PCUSA v PCA

[Snowbunny]

hola,

you must excuse my confusion about this because i am not a Presbyterian and know very little about Presbyterianism. my husband is one... we go to a Presby service (when he is here) after Mass, usually with his parents. but he made an off handed remark recently about the "PCUSA" churches not being 'real' Presbyterians and that the PCA was an orthodox Presbyterian organization... they way he spoke on the subject made it seem to me like they were completely different denominations...

what is this? is anyone familiar with these organizations and why one might consider the other so radical?

gracias

 

[david01]

Your husband is mistaken if he thinks the two denominations are so radically different. If you think of any faith as having a spectrum of beliefs from very traditional and conservative to very modern and liberal you can understand my analogy. That is like within Roman Catholicism seeing some very traditional churches using the Latin mass versus some at the other end of the spectrum advocating for women priests. Presbyterianism is like that, but is not a unified denomination like the RCC. At the very traditional and conservative end of the spectrum I would probably place the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, which would make the PCA look like a bunch of flaming liberals, by comparison. At the end of the liberal side is the PCUSA. The PCUSA, and its prior denominations have been spinning off denominations for over seventy years now. As time has gone on the denominations that have come out have been progressively more liberal than their predecessors. The first out was the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, which is very conservative. The latest is the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, which is moderately liberal. The PCA developed during the 1950's and is probably near the middle of the spectrum.

I hope this helps your understanding.

 

[AndOne]

Your husband is mistaken if he thinks the two denominations are so radically different. If you think of any faith as having a spectrum of beliefs from very traditional and conservative to very modern and liberal you can understand my analogy. That is like within Roman Catholicism seeing some very traditional churches using the Latin mass versus some at the other end of the spectrum advocating for women priests. Presbyterianism is like that, but is not a unified denomination like the RCC. At the very traditional and conservative end of the spectrum I would probably place the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, which would make the PCA look like a bunch of flaming liberals, by comparison. At the end of the liberal side is the PCUSA. The PCUSA, and its prior denominations have been spinning off denominations for over seventy years now. As time has gone on the denominations that have come out have been progressively more liberal than their predecessors. The first out was the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, which is very conservative. The latest is the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, which is moderately liberal. The PCA developed during the 1950's and is probably near the middle of the spectrum.

I hope this helps your understanding.

Here's an idea - lets hear what a Presbyterian has to say about this...

 

[Elderone]

hola,

you must excuse my confusion about this because i am not a Presbyterian and know very little about Presbyterianism. my husband is one... we go to a Presby service (when he is here) after Mass, usually with his parents. but he made an off handed remark recently about the "PCUSA" churches not being 'real' Presbyterians and that the PCA was an orthodox Presbyterian organization... they way he spoke on the subject made it seem to me like they were completely different denominations...

what is this? is anyone familiar with these organizations and why one might consider the other so radical?

gracias

Looking back on the United Presbyterian Church in the '50's when I was a member, and the Presbyterian Church USA, the church that came about with the combining of the Presbyterian Church in the US and the United Presbyterian Church in '83, I would have to say only slightly kiddingly, they seem to be different denominations. The PCUSA is very liberal.

However, the PCA does not have a great deal to boast about these days when it comes to being conservative. They are more so than the PCUSA but going liberal also.

One thing left out of david01's assessment, which was a good quick overview, are the Reformed Presbyterian Churches. These denominations have split off mostly from the PCUSA throughout the years and are doing a pretty good job of teaching and adhering to the Bible.

Hopefully that is not more information than you wanted.

 

[arunma]

The PCA is liberal? I recently joined a PCA church plant(specifically because all the other reformed churches in the area are liberal), and I'm fairly certain that they are not liberal by any stretch of the imagination. Perhaps someone could clarify the ways in which they believe the PCA to be liberal.

Anyway Snowbunny, I would agree with your husband. The PCUSA is an apostate denomination. They believe neither in the Bible nor in redemption by faith in Christ. They've reduced the Gospel to a set of social reforms, and approve of such immoralities as openly homosexual pastors.

 

[nill]

I'm curious about the "PCA is growing more liberal" thing, too... could someone clarify that?

 

[david01]

For the record, I was also raised in the United Presbyterian Church in the 1950's and watched it grow progressively more liberal. After the Lord graciously saved me, I seriously examined the various Presbyterian denominations and continue to follow them with some interest, primarily through The Presbyterian Layman.

The Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America is vastly more conservative than the PCA. In a relative sense they make the PCA look like flaming liberals. For example, the RPCNA still sings only the Psalms without instrumental accompaniment. They maintain the Scottish Presbyterian practice of communion two or three times a year at infrequent intervals. Their communion begins with a set of preparatory services on Saturday or Friday night and culminates on Sunday morning when the elders collect the communion tokens to admit communicants to the front of the church to partake. The tokens are dispensed on the Saturday night prior to communion. To become a member, one must take an oath and covenant that they recognize the RPCNA as God's only church and that they will be faithful members of His church for the remainder of their lives, as will all of their descendants. In contrast, the PCA is full of flaming liberals who have abandoned willy-nilly historic Presbyterianism.

 

[Elderone]

The PCA is liberal?

I'm curious about the "PCA is growing more liberal" thing, too... could someone clarify that?

Keep in mind that a good many churches will look very conservative when compared with the PCUSA. If you wish to "really" determine how conservative a congregation or denomination is, compare it to a Biblically conservative standard, such as the RPCNA.

 

[arunma]

Actually, based on David's description, I'm not sure the practices of the RPCNA are Biblical. Now, we can define conservativism however we like. But at the end of the day my doctrinal allegiance is to the Scriptures, and not to an artificially constructed spectrum of liberalism and conservativism.

 

[AndOne]

The Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America is vastly more conservative than the PCA. In a relative sense they make the PCA look like flaming liberals. For example, the RPCNA still sings only the Psalms without instrumental accompaniment. They maintain the Scottish Presbyterian practice of communion two or three times a year at infrequent intervals. Their communion begins with a set of preparatory services on Saturday or Friday night and culminates on Sunday morning when the elders collect the communion tokens to admit communicants to the front of the church to partake. The tokens are dispensed on the Saturday night prior to communion. To become a member, one must take an oath and covenant that they recognize the RPCNA as God's only church and that they will be faithful members of His church for the remainder of their lives, as will all of their descendants. In contrast, the PCA is full of flaming liberals who have abandoned willy-nilly historic Presbyterianism.

I don't call that conservatism - rather LEGALISM.

 

[Elderone]

To become a member, one must take an oath and covenant that they recognize the RPCNA as God's only church and that they will be faithful members of His church for the remainder of their lives, as will all of their descendants.

I admit their oath and covenant is one I could never take.

The preparation services, on the other hand, are very useful to bringing peoples minds back to just what the Lord's table is about. We did not pass out the tokens, but one week before the quarterly Communion the following information was included with the bulletin, and the Wednesday night service prior was preparation for the Sunday service.

Communion Preparation
In preparation for the Lord's supper, a review may be useful of the Nicene Creed, which we will recite in place of the Apostles' Creed, and several questions from the Larger Catechism. The Larger Catechism, together with the Confession of Faith and the Shorter Catechism, are viewed as a reliable summary of what the Bible teaches and, consequently, are best presented with the Biblical references that are included below, at a minimum.

The Nicene Creed

I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of His Father before all worlds; God of God; Light of Light; Very God of Very God; Begotten, not made; Being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made; Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven; And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried; And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; And ascended into heaven; And sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And He shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead; Whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost; the Lord and Giver of Life; Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; Who spake by the prophets. And I believe one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins. And I look for the Resurrection of the dead; And the Life of the world to come. Amen.

Larger Catechism Questions

Q. 168. What is the Lord's supper?
A. The Lord's supper is a sacrament of the New Testament,z wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, His death is shewed forth; and they that worthily communicate feed on His body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in gracea; have their union and communion with Him confirmed;b testify and renew their thankfulness,c and engagement to God,d and their mutual love and fellowship each with other, as members of the same mystical body.e
z. Luke 22:20. a. Matthew 26:26-28; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26.
b. 1 Corinthians 10:16. c. 1 Corinthians 11:24.
d. 1 Corinthians 10:14-16, 21. e. 1 Corinthians 10:17.

Q. 169. How hath Christ appointed bread and wine to be given and received in the sacrament of the Lord's supper?
A. Christ hath appointed the ministers of His word, in the administration of this sacrament of the Lord's supper, to set apart the bread and wine from common use, by the word of institution, thanksgiving, and prayer; to take and break the bread, and to give both the bread and the wine to the communicants: who are, by the same appointment, to take and eat the bread, and to drink the wine, in thankful remembrance that the body of Christ was broken and given, and His blood shed, for them.f
f. 1 Corinthians 11:23-24; Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24;
Luke 22:19-20.

Q. 170. How do they that worthily communicate in the Lord's supper feed upon the body and blood of Christ therein?
A. As the body and blood of Christ are not corporally or carnally present in, with, or under the bread and wine in the Lord's supper,g and yet are spiritually present to the faith of the receiver, no less truly and really than the elements themselves are to their outward senses;h so they that worthily communicate in the sacrament of the Lord's supper, do therein feed upon the body and blood of Christ, not after a corporal and carnal, but in a spiritual manner; yet truly and really,i while by faith they receive and apply unto themselves Christ crucified, and all the benefits of His death.k
g. Acts 3:21. h. Matthew 26:26, 28. i. 1 Corinthians 11:24-29.
k. 1 Corinthians 10:16.

Q. 171. How are they that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper to prepare themselves before they come unto it?
A. They that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper are, before they come, to prepare themselves thereunto, by examining themselvesl of their being in Christ,m of their sins and wants;n of the truth and measure of their knowledge,o faith,p repentance;q love to God and the brethern,r charity to all men,s forgiving those that have done them wrong;t of their desires after Christ,v and of their new obedience;w and by renewing the exercise of these graces,x by serious meditation,y and fervent prayer.z
l. 1 Corinthians 11:28. m. 2 Corinthians 13:5.
n. 1 Corinthians 5:7; Exodus 12:15. o. 1 Corinthians 11:29.
p. 2 Corinthians 13:5; Matthew 26:28. q. Zechariah 12:10; 1 Corinthians 11:31.
r. 1 Corinthians 10:16-17; Acts 2:46-47.
s. 1 Corinthians 5:8; 1 Corinthians 11:18, 20. t. Matthew 5:23-24.
v. Isaiah 55:1; John 7:37. w. 1 Corinthians 5:7-8.
x. 1 Corinthians 11:25-26, 28; Hebrews 10:21-22, 24; Psalm 26:6.
y. 1 Corinthians 11:24-25. z. 2 Chronicles 30:18-19; Matthew 26:26.

Q. 172. May one who doubteth of his being in Christ, or of his due preparation, come to the Lord's supper?
A. One who doubteth of his being in Christ, or of his due preparation to the sacrament of the Lord's supper, may have true interest in Christ, though he be not yet assured thereof;a and in God's account hath it, if he be duly affected with the apprehension of the want of it,b and unfeignedly desires to be found in Christ,c and to depart from iniquityd: in which case (because promises are made, and this sacrament is appointed, for the relief even of weak and doubting Christianse) he is to bewail his unbelief,f and labour to have his doubts resolved;g and, so doing, he may and ought to come to the Lord's supper, that he may be further strengthened.h
a. Isaiah 1:10; 1 John 5:13; Psalm 88:1-18; Psalm 77:1-4, 7-10; Jonah 2:4, 7. b. Isaiah 54:7-10; Matthew 5:3-4; Psalm 31:22; Psalm 73:13, 22-23.
c. Philippians 3:8-9; Psalm 10:17; Psalm 42:1-2, 5, 11.
d. 2 Timothy 2:19; Isaiah 1:10; Psalm 66:18-20.
e. Isaiah 40:11, 29, 31; Matthew 11:28; Matthew 12:20; Matthew 26:28.
f. Mark 9:24. g. Acts 2:37; Acts 16:30. h. Romans 4:11; 1 Corinthians 11:28.

Q. 173. May any who profess the faith, and desire to come to the Lord's supper, be kept from it?
A. Such as are found to be ignorant or scandalous, notwithstanding their profession of the faith, and desire to come to the Lord's supper, may and ought to be kept from that sacrament, by the power which Christ hath left in His church,i until they receive instruction, and manifest their reformation.k
i. 1 Corinthians 11:27-34; cf. Matthew 7:6, 1 Corinthians 5:1-13, Jude 23,
1 Timothy 5:22. k. 2 Corinthians 2:7.

Q. 174. What is required of them that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper in the time of the administration of it?
A. It is required of them that receive the sacrament of the Lord's
supper, that, during the time of the administration of it, with all holy reverence and attention they wait upon God in that ordinance,l diligently observe the sacramental elements and actions,m heedfully discern the Lord's body,n and affectionately meditate on His death and sufferings,o and thereby stir up themselves to a vigorous exercise of their graces;p in judging themselves,q and sorrowing for sin;r in earnest hungering and thirsting after Christ,s feeding on Him by faith,t receiving of His fulness,v trusting in His merits,w rejoicing in His love,x giving thanks for His grace;y in renewing of their covenant with God,z and love to all the saints.a
l. Leviticus 10:3; Hebrews 12:28; Psalm 5:7; 1 Corinthians 11:17, 26-27.
m. Exodus 24:8; Matthew 26:28. n. 1 Corinthians 11:29.
o. Luke 22:19. p. 1 Corinthians 11:26; 1 Corinthians 10:3-5, 11, 14.
q. 1 Corinthians 11:31. r. Zechariah 12:10. s. Revelation 22:17.
t. John 6:35. v. John 1:16. w. Philippians 1:16.
x. Psalm 63:4, 5; 2 Chronicles 30:21. y. Psalm 22:26.
z. Jeremiah 1:5; Psalm 1:5. a. Acts 2:42.

Q. 175. What is the duty of Christians, after they have received the sacrament of the Lord's supper? A. The duty of Christians, after they have received the sacrament of the Lord's supper, is seriously to consider how they have behaved themselves therein, and with what success;b if they find quickening and comfort, to bless God for it,c beg the continuance of it,d watch against relapses,e fulfill their vows,f and encourage themselves to a frequent attendance on that ordinanceg: but if they find no present benefit, more exactly to review their preparation to, and carriage at, the sacrament;h in both which, if they can approve themselves to God and their own consciences, they are to wait for the fruit of it in due timei: but, if they see they have failed in either, they are to be humbled,k and to attend upon it afterwards with more care and diligence.l
b. Psalm 28:7; Psalm 85:8; 1 Corinthians 11:17, 30-31.
c. 2 Chronicles 30:21-23, 25-26; Acts 2:42, 46-47.
d. Psalm 36:10; Song of Solomon 3:4; 1 Chronicles 29:18.
e. 1 Corinthians 10:3-5, 12. f. Psalm 1:14.
g. 1 Corinthians 11:25-26; Acts 2:42, 46.
h. Song of Solomon 5:1-6; Ecclesiastes 5:1-6.
i. Psalm 123:1-2; Psalm 42:5, 8; Psalm 43:3-5.
k. 2 Chronicles 30:18-19; Isaiah 1:16, 18.
l. 2 Corinthians 7:11; 1 Chronicles 15:12-14.

 

[Paleoconservatarian]

I don't call that conservatism - rather LEGALISM.

I agree. I wouldn't call it conservative to demand an oath denouncing everyone else -- say, their fellow NAPARC members -- as false churches. Nor do I consider it conservative for them to deny Christ's people His body and blood for almost the entire year, and then only if they observe a day other than the Lord's Day (and Lord knows what other legalistic requirements).

 

[AndOne]

I agree. I wouldn't call it conservative to demand an oath denouncing everyone else -- say, their fellow NAPARC members -- as false churches. Nor do I consider it conservative for them to deny Christ's people His body and blood for almost the entire year, and then only if they observe a day other than the Lord's Day (and Lord knows what other legalistic requirements).

Yep - sounds like they're a pope away from Catholicism...

 

[heymikey80]

hola,

you must excuse my confusion about this because i am not a Presbyterian and know very little about Presbyterianism. my husband is one... we go to a Presby service (when he is here) after Mass, usually with his parents. but he made an off handed remark recently about the "PCUSA" churches not being 'real' Presbyterians and that the PCA was an orthodox Presbyterian organization... they way he spoke on the subject made it seem to me like they were completely different denominations...

what is this? is anyone familiar with these organizations and why one might consider the other so radical?

gracias

They are completely different organizations. The PCUSA is not recognized as a Reformed church by NAPARC.

Blocs of churches remove themselves from the PCUSA every few years. The OPC was an early group that separated from the northern church mid-last-century. The PCA was formed from a group of southern churches separated from the southern church in the 70's; the EPC was formed from a group of northern churches about a decade later. Another bloc of churches is removing from the PCUSA at this time as well.

The PCUSA is a mainline denomination with little but a history of the organization being from a Reformed background. One brighter light in the PCUSA is the Alliance of Confessing Churches within the PCUSA. They are more careful with the original Confession and Catechisms of the Presbyterian Church.

 

[arunma]

Yep - sounds like they're a pope away from Catholicism...

Quite right. Catholics also claim to have the only true church (as though God's people were a building). Marriage also requires raising one's children as Catholics. And in the end, they define "liberalism" as having drums in church. I don't think that all of us are talking about the same liberal-conservative spectrum.

 

[david01]

In the defence of the RPCNA (of which I am not a member) I would say that they are extremely traditional in their beliefs and practices. They have steadfastly adhered to the beliefs and traditions of the Covenanter Presbyterians of Scotland since the seventeenth century. I would not term them legalists, however. Their soteriology is the same as all Reformed and Presbyterian churches.

As for observance of the Lord's Day, they strictly adhere to a close observance of Sunday as the Lord's Day with the day devoted to the Lord and not to work or other secular pursuits. They observe communion on Sunday, but prepare for it either on Saturday or beginning on Friday night.

They do not denounce other churches per se, but simply adhere to the belief that they are God's church (alone). In this, they are no different than many denominations such as the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, etc.

As for myself, I have chosen not to enter into the spectrom of Presbyterianism, but do find many things in the RPCNA worthy of consideration such as the singing of the Psalms and the serious nature of the Lord' Supper.

 

[david01]

One small correction, heymikey80. The PCA was formed during the 1950's and was a relatively tiny denomination until the 1970's when it grew through the addition of many conservative churches which left the Southern Presbyterian Church at that time. It has since been growing in a similar manner as PCUSA churches now have several more conservative denominations from which to choose.

 

[Paleoconservatarian]

As for observance of the Lord's Day, they strictly adhere to a close observance of Sunday as the Lord's Day with the day devoted to the Lord and not to work or other secular pursuits. They observe communion on Sunday, but prepare for it either on Saturday or beginning on Friday night.

Yet the Lord's Supper isn't a characteristic of this day of worship, of receiving and enjoying God's gifts through Word and Sacrament. How can we, in light of what we claim the Eucharist is, hold infrequency to be a measure of piety? And to not only withhold Christ's body and blood except on rare occasion, but then to require communicants to observe a day that has not been set aside as the Lord's Day, seems to me to show a great indifference to the means of grace and the sanctity of the day.

This is one area where I think the Heidelberg Catechism shines. In regard to the Lord's Day, we are taught that we must: "diligently attend church to learn the Word of God, to use the Holy Sacraments, to call publicly upon the Lord, and to give Christian alms." (Q. 103)

Or as the WCF confesses: "The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear; the sound preaching, and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God with understanding, faith, and reverence; singing of psalms with grace in the heart; as, also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ; are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God" (21.5)

They do not denounce other churches per se, but simply adhere to the belief that they are God's church (alone). In this, they are no different than many denominations such as the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, etc.

So you mean to say that the Church of Rome doesn't think that ours are false churches? Being God's only church is kind of an exclusive office. When you claim to be it, you're necessarily excluding the others.

 

[AndOne]

One small correction, heymikey80. The PCA was formed during the 1950's and was a relatively tiny denomination until the 1970's when it grew through the addition of many conservative churches which left the Southern Presbyterian Church at that time. It has since been growing in a similar manner as PCUSA churches now have several more conservative denominations from which to choose.

According to the PCA's own website - they were organized as a constitutional assembly in December of 1973.

You can also read of their commitment to Westminster Standards at the same link here: http://www.pcanet.org/general/history.htm

The PCA is a solid denomination - I've visited 10th Presbyterian in Phili on a few occasions - and it is top notch. I'd recommend a PCA church to any one who is looking for a solid church home.

 

[david01]

Actually, I am in entire agreement with your points, Paleoconservative.

My position is not to defend the RPCNA, but to explain how they are at the extreme end of the Presbyterian spectrum. Please note that they carry on the beliefs and traditions of one segment of Scottish Presbyterianism. Even in the seventeenth century there were divisions within Presbyterianism.

That being said, their defence of the infrequency of Communion is actually the standard explanation often given. A more frequent observance would lead to less reverence and self-inspection that is necessary to partake worthily.

The Church of Rome does a hopscotch when it comes to denouncing other churches. Their postion du jour is that other churches do, indeed, partake of the salvation offered by Christ, but that the "fullness" of salvation is limited to the Church of Rome. They now say that virtually any form of Trinitarian baptism provides a (limited measure of) salvation, but beyond that, there is no salvation apart from the Church of Rome.

The RPCNA doesn't do that sort of hopscotch. They recognize that that their (very small) membership is not limited to all the elect on the earth, but that, as far as being God's earthly church, they are it. Other Christians are simply outside of the church, but they are fully elect.