Thursday, May 08, 2008

PCA Fault Lines and the Coming Ecclesiastical Earthquake, Part One: Introduction

Covenant Seminary President Bryan Chappell will lead an important presentation and discussion concerning the future direction of the PCA at the PCA's General Assembly in Dallas this summer. The stated reason that this seminar needs to take place (and it does, and will be excellent in Dr. Chappell's able hands) is because of the increasingly controversial and divisive issue of the role of women in the Church's ministry. The past few years have witnessed several prominent ministers and congregations depart from the PCA over the current stance of the denomination on this question. Other congregations freely use the term 'deaconess' to refer to women in their churches who carry forward ministry related tasks, and this makes some in other congregations very uncomfortable. At least two Presbyteries have offered Overtures for this year's GA to form a study committee to look into this matter, reporting back to the GA the following year. Thus the issue will shortly be noted as a front and center issue, rather than a simmering controversy discussed only quietly and in private. Looking ahead to Dr. Chappell's seminar, I thought it might be helpful to say up front the way I see it. This opening article, written before I knew about Dr. Chappell's seminar, offers my take on why this matter is so potentially explosive.


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.

15 comments:

Fr. Bill said...

Wandering over here via a link where you commented on Anglicans ...

I'm disappointed that no PCA-types have made comments on this analysis of yours. For one outside the PCA reservation, but with good friends inside it, I find this very helpful. My cradle-Anglican daughter may very likely attend an HC congregation when she departs for college this summer, as the best option for Biblical orthodoxy and compatibility with forms and worship culture she has grown up with.

Jack Smith said...

Rev. Cassidy, spot on. Your analysis of the circumstances in the PCA is stellar. I hope the full article can be put in print for broader distribution. The interested but un-or-ill informed, as well as those who have some knowledge of the issues and are thinking through these things objectively, will benefit greatly. This is much more about power than purity.
Thanks for your pastoral concern and well articulated observations.

PANDG.

Jack

Oso Famoso said...

I think you really describe the PCA quite well. I was more of an LR/HC that went to a TR/NP church.

The PCA is, surprisingly, a big tent. I lived in Houston and would visit other PCA Churches often. The worship from one to the next often varied greatly. My former church was old school neo-puritan with a southern twist. No vestments. No weekly communion. Never a female lector.

However, the one down the road was high church, vestments, talking about lent, weekly communion and woman lectors.

My family is still PCA and I trully love the PCA and my former church. I pray that the PCA remains a good congregation.

Fr. Bill said...

Pr. Cassidy,

I've been reflecting on your taxonomy of the PCA along lines of worship culture, partly because I have old friends within the PCA, partly because I have long sensed a vital linkage between the currents of sexual revisionism and currents of worship revisionism over the past 20 or 30 years within broadly evangelical Protestantism. It's been very difficult for me to discern just how these currents aid and abet one another, if they are not, in fact, joined at the hip.

But, your analysis now makes me focus all the more intently on developments within the PCA over the next few years, because whatever happens, it may illuminate these linkages.

Are you going to unburden yourself with further analyses along these lines? Your title includes the word "introduction," which encourages me. I hope in your further musings you will expound how these differing worship cultures and the faultlines between them will be affected by pressure to move the PCA generally down the egalitarian primrose path.

From where I sit, I'd guess the EPMs will skip down that path with great merriment. I'd also guess that the HCs would steadfastly refuse to do that.

What's going to be fascinating to watch (like trainwrecks are fascinating to watch) is how the NPs and STs do (or do not) decide which road to take. And why. And in league with whom. Or not.

Wayne said...

This is a pretty good analysis, especially where the PCA is thickest. Something I've noticed in my time with the PCA in the Midwest (Nebraska, Indiana, & Iowa) is the absence of what you describe as ST and instead you have a good number of churches, many of whom were historically RPCES, that could be characterized as broadly evangelical, 70-80's style praise and worship music, monthly communion, and a generally cooperative relationship to other evangelical churches in their communities. I would see them as similar to their Southern cousins without some of the characteristic features you describe (e.g., choir & pomp).

I suppose that such a taxonomy today is possible due to the fall-out of the "worship wars" and a general increase in an interest in worship per se that we've seen in the last 20 years. Today it's much easier to be self-conscious about one's philosophy of worship in a way that really wasn't possible in the PCA half a generation ago.

I will pray for Bryan and others who serve in such a capacity that greater unity and peace can exist along these "fault lines."

Pastor St. John said...

I agree that the issue of women in the church will be divisive, however, I don't see how it ties into your several types of PCA churches/pastors. Personally, I suppose I'm in the NP camp. However, I'm not a fighting NP. The thing that irks me is that the PCA would bumble along just fine if the change agents would just LEAVE IT ALONE. Quit trying to push the envelope. If you want women deacons, or deaconesses, then fine: leave the PCA and join a denomination where they are already accepted. What's so hard about that? Incidentally, I'm compiling all the links about this issue I can find at: http://www.waysidechurch.org/femdeacs/femdeacs.htm

matt boulter said...

Thanks for this post, hiero-presbyter Cassidy!

I am wondering what it is (or isn't) in Presbyterian ecclesiology which leads to the eruptability of these tectonic plates along these fault lines.

I think it can be genealogically linked to the 17th-century non-conformist stance on worship as well as the rejection of the historic episcopate.

Fascinating. We will continue to pray for Christ's church, including the beloved PCA.

DP Cassidy said...

Well, its early days...my PCA colleagues will show up and help me do a better job with this.

DP Cassidy said...

Oso,

Yes, it is a Big Tent, though some guys keep wanting to move the stakes a little closer together. Thank you for your prayers.

DP Cassidy said...

Wayne, I have the mid-west praise band type church in my EPM group, though that isn't entirely fair to them; they are 'E' without really being veru 'PM'. I appreciate the disticntion you're making there. And you're right - its a worship issue that has created the major differences. These arise from theological paradigms, and thus inevitably - without other common sources of unity (baptism, supper, etc.) - can cause dis-union.

DP Cassidy said...

Pastor St. John,

Thanks for the link.

The tie in as I see it is with regard to the way in which the various 'plates' relate to the pressure created by the debate. This issue affects all, whereas other issues may have affected only 1 - 3 of the groups. I think the PCA leadership senses this and is thankfully taking proactive steps to have fruitful conversation and keep explosiveness at bay. I hope Dr. Chappell's seminar will go some distance to achieiving that healthy end.

DP Cassidy said...

Matt,

I'll enlarge on this soon. The factors you note might be considered 'unifying factors' in certain communions. Gathering around the eucharist or the Bishop allows certan groups of Christians to have a different focus of unity than a single troubling issue, affording them 'more time' to debate and discuss issues. That can be taken to an extreme of course (as I believe has occured in the some parts of the Anglican communion). But you are on to one of the nagging problems.

Frank said...

Dear Pastor Cassidy:

I believe that you have given a good analysis to the situation facing the PCA. One of the problems is that the PCA officially is committed to the Westminster Standards, which reflect the Puritan approach; but, practically speaking, has a wide diversity of views--as you have delineated.

If I may, please allow me to refer to my book, The History of the Presbyterian Church in America: The Silver Anniversary Edition (1999), in which I wrote: "The outcome of the present controversies over distaff participation in public worship and in the life of the church may very well indicate in what direction the PCA is going on a wide variety of matters" (p. 529).

Those interested may also want to peruse back issues of Presbyterian & Reformed News, available on-line at www.presbyteriannews.org, for coverage of some of the earlier skirmishes in this on-going battle.

Let me encourage you to keep up the good work!

Cordially,
Frank J. Smith, Ph.D., D.D.
Pastor, Reformation Presbyterian Church, Oostburg, Wisconsin
Stated Clerk, Reformation Presbytery of the Midwest
Editor, Presbyterian International News Service
(920)564-6207

DP Cassidy said...

Frank,

Thanks for stopping by. Your book is an excellent resource that I would recommend to all.

All the best!

Les said...

David, very good article. I have also read the second installment and look forward to the rest. I agree that this issue may be the proverbial straw which breaks the camel's back (my words of course).

Les Prouty
http://reformationfaithtoday.com/