The PCA

[HamletsChoice]

This subject was discussed a little bit in another thread and I wanted to take this opportunity to get the benefit of everyone's thoughts and experiences with the PCA.

What I have directly experienced in visiting PCA churches in Georgia, Florida and Alabama over the past 10 years and have also heard in the testimonies from former PCA pastors and members as to why they left the PCA is that the PCA encourages belief in a non-literal 6 day creation even to the point of tolerating evolution, toleration of homosexuality as “just another sin,” toleration of women in leadership, toleration of a lack of strict adherence to the WCF, toleration of unorthodox church services that permit ballet dancers, mime’s, puppets, gorilla costumes, and rock music, and a general eschatological attitude of surrender and defeat to non-Christian secular worldviews.

Of course I have also experienced some PCA churches that don’t have this same spirit of “toleration and beliefs” such as James Kennedy’s church, R.C. Sproul’s church (however R.C. has only just very recently exercised faith in the six-day creation revelation recorded in Genesis) and some other less famous churches scattered about here and there. These churches seem to be in the minority though.

I am also reading the writings of PCA leaders who complain that the PCA church is getting worse every year with more and more accounts of pastors leaving the PCA for some or all of the reasons noted above.

Please don’t get me wrong I want the PCA to succeed and prosper, but what I want more is for the Kingdom of God and truth to succeed and prosper and “become a great mountain and fill the whole earth (DAN 2:35).

 

[CCWoody]

• the PCA encourages belief in a non-literal 6 day creation ~ Not been my experience.
• toleration of homosexuality as “just another sin" ~ depends upon what you mean.
• toleration of women in leadership ~ never been brought up
• toleration of a lack of strict adherence to the WCF ~ In my elder candidates training/ classes/ fellowship, we were required to adhere to the WCF, memorize the short catechism, and learn the BCO to just get started. Adherence to the WCF or Calvinism is not a requirement for membership in the PCA (as it should be.)
• toleration of unorthodox church services that permit ballet dancers, mime’s, puppets, gorilla costumes, and rock music ~ not that I'm in favor of turning the service into a 3 ring circus, what is wrong with "rock music?"
• a general eschatological attitude of surrender and defeat to non-Christian secular worldviews ~ Don't know what you mean here. I'm Amill, not Postmill, so I don't expect Christ to return to some kind of golden age.

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[Foundthelight]

This subject was discussed a little bit in another thread and I wanted to take this opportunity to get the benefit of everyone's thoughts and experiences with the PCA.

What I have directly experienced in visiting PCA churches in Georgia, Florida and Alabama over the past 10 years and have also heard in the testimonies from former PCA pastors and members as to why they left the PCA is that the PCA encourages belief in a non-literal 6 day creation even to the point of tolerating evolution, toleration of homosexuality as “just another sin,” toleration of women in leadership, toleration of a lack of strict adherence to the WCF, toleration of unorthodox church services that permit ballet dancers, mime’s, puppets, gorilla costumes, and rock music, and a general eschatological attitude of surrender and defeat to non-Christian secular worldviews.

Of course I have also experienced some PCA churches that don’t have this same spirit of “toleration and beliefs” such as James Kennedy’s church, R.C. Sproul’s church (however R.C. has only just very recently exercised faith in the six-day creation revelation recorded in Genesis) and some other less famous churches scattered about here and there. These churches seem to be in the minority though.

I am also reading the writings of PCA leaders who complain that the PCA church is getting worse every year with more and more accounts of pastors leaving the PCA for some or all of the reasons noted above.

Please don’t get me wrong I want the PCA to succeed and prosper, but what I want more is for the Kingdom of God and truth to succeed and prosper and “become a great mountain and fill the whole earth (DAN 2:35).

Gee. This sounds exactly like my complaints about the PCUSA. When our church leaders abandon clear Scripture and our confessions they are acting not from the urgings of the Holy Spirit, but rather, from the urgings of some other spirit. The war continues.

I will pray for the PCA as I pray fro the PCUSA.

Perhaps we need a new Reformed denomination in America. A denomination that holds to the Bible first, the confessions second, and the teachings of its pastors third.

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

This subject was discussed a little bit in another thread and I wanted to take this opportunity to get the benefit of everyone's thoughts and experiences with the PCA.

What I have directly experienced in visiting PCA churches in Georgia, Florida and Alabama over the past 10 years and have also heard in the testimonies from former PCA pastors and members as to why they left the PCA is that the PCA encourages belief in a non-literal 6 day creation even to the point of tolerating evolution, toleration of homosexuality as “just another sin,” toleration of women in leadership, toleration of a lack of strict adherence to the WCF, toleration of unorthodox church services that permit ballet dancers, mime’s, puppets, gorilla costumes, and rock music, and a general eschatological attitude of surrender and defeat to non-Christian secular worldviews.

Of course I have also experienced some PCA churches that don’t have this same spirit of “toleration and beliefs” such as James Kennedy’s church, R.C. Sproul’s church (however R.C. has only just very recently exercised faith in the six-day creation revelation recorded in Genesis) and some other less famous churches scattered about here and there. These churches seem to be in the minority though.

I am also reading the writings of PCA leaders who complain that the PCA church is getting worse every year with more and more accounts of pastors leaving the PCA for some or all of the reasons noted above.

Please don’t get me wrong I want the PCA to succeed and prosper, but what I want more is for the Kingdom of God and truth to succeed and prosper and “become a great mountain and fill the whole earth (DAN 2:35).

Hamlets Choice,

On the other thread when you mde these accusations I said that I had been in the PCA for 20 (+) years and I have not seen the things you mentioned then.

The PCA is solid on the homosexual issue. I gave you the official position and it is solid as a rock and I know of no compromise on it. The words you use “just another sin,” are problematic. What do you mean? Homosexuality is like every other sin in the since that those who practice it need to repent and turn from the sin to Christ. That is not compromise and it is the PCA position.

The PCA does not have women elders or deacons, so where is the compromise here?

Eschatology has never been a point of orthodoxy and should not be. How would you have barred all none Post-millennialists? I would agree that all Dispensationalists should be barred from being ordained, but that is because they have a deviant, non-Reformed theology. Their eschatology is a product of that heterodox theology.

I have not heard of any evolutionists leaders in the PCA. I know there has been a debate on the matter of Gen. 1 as to whether it should be seen as literal or poetic and non-literal. But I know of no one who brings evolution into the mix. Perhaps you can name some names, or is this just more gossip?

I have never experienced the type of worship services you mention. My experience with PCA Worship runs from less liturgical (Baptist like) worship to very liturgical (Episcopalian like), and all points in between, but NOTHING like what you mention.

I know that one can take exception to the WCF on minor points, but my experience is that they must be minor. I know of PCA pastor who believe in paedo-communion, but they are not allowed to practice that believe because they are in the PCA. I know of churches that have left the PCA on this issue and of one church that did not join the PCA because of this issue, but that is as close as things get to your accusations.

I disagree with my friend CC Woody. I do not think subscription to the WCF should ever be required for membership in CHRIST Church, no matter what the denomination. I do believe that elders and deacons should subscribe, and if the differ with the confession at any point, they need to let the proper people know. If it is a minor item.

For example, when I was being ordained as a deacon I pointed out that I disagreed with the WCF when it says that divorces is lawful onl for adultery, because I believe the Scriptures teach that abandonment too are lawful grounds. This was not seen as a major difference and I was ordained a deacon.

As I mentioned before, I do have problems with some items in the PCA, but I have not seen anything like what you mention. All Churches, in this world, are governed by sinners. This is true of yours and mine. There are no perfect churches and there are no perfect denominations, but the accussations you make are very grave and you need to put up evidence to back them up (names and dates), or you need to repent for "tale bearing" and gossip.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

 

[rmwilliamsll]

I am also reading the writings of PCA leaders who complain that the PCA church is getting worse every year with more and more accounts of pastors leaving the PCA for some or all of the reasons noted above.

the easiest thing to do is tell us where to go online to read these first hand accounts. that way we all can see and hear of the same complaints. personally i have neither heard nor experienced any of these specific problems.

I disagree with my friend CC Woody. I do not think subscription to the WCF should ever be required for membership in CHRIST Church, no matter what the denomination. I do believe that elders and deacons should subscribe, and if the differ with the confession at any point, they need to let the proper people know. If it is a minor item.

1. The terms of admission into his kingdom. These cannot be rightfully altered by any human authority. Men can neither add to them, nor detract from them. The rule which He has laid down on this subject is, that what He requires as a condition for admission into his kingdom in heaven, is to be required as a condition of admission to his kingdom on earth. Nothing more and nothing less is to be demanded. We are to receive all those whom Christ receives. No degree of knowledge, no confession, beyond that which is necessary to salvation, can be demanded as a condition of our recognizing any one as a Christian brother and treating him as such. Philip baptized the Eunuch on the confession "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." (Acts viii. 37.) "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations." (Rom. xiv. 1.) "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth." (Verse 4.) "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God." (1 John v. 1.) For men to reject from their fellowship those whom God has received into his, is an intolerable assumption. All those terms of Church communion which have been set up beyond the credible profession of faith in Christ are usurpations of an authority which belongs to Him alone.

from: http://www.dabar.org/Theology/Hodge/HodgeVIII/P3_C11.htm
about 3/4 of the way down, under the green label "Nature of this Kingdom."


I have not heard of any evolutionists leaders in the PCA. I know there has been a debate on the matter of Gen. 1 as to whether it should be seen as literal or poetic and non-literal. But I know of no one who brings evolution into the mix. Perhaps you can name some names, or is this just more gossip?

reading both the OPC and PCA creation reports (which are excellent documents on the issues), both explicitly deny the validity of a evolutionary stance. Even one like Howard Van Til or Terry Gray or BB. Warfield which is otherwise supportive of all the major issues of Gen 1, as the documents at T.Gray's church trial state.

 

[mlqurgw]

I can only give you my experiences with the PCA and by no means is this a description of the PCA as a whole.

The first church I joined was PCA. I attended several meetings of the Presbytery with my pastor and was extremely dissapointed to find that more than half of them were Arminians. This, of course, affected both their message and their methods. I reamained in the PCA when I moved to Fla. and joined Orangewood PCA. in the Orlando area. I sent my daughters to their school and became very close friends with the pastor and several elders. I did argue with them over the fact that the doctrines of grace were hardly, if ever, preached or taught. Their response was that it was higher knowledge that wasn't necessary to be believers. They did, in their new members class, spend about five minutes going over them as being taught in the WCF but it was stressed that folks didn't have to believe them to become members. I finally left when I was told I needed to sign a pledge card to give a certain amount of money to build a new building.

Of course I must tell you that I was a Baptist even then and it was known by all. That was way back in the early 80's.

 

[CCWoody]

I disagree with my friend CC Woody. I do not think subscription to the WCF should ever be required for membership in CHRIST Church, no matter what the denomination. I do believe that elders and deacons should subscribe, and if the differ with the confession at any point, they need to let the proper people know. If it is a minor item.

Reread what I wrote. We are not in disagreement.

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

Reread what I wrote. We are not in disagreement.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist

Woody.​

Thanks for correcting my error.

In Christ,
Kenith

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

oops. double post. See below.
Kenith

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

I can only give you my experiences with the PCA and by no means is this a description of the PCA as a whole.

The first church I joined was PCA. I attended several meetings of the Presbytery with my pastor and was extremely dissapointed to find that more than half of them were Arminians. This, of course, affected both their message and their methods. I reamained in the PCA when I moved to Fla. and joined Orangewood PCA. in the Orlando area. I sent my daughters to their school and became very close friends with the pastor and several elders. I did argue with them over the fact that the doctrines of grace were hardly, if ever, preached or taught. Their response was that it was higher knowledge that wasn't necessary to be believers. They did, in their new members class, spend about five minutes going over them as being taught in the WCF but it was stressed that folks didn't have to believe them to become members. I finally left when I was told I needed to sign a pledge card to give a certain amount of money to build a new building.

Of course I must tell you that I was a Baptist even then and it was known by all. That was way back in the early 80's.

mlqurgw,

Thanks for your comments. I knew of men in the PCA back when, who may have not been Calvinists. Many of the folks who broke with the PCUS (the Old Southern Presbyterian Church) and founded the PCA did so because the were conservative evangelicals and not necessarily Reformed. I think that that has changed dramatically. The PCA today is, I believe, very much Reformed, unlike back in 1973 when it began (though even then it had to have been mostly Reformed).

When I came into the PCA, I knew a deacon and and elder who were not paedobaptist. Today that could not happen in any of the PCA Churchs that I am familiar with.

The PCA was always conservative, but it was not always solidly Reformed. I can not swear that it is today, but I believe it is more Reformed and less broadly evangelical then it once was.

The hot topics debated in the PCA when I came into the denomination was Christian Reconstruction and presuppositional apologetics verses classical apologetics. Today the hot buttons issues I know of are paedo-communion, Norman Shepherd, N.T.Wright and the New Perspective stuff, and Auburn Ave. issues.

Those involved in all sides of these debates within the PCA are solid Calvinists and paedo-baptist. They are also all theologically and morally conservative. None, to my knowledge come close to the wild accusations (which, even now, remain only unsubstantiated accusations) made by Hamlets Choice.

The PCA needs all the Solid Reformed Christians she can get. If there is a PCA Church near you, please check it out.

In Chrsit,
Kenith

 

[mlqurgw]

mlqurgw,

Thanks for your comments. I knew of men in the PCA back when, who may have not been Calvinists. Many of the folks who broke with the PCUS (the Old Southern Presbyterian Church) and founded the PCA did so because the were conservative evangelicals and not necessarily Reformed. I think that that has changed dramatically. The PCA today is, I believe, very much Reformed, unlike back in 1973 when it began (though even then it had to have been mostly Reformed).

When I came into the PCA, I knew a deacon and and elder who were not paedobaptist. Today that could not happen in any of the PCA Churchs that I am familiar with.

The PCA was always conservative, but it was not always solidly Reformed. I can not swear that it is today, but I believe it is more Reformed and less broadly evangelical then it once was.

The hot topics debated in the PCA when I came into the denomination was Christian Reconstruction and presuppositional apologetics verses classical apologetics. Today the hot buttons issues I know of are paedo-communion, Norman Shepherd, N.T.Wright and the New Perspective stuff, and Auburn Ave. issues.

Those involved in all sides of these debates within the PCA are solid Calvinists and paedo-baptist. They are also all theologically and morally conservative. None, to my knowledge come close to the wild accusations (which, even now, remain only unsubstantiated accusations) made by Hamlets Choice.

The PCA needs all the Solid Reformed Christians she can get. If there is a PCA Church near you, please check it out.

In Chrsit,
Kenith

I appreciate you my friend but I am solidly Baptist. Yes there is a PCA very close to where I attend. To my knowledge the pastor does give lip service to the doctrines of grace but he isn't held by them. I have always remembered something my brother-in-law once said to me: There are a lot of people who hold to the doctrines but few whom they hold. Be well my brother.

 

[Gabriel]

Hamlets Choice,

On the other thread when you mde these accusations I said that I had been in the PCA for 20 (+) years and I have not seen the things you mentioned then.

The PCA is solid on the homosexual issue. I gave you the official position and it is solid as a rock and I know of no compromise on it. The words you use “just another sin,” are problematic. What do you mean? Homosexuality is like every other sin in the since that those who practice it need to repent and turn from the sin to Christ. That is not compromise and it is the PCA position.

The PCA does not have women elders or deacons, so where is the compromise here?

Eschatology has never been a point of orthodoxy and should not be. How would you have barred all none Post-millennialists? I would agree that all Dispensationalists should be barred from being ordained, but that is because they have a deviant, non-Reformed theology. Their eschatology is a product of that heterodox theology.

I have not heard of any evolutionists leaders in the PCA. I know there has been a debate on the matter of Gen. 1 as to whether it should be seen as literal or poetic and non-literal. But I know of no one who brings evolution into the mix. Perhaps you can name some names, or is this just more gossip?

I have never experienced the type of worship services you mention. My experience with PCA Worship runs from less liturgical (Baptist like) worship to very liturgical (Episcopalian like), and all points in between, but NOTHING like what you mention.

I know that one can take exception to the WCF on minor points, but my experience is that they must be minor. I know of PCA pastor who believe in paedo-communion, but they are not allowed to practice that believe because they are in the PCA. I know of churches that have left the PCA on this issue and of one church that did not join the PCA because of this issue, but that is as close as things get to your accusations.

I disagree with my friend CC Woody. I do not think subscription to the WCF should ever be required for membership in CHRIST Church, no matter what the denomination. I do believe that elders and deacons should subscribe, and if the differ with the confession at any point, they need to let the proper people know. If it is a minor item.

For example, when I was being ordained as a deacon I pointed out that I disagreed with the WCF when it says that divorces is lawful onl for adultery, because I believe the Scriptures teach that abandonment too are lawful grounds. This was not seen as a major difference and I was ordained a deacon.

As I mentioned before, I do have problems with some items in the PCA, but I have not seen anything like what you mention. All Churches, in this world, are governed by sinners. This is true of yours and mine. There are no perfect churches and there are no perfect denominations, but the accussations you make are very grave and you need to put up evidence to back them up (names and dates), or you need to repent for "tale bearing" and gossip.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

Ditto and a strong one at that, with the CCWoody exception of course. Thanks for saving me all the typing, Cajun. As an elder in the PCA I found the OP disturbing. I'd like to know where the "information" came from.

I would also request that the OP get all his ducks in a row before he starts shootin. Those are some pretty serious claims.

 

[HamletsChoice]

Ditto and a strong one at that, with the CCWoody exception of course. Thanks for saving me all the typing, Cajun. As an elder in the PCA I found the OP disturbing. I'd like to know where the "information" came from.

I would also request that the OP get all his ducks in a row before he starts shootin. Those are some pretty serious claims.

Hey ease up a little bit, I'm just posting my experiences I've had over the past 10 years attending PCA churches and hearing and reading from former PCA pastors who left the PCA. I'm not on trial, I'm not trying to prove a dissertation for a PhD, I'm simply posting what I have experienced and asking others to do the same.

I understand that there are some here in leadership positions within the PCA that may be upset with what I have experienced but hey, so am I. But don't accuse me of having not experienced what I've experienced. It's been a real nightmare for my family.

You're right, these are serious issues and thus the need for this post.

I attend Joe Morecraft's church which is part of a denomination (RPCUS) that split from the PCA long ago over these same issues that I have only recently observed. I've visited numerous PCA churches over the past 10 years in order to get my own perspective independent of Joe and the RPCUS and as I've already stated I have not been impressed. I also have to say that as a result of our favorable experiences with James Kennedy and RC Sproul that when I went into this I had really hoped the PCA was going to be much much better than what we had previously heard and what we subsequently experienced.

The RPCUS has many former PCA pastors who have had similar experiences as I have had but obviously to a much greater degree. The most recent was Henry Johnson who was part of the Westminster Presbytery that withdrew from the PCA in 2001. I am attaching an article from the PRESBYTERIAN AND REFORMED NEWS whose stated purpose:

"is to advance fellowship, piety, and orthodoxy, especially among the constituency of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), through the dissemination of news about and of interest to the PCA and through the publication of articles and editorials which promote historic Presbyterian doctrine and practice."


Please also note the articles on women preaching and creation issues within the PCA in this publication.

http://www.presbyteriannews.org/volumes/v7/3/pr7-3.pdf#search='westminster%20presbytery%20leaves%20pca'

 

[heymikey80]

Good description, Cajun Huguenot. Having worked in Sunday School in an OPC church for seven years after working in a PCA church for five, I can verify that the PCA churches I've been in don't have problems with many of these areas, if any. Presently I'm in an EPC church, though. Many (but not all, certainly not on homosexuality) of these points are indeed permitted in the EPC.

The main observable difference among the denominations seems to be their approaches on creation, liturgy, and ordination. But while the PCA is less stringent on liturgy than the OPC, it is not open to worship activities that deviated from the parts of worship, either.

My current church, though, is an EPC church. My church does use contemporary music, ordains women as deacons. Definitely. We also have screens for the music and the preaching notes. On the other issues, though: no, we're not really open as a church on these issues. Note again: this is an EPC church, not a PCA church.

To my understanding there is an independent news group in the PCA that tends to report events this way. So I'd conclude there is a far-right edge of the PCA that's looking for heresy and error -- though I wonder sometimes if they look to themselves (to see the self-reflection of some OPC churches, see below).

The PCA churches I've been in carefully regulate the worship service time to include only devotional materials. However, many don't limit worship singing to antiphonal Psalms (which is prescribed by Westminster and the Regulative Principle).

The OPC church I've been in went as far as to exclude announcements from the worship service because it's not regulative (the announcements took up the five minutes ahead of worship). OPC churches can be antiphonal, too.

To me these are all evangelical, warm, and knowledgeable churches I've been in, too. I'm not intending to be disparaging here. This is simply the way they are, and I hope my words are helping to represent them well. They've been great churches.

If anything I think you're seeing more definition between the EPC and the PCA, which itself doesn't even involve all the issues you bring up. The EPC is open to churches with some of these more liberal tendencies, and I've seen some defections from PCA to EPC on this count. But if more-liberal churches are leaving the PCA for the EPC over these issues on the left, why would people on the right think it's a compromise?

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

Hey ease up a little bit, I'm just posting my experiences I've had over the past 10 years attending PCA churches and hearing and reading from former PCA pastors who left the PCA. I'm not on trial, I'm not trying to prove a dissertation for a PhD, I'm simply posting what I have experienced and asking others to do the same.

I understand that there are some here in leadership positions within the PCA that may be upset with what I have experienced but hey, so am I. But don't accuse me of having not experienced what I've experienced. It's been a real nightmare for my family.

You're right, these are serious issues and thus the need for this post.

I attend Joe Morecraft's church which is part of a denomination (RPCUS) that split from the PCA long ago over these same issues that I have only recently observed. I've visited numerous PCA churches over the past 10 years in order to get my own perspective independent of Joe and the RPCUS and as I've already stated I have not been impressed. I also have to say that as a result of our favorable experiences with James Kennedy and RC Sproul that when I went into this I had really hoped the PCA was going to be much much better than what we had previously heard and what we subsequently experienced.

The RPCUS has many former PCA pastors who have had similar experiences as I have had but obviously to a much greater degree. The most recent was Henry Johnson who was part of the Westminster Presbytery that withdrew from the PCA in 2001. I am attaching an article from the PRESBYTERIAN AND REFORMED NEWS whose stated purpose:

"is to advance fellowship, piety, and orthodoxy, especially among the constituency of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), through the dissemination of news about and of interest to the PCA and through the publication of articles and editorials which promote historic Presbyterian doctrine and practice."


Please also note the articles on women preaching and creation issues within the PCA in this publication.

http://www.presbyteriannews.org/volumes/v7/3/pr7-3.pdf#search='westminster%20presbytery%20leaves%20pca'

THere is no reason to ease up at all. You have made some very serious accusations about the PCA. Four long time PCA members, some of whom are officers in that denomination, have NEVER seen or heard anything in the PCA remotely close to what you claim.

I will say it again (for atleast the third time) put up or shut up. You have made some terrible claims. Prove them or apologizs and drop the matter. Anything else is sin on your part.

Last time I checked the RPCUS had only a dozen or so congregations, so even if every pastor in the denomination was a PCA dropout, it would hardly qualify as having "many former PCA pastors."

I will read your article (I have not done so yet) but the two items (even if valid - which remains to be seen) it deals with is only part of the gross accusations you have made. What about the others?

Deo Vindice,
Kenith

 

[rmwilliamsll]

first, thanks for the link to:
http://www.presbyteriannews.org/volumes/v7/3/pr7-3.pdf
almost two years ago, when i first starting studying for teaching a class on american presbyterian history i had come across the threat to leave, and a note that they didn't in 2001 but i never found this one. it is now in my notes.


ineed a little help with this still.
where did the Westminster Presbytery from the PCA go in 2002?

quick study of the micro split P's
http://timbayly.worldmagblog.com/timbayly/archives/022378.html

i found this:

In 1972, a conservative movement removed itself from the Presbyterian Church in the United States to form the Presbyterian Church in America a continuing church. In 1982, the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod merged with the Presbyterian Church in America. In 1983, a few churches in the North Georgia Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church in America withdrew from the denomination over purity of doctrine and ecclesiastical practices. There upon was formed Covenant Presbytery. In 1985, Covenant Presbytery formed the Reformed Presbyterian Church in the United States as a continuing church. In 1990, the Reformed Presbyterian Church divided into four presbyteries and changed its name to the Reformed Presbyterian Church in the Americas.

The following year, as a result of the Reformed Presbyterian Church in America's failure to establish and maintain a system of church discipline and the inability (after nine years) to finalize on a constitution (!), three of the four presbyteries chose to depart.

After the departure, the Western Presbytery dissolved itself with several churches electing to join with the Westminster Presbytery. One member church left the Hanover Presbytery (which chose to stand alone to this day) and also joined the Westminster Presbytery. During this time, the Westminster Presbytery sought counsel with representatives of several other denominations, some of who requested that the presbytery join with their denomination.

from: http://www.rpcga.org/index.php?p=aboutus&sub=history

i found this list of conservative churches, first time i've seen this complete of a list:
http://www.tateville.com/churches.html

this is J.Morecraft's group: http://www.rpcus.com/

and two breakaways from them:
http://www.covenantreformed.com/Authority/history.shtml

http://www.rpchanover.org/

and the current right side break from the OPC in: http://www.erpchurch.org/



i'm trying to make a little bit of sense out of it all.

1. all the breaks have been to the right.
2. The EPC seems to occupy the left most position in the conservative spectrum.
3. the tipping point between conservatives and liberals appears to be ordination of women.
4. the tipping point for the right side breaks? theonomy, hymn singing rather than EP, some personality, some worship styles, YECism, N.Shepherd and FV. are there more issues? can they be ordered from most to least significant?

But if more-liberal churches are leaving the PCA for the EPC over these issues on the left, why would people on the right think it's a compromise?
does anyone know the magnitude of this transfer?

more notes:

And the beat goes on! I read last week on the Presbyterian Church in America’s website that the Westminster Presbytery, one of the regional bodies that make up our denomination, a presbytery located in southwest Virginia and northeast Tennessee, has voted to leave the PCA. Only some of the churches will actually leave the denomination, but a majority of the minister and elder members of that presbytery voted to leave our church. If you asked them why, they would say what countless Christians have said before them through the ages, that dividing from this particular Christian body was an act of loyalty to Jesus Christ and to the faith once delivered to the saints. They would say, I’m sure, that they regretted the necessity to separate from the PCA, but that it was a choice forced upon them by the PCA’s departure from historic Christianity.



We, of course, would reply, "Stuff and nonsense! No one is departing from historic Christianity; no one is even departing from historic Reformed Christianity. We are still a church that holds sincerely to the Westminster Confession of Faith, to the inerrancy of the Bible, to the gospel of Jesus Christ." But, they would reply, "No. That isn’t true." And they would point to such things as the fact that the PCA permits ministers and elders to hold other views than that the creation days of Genesis 1 were ordinary 24-hour days. We would reply that to divide over such matters, concerning which good men with a deep loyalty to our Reformed Faith and to the supreme authority of the Bible have long held different views, is schismatic. Such divisions we say are precisely what the Lord Jesus prayed against in his great prayer. Unity that is based on such a complete agreement regarding every detail of biblical interpretation is not supernatural unity at all. It is simply the unity that any group of human beings can enjoy with people who agree with them about everything! But they would say, on the contrary, that to remain in a church that permitted such interpretations of the Bible would be tantamount to betraying the Lord with a kiss. Did not Paul himself once write, "No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval." And does not the Bible over and again warn against giving any foothold to false teaching?



And, surely, it is not difficult to see the logic of their position when we ourselves are subject to that same logic in other ways. For example, it is all very well to say that we should have remained in the mother church, that we should not have left what is today the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, but, fact is, PCA pastors couldn’t serve in the PCUSA if they wanted to. Should we apply, we would be examined, and the PCUSA ministers and elders in that presbytery would ask us whether we believed scripture permitted the ordination of women and we would say no and that would be the end of that. Or, they may ask us whether we are willing to serve peaceably with ministers and elders who have very different convictions than our own. "What sort of convictions?" we might ask. And they might say, "Well, that Christians aren’t the only people in the world who are saved, that other religions also can lead to God and heaven; or that open, practicing homosexuals ought to be permitted to be members in good standing in the church, even ministers." And, we would say, "Well, no; I couldn’t live peaceably with those views. I would be conscience bound to declare them unchristian." And that would be the end of that. The PCUSA conservatives were, this past year, unable to pass an amendment to their Book of Church Order that would have forbidden PCUSA ministers from blessing homosexual unions. And, we think, surely it cannot be right continually to be discussing whether a Christian Church will observe the teaching of the Bible! And, in any case, we couldn’t belong to such a church without having to deny our own fundamental convictions as Christians. That would be a betrayal of the Lord and his Word plain and simple. Well, say the folk in Westminster Presbytery, we are in precisely the same situation.

a nice sermon on the topic at: http://faithtacoma.org/sermons/John/John17.20-26.May27.01.htm

there is a nice paper on the comparision of the politics of pastors in PCUSA and PCA at:
http://mpsa.indiana.edu/conf2003papers/1032120531.pdf

my notes for the HAP class are at:
http://dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/hap0.html
the class on micro split P's is at:
http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/hap12.html

i'll add what i learn here to that page.

 

[CCWoody]

I wish to make a correction to my observations listed earlier concerning the requirement of our PCA elders (both teaching and ruling) to confess to the WCF. I make this correction after consulting this morning with my teaching elder. I had to wait cause he went on vacation to my favorite nearby hide-a-way and didn't take me.

It has been asserted that it is not a requirement, and depending upon what that means, it may be true. We are Sola Scriptura, not Sola Westminster. Therefore, there is a wording of what is required which may be interpreted to mean that we don't have to believe the WCF. This is not to say that we don't believe the WCF. We do. But, there are some, I'm sure, who have taken exception to the wording as if it somehow makes us less Calvinists or means we can simply ignore the WCF. It is just not true.

Or so this is what I think my elder told me.

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

first, thanks for the link to:
http://www.presbyteriannews.org/volumes/v7/3/pr7-3.pdf
almost two years ago, when i first starting studying for teaching a class on american presbyterian history i had come across the threat to leave, and a note that they didn't in 2001 but i never found this one. it is now in my notes.


ineed a little help with this still.
where did the Westminster Presbytery from the PCA go in 2002?

quick study of the micro split P's
http://timbayly.worldmagblog.com/timbayly/archives/022378.html

i found this:

from: http://www.rpcga.org/index.php?p=aboutus&sub=history

i found this list of conservative churches, first time i've seen this complete of a list:
http://www.tateville.com/churches.html

this is J.Morecraft's group: http://www.rpcus.com/

and two breakaways from them:
http://www.covenantreformed.com/Authority/history.shtml

http://www.rpchanover.org/

and the current right side break from the OPC in: http://www.erpchurch.org/



i'm trying to make a little bit of sense out of it all.

1. all the breaks have been to the right.
2. The EPC seems to occupy the left most position in the conservative spectrum.
3. the tipping point between conservatives and liberals appears to be ordination of women.
4. the tipping point for the right side breaks? theonomy, hymn singing rather than EP, some personality, some worship styles, YECism, N.Shepherd and FV. are there more issues? can they be ordered from most to least significant?

But if more-liberal churches are leaving the PCA for the EPC over these issues on the left, why would people on the right think it's a compromise?
does anyone know the magnitude of this transfer?

more notes:

a nice sermon on the topic at: http://faithtacoma.org/sermons/John/John17.20-26.May27.01.htm

there is a nice paper on the comparision of the politics of pastors in PCUSA and PCA at:
http://mpsa.indiana.edu/conf2003papers/1032120531.pdf

my notes for the HAP class are at:
http://dakotacom.net/%7Ermwillia/hap0.html
the class on micro split P's is at:
http://www.dakotacom.net/%7Ermwillia/hap12.html

i'll add what i learn here to that page.

Hey rmwilliamsll,

This is a great post. One of the best things we Reformed Christians have going for us is we take theology seriously. At the same time one of our great failings is we take it so seriously that we are willing to be schismatic (some thing the Scriptures tell us not to be) rather than be in unity with other Reformed brethren who differ with us on issues that should not divide us.

Now Back to Hamletschoice, I am still waiting for evidence for your (still) unsubstantiated accusations against the PCA. I don't doubt that you are a Reformed brother, but you have, in my eyes, slandered me and thousands of other faithful Reformed brothers and sisters in Christ. I hope you are man enough (Christian enough) to give evidence or apologise.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

 

[HamletsChoice]

Hey rmwilliamsll,

This is a great post. One of the best things we Reformed Christians have going for us is we take theology seriously. At the same time one of our great failings is we take it so seriously that we are willing to be schismatic (some thing the Scriptures tell us not to be) rather than be in unity with other Reformed brethren who differ with us on issues that should not divide us.

Now Back to Hamletschoice, I am still waiting for evidence for your (still) unsubstantiated accusations against the PCA. I don't doubt that you are a Reformed brother, but you have, in my eyes, slandered me and thousands of other faithful Reformed brothers and sisters in Christ. I hope you are man enough (Christian enough) to give evidence or apologise.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

Kenith,

Did you read the PCA publication I posted? It is evidence.

Pastor's, who have spent their lives serving in the PCA, are having to leave the PCA because of what they believe are significant compromises with the Word of God. Entire denominations are being formed to contain the exodus. You and others might call it a schism but, lest we forget, that was the exact accusation against Martin Luther and John Calvin.

You can't brow-beat them or me out of what we have personally witnessed in the PCA. Instead I want to suggest we go through each of the issues I named one-by-one and let's examine all the evidence.

Let's start with the role of women in PCA churches, ok?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Kenith,

Did you read the PCA publication I posted? It is evidence.

Pastor's, who have spent their lives serving in the PCA, are having to leave the PCA because of what they believe are significant compromises with the Word of God. Entire denominations are being formed to contain the exodus. You and others might call it a schism but, lest we forget, that was the exact accusation against Martin Luther and John Calvin.

You can't brow-beat them or me out of what we have personally witnessed in the PCA. Instead I want to suggest we go through each of the issues I named one-by-one and let's examine all the evidence.

Let's start with the role of women in PCA churches, ok?

can i suggest a new thread pointing back to this one? keep that one on track and let this one move around a little bit around the target of PCA schisms.