, pity parties and the like.
Don’t curse the tensions in the PCA. Curse what we can sinfully allow the tensions to do to the PCA! Those who differ with you theologically are your brothers. Treat them as such instead of enemies. Show charity to one another instead of seeing “them” in the worst possible light. Make sure your non-negotiables are biblical non-negotiables and not just your particular applications of normative truth or your preferences. Brothers, we need each other so we don’t fall off the road into either ditch.
I am the News Editor for the Aquila Report, and I’d like to ask your permission to reprint your article in full. We would, of course, include a short bio and a link to your original article. Please let me know if you approve.
Thanks,
Rachel Miller
Well said. It seems in all this discussion and backlash that we forget the 5th preliminary principle: that good men of conscience can disagree on certain things and we must forbear. Either that or we forget how hard forbearance is and try to take the easy routes like secret societies or taking our toys and going home (a good analogy I think). It is not easy to stick with people whose views on worship (just one example) we do not like though they fit within biblical bounds, but we must for it is part of what it means to have unity amid diversity and one way God sanctifies us. If we put as much effort into forbearing with our denominational brothers as we expect from our members in their marriages, we might see God do some amazing things among us as a result.
Agreed!
Dear Steve, a confessional church is exactly about building your relationships by (lovingly) toeing theological lines. This is also quite biblical (Eph 4). You may prefer a bigger tent, but that does just turn the PCA membership vows into a perjury. Love,
James,
Not all lines are created equal. Some are far more important than others. Yes, I’m not a strict subscriptionist. That does not mean that I accept any old position from someone. This is why we examine exceptions, to rule certain departures to be severe and unacceptable. That doesn’t turn membership vows into perjury. But if we find someone does lie, and teaches unacceptable positions- they need to be held accountable.
Thanks,
Steve
At the risk of sounding like a 6-year old picking up his toys, I’d like to think that justification by faith alone and imputation are genuine biblical non-negotiables and are things that, so far, the PCA has not gotten right, at least if the trials of Jeffery Meyers, Peter Leithart and Greg Lawrence are any indication.
The PCA has stated that the doctrines of the Federal Vision and New Perspectives strike at the vitals of the faith, yet we see the men advancing this hostile system of salvation being exonerated and cleared of all charges in one presbytery after another, yet the rise of the FV/NPP is nowhere mentioned in your piece. Was that just an oversight? Can we expect men to “grow toward maturity” if they can’t even agree on what the Gospel is?
Not an oversight- I thought it was a no brainer. Some Presbyteries are struggling with this. I don’t know the nature of the evidence introduced, but you’d think the books might provide a compelling reason. There is still room for us to grow.
I don’t know what room there is to grow when the true Gospel is allow to stand alongside a demonstrably false one? What you take as a no brainer seems to me to be a gaping hole in your argument. Besides, at this late date, not to mention given the conclusions of the PCA study report, no presbytery should be “struggling” with the FV (especially when in two of these cases these men were signers of the Joint Federal Vision Profession).
If the SJC allows these decisions to stand (and I suspect they will) then I think conservatives (and frankly anyone who understands and believes the Gospel regardless of their stand on other important but secondary issues) will have no choice but to pick up their marbles and leave. I suspect most won’t as even many conservatives have already proven their willingness to comprise on just about anything to sustain the illusion of peace and unity in the PCA, but I suspect enough will and then the leftward slide you anticipate will be inevitable.
I think there are reasons why conservatives should leave the PCA and the failure of the courts to correctly adjudicate unapologetic and even militant Federal Visionists is a biblical one (see 2 Corinthians 6:14ff for starters).
A good word. A good reminder. Thanks.
Scratch that, I just read the SJC already decided to let the decision of the lower courts stand and the Federal Vision is an acceptable scheme of salvation in the PCA. One doesn’t have to be an Evangelical in order to be a pastor or a teaching in the PCA. http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/the-leithart-verdict/
I understand. It is frustrating. But I don’t want to be reactionary and think it is “game over”.
The Meyers decision was left to stand on some irrelevant technicality and Leithart’s theology has been deemed acceptable in the PCA. Being a non-reactionary, what hand do think is left to play?
I don’t know enough about either case at this point. My responsibilities as a husband, father of 4 and pastor occupy most of my time and energy. At this stage in my life I want to be a better “churchman” than I am. But my primary callings drain me. Sorry that doesn’t answer your question.
Clearly, in those primary callings I am to teach the truth that my family and congregation move toward maturity in Christ.
Secondly, I am to pray for our denomination both privately and as a part of the public ministry, that we would move toward maturity in Christ.
Third, I am to bear with the sins of my denomination realizing that God often works more slowly than I would prefer, and often less visibly than I would prefer.
Perhaps a day will arrive when there is no recourse but to leave. But some, in my opinion, are too quick to get there. Perhaps they love doctrinal purity more than people. I understand that sound doctrine leads to sound living (ordinarily- 1 Tim. 1) unless that pursuit of sound doctrine is itself idolatrous. One aspect of sound living is love for one another.
Cavman, who are you? I’d like to meet you at GA. I might’ve written this, if I were smarter…
https://cavman.wordpress.com/about/