Where from here? The narrow way considered.
Reformed evangelicals who elect to remain within the PC(USA) at this point now must count the cost and consider their future course. One thing is clear--they will not 'win'.
But what I want to ask is, does it matter?
Many of the readers here and all over the PC(USA) who hold to the Reformed faith in its evangelical clarity are apparently asking the same thing. It's a good question, one worthy of followers of Jesus Christ.
So, where to? What next?
I think that in the last few posts I have established my belief that one's denominational label makes not one whit of difference when considering one's faithfulness to the One who calls. Disciples of Jesus Christ are still within the world as it is and until He comes again we always will be. The remnant will find themselves continuing on to the narrow gate and difficult way that Christ spoke of in his greatest sermon:
“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.” --Matthew 7:13-14 ESV
Sobering words.
The pathway that leads to life, from the narrow gate must lead through many human institutions. Now, don't get me wrong here: A denomination's faithfulness does matter. It matters a great deal, even more so when that institution claims to be a servant institution of the Church.
But the reality is that we will find faithful Christians in a variety of places. Yet all are on the narrow way to life by grace through faith. Judging another's path is a perilous business:
"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling," --Philippians 2:12 ESV
It's hard enough to keep to one's own path without looking at the steps of others and judging them. Evaluate? Yes. Learn from others? Certainly. Evaluate and take into account missteps and falterings along the way? Of course. But don't let that be so obsessive that one's own path becomes a stumbling block to yourself or others.
So then, where to? Back to the question.
If you are called to reside in an institution that one knows to be without hope of restoration to the apostolic faith once delivered then what are your choices? Certainly they are limited but I don't know that they are without fruitfulness for the Kingdom. And there will be pockets of faithfulness within the PC(USA) for some years to come.
Will Reformed evangelicals suffer for taking this path, if they choose it? Yes. Some of them will be kicked out from churches when they find themselves in hostile presbyteries and others will be locked out of the ministry for their convictions. They won't be invited to the best committees or the coolest parties. But what does that matter? Each and every persecution is another fulfillment of the promises of Christ. Call them sign-points along the way to life.
Will other Reformed brothers and sisters balk at the choice? Again, yes. Those who remain risk the double threat of suspicion from their peers and scorn from their denominational community. Truly this is a path fraught with difficulty. But in the end, there is the promise of the destination, the reward that is received from the Lord who calls, who perseveres with those whom He chooses.
And the last time I checked, the Bible says nothing about what humanly invented denominational label we wear when we appear before the Throne. If there really is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism", then we had better take that seriously.
No matter where God calls us to tread.



49 remonstrances:
This is much more faithful than the continued throwing of millions into renewal organizations. I love the people in those organizations but I think the threshold has been passed it is no longer worthwhile to have a multimillion dollar industry to lobby the PCorpUSA to behave.
It would be much better to ignore it, defund it, boycott it.
Me I'm not buying the product anymore.
I agree with the sentiment of this post, but lets not call a lack of initiations to committees/parties, "persecution."
We know what real persecution is, and this ain't it.
Toby -
You are right - the evangelicals will not win and denominational labels have nothing to do with faithfulness to Christ. My biggest concern with your post is that all of this is very introspective - it does not seem to consider congregation you serve and lead. I think you have an incorrect view. Adding to your argument about nothing in the Bible about denominations, then why stay? If you stay, how does that help your congregation? By staying, what ministry are you NOT accomplishing because you are tied up in denominational issues? The reward at the end is the same for those who choose to leave the PCUSA and continue in ministry unencumbered by the trappings of an apostate organization. What about the parable of the talents? Are you taking your talent (and congregation) and burying it in the corner of the PCUSA with a "do not disturb" sign? Or, are you taking it out and investing it in viable ministries while operating in an organization that actually supports you? I have yet to see an argument for staying that envisions a healthy and growing church as a result of the benefits of the PCUSA.
Persecution comes in varying degrees and forms. Anytime coercion is the primary means by which religious authorities hold people under their authority, they've laid themselves open to the accusation of persecution.
Is the property trust clause the primary means of holding the PCUSA together and thus a form of persecution?
As someone who followed the Book of Order's process for petitioning to with withdraw from the PCUSA, I put forth that it is.
The trust clause has nothing in common with the Spirit of Jesus Christ. It is a form of spiritual bullying and it certainly won't save the PCUSA from its fate.
The good news is that using fear against people of faith won't work. As old Martin Luther said, "Let goods and kindred go..."
May I make a suggestion? If this is the way you truly feel about the PCUSA, don't let the door hit you in the a-- on the way out! What a bunch of irritating, self-righteous twaddle! If this be persecution, make the most of it.
Much thought has been generated by the last three posts- thanks, even in the midst of boxing up that library.
@ FHA
Man, I feel the love!
Regrettably, I do agree, that on a relative scale globally, using the word 'persecution' to describe the orthodox/prax current situation probably needs to be done by our brother and sisters outside the PCUSA and the US, and not us. I'm not sure it rises to that level, quite yet, generally.
However, as for the rest of FHA's post: I think this is in the spirit of "Gracious Separation? I'll tell you what gracious separation is. Just leave the keys as you leave" we heard in San Jose.
Principled objections based on scripture and being conflicted, really are just twaddle to those who have moved beyond the scriptures. I think 1 John has something to say about that.
dm
Fred -
The test of courage comes when we are in the minority. The test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority.
- Ralph W. Sockman
I ask that you who campaign for tolerance extend the same to others. On your blog I also read the following:
"In the end, the new, inclusive Presbyterian Church (imagine that!) will include the (former) blusterers as well. What is humbling is that gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Christians will be the first to welcome them with open arms." - quote from John Shuck
"Right on, John! Like you, I am hopeful" - your response to John's quote.
So Fred, do you really want to welcome them? It is obvious you agree with John's assertion that those who choose to stay will be welcomed, but your post above (and on your blog) betrays that facade.
Fred, while I appreciate candor as much as the next guy, I don't believe your comment represents a very helpful attitude.
I think we all need to remember that the world is watching, and we are Christ's ambassadors.
This goes for both sides of the discussion.
Regards,
Chester
Toby,
I wish you the best in whatever choice you make. We can look in History at people that maintained their organizational ties and further God's kingdom.
Biblically, Paul did maintain his identity as a Roman Citizen. Paul used this to save himself from stoning. God used this to put Paul in front of rulers that he would not have otherwise had the chance to evangelize. He could have denied or renounced his Roman citizenship and missed many opportunities.
In history, Wilberforce was ready to quit the Parliment except that John Newton urged him to stay. Through Wilberforce, slavery was peacefully abolished in England.
Likewise, God may have a purpose for you to stay in the PCUSA.
The costs are high, though, and you are stronger than I, if you decide to stay. My prayers are with you.
In His Love,
Paul
Note to readers:
I am letting Fred's comment stand, despite its violation of my rules on conduct. We all need to see what can happen when bitterness starts to rule our public discourse.
With progressives like Mark Smith, Bruce Reyes-Chow and many of our other friends with differing convictions we can have a wonderful relationship in our disagreements.
Any further cursing or bad behavior will be subject to immediate deletion.
To Bill Crawford: What do you mean by millions of dollars in the renewal organizations? Could you document that?
You are free to make your choice, but please don't say anything careless about the renewal groups unless you are sure of your facts.
Debbie
Toby, there's seems to be a concerted effort against voices of dissent right now.
I may not have a voice on Presbyterian Bloggers much longer. A few people are starting up a new site and may be trying to terminate the old one because I'm the only one writing regularily now.
And I thought that free speech was an important part of the PCUSA.
As for Fred...he doesn't know what the right Door is anyway...
Toby,
Honestly, I am very concerned with this blog entry. I have not heard a compeling argument as to the advantages to the kingdom of God for you or any evangelical to stay in a denomination that you are indicating cannot be reformed (I am assuming this is what is meant by not being able to win)?
I am also very concerned with the continued mixing of categories between the church and the world. So many of the comments about staying and being faithful use examples of "staying in the world" not in a church organization.
Show me compeling Biblical evidence to stay in a church (denominations I am here including as an extended church) that is not mixing church and world.
For instance Paul Schmidt's comment on Paul not renouncing his Roman citizenship despite the corruption of the government indicates a serious confusion of church and world.
When bringing such Biblical evidence I would like to have you keep in mind our cultural milieu...a church around every corner, and a megachurch 15 minutes away.
What will staying and being faithful look like? Will you be encouraging people to join your church (knowing that they are also joining the PCUSA)? What would compel you to want them to join your congregation, when there might be a faithful congregation (independent or part of a Biblically faithful denomination) just down the road?
Will you hide your affiliation with the PCUSA, or will you continue to say yes, but that isn't us to questions about the liberalism of the denomination?
How is staying and doing nothing about the purity of the church honoring to our savior?
Stushie,
You gotta give us more info than that!
Tell, tell!
Toby,
I forgot one more line of consideration. Will faithfulness now mean total withholding of all monies to Presbytery, Synod and GA? If you are considering designating, how is this any different than a codependant spouse paying only for their alcoholic spouse's food and housing, but in the process enabling them to continue in their disease? All those who have been advocating designating have been unable to answer this question to my satisfaction.
Thank you and may the Lord bless you as you continue to wrestle with these questions.
Is there a perfect church here on earth? There may be some who are more faithful than others but all denominations have their faults and being independant comes with its own problems.
The folks joining or church over the past few years are not becoming part of our fellowship because we are PCUSA they are joining for various reasons each has their own. I don't see much brand loyalty any more.
I do believe that we are called to minister in this particular place at this particular time. As to being faithful, I believe that we can be faithful by doing what God commands in our lives and in the life of our particular churches.
"But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."
And for Adel we don't have a megachurch within a hundred miles. :)
Toby -
I have re-read your post for the umpteenth time and I finally get it. You are correct - Where do we go? We go where God calls us to go. Period. Now the tough part is discernment....
Also, some folks object to the word "persecution". That certainly means different things to different people - particularly depending on the position they are currently in. However, If you had a family and your employment was threatened by pretty much "the only game in town", you might choose to use the word "persecuted". Let's not overanalyze the individual words, but try to understand the point of the post.
Finally, I guess friendship ain't what it used to be, right Fred (see Fred's blog...)?
Reading and seeing a little more clearly,
Jim
Jim L,
Thanks for the affirmation, and for reading my poor words for the umpteenth time... :)
I was sorely disapointed to read Fred's attack and to look at his blog. I had no idea that he had slipped so far into heresy. But the worst part is the foul language. I HAD counted him a friend.
But faithfulness to the teachings of Christ matter more.
Thanks again for reading! I DID write this post early in the morning, so I'm glad that your re-reading made more sense to you! ;)
Debbie, I don't think Bill was targeting renewal groups. I've been affiliated with for runners for PFR in both denominations and have enjoyed wonderful renewals from PRMI. However he's not off base. ECF reports PFR's 1.125 million, PRMI was 3/4 of a million and the Pres. Lay committee was a wee bit over 1.5 million. [Source http://www.ecfa.org/]
Alan
Toby,
Your (ex?) friend Fred Herman speaks with the voice of experience and wisdom. You show a great deal of disrespect when you say he has “descended into heresy”. Maybe it is you who has ascended to arrogance and self-righteousness. All he did was raise (again) the point of “if you feel that way” why don’t you leave?
Seems everybody is asking you that question one way or another.
Just think. This burden to revile against the PCUSA could be lifted from you. (Unrepentant revilers are condemned in scripture along with all the other kinds of sinners). You could be freed, forgive and be forgiven, and you could get on with your life.
Although, on the other hand, my guess is that this burden has nothing to do with your affiliation. There are a number of ex-PCUSA pastors and elders still reviling away with wanton abandon. They can’t seem to really leave or shake it off. It has nothing to do with denominational affiliation. It has to do with sin, and sin is ubiquitous. Everybody has a list of favorites they refuse to drop.
Here is the real issue as I see it. In order to be an effective minister you need to be at peace with your denomination – regardless of which denomination it is. You need to be able to focus on the congregation you serve. 80% to 90% of church members do not care which way their denomination is going so long as their pastor is there for >them<. Back in the days of the Reformation, pastors had no choices. There was only one Church, and it was in bed with the State. To leave or disobey was treason punishable by death. But today we have endless choices. There are more choices of worship affiliation then there are brands of cereal at the Grocery store. I am guessing this too is the work of the Holy Spirit. For every doctrine there is a ready-made church or denomination. You don’t have to fight with anybody. It’s not treason, and it’s not reformation.
If you really want to serve a congregation you will have to make peace with your denomination, or find another with which you can be at peace. Or else you will have to leave the ministry altogether. Those are your choices.
The time has come to decide.
Jodie,
you write, "Here is the real issue as I see it. In order to be an effective minister you need to be at peace with your denomination"
WRONG--the only way Toby will be and is an effective minister is to follow where Jesus Christ leads Him.
All of your advice sounds like it is coming stright out of the pit of hell.
I have to agree with Mignon's Dad. (Love your handle.) and Viola.
There are no perfect denominations out there, and in the visible church there will always be tares mixed in with the wheat.
Oh, trust me, there are plenty of problems in the more conservative, as well as the mainline denominations.
Although, I would definitely leave any church that officially renounced the Nicene Creed, or prohibited the preaching of the gospel. But, certainly, that's not the case here.
I think we should all go where God calls us, and remain faithful.
And, Toby, why can't you be Fred's friend?? If it's true that he's slipped into heresy, he needs your friendship all the more. Maybe he's just feeling upset right now.
God loves, and Jesus died for every heretic, and for all of us sinners. Where would any of us be without the grace, and mercy of the Lord?
Nice post Viola,
A typical example of reviling that I was looking for:
"All of your advice sounds like it is coming stright out of the pit of hell"
One of the favorite passages the anti gay crowd likes to throw around is 1 Cor 6:9-10 (NAS):
"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor REVILERS, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God." (emphasis added)
Kinda levels the playing field, don't you think?
You think nothing of sending young and relatively inexperienced pastors into no-win situations, and when they crash and burn you blame it all on Jesus.
(others you tear down yourself, but always in the name of Jesus)
The truth is you have no idea where Jesus is leading, do you? He doesn't tell you, and He doesn't consult with you. You use those words, but you have no idea what they mean.
Actually Reformed believers hold that Jesus only died for the elect, not for all.
Wow,
Hard to react to all the voices.
Backwoods--"boom goes the dynamite!" Point on concerning the intent and efficiency of the atonement. It looks like we love people because they are people--bearers of the image of God (broken though it might be).
Jodie--I hate to say it but your words sound like reviling.
--as far as following where Jesus leads, there is that great verse in John 10, "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me."
--(I do think your hard question to Toby is one he is not unaware of and probably prays about on a regular basis.)
--great point about young and inexperienced pastors. I work with such, as well as older and more expereinced pastors, all the time. My first area of concern is always identity, pastors who get so hung up in the work or hurt in/by the work that they forget we stand only because of the grace and mercy of Jesus. It is only with that foundation that any 'tools' or 'skills' help in ministry.
grace
Hey all - No comment really other than to say that I am soaking all of this in and listening. Toby has certainly raised a compelling question. I think some of the varied responses are extremely helpful in getting a broader picture of how folks are responding to each other and particular recent GA actions. While clearly, not every one is agreement about tone, intent, purpose, etc. it is clear that there is passionate faith being lived out. Again, as I am charged with telling "the" story of the church, the "the" becomes quite complex. Whew. But thank you nonetheless!
Grace,
I don't think I have ever said of someone I disagreed that their words sounded like they came from the "pit of hell". I have heard a lot of foul mouthed cussing in my life, but that beats them all.
Nevertheless,
If my words also sound like reviling to you, does that make reviling OK?
I rest my case.
Jodie,
Reviling (using abusive or contemptuous language in speaking to or about someone) is never okay. Never said it was, nor that I have not been guilty. But I do seek to keep my words gentle and respectful.
Lots of us have heard worse, I hope you don't have to very often. I certainly didn't mean you were using 'bad' language. It just seemed a bit 'loaded'.
All the same, I am glad to hear your view. And your questions and points. It was seemingly strange to hear your complaint and then hear you complain so similarly.
I don't know anything about who is sending out young, inexperienced pastors, but the comments about not hearing Jesus sounded mean spirited (contemptuous, abusive, reviling).
always grace
Jodie -
Read Fred's response "don't let the door hit you...". Read Fred's two blog entries regarding this post. The first where he trumpets his supposed wittiness (which is just above his post discussing the warm welcome for those who stay). Then read the more recent post where Fred posted a personal email from Toby and then blasts that. That might help you understand Toby's comment and see who really has descended into arrogance.
Dan and Grace and Viola,
I apologize.
Two wrongs do not make a right.
Jodie,
Stop and think for a minute. Part of what Toby wrote is this: "If you are called to reside in an institution that one knows to be without hope of restoration to the apostolic faith once delivered then what are your choices? Certainly they are limited but I don't know that they are without fruitfulness for the Kingdom. And there will be pockets of faithfulness within the PC(USA) for some years to come.
Will Reformed evangelicals suffer for taking this path, if they choose it? Yes. Some of them will be kicked out from churches when they find themselves in hostile presbyteries and others will be locked out of the ministry for their convictions. They won't be invited to the best committees or the coolest parties. But what does that matter? Each and every persecution is another fulfillment of the promises of Christ. Call them sign-points along the way to life."
And you wrote in contradiction, "Here is the real issue as I see it. In order to be an effective minister you need to be at peace with your denomination – regardless of which denomination it is. You need to be able to focus on the congregation you serve. 80% to 90% of church members do not care which way their denomination is going so long as their pastor is there for >them<. "
Now think of when Jesus tells his disciples he is going to Jerusalem to die and Peter rebukes him. What does Jesus say? "Get behind me Satan."
Toby was clearly making a statement about where he was willing to head for the Lord. And you were, (no chance at all), going to turn him around. And not by kind statements but by put downs about the effectiveness of his ministry. I repeat my earlier statement and it is not cussing--it is Scripture.
Toby, there re two important reformed teachers who have different perspectives on the kind of situation evangelicals face in the PCUSA today.
On the one hand, Dr. Richard Lovelace has pointed out rather graphically the Body of Christ does not have hemophilia. If it is cut, wounded, even severely, it can heal. That's one reason why he urged evangelicals to stay in the established denominations, no matter how badly wounded. Eventually, they will heal themselves. And speaking theologically, I believe that.
On the other hand, Dr. Francis Schaeffer pointed out in the history of the church, no denomination that has surrendered on the issues of the infallibility of the Bible and the uniqueness of Jesus Christ has ever recovered an evangelical witness. That's why he urged evangelicals to separate and protect themselves from oversight and entanglements that were at least distractions from following Christ's mission -- sometimes actual impediments to following. And, I have to admit, I can't think of a counter example to prove Dr. Schaeffer wrong.
When I was much younger in ministry, it was easier to dismiss Dr. Schaeffer and cling to the hope Dr. Lovelace taught. Now, however, that's harder to do.
Viola,
I think Toby can speak for himself.
As for you, you are not Jesus. You, as a self professed >>disciple<< of Jesus, do not get to say what you said to me, another self professed disciple of Jesus.
Do you think you are following Scripture? Then follow Mat 5:22. Jesus says very clearly what his disciples can say to each other.
Jodie
I'd love to have a conversation with you. Maybe the Lord will do that some day. Until then, apology accepted.
grace always
Toby,
I don't know how you could work to numerically grow a church knowing that one day you will have to entrust their continued care to someone who meets increasingly loopy/lax denominational standards. That's why I had to take my family out.
Jodie,
How come the vocal minority that pushed the gay agenda through and made it such a huge and unending stink didn't take your sage advice and go elsewhere? The UCC, MCC, and ECUSA have all been around for more than two decades. This could have ended if peaceable denominational affiliation was the true goal. No...this is about money and validation and name-brand (at best... more nefarious intent could be alleged).
PJ,
I don't know about whole denominations, but Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, KY was pulled back from the fires. It had abandoned inerrancy and was looking more and more like helLPTS until 1993 when a young PhD grad was selected as president. Now, SBTS churns out more hard-core Calvinists than both Westminster Campuses combined! I think that stands to turn around the entire denomination.
Jodie,
Dan, and I are not the same person. I'm not sure why he signed "grace," at the end of his entry.
Oh, I see now. He meant it as in the "grace of the Lord."
Prayers that you and Viola can work this through together.
Adel wrote:
For instance Paul Schmidt's comment on Paul not renouncing his Roman citizenship despite the corruption of the government indicates a serious confusion of church and world.
Adel, I am actually not confused as I think that the current PCUSA is part of the world. But I could be wrong and am looking to the Bible for guidance. Do you have any verses to recommend?
Paul
"Jodie,
you write, "Here is the real issue as I see it. In order to be an effective minister you need to be at peace with your denomination"
WRONG--the only way Toby will be and is an effective minister is to follow where Jesus Christ leads Him."
This really bugs me.
It appears that Viola wants to attach Jodie, regardless of the fact that THEY'RE BOTH SAYING THE SAME THING!
Toby is clearly concerned that being part of the PC(USA) may compromise his ability to follow where Christ leads. They're both saying the same thing.
This truly demonstrates the problem in the denomination - we are ready to attack people on "the other side" regardless of the fact that their words agree with us. In that we are trying really hard to be like the world that some feel we should be separate from.
By George, I think I agree with Mark! :-o
Must be our common baldness.
"Must be our common baldness."
Wisdom is received much more easily without all that hair in the way.
:-)
Paul,
I would agree with you that that the PCUSA has become very worldly. But one of the major aspects of Presbyterianism is its connectionalism and shared ministry and shared government. It is a very close yoking and identification if you will. If you truly believe that the denomination has become "the world" or indistinguishable from the world, then we must be obedient and refuse to be equally yoked with such. 2Corinthians 6:14 comes to mind. Especially when we focus on the complete context of the passage. I would argue that the biblical evidence would indicate that when a denomination reaches a point where true discipline and renewal are no longer possible, then separation is the biblical call to believers. What I am hearing from renewal leaders and organizations is that they no longer believe that the denomination can once again return to sound orthodoxy. Therefore, logicallly and biblically, I think separation is appropriate. Maybe the 2 synod model could be a first good step toward separation, but personally I do not believe it can be implemented.
Having said this, I am very grateful to brothers and sisters who choose to remain and answer a call to make the PCUSA their mission field. But I believe that it is not business as usual any longer. A congregation that chooses to stay becomes a mission church to the denomination, loving and evangelizing, but never confusing it for the church. This can also be very dangerous with many possible land mines along the way, therefore great care and extremely thorough training of leaders would be required. It is also the place for a strong prophetic ministry.
Mark,
"Congratulations" on turning 40 by the way. It's not so bad ... although I wonder where 30 went.
I want to throw my hat in the ring with Mark and John....[2,3,4]..sounds like they could use a hat....
Cameron,
Better watch out. Mocking baldness in men of God can lead to some [ahem] unBEAR,able situations.
Adel,
I agree enthusiastically with your post.
In my Bible study, I could find no examples of Presbyterian style government for the Church. The churches were local in nature, they did have problems with false teachers and prophets. But he did not talk about taking these false teachers to the Committee on Ministry or through the denominational discipline structure.
Here is what I found:
1 John 4:1-3
...many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist...
2 Peter 2 (read the whole chapter)
1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
14 With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed—an accursed brood!
Adel, you also wrote "when a denomination reaches a point where true discipline and renewal are no longer possible, then separation is the biblical call".
I think the Spahr case is a good example that discipline can no longer work. In fact, I worry that it goes much deeper. Discipline cases (I believe) are heard at the Presbytery level in private (as they should be.) That means if someone is attempting to use the process to bring a false teacher to discipline, and the investigators look at the case just as the PJC looked at Spahr, the unsound decision will be kept private. This means that Spahr may be just a single instance of the same types of rulings going on within the denomination that no one knows about.
In His Love,
Paul
Paul,
The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 is generally held to be a synod of some sort. Now you can argue whether the hard lines between presbyter and episkopos had yet been drawn up. But it's not plausible to assume no connectivity in the church. Jerusalem was a center for apostolic authority to plant churches - and offerings were taken up in missionary outposts for the purpose of support for the saints in Jerusalem. (Recall that most of the non-Hebrews had been tossed out after the stoning of St. Stephen the Protomartyr.)
As for discipline, I think the larger issue is not hiddenness but a refusal to even bring disciplinary procedure at all. Instead, we choose gossip, back-biting, ostracism, or a plethora of other non-biblical ways of dealing with the conflict. Matthew 18 is so clear, but we're unwilling to do it - either because we know we aren't right, or we think the Bible itself isn't right about how to handle it.
Chris,
Thanks for the info on the Jerusalem Council. I am excited about reading further about during my Bible Study time.
My comments on the secretness was to point out that there may be many instances of the discipline process failing that are not known -- therefore the problem may be much worse.
In His Love,
Paul
"But the reality is that we will find faithful Christians in a variety of places. Yet all are on the narrow way to life by grace through faith. Judging another's path is a perilous business:"
Thanks. Even if you don't actually mean what I think you mean. This was something I appreciated reading.
Post a Comment