Category Archives: EPC

Witherspoon Society response to NPWL comments on women in leadership in EPC

Leave a reply

A week ago I discussed the Network of Presbyterian Women in Leadership (NPWL) articles that asked important and hard questions about how women in leadership would be accepted by the Evangelical Presbyterian Church with the New Wineskins Association of Churches’ expected transition from the PC(USA) to the EPC.  In that posting I commented on a parallel between some of the language used in that articles about the ordination of women with the language that is used in favor of the ordination of active homosexuals.  Others have also noted that parallelism and the Witherspoon Society has posted an open letter that Karen Ellen Kavey of Chapaqqua, NY, wrote about this to Becce Bettridge, Director of the NPWL and author of one of the articles.  Ms. Kavey writes that she is appreciative of Ms. Bettridge asking these questions but then goes on to write:

An unsettling question haunts me: How can someone, such as yourself, feel and express such genuine, palpable, well-reasoned concern for themselves regarding inequality, especially inequality based on interpretation of Scripture, and not feel this very same concern for others?

If, instead of the word “women”, you had substituted all minorities into your wonderful Questions, it would be a perfect essay… a letter for all God’s people.

The question of ordination standards is not an easy one and, as this exchange points out, is a continuum. Where you draw the line as to who should and who should not be ordained varies widely depending on perspective.

NWAC responds to the NPWL

Leave a reply

In my previous post I reported on three articles the Network of Presbyterian Women in Leadership (NPWL) posted on their web site discussing the transition of churches to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC) and their polity that ordination of women is a local option.  The New Wineskins Association of Churches (NWAC) has responded in their web log to the first two articles posted on the NPWL web site.  The entry, titled “Advancing Biblical Truth: Women in Leadership and the Proposed New Wineskins/EPC Transitional Presbytery“, begins with the statement that the NWAC:

The New Wineskins Constitution
makes no explicit distinction between men and women serving in roles of
leadership in the church, embracing the biblical declaration in
Galatians 3:28 that in Christ “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave
nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Women
have always been, continue to be, and will always be an integral part
of the New Thing that God is doing through the New Wineskins
Association of Churches (NWAC).

(If you followed the New Wineskins Winter Convocation you know that there was a question from the floor asking why the Strategy Team was all male.  The response was that no women had asked to be on it.)

Further on in the NWAC response where they discuss the Rev. Anita Miller Bell’s article about the glass ceiling for women in the PC(USA) there is an interesting observation that I had not previously thought about:

To Rev. Anita Bell’s credit, she admits that the experience of women pastors within the PCUSA has not been all it should be. However, both NPWL articles fail to examine underlying causes to the “glass ceiling” in the PCUSA other than a pastor’s gender. There are at least two other realities that should have been discussed. The first is the promotion of feminist and womanist theologies by the denomination. This has not helped orthodox and evangelical women pastors in finding a call. Pastor nominating committees are understandably concerned about the possibility of nominating a pastoral candidate and then later discovering the candidate does not uphold an orthodox or evangelical theology.

The NWAC  article goes on to discuss eight reasons that evangelical women pastors should consider moving to the EPC.  These include the fact that the NWAC will have its own transitional presbytery in the EPC where they will get to decide if women can be ordained and the fact that if you are an evangelical Presbyterian women looking for an alternative to the PC(USA) than the EPC is the only game in town.

The take on the PC(USA) to EPC transition from the Network of Presbyterian Women in Leadership

Leave a reply

The Network of Presbyterian Women in Leadership (NPWL) is posting a series of articles on the transition of churches from the PC(USA) to the EPC. The issue of course is that the ordination of women is not accepted across the EPC but is a “local option.”  As Becce Bettridge, the Director of NPWL, put it in the first article titled “Has Anyone Asked the Women“: “My question to the EPC is: Why would I want to be part of a church that overwhelmingly now views my leadership with suspicion?”

The second article in the series, “Where will the Women be Welcome,” by the Rev. Anita Miller Bell asks a broader question:  “Are ordained women treated as equals in the PC(USA)?”  She writes:

Yet, lest we become too judgmental of our brothers and sisters in the EPC and those who would join them, we must take a moment of honest self-reflection in our PCUSA fellowship.  Ordained women, especially those called to the ministry of Word and Sacrament, know full inclusion in the ministry life of the PCUSA in name only.  After 50 years, women still face the “glass ceiling” across the theological spectrum of the church.

 Her analysis of this situation is fascinating, at least to me, and I think it contains a great deal of truth.  She writes, in part:

This lukewarm embrace of women in ministry by the PCUSA and the “local option” approach of the EPC both find their roots in the original decision made by our denominations’ predecessor to ordain women to the ministry of Word and Sacrament 50 years ago. That decision, framed by postwar emphasis on human rights and democracy among mainline churches, has often been characterized as a “simple act of fairness”.   Our debate centered more on the social correctness of opening the door to women in ordained ministry than on the Biblical
witness of the essential nature of women’s ministry within the body of
Christ.

Such well-intentioned “social correctness” has not transformed the heart and mind of the church to embrace fully the leadership of the sisters in our midst.

She goes on to discuss the “Body of Christ” and how an individual’s gifts and talents are intended to be used for the building up of the body and how a person’s calling should not be a matter of fairness but a response to their place and role in the body.

There are presently three articles posted and in the third seminarian Janice Krouskop discusses her perspective on the transition and what it may mean for her call and career.

The EPC does have a Position Paper on the Ordination of Women where they say:

…while some churches may ordain women and some may decline to do so, neither position is essential to the existence of the church since people of good faith who equally love the Lord and hold to the infallibility of Scripture differ on this issue, and since uniformity of view and practice is not essential to the existence of the visible church, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church has chosen to leave this decision to the Spirit-guided consciences of particular congregations concerning the ordination of women as elders and deacons, and to the presbyteries concerning the ordination of women as ministers.

Now, a couple of comments where I’m about the stray into the more controversial and may raise the blood pressure of some of my readers…

Returning to the first NPWL article, it contains echoes of arguments that I regularly hear.  In one line  Ms. Bettridge asks: “Why would I want to be part of a church whose denominational culture does not view me as an equal partner in ministry, gifted and called to serve the Body of Christ?”

What caught my attention here is that this is essentially the same question that my friends and family who support the ordination of practicing homosexuals ask.  The progressives in the PC(USA) and other denominations see no difference between these two ordination questions.  If a person has been given these gifts for leadership by God, why should they not be ordained?  Does Rev. Anita Miller Bell’s argument apply here as well?  It is not a matter of fairness but a matter of gifts and call.  And appealing to scripture is not the clear-cut way out since we are all probably familiar with the exegetical arguments on all sides of both of these issues.  It comes down to how you read scripture and how you understand officers within the church.

Now, I do acknowledge that the two issues are different and I see differences in the scriptural support for the two issues.  But, the PCA and other conservative Presbyterian branches do not recognize either ordination, and the PC(USA) recognizes one and is arguing about the other. We need to be aware that for many people these two issues are linked and each of the NPWL articles could be quickly and easily rewritten to focus the same arguments on the issue of homosexual ordination.

My two cents worth from my background and experience.  Now back to our regularly scheduled politics.

New Wineskins Winter Convocation – Day 2

Leave a reply

Well, last Friday was the second and final day of the New Wineskins Winter Convocation and I have been surprised by how little information has come out about the meeting.  The best so far is Toby Brown’s post “Day Two: No Looking back” on his blog A Classical Presbyterian.  He recounts the standing vote to accept the recommendations of the Strategy Team Report (links still broken at the NWAC web site by the way) and the general Spirit-filled atmosphere of the meeting.  It is also interesting to read his reflections on the generally positive atmosphere of the meeting and the fact the those making the decision were well aware of the implications and were “counting the cost.”

I expect over the next few hours, as a new work week begins, that more will roll out.  We shall see how others interpret the meeting.  But for the moment, it appears that many of these churches will find a new spiritual home in the EPC.

More from the New Wineskins Convocation

Leave a reply

In the last hour or so the Layman Online has posted four stories from the NWAC Convocation in Orlando.  Two are about comments from the Evangelical Presbyterian Church representatives, one from the Moderator and one from the State Clerk.  Another article is about the speech from the keynote speaker Rev. Sameh Maurice a pastor in Cairo, Egypt.  Finally, there are the comments of Rev. Dr. Gerrit Dawson, one of the Co-Moderators of NWAC.

New Wineskins Winter Convocation

Leave a reply

The New Wineskins Association of Churches (NWAC) Winter Convocation began yesterday in Orlando, Florida.  The main text of these meetings has been “are we called to remain faithful within or apart from the PC(USA)?”  For this meeting the sub-text is whether the churches that feel called to leave the PC(USA) are called to transfer to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church.  This story developed in both the EPC and the Strategy Report that the New Wineskins Task Force prepared. (Note: The link to the Strategy Report is broken and it has apparently been removed or moved on the NWAC web site.  I will leave the link in the hope it returns and will fix it if I find the correct current link.)

At this time I have not found too much about the meeting that has been written.  Toby Brown of the blog “A Classical Presbyterian” is at the meeting and he reports on the good spirit and the power present in the convocation.  I don’t see anything yet about decisions at the business sessions but he is enthusiastic about the convocation’s business of worship, nurture, and prayer and promises much more after today’s session.

The PC(USA) has just issued a press release but as of this moment their news page does not list it.  (Their lead story is still the ecumenical gathering in Pasadena, CA, on Wednesday.)  The PC(USA) press release has gone out by e-mail and has already been picked up by the Worldwide Faith News.  I am a bit disappointed that Toya Richards Hill, the author of the piece, refers to churches at the New Wineskins Convocation as “dissident Presbyterians.”  It must be remembered that while many in the NWAC are considering leaving, there are still many, like Toby Brown, who are looking at remaining faithful in the PC(USA).  This is mentioned at the end of the article however.  Much of the article contains historical background and the EPC and Strategy Report news that I have discussed previously ( Strategy Report and EPC Transition plans).

I will post updates as more news becomes available.

New Wineskins Strategy Report

Leave a reply

Well, no sooner do I post my comments on waiting than a couple of hours later the New Wineskins Association of Churches (NWAC) issues their Strategy Report for their Winter Convocation next month.  The Strategy Report is available as a 155 page PDF document from the New Wineskins site. After taking a day to look it over here are my observations and comments.

Of those 155 pages, only the first 33 are report content and the remainder are “Exhibits” which I will discuss in a minute.  The report has five recommendations for the NWAC convocation to consider.

In the transmittal letter, the “Strategy Team” says they began with the question “What is the heart of the issue with the PC(USA)?”  Their conclusion is that the PC(USA) has drifted away from orthodox Reformed Christianity which culminated with the 2006 GA not repudiating the Trinity Report and adopting the report of the Theological Task Force.  As the report says: “These actions were the culmination of nearly eighty-five years of debate concerning Biblically faithful doctrine (orthodoxy) and practice (orthopraxy).”  The report goes on to comment on the current state of the PC(USA):

The PC(USA) has now embraced a de facto confessional position which encourages the worship of a god unknown in the Scriptures, a god of man’s own making whose names appeal to the sensibilities of contemporary philosophy, politics and a culture that asks the Church to validate rather than redeem that culture. It also adopted an authoritative interpretation of the Book of Order that, while affirming the existence of standards for ordination, takes the step of making the enforcement of those standards optional on the local level. This new reality allows local judicatories to determine that such departure from revealed truth is a “non-essential” for ordination.

The PC(USA) now allows ministers of the Word and Sacrament, ruling elders, deacons, and by logical extension church members, to embrace beliefs that are inconsistent with the clear teaching of the Scriptures and the doctrines from our own Book of Confessions. We now believe that the PC(USA) has eroded Reformed orthodoxy and Presbyterian practice to a point where the collective conscience of many no longer allows us to remain aligned with this thinking. This report proposes new ways to minister with faithfulness to the Gospel both inside and outside the PC(USA).

The main body of the report discusses how the churches are called to “A New Thing” (yes, you can easily guess that the report draws thematically from Isaiah 43 as many redesign processes seem to these days) with that new thing being a call to become a clearly “Missional Church.”  The “New Thing” is necessary because in the PC(USA) the churches and the denomination have lost their theological identity.  To accomplish this the report, in Chapter III, lays out “The Plan.”  In summary it is:

The Plan we are prayerfully called to endorse is a realignment by NWAC churches with the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC) to fulfill our vision of becoming a missional force for Jesus. Initially, NWAC churches will be received into a non-geographic transitional presbytery (NWEPC) of the EPC. We will immediately begin working as partners with the EPC leadership to develop a more missionally faithful new thing.

This proposed alignment includes:  A NWAC presbytery in the EPC that will have the full normal authority of a presbytery, including the ability to ordain, receive, install and dismiss pastors and plant churches.  The ministers however, must “affirm without reservation” the EPC confessional and doctrinal standards.  This presbytery and the rest of the current EPC will establish a commission, if the EPC GA approves, that will look at how to structure the EPC as a missional church.  Also, the EPC is absolved of responsibility for legal disputes that arise from a NWAC church leaving the PC(USA) and a NWAC church need not go through the NWEPC presbytery but may join the EPC directly if they so chose.  The NWEPC will be a transitional structure to be removed by 2012 at the latest.

To their credit, the Strategy Team acknowledges staying with the PC(USA) is a faithful option as well although they argue against it saying that the denomination will only get worse.  The report says that what is already a dying branch of the Reformed Church will become even more theologically unorthodox by the departure of its evangelical congregations.  But each congregation must make its own decision.

So, the five recommendations are: 1) Implement the plan.  2) Enter into relationship/discussion with the EPC as a body.  3) Those churches called to leave, do so.  4) Those churches that are still discerning God’s will continue to study faithfully.  5)  Those churches called to stay in the PC(USA) continue to be a faithful witness there.

Now, the rest of the story…
The exhibits section of the report takes up, as I have already noted, almost 3/4 of the report.  The first group of exhibits are educational resource materials gathered from a variety of sources including published articles and information sheets for congregations.  The second group are entitled “Legal Action Plan Documents” and are a set of documents providing assistance, maybe a complete road map, to handle the legal issues of leaving the PC(USA), mostly related to property.  The third group are denomination relations resources, mostly documents from the PC(USA) headquarters including the “Louisville Papers.”  And finally, there are sample overtures and letters.

So, some comments…
Well, the NWAC has now presented their side of the news that they have been talking with the EPC and from both sides it is apparent that the talks were fairly extensive.  There is also in the report, on page 9 following the Executive Summary, a great chart  showing a comparison of churches in the PC(USA), NWAC, EPC and PCA including theological and social stands.  The point of the chart, while being extremely informative, appears to be to show that the EPC is the logical body to affiliate with.  No argument from me there.  But with 148 NWAC churches and 180 EPC churches, if all transfer over to the EPC it will nearly double the size of the denomination.  However, it will still be far behind the PCA with 1300 congregations.

And finally, in discussing this transfer with a good friend of mine who is an evangelical PC(USA) minister, he mentioned that he might have problems affirming the Westminster Standards without reservation, primarily for Chapter 21, Section 8 that reads:

8. This Sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due
preparing of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs
beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest, all the day, from their
own works, words, and thoughts about their worldly employments and
recreations, but also are taken up, the whole time, in the public and
private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and
mercy. (emphasis mine)

Does this preclude watching the Super Bowl or World Cup games on Sunday?

EPC preparing transition process for PC(USA) congregations that want to transfer

1 Reply

With the Evangelical Presbyterian Church appearing to be the denomination of choice for congregations that are choosing to leave the PC(USA), the EPC is beginning to make arrangements for congregations that are interested in joining their denomination.  This development was announced in a December 20th letter from their stated clerk, Jeff Jeremiah.  In it he talks about a proposal to be brought to the 2007 General Assembly to create one or more “transitional presbyteries” that will be non-geographic bodies for congregations wishing to join the EPC to reside in for up to five years.  There is now a web page linked from the EPC home page about “Information for Churches Interested in Becoming Part of the EPC.”

Another interesting development discussed in the letter was the fact that Mr. Jeremiah and four others from the EPC leadership met with leaders of the New Wineskins Association of Churches about their possible relationship with the EPC.  The meetings were held in Tampa, FL, December 12-13.  I have found no formal statement from the New Wineskins Association yet.