PCA Fault Lines and the Approaching Ecclesiastical Earthquake, Part One: Introduction
PCA Fault Lines and the Coming Ecclesiastical Earthquake
Introduction
For some years our family lived in western Kentucky, not far from the New Madrid fault line that runs north-south through the central United States. We were regularly warned about the danger of a major earthquake, the kind that occurred in 1811-1812 which re-directed the Mississippi River and formed Reelfoot Lake in western Tennessee. It was an almighty shake up that very well could be repeated. We never felt more than minor tremors, one occurring just a few weeks ago in that region of the country.
Fault lines are boundaries, places where the tectonic plates that make up the surface of the earth meet – and sometimes move, causing the great earthquakes which can devastate wide areas. These underground lines are well known and in some cases visible to trained eyes. Yet the surface appears to be safe to most observers, the underlying faults not readily recognizable. When tectonic plates – the massive, irregularly shaped slabs of solid rock that make up the earth’s lithosphere – shift and collide along the hitherto hidden fault lines, the energy released causes massive devastation. The minor tremors often experienced in the fault line regions are reminders of what lurks beneath.
It seems to me that some ecclesiastical geological surveying is in order. It appears to many that some fault lines are running beneath the surface of the Presbyterian Church in America, occasionally showing themselves with the eruption of various disputes. It has to be said that most of these in recent years have been what one might describe as ‘minor tremors’ (though to the people directly involved they might have felt rather dangerous indeed). Issues like the length of the days in creation, theonomy, spiritual gifts, and the more recent controversy about the New Perspective on Paul and Federal Vision theology have indeed demanded a lot of attention from PCA elders and congregations, and yet have been rather tame disputes in comparison with other titanic conflicts in Church history. But is ‘the big one’ coming? I think so.
In the past I have described the PCA as consisting of a few prominent groups: TRs (Truly Reformed), the BRs (Barely Reformed), the URs (Urban Reformed), and the LRs (Liturgically Reformed). Tim Keller has suggested a paradigm of ‘Transformationalists’, ‘Doctrinalists’, and ‘Pietists’. Keller’s incisive analysis captures the picture in broad terms, and I think it is certainly helpful. Nevertheless, the TR, BR, UR, and LR distinctions strike a chord at the practical-emotional level because they describe approaches to worship as well as approaches to society. TRs, BRs, URs, and LRs might all be engaged for cultural transformation, but their differences on worship would ultimately alienate them from one another.
Yet this demarcation also masks the more substantial divisions that exist in the PCA. The recent FV controversy highlights this. The BRs and TRs were able to make common cause against people they perceived to be common opponents, and thus one might fairly conclude that the fault line running between the TR tectonic plate and the BR tectonic plate is surprisingly narrow and lacking in the capacity to become the epicenter for a massive shift. But neither the TRs nor the BRs could make common cause with many of the LRs, primarily because the LRs viewed those condemned in the FV-NPP Report as on their side of the fault-lines. Why? The culture of worship. The URs were largely silent in the last conflict, not from lack of conviction either way, but probably because they saw the FV controversy as a conflict between two kinds of TRs, and the outcome would not in any way affect their worship culture. And that is where the real divide in the PCA exists – worship and sacraments.
Let me suggest that this worship demarcation is a much more critical fault line that runs through the lithography of the PCA landscape beneath the previously mentioned groupings and it is this line that provides the context for the considerable shift that I believe may well take place. This lithographic survey highlights four key ecclesiastical cultures in the PCA which I have labeled in this way: HCs (Historical Catholics), NPs (Neo-Puritans), STs (Southern Traditionalists), and EPMs (Evangelical Postmoderns). There is some crossover among these groups; there are NPs who are also STs. But it should also be noted that the chasm between each of these groups is also quite wide. There does not seem to be a place where, for instance, the HCs meet the EPMs, or the EPMs meet the STs. What is characteristic of each grouping indicates why a place of meeting would be very difficult. Some of this is due in no small part to the underlying history of the Reformed movements. The differences between the British and European Continental churches and theology (and the unique approaches that exist between the European communions, notably between the Kuyperians and Schilderians), all contribute to this divergence. Those from a Scottish heritage for instance could never bear to have portions of the English Book of Common Prayer used in their services, nor could the Dutch Reformed ponder for long a Scottish style Presbyterian polity.
Let’s look briefly at these groups as I observe them.
HCs (historic catholics) value the ancient Faith as expressed in the Creeds, worship in such a way that the Lord’s Table has a place of weekly prominence, and the liturgical structure images the more ancient practices of the Church. Scripture is taken very seriously, studied enthusiastically, and proclaimed faithfully. These congregations however see themselves first and foremost as part of the centuries deep and wide Christian Church which encompasses a far wider community than the Reformed, and takes seriously the call to work with other kinds of Christian congregations in their locality for the growth of the Kingdom. Often in favor of paedocommunion, HCs are determined to plant beachheads of kingdom renewal, appreciating their reformed pedigree and confessional allegiance, but never allowing that to trump Scripture when there is any apparent disagreement between the two. They would value Systematic theology, but not at the expense of Biblical theology, which would have pride of place in this theological scheme.
NPs (Neo-Puritans) value the Confession and Catechisms above the ancient Creeds, worship in what might be identified as a more Puritan- minimalist style, and have a liturgical structure which places the greatest emphasis on the sermon. Here Scripture is taken very seriously as well, and it is taught and proclaimed with vigor and devotion. These congregations see themselves as rooted not so much in a patristic Church tradition as in the Reformation itself, and may view with suspicion anything that is not part and parcel of that great renewal. They may work with other local congregations, but might also be reluctant to do so in the name of preserving the purity of the Gospel.
STs (Southern Traditionalists) might be described as exactly like the NPs with this notable exception: STs tend to be ready and able to work with other evangelical congregations in community wide evangelistic work and mercy ministry. In addition, their worship is somewhat more culturally conditioned as well, often with large choirs at the front of the worship space, and magnificent productions and spectacles presented that affirm America’s uniquely Christian history, as well as the expected Christmas and Easter pageantry. One person described these congregations as NPs with a smile. That is not fair to either group in fact. Their similarities in concern are genuine, but their differences in worship remain profound. Like EPMs, these churches will be happy to employ modern technologies of mass communication to increase their reach and (as they see it) effectiveness in getting the message out.
EPMs (Evangelical post-moderns) value contextualization and the constant search for the narrative of the people they serve, so that the narrative of Scripture can be communicated to those people. In a certain sense this is not post-modern; it does after all acknowledge a meta-narrative in both the community and the Scripture. But it is post-modern in its shape, for its methodology suggests that the narrative of the post-apostolic experience of the Church can be “mined” for examples without buying the whole parcel of the experience and history of that ancient Church. EPMs would thus be more than happy to quote an Augustine or Athanasius, while in the same breath roundly asserting that we must beware of the dead religiosity of the past. Worship here may best be described as experimental and open; the leaders are committed to the search for the appropriate words and vehicles to present the person and message of Jesus Christ within their cultural context and language. This may include drama, art, various musical styles and performances (though never classical), and innovative preaching and teaching presentations, often involving multi-media displays with power point and move clips. They are gladly open to work with Christians from other groups, and they tend to not be self-consciously catechetical and confessional, seeking to keep the doctrinal and dogmatic end of the Faith somewhat underground and on a very short leash.
Running throughout the PCA are fault lines around these theological and ecclesiastical tectonic plates. They await the one issue that will unleash the kind of energy that causes a massive shift, with the plates moving away from one another, causing a new alignment to occur. That issue is now on the horizon, and the low rumblings from deep beneath the surface can be heard as that issue moves closer to consideration. That issue is the role of women in the Church.
I am a former PCA ruling elder, currently pastoring a CRE church in Morgantown, WV. I thought it would be helpful if I knew who pastordc is? What is his background, etc. Nothing extensive, just a sketch would be nice. Thanks,
Peter Jones, Pastor
P.S. The article is helpful. I am looking forward to the others.
Thanks for the inciteful post. I have put a link on my page where I am bring all the female deacon deaconess info together for the PCA…
http://www.waysidechurch.org/femdeacs/blogs.htm
Those of us in the PCA need to answer the question of about sexuality before we get into the whole ” women in the church issue.” The broad issue before the narrow one.
Here’s the brief sketch: David Cassidy, married to Toni since 1980, and dad to three: Sean, Claire, and Anna. Pastor of Redeemer Pres (PCA) in Austin, Texas. My own blog is at http://www.bythissign.blogspot.com and the church site is http://www.redeemerpres.org. I’m the author of ‘2000 Years in 2 Days’ (A Seminar introducing Church History to congregations), and ‘Confessing the Faith – Meditations on the Nicene Creed’. I grew up in Indiana, moved to Britain at 19 and served as a Pastor there after school; moved back to the US after 8 years, in 1987, and have been active in church-planting and pastoral leadership development for many years both in the US and abroad. And I love the Chicago Cubs. Oh well. I was originally in the (very terrific) Nashville Presbytery of the PCA (while we lived in KY and I served ‘out of bounds’ as a Pastor there), and enjoy now serving in the South Texas Presbytery. We’ve been in Austin since June 05. I hope that fills in the gap. Sorry, I didn’t know the post would say ‘pastordc’.
Thanks David. That helped a lot. Looking forward to the rest of the posts.
Peter Jones
As I imagine you’ll point out, deaconnesses (not lady deacons, but a different function) are something the HC/LR have in common with the EPM/UR group. Deaconnesses are all over the Bible, and all over church history. Nowadays they are called nuns, and often have to take special vows; but there’s no need for us to take all of that over. Women served at the Tabernacle, at the Temple, served Jesus, and served in the early church. It is odd to me that there are people in the PCA who freak out over this, but I think you may be right that this is an issue that will finally split the PCA.
Also, I would dispute slightly your description of the NP Neo-Puritan group. I don’t think they see themselves with the Reformation but with the so-called Second Reformation. The Reformation was liturgical, had a church year, was not afraid of bishops per se, and called for weekly communion. The Second Reformation was against those things. In the PCA it’s a mixed bag, but on all those kinds of issues, including “covenant of works” language, the NP group is quite different from Calvin, Bucer, and the Reformation. The NP group is quite at home with Baptists, but not with Anglicans and Lutherans. The Swiss Reformers had the opposite set of affections.
The recent Federal Vision controversy was a fight launched by Second Reformation NP types against First Reformation Calvinists.
David,
First, thanks for the thoughts.
Second, the link to your blog goes to a website about the coming pretribulational rapture. I’m sure that’s not you! :)
Your p and s are transposed in ‘blogspot’.
Josh,
Thanks for the correction on the blog. Yes, here’s the proper postmillennial address -
http://www.bythissign.blogspot.com
David
Jim,
Thanks for your comments. I am hopeful that modern nuns do not exhaust the possibilities for the new expression of ancient roles for women in the service of Christ, the Church, and the Gospel. I think we need a fresh consideration of the Trinity, as well as the role of the Virgin Mary in redemptive history, to gain a better grasp of a theology of women for the Church. This would be free from the feminist theology agenda, rooted in Scripture, and the practice of the ancient catholic – ie, patristic – Church.
I think there are a lot of folks in the PCA who are opposed to the idea of women deacons/deaconesses because they suspect (and I think rightly so) that the motivation for this issue lies more in seeking to placate the spirit of the age than pleasing God through obedience to Scripture. They are asking the right question of those anxious for a change. On the other hand, if the motivation for change was in fact the desire to search the Scriptures, learn from history, and seek to be faithful – even if that means changing drastically – there would be less of a distress signal going up.
My fear is that, given the litigious way we PCAers go about things, we will have an environment in which constructive discussion cannot take place, and in which the younger, gifted leaders will simply go elsewhere, desiring to serve God in ways other than filing briefs for a presbytery trial or for the SJC. I am sympathetic to that concern.
Why are we making up the word “deaconess”? isn’t the word “deacon” for both masculine or feminine in the Greek?