The leadership of the PCUSA has responded to the “Fellowship PCUSA” letter. Stated Clerk Gradye Parsons, General Aeembly Moderator Cynthia Bolbach, and General Assembly Mission Council director Linda Valentine put out a missive entitled “Future of the church” that says about what you’d expect. Most of is is standard boilerplate, but this caught my eye:
We hear many voices seeking God’s guidance in discerning how to move forward in a rapidly evolving church and culture. A number of pastors recently issued a Letter to the Presbyterian Church, expressing frustration and calling for something new. Elsewhere, an open invitation has been extended to a conversation about more vital, faithful and connectional congregational ministry in the “next” PC(USA). The 219th General Assembly (2010) empowered a Middle Governing Body Commission, not only to consider the relationships of our middle governing bodies, but to act, upon request, responsively in new expressions of the church. Another task force has been set into motion to consider the whole form and function of our meetings of the general assembly, another is examining what the nature of the church is in the 21st century, and yet another is considering how we can live up to our aspirations for racial and ethnic diversity. Presbyterians everywhere long for vibrant congregations and communities of faith, and relationships built upon trust and our common faith in Jesus Christ.
Talk about missing the point. In one paragraph, they manage to mention not one, not two, but four committees, two of which have to do with tweaking the machinery, one of which has to do with secondary theology, and one of which has to do with a problem that is virtually non-existent in the mainline churches. If committees could solve the problems of the mainline churches, they’d be the biggest, most vital religious organizations in America.
The problems of the mainline are three-fold. First, there’s the theological problem. Much of the bureaucratic leadership, virtually all of the seminary teachers, and a substantial portion of the pastors have abandoned historic Christian orthodoxy, so that they have no good news to offer to a lost world. Second, the the mission problem. Because theological orthodoxy has been abandoned, the mission of reaching the world with the gospel of Christ has been laid aside, and political activism has replaced it. Finally, there’s the spiritual problem. As theological orthodoxy fades, and the biblical mission of the church takes a back seat, congregations–the heart of any denomination–lose heart, see themselves as increasingly irrelevant, isolated, and purposeless. All the institutional tinkering in the world isn’t going to change any of this.
For the PCUSA troika to talk about “middle governing bodies” and “new forms and functions” for General Assembly indicates that they still don’t realize that the crisis of the mainline in general, and the PCUSA in particular, isn’t a polity crisis. It’s a God crisis.
February 8, 2011 at 1:12 pm
I’m not sure they believe there IS a crisis.
Much of that percpetion has come from those of us who have felt disenfranchised in the PC(USA). Meaning, for us (I am formerly PC(USA)) the crisis was exactly what you describe – very astutely by the way.
We saw (and those of like mind who remain in the PC(USA) see) a crisis when the denomination backed political causes we found offensive and rather falsely implied they had the support of x million members. We saw that crisis compounded when they were called on the disparity between members’ beliefs in their own statistical analysis and official stands/ acts of officials – they told us the Holy Spirit authored those stands and acts.
We saw a crisis when the theology we found true – orthodox reformed theology – was undermined at every turn and honored only as a historic relic … kind of the way we might regard the Mayflower Compact as a governing document that applied to us.
We saw a crisis when officials readily violated the book of order or the express instructions of General Assemblies.
And we saw a major crisis when what we read in the Bible – and take as authoritative and normative for Christians – was flatly contradicted in ever increasing ways.
The thing is – the institution/ organization doesn’t see those things as a crisis at all. Their crisis is a combination of bad press, potential property loss, loss of political influence, potentail (though unlikely) overriding by members who exercised their proper function within Presbyterianism, loss of money, and loss of numbers.
One can argue causation all one wants – the fact remains these are two very separate sets of crises.
February 8, 2011 at 7:25 pm
If I read PCUSA statistics correctly, they have lost members EVERY YEAR since 1965 (after adjusting for the merger with the PCUS in 1982-83). If that isn’t a crisis, I don’t know what is. What other oganization, seeing 45 straight years of decline, would refuse to address it seriously?
February 8, 2011 at 8:59 pm
You are correct, Tom — they have lost members every year, and it has increased steadily in the past decade, with a loss of over 235,000 between 2006-09.
Perhaps this is a better illustration of the situation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDAmPIq29ro ::shifty::
February 9, 2011 at 12:28 am
I’m pretty sure the leadership in question would agree that numeric decline is a problem. And they would either try to explain it as reflective of larger cultural shifts or even as a failure of the “church” to evolve.
I also acknowledge the membership decline to be a problem. But I’m not prepared to say it is related to the actions of the leadership in a direct causal link. That may be, but it is unproven.
For me, the far greater issue is faithfulness. If the organization were faithful and had identical numerical losses then it would still be in the right. It is also conceivable that an organization that were unfaithful might, in some circumstances actually grow in membership because it offered what people wanted to hear.
(My point here is the numbers – while important, are not, IMO, the significant crisis. They may be a symptom – but the problem seems to me to be one of faithfulness.)