Why the “New Reformed Body” is Not Reformed

Some of y’all have heard of this most recent attempt by the self-identified “evangelicals” in the PC(USA) to reform the denomination and to stake claim to a “Reformed Heritage”. I recently came into possession of a draft that contains some of the “essential tenets” that the group wishes to be foundational to the future of their project. If you read the whole thing (which you can find here).  I could take a while and detail some of the more problematic sections, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so. It is no longer my fight and I think the “reformers” in the PC(USA) would be better off and wiser to recognize that the project they are engaged in cannot be reconciled with the confessional heritage they wish to attach themselves unto. So for the purposes of this blogpost I just want to highlight one error from the list of essentials that really is emblematic of the problems throughout the essentials.

The “NRB” Statement on Baptism

 

“In the baptism of infants, we confess our confidence in God’s prevenient grace, that a baby who cannot turn to God is nonetheless claimed as a member of the covenant community, a child of God, cleansed by grace and sealed by the spirit.”

 

At first glance two things come up. 1) The use of the phrase “prevenient grace”. A body which wants to claim a heritage in the Reformed Faith would be wise to not use a Wesleyan and Arminian term that is fraught with difficulties. For a good understanding as to why Reformed believers eschew the term “prevenient grace” see this link.  2) The part of the statement from “that a baby…” on is straight Baptismal Regeneration. See this link as to why this is a problem.

There are few things I have encountered than trying to help my PC(USA) friends understand why even though they like to use the word “Reformed” their theology shows them not to be, at least in any way that any traditional and Confessional Reformed person would understand the term.

Homosexuality and the PC(USA)

I was going to write a long blogpost concerning this article but I just can’t bring myself to do so.  Read it. It is just so sad on so many levels.

The actions of Rev. Steele in divorcing his wife of 29 years so he could express his homosexuality made me tear up in sadness for his wife and family. I cannot imagine anything more selfish and frankly wicked.

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/11192/1159633-53.stm

Another Problem With Ecclesiology

In prior posts I noted the type of defective understanding of Presbyterianism that inhabits the “renewal” movements in the PC(USA). Today I was notified of this video conversation concerning “Multi-site” churches led by Mark Driscoll and James MacDonald and critique thereof by Mark Dever. (You can view the video here).  While all three are Baptist and therefore Congregationalist and therefore all defective in this Presbyterian’s understanding of what the Bible teaches concerning Ecclesiology, Mark Dever does a very good job of pointing out the “man-centered” nature of multi-site churches. No matter what Mark Driscoll thinks his organization will fall-apart after he dies/retires because it has the wrong focus in its understanding of the church and how it should be governed.

Episcocongregian

I made the comment yesterday that one of the major problems facing the renewal groups in the PC(USA) is that they have a defective understanding of Presbyterianism and ecclesiology in general. It is my position that what the PC(USA) has currently is a hybrid of episcopacy and congregationalism. In other words you have a governing body that uses Presbyterian terms (Presbytery, Synod, General Assembly, Elder, Deacon, etc…) but functions with characteristics more fitting both episcopacy and congregationalism.

The episcopacy comes out both in the day-to-day operations of a Presbytery and in how the entire body from General Assembly to local church member operates. Firstly, anyone who has spent time around the PC(USA) knows that all of the power in the denomination resides in Louisville.  It is very much a top-down organization. Nothing happens without some involvement of the myriad department heads at the GA-level. [As a side comment here this is something PCA brothers have noted to me about the growing influence/power coming from Atlanta and how some of the issues in the PCA are from this dimension].  Secondly, the presence of the “Executive Presbyter” in PC(USA) Presbyteries is something that is just non-existent in any of the other presbyterian bodies. While the EP may vary from presbytery-to-presbytery the vast majority of EP’s are Full-Time and exhibit much power over their presbyteries.

The Presbyterian system traditionally (and how it is practiced today in confessionally reformed presbyterian bodies) bears little resemblance to how the current PC(USA) operates at the GA, Synod, and Presbytery levels. Presbyterianism has always been marked by the place it puts the majority of the power in church life.  This place is in the local session not in a bureaucracy at the top-level of the denomination.

Now the Congregationalism is exemplified by how individual churches in the denomination function and see themselves and the rational given in the document submitted by the new renewal group in its understanding how they can continue to remain linked to other congregations that they otherwise find to be defective in theology/practice. Traditionally one of the things that delineated Congregationalists and Presbyterians was how they understood the local church to be related to other bodies of like-minded believers. If one looks at how NACC or CCCC works it fits almost perfectly with what the renewal group is looking for in their new proposed system.  A group with the barest requirements for membership that has no real tangible connectivity and can garner the benefits of a larger organization (read here share legacy and medical costs).  Presbyterianism for 500 years has believed that there is a real tangible relationship between each and every local church in communion. This is one of the reasons why if you read any presbyterian manual of discipline there is great care to show why it is so vital that presbyteries oversee the work being done by their Ministers and if need be remove the leaven from the lump.

Let Goods and Kindred Go…

Martin Luther in his famous hymn A Mighty Fortress is Our God wrote the line ”The Spirit and the gifts are ours through him who with us sideth. Let goods and kindred go…” and this immediately came to mind when I was passed a link to the most recent attempt by those men in the PC(USA) who claim to have had enough of the false teaching in the PC(USA) to state in a public manner that they are mad and they can’t take it anymore.  For those who may not be aware this is just the latest attempt for Ministers who are still in the PC(USA) to stake their claim to Biblical fidelity within this mainline church and I can guarantee you it won’t be the last. I was a part of one while still in the PC(USA) 5 years ago.

Just like the other attempts it is another missive full of sound and fury signifying nothing. In this latest petition the claim is made that if they do not get their way this time they will leave and form an another denomination with like-minded folk in the PC(USA). There are a plethora of other denominations of a Presbyterian vintage (ARP, PCA, OPC, RPCNA, EPC, etc…) in which they would be gladly welcomed in out of the cold, wickedness of the PC(USA).  These congregations have had multiple opportunities to leave the denomination (both UPCUSA and PCUS)  since 1936 and each time they have refused. However as the line in Luther’s hymn states for them to go into the already existing confessionally Reformed denominations they would have to literally let goods and kindred go. It would mean losing #1 Church Property, #2 Pension, Medical, other benefits, #3 Endowments, and #4 Women’s Ordination. Those 4 things and the fear of losing them is what keeps them out of those Presbyterian bodies mentioned (it is also my position that the vast majority of folks signing this petition aren’t exactly what the ARP, PCA, OPC, RPCNA, etc. would consider “Reformed” but that is an issue for another day).  As my friend and fellow escapee the Rev’d. Chris Larimer wrote on my facebook page, “We’re being dragged to hell by golden chains of friendship and property.” Which sums up the issue pretty succinctly. No one ever said following conscience in regards to Biblical Christianity and leaving communion with those who want to deny Christ and His Word (which we are commanded to do) was easy or did not come at a price. It is about high time for those who value Biblical Christianity in the PC(USA) to do you know what or get off the pot.  Not to continue to try and finagle a way to keep #1-#4 listed above, to have your cake and eat it to, while still complaining about the apostasy of people who have covenanted with in your ordination vows.

[As an edited section after reading through this again I have come to the belief that part of the problem is a defective view of Presbyterianism and Ecclesiology in general. If you want an exhaustive theology of Presbyterianism look no further than James Bannerman's "The Church of Christ"...a shorter but no less important work is Stuart Robinson's "The Church of God". For more advanced studies read George Gillespie's "Aaron's Rod Blossoming".]

As the author of the hymn once stated going against conscience is neither right nor safe.  So if your conscience tells you that the PC(USA) is no longer a true Church of Christ (which is really the only good reason for breaking apart from a denomination) than be done with it and move on without property and pension and hold the plow and go forward.