Category Archives: EPC

Women in Ordained Ministry in the Church — Current Discussion and Some Thoughts

Leave a reply

The first item, or actually two items, of news relates to the ongoing discussion in the Presbyterian Church in America about the role of women in the diaconate.  You may remember that at their General Assembly back in June there was a significant discussion about establishing a study committee to look at this issue and the various aspects of ordination versus commissioning versus participation.  In the end the Assembly decided not to establish the study committee but to continue the discussion in the denomination, including through the process of records review.

As part of that continuing discussion the PCA publication byFaith has just published on-line a pair of articles that do a great job of presenting two of the aspects of this issue:

The Case for our Current Policy on Female Deacons by Ligon Duncan

The Case for Commissioning (Not Ordaining) Deaconesses by Tim Keller

Each of the articles is well written for a knowledgeable but not scholarly audience.  For instance, they presuppose that you know a bit about the issue and are familiar with the concepts of complementarianism and egalitarianism.  But they do a good job of discussing relevant points in the history of the debate as well as theological and scriptural issues without your eyes glazing over when presented with the Greek vocabulary.

It is also important to point out that the articles are written by two high-profile and respected teaching elders in the PCA with somewhat different views, but who both acknowledge, if not affirm, the present constitutional standard of the PCA that only men may hold any ordained office.  They also affirm the constitutional standard that women are to be involved in the diaconate ministry.  The articles discuss two different approaches to that involvement.

For those of us not in the PCA this is not an unrelated issue.  Between the PCA, with no ordination of women, and the PC(USA), with full ordination of women, there is the Evangelical Presbyterian Church with “local option” ordination.

As the movement of churches disaffiliating from the PC(USA) began and these churches generally realigned with the EPC, there were concerns raised about the status of women’s ordinations in the realigned churches.  In particular, Presbyterians for Renewal had an article in their 12 reasons to stay in the PC(USA) on “The PC(USA) Affirms and Encourages Women.”  (All of my links to that original article are now broken but there is a post at Renewing.NewCastleFPC.org that has the original list of 12 reasons to stay in the PC(USA).)  There was also a series of articles by the Network of Presbyterian Women in Leadership titled “Has anyone asked the women?”

In thinking about this I wondered “How much of an issue is this at the present time?”

So in my morning coffee break and over lunch today I did a quick survey.  I took the EPC list of churches in the New Wineskins/EPC Transitional Presbytery and did a quick, and probably unscientific, look at all listed web sites to see how many had women on staff who were ordained as ministers.  I would first note that of the 30 churches on the list, there is only one with a woman as the solo/senior/head pastor.  In total I found about six women in what appeared to be ordained pastoral positions at these 30 churches.  (I gave one or two ambiguous names the benefit of the doubt as being women and on some church web sites technical titles that a GA Junkie would want were absent, so again I had to make my best judgment if the individual was ordained.  I also included one commissioned lay pastor.  Like I said, it was quick, “back of the envelope,” and unscientific.)  My best count from the web sites is that there are at least 66 total ordained ministers at these churches.  At six out of 66 there are about 9% ordained women serving in these churches.  So in reality, while six individuals may have an issue when the transitional presbytery dissolves (depends on the status of women in the presbyteries these churches will be transferred into), 91% will have no problem.  (Interestingly, I just called up the PC(USA) 2007 statistics, and while they break out male/female elders and deacons, they don’t for ministers.  But I would bet that the percentage of ministers in the PC(USA) who are women, while less than 50% is more than 9%.  I did a count of my presbytery membership and it is 15%.  For ministers serving churches it is 22% in my presbytery.)

It is interesting to consider the reasons for this low percentage of women in ordained ministry in these churches.  I am not aware of a departure of women from the church as the church departs for the EPC.  Maybe there is already a “corporate culture” at these churches that gives them an affinity for the EPC including the lower likelyhood of women in ordained office.  Or you could play thought games with the cause and effect:  “Because they have few women in leadership they have an affinity for the EPC” or “Because they have an affinity for the EPC they have few women in leadership.”  While not losing sight of the fact that these churches are realigning with the EPC for other reasons, the issue of women in ordained leadership, or not in leadership as the case may be, appears to be an associated factor.

But at another level it is an issue.  Over the last couple of months I’ve had conversations with two women attending my church about their sense of call to ordained ministry.  For both, because of “where they are,” ordained ministry in their present situation is not an option, whether it be denominational membership or seminary attendance.  They are still talking to God about whether the call is authentic and if so should they make a change in their situation.

And given time, maybe this will not be an issue with the EPC.  I have speculated that with a continued or increased realignment of churches from the PC(USA) to the EPC there can’t but help being a certain “PC(USA)-isation” of the EPC which I expect will include the spreading of women’s ordination under local option, if not the approval of the ordination of women across the denomination.  As I frequently say, time will tell.

The 28th General Assembly of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church

Leave a reply

We are now in the midst of the 28th General Assembly of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, being held in Bethesda, Maryland.  By most Presbyterian standards four days is relatively short for a GA.

Since I am currently focusing on another General Assembly that starts tomorrow, and still have two blog entries each to finish from the Church of Scotland, PCA, and my GA 101 series, I’ll have to play catch-up later on the EPC meeting.  However, I don’t feel too bad doing that since the Rev. David Fischler from The Reformed Pastor is attending and blogging.  I would also note, and David confirms, that the Rev. Bill Crawford from Bayou Christian is there as well and I would expect his comments at some point in the future.  The event is properly covered.

But some think that the real EPC fireworks will be over at the PC(USA) where an overture makes accusations of “sheep stealing” (the polite term the overture uses is “persuade” but other stronger terms are being used in private conversation) and some in the PC(USA) want an investigation and cutting formal ties with the EPC.

Blessings on the EPC meeting and I’ll try to cross-correlate later.

Synod of the Sun (PC(USA)) Establishes Administrative Commission for Presbytery of South Louisiania Property Cases

3 Replies

The big news over the weekend in the Politics of Presbyterianism was that the Synod of the Sun established an administrative commission to work with the Presbytery of South Louisiana regarding the Presbytery’s handling of church property cases.

Background
Back on October 28, 2007, the membership of First Presbyterian Church of Baton Rouge, LA, voted 422-60 to leave the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and transfer to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC).  It is interesting to note that the pastor of the church is the Rev. Gerrit Dawson, who is co-moderator of the New Wineskins Association of Churches along with the Rev. Dean Weaver.  Rev. Weaver’s church, Memorial Park Presbyterian Church in Allison Park, PA, just came to terms with Pittsburgh Presbytery concerning its release to the EPC.

The total number voting at the meeting, 482, represents only one-quarter of the membership of the church according to the article published by the Presbyterian News Service.

The significant piece of background noted in that article is that the Presbytery of South Louisiana had granted to First Presbyterian clear title to their property roughly a year before the vote so the church was free to take their property with them without further legal action or negotiation.

Synod Meeting
The published facts in this action are from a single source, a Synod of the Sun news story about the matter on the Presbyterian Neighbor News.  The action appears to have been taken at a twice-annual stated meeting of the Synod of the Sun but the packet for the meeting does not contain any advanced information about this business.

The news story says that in a letter to the Synod Executive dated April 8 presbytery pastors and elders “expressed a concern regarding our presbytery’s leadership,
particularly pertaining to the presbytery’s response to churches
seeking title to their properties.”  The letter “further stated that presbytery leaders gave insufficient
consideration to denominational protocols on such matters and gave
insufficient consultation with other churches.”  Finally, the letter is said to ask for an administrative commission to look into this.

According to the article the next step was a meeting:

Synod Executive Judy Fletcher met with members of the presbytery
council of South Louisiana, April 22, and said they concurred that
outside consultation would be helpful. The council sent a letter to
synod supporting an administrative commission but asking that the power
of original jurisdiction not be given.

The news story says that this past weekend those at the Synod meeting unanimously approved the administrative commission:

Synod commissioners established an administrative commission charged
with determining the “validity of the presbytery’s procedures and
decisions (past, pending, and future) regarding various congregations
and their properties.”

The synod document further stated that
“All pending and future decisions regarding property in the Presbytery
of South Louisiana shall require the approval of the commission.” The
commission shall also listen to expressions of concern regarding the
presbytery’s leadership and suggest ways the presbytery can move toward
a fuller expression of the ministry of Christ’s Church.

Reaction
I probably don’t need to tell you that from the conservative quarters of the PC(USA) the reaction has been swift and strong.  With the past history of the “Louisville Papers” and the perception of the Office of the General Assembly wanting to hold onto the property at all costs this appears as top-down punitive and corrective action on the Presbytery for being gracious and pastoral with churches that wanted to depart the denomination.  In particular Bill Crawford at Bayou Christian, Toby Brown at A Classical Presbyterian, David Fischler at The Reformed Pastor, and Michael McCarty at Around the Scuttlebutt have particularly negative views of this action and the possible conspiracy with Louisville it represents.

Comments
On one level this action can just be viewed as the way that our connectional system operates.  When there is a disagreement on one level we move up to the next-higher governing body to get help and direction from the collective wisdom of that body to help us get around a disagreement or rough patch.  Not knowing any facts from other sources, and ignoring that a controversial topic is in play here, the sequence of events, steps taken, and the unanimous vote, all would make it appear that this is our Presbyterian system working properly, decently, and in order.

But as the reaction in the blogosphere demonstrates this is a loaded topic.  It is my view that there has been a disconnect between the national structure of the PC(USA) and the “people in the pews” which makes an action like this, even if innocent, appear disciplinary and controlling.  And with the Louisville Papers in circulation this can also be interpreted as conspiratory.  The press release is carefully crafted and with no other sources to go on it appears that a concerted effort was made to put a controlled positive public relations spin on this.  The two areas of concern for me are the short lead time which prevented information from being in the advanced packet, and that the only governing body to speak on this is the Synod of the Sun and there is no comment from the Presbytery of South Louisiana.

But related to both the “innocent” and the “conspiratory” interpretations of this action is a question I always ask:  Is an administrative commission the best option?  I always keep in mind that an administrative commission like this one is the second most powerful action a governing body can take regarding a lower governing body.  It is only out-done by an administrative commission that is granted the power of “original jurisdiction.”  In a real sense this can be the “Ecclesiastical Nuke” that Rev. Fischler refers to it as.

For those readers who may not understand the full implications, in Presbyterian lingo a “commission” is a group elected and given certain powers and responsibilities to act on behalf of and with the authority of the governing body that created it.  When granted original jurisdiction, the commission can take full control of the lower governing body.  When a presbytery establishes an administrative commission to work with a church, if that commission has original jurisdiction they can set themselves up as the session of the church if they decide it is necessary.  In general Presbyterians have two types of commissions, administrative and judicial.

So, was an administrative commission the best option?  Not being there and having all the facts I can not say.  I will say that when I was working with my presbytery, particularly as the moderator of the Committee on Ministry, it was my view and experience that an administrative commission was a last resort.  Creating one to work with a church was often viewed as a power play by the presbytery much as this is viewed in some quarters as a power play by the synod.  Yes, there are cases were a body with the authority was needed and yes there are cases where an administrative commission is welcomed.  But I have found that beginning with task forces, listening teams, or discussion groups was at least a “kinder and gentler” way to begin the process.  Showing up at the door as an administrative commission, however well intentioned, was not always viewed as a friendly gesture.  “Hi.  We’re from the presbytery and we are here to help you.”

I was aware that in other presbyteries and other synods some of my counterparts felt that administrative commissions were the way to go.  The idea was to send in the big guns, get things cleaned up quickly, and get out.  (Commando Presbyterian governance?) 

Maybe they are right but it never sat well with me both from a connectional and pastoral perspective.  This is a view reaffirmed by a friend of mine at a recent presbytery meeting where the administrative commission he was chairing made their final report and was dismissed.  After delivering the final report he was allowed some personal comments in which he said that administrative commissions are a painful solution in many situations and while they sometimes may be necessary they should only be used as a last resort.

Preach it brother!

New Evangelical Presbyterian Church Web Site Design

Leave a reply

Overnight the Evangelical Presbyterian Church rolled out a new web site design.  It is clean and consistent, makes extensive use of flash, and is very readable.  It is still not completed or linked in places and seldom uses both the left and right side bar at the same time.  Still it is attractive, easy to navigate. and makes extensive use of Jeff Jeremiah’s picture.  But I also noted that the web site for the Presbytery of the East disappeared at the same time this site was launched.  And for the hard core web designers, it does not scale well to smaller screens, the little bullets in the left nav bar are not open/close toggles as you might expect, but it looks good on several different browsers, if you have the screen resolution.  And the name might bother you, but looking at the source code it uses the “suckerfish” javascript for drop-downs menus.

Geek moment over, enjoy the new look.

Tension in the EPC/PCUSA Relationship?

Leave a reply

There appears to be a developing story in the relationship between the Evangelical Presbyterian Church and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) (PC(USA)).  On his blog, Reformed Pastor, Teaching Elder David Fischler discusses last weekend’s EPC Presbytery of the East meeting.  Specifically, he reports the comments at that meeting by EPC Stated Clerk/Executive Pastor Dr. Jeffrey Jeremiah regarding contacts from the PC(USA) headquarters.

Specifically, TE Jeremiah mentioned that in the fall a PC(USA) “constitutional body” declared that churches were not to be released to the EPC Transitional Presbytery.  I am not sure exactly what declaration this was, but it might be referring to one of two Advisory Opinions from the Office of the General Assembly (OGA).  Opinion 17 was titled Schism and Opinion 19 was titled Implementing the Trust Clause for the Unity of the Church.  It could also be related to letters sent to presbyteries by the OGA that we don’t have the text of.

Mr. Fischler’s report on TE Jeremiah’s comments continues on to say that the EPC has been contacted by the PC(USA) and accused of initiating contact with PC(USA) congregations to encourage them to switch to the EPC.  Mr. Jeremiah flatly denies that the EPC has initiated contact and is concerned that their reply to the inquiry of an individual could be interpreted as recruiting of that church.  In addition, the PC(USA) was displeased that the EPC would receive a church that was not properly dismissed by their presbytery but just left, technically speaking they “disaffiliated.”

Finally, TE Jeremiah reported that there is at least one PC(USA) presbytery that will be sending an overture to this June’s General Assembly to declare that the PC(USA) is no longer in “correspondence” with the EPC, thereby prohibiting presbyteries from dismissing congregations to it.  This information is echoed by the Rev. Bill Crawford in his blog Bayou Christian.  Rev. Crawford’s source also says that Louisville is encouraging presbyteries to stall dismissal actions “by any means possible” until after GA so that churches could no longer be dismissed to the EPC… If the Overture passes.

We will have to wait for further developments to see if such an overture is submitted and how this plays out in advance of GA.  It should be noted that the New Wineskins Association of Churches has their own sample overture for presbyteries to approve and send to GA making it easier for churches to be dismissed with their property.  Among other Book of Order changes, this overture requests that Chapter VIII, “The Church and Its Property” be completely removed from the Constitution.  Again, I have not heard of a presbytery passing this overture nor has it appeared on the GA Business page listing.

Recent Developments in Churches Breaking with the PC(USA)

Leave a reply

I made a decision a while back to not worry about posting the updates and details of the several and on-going cases where churches are leaving the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) (PC(USA)), particularly those associated with the New Wineskins Association of Churches (NWAC) and particularly those moving to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC).  The reasons for my not covering them in detail are many:  Others, particularly the blog PresbyLaw and the Layman Online, are already doing a good job keeping all of us up-to-date on the details.  Also, while each case is different, many can be grouped in the different categories of “leaving with property,” “leaving with property after a settlement with the presbytery,” “leaving without property,” and those that are still in the process tied up in either church processes or civil litigation.  So, not to deny the significance of any individual church, from a process point of view I was afraid that blogging the individual cases would start to sound repetitive.  Finally, it looked like posting updates on the 60-100 churches that are going through this would consume a good portion of my blogging time that I would rather target to a broader range of polity issues.

Having said that, I do want to comment on the current high-profile case since it has a number of interesting distinctives.

At a congregational meeting yesterday the members of Memorial Park Presbyterian Church in Allison Park, PA, voted by a margin of 664-25 to leave the PC(USA).  Among the distinctives of Memorial Park are that it is the largest church in Pittsburgh Presbytery with over 1650 members and the senior pastor, the Rev. Dr. D. Dean Weaver, is the co-moderator of the New Wineskins Association of Churches.  But the most distinctive thing that brought them to the vote yesterday was the way in which this journey unfolded.

The first vote was on June 3, 2007, when the congregation voted 951-93 to request dismissal from the PC(USA) to the EPC. ( church press release)  Memorial Park then began negotiating with the Pittsburgh Presbytery to be dismissed.  It should surprise none of us that the negotiations were basically about money, at least if the latest information is accurate.  According to a letter the church sent out on January 3, 2008, the church and the presbytery were far apart on offers and request, and no progress had been made in several months.  The church then initiated legal action to secure the property (“quiet title claim”) in the Allegheny County Common Pleas Court. ( Pittsburgh Post-Gazett Article)  Following the court filing the Presbytery’s Administrative Commission appears to have tried to invoke “original jurisdiction” and take control of the church, including the instruction that the congregational meeting yesterday be canceled.  The church requested from the Common Pleas Court, and got, an injunction against the presbytery so that the meeting could procede.  The Presbytery agreed not to further contest the injunction as long as the church did not transfer the property yet.  At the meeting the congregation voted 664-25 to dissolve all ties to the PC(USA) and affiliate with the EPC.  ( Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Article about the new developments)  Following the court filing the Presbytery also sent a letter out to members of the Presbytery.

That is where the case sits at this moment, but this is far from over.  Because the congregation now considers itself a member of the EPC, or at least not a member of the PC(USA), the Administrative Commission should have no further power or authority.  The Presbytery emphasizes that the church did not follow the process for departure and was never released, therefore it is still a PC(USA) congregation.  As you can probably guess, Judge Judith L. Friedman of the Court of Common Pleas will probably have the next, but certainly not the last, say on this.  Court arguments will resume tomorrow.

EPC update on the Transitional Presbytery

Leave a reply

The latest issue of the “ EP News,” the on-line newsletter of the General Assembly office of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC), has an update on their Transitional Presbytery to provide a path for PC(USA) churches, especially those who are part of the New Wineskins Association of Churches (NWAC), to join the EPC.  The newsletter says:

As of August 21, the following churches and
pastors have been received into the NW/EPC Transitional Presbytery: 
Central Presbyterian Church, Huntsville, AL (Randy Jenkins, pastor),
First Presbyterian Church, Quincy, IL (Rod Bakker and Kevin McGinnis,
pastors), The Forks of the Brandywine Presbyterian Church, Glenmoore,
PA (Andy Curtis, pastor), Great Valley Presbyterian Church, Malvern, PA
(Dan Stewart, pastor), and Upper Octorara Presbyterian Church,
Parkesburg, PA (Bill Kelly, pastor).  Hope Presbyterian Church of Rogue
River, OR (Brian Boisen, pastor), has been received pending their
dismissal from the PCUSA.  Also, Sean Martin has been received as a
minister member of the presbytery.  He will be laboring outside the
bounds at Covenant Presbyterian Church, Simsbury, CT.

The article also lists one more church, Grace Chapel of Madison, MS, which has also been received by the administrative commission.  I interpret this differentiation to mean that Grace Chapel is moving to the EPC but is not a NWAC church.

Headlines

Leave a reply

No, once again I have not fallen off the face of the earth, and I have not given up on being a GA Junkie.  But between work, family, and getting myself into a presbytery issue and also a synod issue, I have little time left to report on Presbyterian happenings here.

So today, I give you a selection of recent happenings in their barest form with links to more information.  My integration and analysis will have to wait.

In the Church of Scotland news, the new British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, the son of a Church of Scotland minister, is still dropping hints about cutting state oversight of the Church of England.  But what about changing the law so a non-Protestant can be monarch the Scottish Catholic bishop asks?

The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America adopted the report declaring that the Federal Vision Theology is out of line with the orthodoxy of the Westminster standards.  Now the discussion is getting hot.  The Rev. Steve Wilkins (or TE Wilkins as the PCA’ers would say) has issued a response to the adoption of the report.  That and much more is available at his church’s Federal Vision Page.  There is also a public response from the Rev. Peter Leithart, another proponent.  In addition, the blogosphere is alive

At the General Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America there was a special motion “that a study
committee be created to read and evaluate reports and responses from other
Reformed denominations and institutions regarding recent controversies on the
doctrine of justification.”  In other words, they will also be studying the Federal Vision theology.

The General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church spent a significant amount of time revising their Directory for Public Worship.  This was a monumental task and after multiple sessions revising and word-smithing the document, they in the end only got through the Preface and five of the eighteen sections.  The whole project has been referred to the 2008 GA.

The Cumberland Presbyterian Church took the unique step of electing co-moderators of the GA.

And finally, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church GA approved the proposal to create the New Wineskins transitional presbytery for churches interested in leaving the PCUSA and exploring membership in the EPC.

More on these and other stories as my time permits.

State of the PCUSA: II — Departure of churches from the PC(USA)

Leave a reply

This past week the Presbyterian Church (USA) (PCUSA) issued a formal response to the New Wineskins Association of Churches (NWAC) document that details their perceived problems with the PC(USA).  The New Wineskins Strategy Team Report, A Time for Every Purpose Under Heaven, was adopted at their Winter Convocation in February.  While there was some general response at that time, this week the PCUSA sent a letter from Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick and General Assembly Council Executive Director Linda Valentine to all the middle governing bodies promoting new materials from the Office of Theology that directly addresses the NWAC concerns (the PCUSA letter calls them “mischaracterizations”).  The Presbyterian News Service has issued a press release on the letter and materials and the letter, a one page summary, and the four page detailed commentary can be found as a single PDF file on the PC(USA) Middle Governing Body Connect site.  (The titling of the file as “wineskins-letter-brief” had me looking for the long version but as best as I can tell that is the whole thing.)

The material is basically what many of us PC(USA) watchers would have expected out of Louisville:  It is well written, contains numerous references to the confessions, particularly the confession of 1967, explains in detail the actions of the General Assembly with respect to different reports, like the Trinity Report, and overall is a great rebuttal to the NWAC document.  There are however two problems.

The first problem is that it will have difficulty getting into the hands of the members in the pews and when it does it is written at a level that will put the average person asleep faster than a slow sermon on a hot day.  There is an obvious reason for sending it to Middle Governing Bodies and that is because that is the place that it will be used and understood.  I can’t see this getting much “trickle down” from there the way that the NWAC strategy report got distributed.

The second problem is the persistent one in the PC(USA) about our words matching our actions.  As much as the NWAC is a relatively small percentage of the churches in the PC(USA), there are also a small number of churches on the progressive side whose theology and actions, when they become known through the media (including this blog), seem to contradict the nice words in this document.  (If you want examples I refer you to my blog posts of Sept. 28, 2006; Nov. 11, 2006; April 19, 2007)  This is not helped by actions at the national level which include the infamous “Re-imagining Conference,” the “Louisville Papers,” and the publication of “Christian Faith and the Truth behind 9/11.”  I realize that there is a rational explanation behind every one of these and I am lumping three very different issues together.  But that is the way that many of the PC(USA) members view what has been happening in the denomination over the last couple of decades.  In their minds all these things can not be separated!

This is not to say that there are not good things coming out of Louisville.  In particular I point to the Director of Evangelism and Church Growth, Eric Hoey’s comments in the June Perspectives where he realistically assesses the declining rate of adult baptisms and membership decline and says:

This tells me very clearly that Presbyterians do not know how to share the “Good News” of their faith and welcome people into our churches through baptism… If we continue down this path of not being able to share our faith, the apple of the PC(USA) will soon fall apart! (emphasis his)

This almost seems to reinforce the NWAC contention that the PCUSA has lost its missional interest.

Anyway, I’ll get down off my soapbox now, but it is important to remember that the PC(USA) operates on several levels and it has been my experience that what happens at higher governing bodies has little day-to-day importance or visibility to the “member in the pew.”

We will see what will happen with this document.  In my experience, it will get a limited circulation to people who already know this material.

In the mean time there is serious action with NWAC leaving the PC(USA) in favor of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church.  While several churches are moving in this direction, I will highlight two.

The first is Signal Mountain Presbyterian Church in Signal Mountain, Tennessee.  This departure is notable because of the size of the church and the amicable way in which it happened.  It is a church of 1800 members and following the congregational vote of 1,082-10 on January 28 the Presbytery of East Tennessee established an Administrative Commission to review the situation.  The report of the Commission in the presbytery meeting packet (report begins on page 7) is interesting, if for nothing else than it’s generally positive and friendly tone.  For example, from the forward:

We wish to acknowledge the cooperative spirit and non-confrontational approach evinced by the Session of SMPC, and especially the Clerk of Session, Steve Frost, in their interactions with the ARC. Every request from the ARC to the Session for information and records were met in a timely and gracious fashion. The character of conversations moved quickly from cautious to cordial to trustful. This alone distinguishes the current situation with most other dismissal requests in the denominations, which have been characterized by hostility, distrust and, oftentimes, aggression. The ARC has tried to find a different way that, while recognizing our obvious differences with the members of SMPC, emphasizes our commonality resulting from being a part of the Body of Christ. If we have succeeded, it is due in no small measure to the like-minded approach taken by SMPC’s Session. Indeed, the letter of January 10, 2007, was notable for its pastoral and gracious tone, and made a pastoral approach by ARC possible. We thank God for these, our brothers and sisters in Christ.

In the action items the recommendation is:

That Signal Mountain Presbyterian Church be dismissed from the Presbytery of East Tennessee, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), with property, real and personal (i.e., all assets), to the Presbytery of the Southeast of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, effective immediately upon receipt by the Stated Clerk of PET of notification of acceptance of SMPC by the Stated Clerk of the Presbytery of the Southeast of the EPC; said dismissal being contingent upon no other conditions.

So the church got to leave with their property and name.  In addition, the church agreed to continue to support the presbytery mission budget for another five years and the two parties agreed to a transition support structure for any Associate Pastor that wanted to remain in the PC(USA).  The Presbyt
erian News Service has a press release on the departure as do other media sources.

The second high-profile church to vote to leave the PC(USA) is Memorial Park Presbyterian Church in Pittsburgh Presbytery.  On June 3 the congregation voted 951 to 93 to request the presbytery dismiss them to pursue membership in the EPC.  This action is probably not a surprise since the church called the Rev. Dr. D. Dean Weaver in 2005 to serve as senior pastor.  Rev. Weaver is co-moderator of the NWAC.  The yes vote exceeded a threshold that the church set with the presbytery so now negotiations over the details of the departure, including the property, will begin.  According to the PC(USA) press release another church in Pittsburgh Presbytery has reportedly reached an agreement with the presbytery to pay the presbytery $250,000 over 10 years.  The Memorial Park Church has issued its own press release about the congregational vote.

In addition an opposition blog was established last Saturday June 9.  I am a bit hesitant to mention it since it contains one entry with strong language and accusations against the way the meeting and vote was conducted and I do not see an e-mail address or name for contacting the author.  I won’t link to it but if you use “memorial park church blog” in your favorite search engine it should come right up.

And finally a reminder that the General Assembly of the EPC meets next week where they will vote on establishing a special transitional presbytery for NWAC churches that wish to transition to the EPC in that way.

More reaction to the New Wineskins Convocation

Leave a reply

Since the New Wineskins Association of Churches Convocation about a month ago now I have commented on the response from other bloggers as well as the articles from the Network of Presbyterian Women in Leadership about the role of women in leadership and the response it drew from the NWAC and the Witherspoon Society.  There have been some other comments, reports and analysis coming out that I’ll point to now.

The first official response was a follow-up letter from NWAC co-moderator Garrit Dawson.  In this letter he sets forth his summary of the convocation, the action taken, and a list of “what’s next.”

There was also official comment from Dr. Jeremiah, the State Clerk of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church who was part of the delegation the EPC sent to the convocation.  In his message Dr. Jeremiah emphasizes the global mission emphasis the two groups share.

There has not been official reaction from the PC(USA) to the NWAC Convocation.  It was covered in two articles from the PCUSA News Service (Feb. 9, Feb. 14) and mentioned in passing in the recently published interview with Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrick.  There was also the letter from Rev. Kirkpatrick and General Assembly Council Executive Director Linda Valentine that came out before the Convocation that has the appearance of a preemptive strike.

The most recent comment is a series of articles posted on the Witherspoon Society web site that provide news and analysis of the gathering and the NWAC organization.  (From the frequent references to the Presbyterian Outlook article by Leslie Scanlon it would appear that none of these writers were at the convocation.  But neither was I.)

The first article by Gene TeSelle is a brief summary of the meeting and some brief analysis that includes the following:

When there is talk about withdrawal by anyone – right, left, or center – there will be at least the passing thought that it would be “good riddance.” But this is likely to be followed by the feeling that, no matter how much we disagree, we have grown accustomed to each other and may even like each other. Departure is always interpreted as a sign of failure – somewhere, somehow.

But let’s notice that departure to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church would not be to a group that is alienated from the PC(USA) to the extent of anathematizing it. The EPC is in communion with us. We might think of those who withdraw to it as being in a “holding tank,” an interim situation while they think things over. They might even decide to return to the PC(USA), especially if the EPC gets tangled up in debates over women’s ordination. When you think you’re escaping to a purer and more homogeneous communion, you may find that you are only increasing the number of disputes to be worried about.

The second article, also by Gene TeSelle, looks at the NWAC theological heritage and the church order that they have outlined.

The third article, “New Wineskins or Simply Whining?” is an opinion piece by John E. Harris.  In it he takes the NWAC to task for being a very small but vocal minority that is now concerned with ordination issues for women when they deny the same arguments for sexually-active homosexuals.

Finally, Berry Craig, a history teacher, has a commentary likening the NWAC transitioning to the EPC with the secession of the Confederate States.  He said that just as northerners had varying opinions in the 1860’s, so PC(USA) liberals are similarly split between “good riddance” and “the union must be preserved.”

So far I have seen a response to the Witherspoon articles from one person, Bill Crawford, who was at the NWAC Convocation.  Mr. Crawford’s comments can be found in his blog Bayou Christian in an entry titled “Feel the Love.”

A couple of comments of my own:
   When Mr. Harris talks about how small the NWAC minority is he uses a percentage of congregations in the PC(USA).  While I do not deny that the number is small, I suspect that the number of members is actually higher.  The membership numbers for NWAC are not published (that I know of) but I would suspect that the average NWAC church is larger than the average PC(USA) congregation.  I know it is for this corner of the world (Southern California).
   Second, Mr. Harris talks about the progressive organizations never advocating departure from the PC(USA). That to my knowledge is true, but I do know that high-profile progressive congregations have discussed it.
   Finally, several of these articles in the end seem to reduce this discussion to money.  That is, are the big churches trying to leverage or force governing bodies to do certain things under threat of losing giving, and the churches that are leaving wanting to take their property with them?

We will see what else gets published and posted in the coming weeks.