What to Expect From A PCUSA Church?

[file13]

Hello. My wife and I are refugees from the Eastern Orthodox Church who have been exploring other Protestant Churches in the area. We were bouncing between a couple of Episcopal Churches, but we can't seem to find a moderately sized church that has any kids (we have an infant). We found an ACNA Anglician Church that had lots of kids, but we're a bit worried them might be too conservative when it comes to "non-essentials." Since then, we've been checking out other denominational Churches and last week went to a PCUSA church which we very much enjoyed and was alive and well with lots of kids and folks our age. I've been checking out some resources about the denomination on-line, but I seem to be getting mixed signals.

The church's website describes themselves as theologically "moderate to progressive," and I'm curious what other folks experiences with PCUSA churches are and what to expect theologically speaking? I've heard it mentioned from other Protestants how the old mainline denominational distinctions are a thing of the past and that the only real difference between a Presbyterian and a Baptist is that the former dunks babies, so I'm wondering if this is what we're likely to encounter there?

Obviously the denomination is theologically Calvinist on paper, but I'm also wondering if this is still the case in light of the comments above? So any thoughts on what we're likely to expect theologically speaking (or even otherwise) would be appreciated.

For a little background, we absolutely believe in the five solas with sola fide being the key to our departure from Orthodoxy. We're theologically moderate in the sense that when it comes to "non-essentials," we're willing to tolerate quite a bit. Some things that are important are that we'd like to find a church that if it does not affirm inerrancy, at least affirms the infallibility of Scripture. We're obviously interested in a church that preaches the "old school Gospel" and not a self help, purpose driven church or one which simply urges us "to be nice people" (not that that's bad in and of itself). I am already leaning towards accepting (admitting to?) Calvinism myself and my wife seems open to it. We're fine with women pastors, though we're uncomfortable with the notion of practicing homosexuals as pastors.

I should also add that the pastor referenced the Book of Confessions in the sermon last week and has a son named Calvin....

Thanks for your help everyone!

 

[hedrick]

It's really hard to summarize the PCUSA. Partly because there's a range. In some areas there isn't much difference from the PCA. I'm in a church in the Northeast that considers itself moderately liberal. In the past we had a well-regarded pastor who was thought to be gay (for good reason, I think). So I can comment from our perspective, but it isn't going apply to all PCUSA churches.

Our members don't spend a lot of time thinking about theology. They accept the main ideas: justification by faith, the authority of Scripture, Christ as God. But they don't really read the Confessions. On the other hand, they get a Reformed perspective in Sunday School, membership class, and sermons. Our pastor leads a Calvin study group. I think if an issue came up in Session (maybe someone proposes that we shouldn't baptize anyone until they're of age), most of the Session members would find it hard to articulate the Reformed position, but they'd have enough sense to ask, and given a presentation of both sides, they'd come down moderately Reformed.

What is moderate? If you read our members a quotation where Calvin says that God, for his own glory, decided to damn a certain set of people, most would find that unChristian. However I think they would agree that God is in control. That's paradoxical, but I think it's within the realm of Reformed thought to maintain that God is in control, but carries out his intentions while maintaining the integrity and moral responsibility of all of us.

You ask about the mainline. It's certainly not as popular as it used to be. But popularity tends to be transitory. I think it still has its own witness. I believe the mainline prioritizes following Jesus, in accordance with his actual teachings, but with some level of intellectual rigor in theology and Biblical studies behind it. Not that our members are scholars themselves, but they recognize and value scholarship, and like having it available when they need it. As such we are in contrast with several emphases that I believe have had far too much influence on Christianity over the years: (1) requiring specific verbal formulas as answers to complex questions that human will probably never fully understand, (2) maintaining a legalistic approach to Christianity that seems rather close to the Pharisees who gave Jesus such a hard time (3) primarily emotional approaches, whether Pentocostal or "seeker sensitive."

I don't think the PCUSA has succumbed either to "self help" or the "seeker sensitive" fad. Most of our members want real content in sermons. They would really dislike a church where they sing "Jesus is wonderful" 100 times. They understand the importance of prayer, and do believe that Jesus is (in some hard to define sense) God.

But most of our members believe (correctly, I think) that Jesus wants us to accept homosexuals. By "our" I mean our congregation. This is highly controversial in the denomination as a whole. So far from votes it looks like we are in the minority. But in a generation we won't be, and I don't think you should commit to the PCUSA expecting us to maintain the conservative position in the long run. If you want to be a conservative, you should join the PCA, or the OPC if you want female elders (although I wonder whether it's going to be possible in the long run to allow female elders and not homosexual elders).

 

[file13]

Thank a bunch hedrick! This is very informative and helpful.

As I mentioned, we're equally wary of extremes on either side and we're not looking for any sort of "theological perfection" or we wouldn't be exploring various denominations in the area (we were at Methodist church the week before so there ya go). I was just more looking for what we might expect, especially when it comes to the church's Reformed roots. We also don't have a problem with homosexuals in church (we were in Episcopal churches before we began looking around at other Protestant churches) or as individuals, but it's the issue of pastors that gives us pause (and I have no desire to debate any of this here and absolutely don't claim to have any solutions). But at the end of the day, we don't have all the answers and honestly, one of the reasons we were a bit wary of some of the other denominations was that we were worried we might find on the conserative end, the kind of legaism you describe that requires us to have perfect theology and subscribe to a list of issues which we would probably consider non-essential. One example is the LCMS and Young Earth Creationism. Do we really need to make this a part of the formal confession of the church? In other words, we're hoping to find a church to raise our family in that tries to remember the old expression "in necessary things unity; in uncertain things freedom; in everything compassion".

In any case, thanks for taking the time to respond because your response has reinforced the good vibe we had and we'll likely be heading back there soon. I'm of course still happy to hear other opinions out there!

 

[ThePresbyteers]

After learning from hedrick, I've relaxed a little. I've been drowning myself with a lot of theological dogma and while I was at it, I found many churches to be selfish, legalistic and contradictory. I settling down to a more flexible church, the PCUSA. I love PCA but I can see deep down their soul that there's something not right. Something like a man saying "I'm much bigger and far more important" to a women. That just give me the creeps. I believe the spiritual world has evolved to what it is today and believe the PCUSA have a much better vision for the future of the church. Personally, I wouldn't want a GLBT (gay) minister but in my area, I don't think I would ever encouter that. In some areas, GLBT would work for certian groups of happy folks. Homosexual ordination seems far too small and only a very few and the Internet and the media blows it far out of proportion like a 200 decibel speakers in the ears.
In my liftime, I think I'll be fine in my area. The most import af all to me is that if you're not sure what the Bible say about things it's best not to make rules about them. The old rules may be against God and we'll be stabbing ourselves in the back. The worst church would be the one that proudly make rules when deep down they're not sure about things like the vagueness of the Bible or flipping coins for decision making. Sometimes the Bible doesn't point out some issues. I really like the idea of the voting process. Not everybody agrees on some things but I believe that the best way to govern a denomination. Otherwise we'll be creating new denomination every single day.
I predict that the PCA will split in the future. And many others will do the same. It's almost like the PCUSA are being sensitive and wise on their decision making. Even though PCUSA might not be popular today but should grow rapidly, not far in the future. Like a rocket. It takes off slowly but goes faster at the end. Others may get left behind.

 

[file13]

That's for the feedback ThePresbyteers!

I hear ya on keeping your mouth shut on issues you're not sure about. I also think I smell what you're stepping in about what you see as problems you bring up with your experiences in the PCA. One of the problems we had in Orthodoxy was the fact that it seems to attract more and more extreme conservatives all the time as folks flee from "the evils of liberalism" and who apparently think that it's holy to to dress like 19th century Russian peasants, complete with giant beards...salvation by beard apparently....

On the other hand, going to Episcopal churches lately (and keep in mind, this is in Dallas, which is still one of the most conservative Episcopal dioceses left in the country), besides the fact that they're just kinda dead, we seemed to have the opposite problem where we just didn't feel like we were getting fed spiritually. Maybe it has something to do with a theological focus in Anglicanism to begin with, but whatever the case, it just felt like something was missing. So yeah, we'd like to find a church that's not only alive, but which tries to avoid extremes in either direction.

In any case, thanks for the feedback and of course, we're still all ears for other perspectives. But from our experience last week and the feedback here, we'll likely go back this week.

God bless!

 

[hedrick]

Thank a bunch hedrick! This is very informative and helpful.

As I mentioned, we're equally wary of extremes on either side and we're not looking for any sort of "theological perfection" or we wouldn't be exploring various denominations in the area (we were at Methodist church the week before so there ya go). I was just more looking for what we might expect, especially when it comes to the church's Reformed roots. We also don't have a problem with homosexuals in church (we were in Episcopal churches before we began looking around at other Protestant churches) or as individuals, but it's the issue of pastors that gives us pause (and I have no desire to debate any of this here and absolutely don't claim to have any solutions). But at the end of the day, we don't have all the answers and honestly, one of the reasons we were a bit wary of some of the other denominations was that we were worried we might find on the conserative end, the kind of legaism you describe that requires us to have perfect theology and subscribe to a list of issues which we would probably consider non-essential. One example is the LCMS and Young Earth Creationism. Do we really need to make this a part of the formal confession of the church? In other words, we're hoping to find a church to raise our family in that tries to remember the old expression "in necessary things unity; in uncertain things freedom; in everything compassion".

The problem is that if you think the authority of Scripture depends upon inerrancy, and you take a fairly common conservative view of how to use Scripture, rejecting evolution may seem like an essential. It's easier for a liberal to accept variations in belief than for a conservative to do so.

A piece of trivia about our congregation: one of our 5th and 6th grade Sunday School teachers believes in a 6 day creation. I believe she taught it that way. (In 7th and 8th grade I present both sides, but tell them that I accept evolution.) However when we talked about homosexuality she was very concerned, because her children have gay friends, and she wanted to make sure I didn't call them sinners. That summarizes our church in a nutshell: a female Young Earth Creationist elder who is in favor of our congregation declaring itself open and accepting of gays. But every one of our Sunday School teachers will teach the key points of the Bible, the basics of Christian theology, and while we may not emphasize predestination (though I will talk about it this year with the youth), we'll certainly emphasize grace.

There aren't many PCUSA churches with homosexual pastors, although it does happen, and might happen somewhat more often if the policy on ordination was changed. (I said our church had had a gay pastor some time ago. He would have been ordained before the change in the constitution to prevent it.) However the importance is wider for a Presbyterian church than it would be for other denominations. Our whole leadership is ordained, including deacons and elders. Over time, our most active members eventually end up serving as elders, deacons, or both. So if we don't ordain homosexuals, that has a significant effect on their ability to be fully involved in the congregation.

I think you'll find pretty much what you're expecting.

 

[file13]

Thanks again hedrick!

Yup, I think you've gone above and beyond the call of duty here and by the grace of God, perhaps we might find a home here. As for inerrancy, I just mentioned it and "infallibility" as more or less of what we'd consider acceptable. I don't self identify as someone who's on board with the term inerrancy. I.e. we just want a church family who takes Scripture seriously. Remember, we're coming from Orthodoxy which puts "Tradition" on par with (or some would say equal or even ever so slightly above) Scripture. After dealing with nonsense where you have Scriptural silence, but a "consensus of the Fathers," the norm is to blindly follow the Fathers. The entire epistemological mess absolutely drove us crazy. So regarding Scripture, on the other end of the spectrum, we don't want an extreme liberal church like the horror stories you here from Episcopal churches where they treat Scripture on more or less the same level as say, the Bhagavad Gita. I love the Gita and all, but I put my faith in Jesus Christ, not Krishna. We're just looking for a church with balance who absolutely affirms that Jesus Christ is our God and savior who saves us unconditionally and without us having to jump through hoops so that God finds us worthy. I am a former Buddhist and I became a Christian because I needed a savior. Orthodoxy taught us that we must climb the "ladder of divine ascent" and that it's a ladder, not an escalator or elevator! We just want to find a good church home who believes in grace and personally I have never been at peace as a Christian until I came to understand as J.I Packer says that:

For of Calvinism there is really only one point to be made in the field soteriology: the point that God saves sinners. God — the Triune Jehovah, Father, Son and Spirit; three Persons working together in sovereign wisdom, power and love to achieve the salvation of a chosen people, the Father electing, the Son fulfilling the Father's will by redeeming, the Spirit executing the purpose of Father and Son by renewing. Saves — does everything, first to last, that is involved in bringing man from death in sin to life in glory: plans, achieves and communicates redemption, calls and keeps, justifies, sanctifies, glorifies. Sinners — men as God finds them, guilty, vile, helpless, powerless, blind, unable to lift a finger to do God's will or better their spiritual lot. God saves sinners — and the force of this confession may not be weakened by disrupting the unity of the work of the Trinity, or by dividing the achievement of salvation between God and man and making the decisive part man's own, or by soft-pedaling the sinner's inability as to allow him to share the praise of his salvation with his Savior.

It's been a long journey, but after going to the little church just down the street and not only being very impressed by the folks there, God had the special music person sing a song not listed in the bulletin. It was the one song that since I've left the "save yourself" (or the "now that you have a partner who's obviously reliable which means essentially that YOU save yourself") world of semi-pelagainism, has been my refuge, "When Peace Like A River." At that point I asked, "is this it?" My wife came in today and said that she really wanted to go back to this church today. So if you have a moment, pray for us that we might find peace with you guys. Not by our will, but by the grace of God.

Thanks again for reaching out to us with some excellent advice and God bless you brother!

 

[ThePresbyteers]

---- So regarding Scripture, on the other end of the spectrum, we don't want an extreme liberal church like the horror stories you here from Episcopal churches where they treat Scripture on more or less the same level as say, the Bhagavad Gita.----

The Episcopal churches dabble in Bhagavad Gita?

 

[file13]

Oh goodness, no! I was making an illustration of the other liberal extreme we're trying to avoid. Although one of the Episcopal churches we went to did have a class on understanding Islam for their Sunday school for a time. But I'm sure it was an attempt to better understand them and not an attempt to espouse universalism (I never went to it). But there are some horror stories of wacky things allegedly going on in the Anglican communion which we'd also like to avoid needless to say and I was just making an extreme example to emphasize our desire for moderation on the other end.

 

[MoreCoffee]

file13, I am curious to know why you left Orthodoxy and how long you were in it - I don't want to pry so if you are uncomfortable discussing the topic then just ignore my question.

God be with you in your search.

 

[file13]

Hi MoreCoffee, please forgive me if I decline going into specifics. I'm really quite sick of theological arguments and have zero interest in engaging in one now. I will say that we were Orthodox for many years, far too long to be a part of the convert "revolving door" statistic (although sadly, we witnessed this far too many times after folks grew out of the "honeymoon phase"). Our specific reasons for leaving are purely theological (we had a superb priest/s and parish and loved our church and the people there) and apply equally to Catholics as Orthodox Christians.

Hope this helps and thanks for understanding!

 

[MoreCoffee]

Hi MoreCoffee, please forgive me if I decline going into specifics. I'm really quite sick of theological arguments and have zero interest in engaging in one now. I will say that we were Orthodox for many years, far too long to be a part of the convert "revolving door" statistic (although sadly, we witnessed this far too many times after folks grew out of the "honeymoon phase"). Our specific reasons for leaving are purely theological (we had a superb priest/s and parish and loved our church and the people there) and apply equally to Catholics as Orthodox Christians.

Hope this helps and thanks for understanding!

In this forum debate is not permitted and it was the last thing on my mind. I asked only to hear and understand what were the salient factors in your decision to become a Protestant. But as I said, there is no need to reply to my question because I respect your right to privacy and the presence of Christ in you.

God keep you.

 

[ThePresbyteers]

---Hi MoreCoffee, please forgive me if I decline going into specifics. I'm really quite sick of theological arguments and have zero interest in engaging in one now.---

MoreCoffee may be promoting a debate. There no need to answer that in the CCCP