© John L. Williams. Used by permission.
Where there is no vision, the people perish, (Proverbs 29:18a KJV)
“On life-support,” opined a minister when asked about the state of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). “In need of hospice care,” said another. These opinions envision the Church on its deathbed awaiting palliative drugs and last rites. I would argue that such a vision is neither faithful to God’s promises nor consistent with the PC(USA)’s present realities.
This article is my alternative to prophecies of the PC(USA)’s imminent death. Following a summary of my perspective, it identifies God-given resources available to the PC(USA). It then focuses on major challenges confronting the PC(USA) and concludes with my personal vision statement.
Perspective
Guided by my belief that the PC(USA) is part of Christ’s body, I try to view it as a whole. I want to see all its congregations–all its people–all its governing bodies, agencies, and institutions–all of its theological and practical ideas–and all the connections and forces that keep it together or stretch it beyond the breaking point. Such a perspective is always dynamic, always changing, and never complete.
I would compare my perspective to that of a wide-angle photographic lens. This lens enables a photographer to stand very close to a person and at the same time view the whole person. It allows a wider than usual field of vision while not requiring the photographer to back away from the subject. That’s how I want to view the PC(USA). I want to be so close that I’m engaged in its life and work, and at the same time I want to see it in its entirety. I don’t want to be limited to one segment or one specific program or issue.
When I take a wide-angle lens view of the Church, I continually observe that:
1. God has richly blessed the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) with a great variety of gifts.
2. God is challenging the PC(USA), perhaps with challenges far more critical than any we have experienced in our history.
These two statements are not mutually exclusive. They are descriptions of God’s simultaneous activities among us. The PC(USA) is gifted by God even while it is challenged by God. This two-fold movement of God’s Spirit raises two questions: Will we receive God’s gifts with thanksgiving? Will we heed God’s call to meet the challenges?
God’s gifts
My list of God’s gifts to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) includes six blessings. Others may identify additional blessings.
The Reformed tradition. Through our Reformation heritage God has given us a tradition that is both theological and practical, one that guides both our belief and our behavior. It shapes our understanding of God as triune, creator, sovereign, merciful, gracious, and caring. In Jesus Christ, according to this tradition, we see and know who God is. Our theological tradition shapes our understanding of ourselves and of the human condition. It enables us to see ourselves as creatures who have enormous potential for good and creativity and are at the same time deeply enmeshed in human alienation and sin. This tradition informs and inspires our thoughts, our speech, our beliefs, and our prayers as we teach, preach, worship, and lead among God’s people.
The Reformed tradition, however, is not solely for the intellect. It’s a tradition for living in the real world. It informs and inspires our actions in the social, economic, and political realms. It’s a tradition of sharing power and authority between ministers and laity in the Church. It’s a tradition of vocation in which God calls all people to particular work. It’s a tradition of personal and social ethics. It’s a tradition of education, a tradition that values the life of the mind.
Affluent members. Of all major religious groups in the U.S., we Presbyterians rank at or near the top in average annual income. We are among the wealthiest Christians in the country, and we are certainly among the wealthiest people worldwide. Our affluence is well documented and well known.
A high average income does not mean that affluence is distributed evenly among us. Some of us live on limited incomes, possibly below the poverty level. Still, most of us have more than enough to live comfortably. Although we sometimes deny it, most of us can afford to be more generous with our resources; and although it makes pastors and other church leaders uncomfortable to say so, most of us need to be challenged to give a larger share of our resources.
Educated members. Just as we Presbyterians are some of the wealthiest Christians, so we are also some of the best educated. A Presbyterian couple I know illustrates the high educational levels among Presbyterians. The couple, their two adult children, and their spouses collectively hold 13 academic degrees. They typify, I believe, a significant number of Presbyterian families. We Presbyterians are beyond question a people with a wealth of learning and knowledge.
We must not, of course, discount our members who did not attend college or complete a college degree. Nor can we equate formal education with intelligence. Members who received their education in the school of lifetime experience contribute skills, knowledge, and forms of intelligence that formally educated people may lack.
Vital congregations. Not every PC(USA) congregation is vital, but many are. These vital communities defy orderly classification. They come in all sizes and are located in many settings. They have diverse membership: Native American, Euro-American, African-American, Hispanic, Asian. They are diverse theologically: liberals, conservatives, moderates. Each has its own unique history, community, patterns of work and worship. What these congregations have in common, in addition to their commitment to Jesus Christ, is vitality.
A visitor can feel the vitality when entering the church building. Greeters project welcome and a sense of meaningful community. The bulletin board depicts lively activity. Worship words and music convey the divine moving among God’s people. We should thank God for our vital congregations and pray for more of them.
Diverse leadership. A General Assembly reflects to a large extent the characteristics of the PC(USA)’s leadership. The first I attended was the 1970 PCUS Assembly. I would estimate that 99 percent of those who attended, both commissioners and visitors, were white; 95 percent were male; and about 70 percent were older than 60. It was an Assembly predominantly of older, white, men; and I as a visitor, at the age of 30, was surely one of the youngest there. That Assembly probably represented the Church’s leadership in that time and place.
Recent General Assemblies have been an obvious contrast to the one I attended in 1970. A variety of racial ethnic groups were present and visible. The number of women as leaders, commissioners, and visitors has risen steadily, a reflection no doubt of the increasing number of women elders and seminary students. With the advent of youth elders and youth advisory delegates, the age range of those present at an Assembly has broadened; and the average age has declined. Those concerned with representation would correctly note that the PC(USA) still has a long way to go before its leadership is truly diverse. Nevertheless, if recent General Assemblies are a sign of the times, PC(USA) leadership is more diverse than ever; and that diversity is contributing to every aspect of the Church’s life and mission.
A history of effective cross-cultural mission. Where in the world is the Christian movement most alive, most vital these days? It’s not in North America or Western Europe. It’s in Africa, Asia, and parts of Central and South America; and we Presbyterians contributed to Christianity’s vitality in these regions. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries we sent missionaries to non-Western countries and cultures, to places such as Congo, Korea, Egypt, China, Brazil, India, and the Philippines. In addition to learning new languages, those missionaries learned how to cross the boundaries between their own Western culture and the non-Western people to whom they were sent. They made some mistakes, confusing Western imperialism with the gospel. Through the work of the Spirit, however, they planted and cultivated the gospel in places and among people very different from themselves; and the gospel flourished there, but not always according to Western patterns.
Thanks to our missionaries and even some of their mistakes, we can more clearly distinguish between the gospel and cultural accommodation. Thanks to them, globalization is part of our rich mission heritage, not a strategy for economic gain. Thanks to them, we know how to engage in cross-cultural mission.
The Reformed tradition, affluent members, educated members, vital congregations, diverse leadership, and a history of effective cross-cultural mission — these are gifts to the Presbyterian Church (USA) from God, gifts for which we should offer thanks.
When I contend that the PC(USA) is gifted by God, I am in no way claiming that our Church is problem free. Instead, by listing six blessings I am declaring my convictions that the PC(USA) is not dead and that God has richly blessed us even in the midst of chaos and critical challenges. These convictions are obvious to me. I see the evidence around me. I discern God at work among us. What if we received joyfully and with thanksgiving the gifts God bestowed on the PC(USA)?
Disestablishment
With God’s blessings come critical challenges, and no challenge affects the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) more than the challenge of the cultural disestablishment of Christianity in the United States. Legal disestablishment had accompanied the founding of the U.S. as a nation. The First Amendment to the Constitution provided that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. …” The First Amendment, however, did not end Christianity’s cultural establishment. Church, school, and civic institutions continued to work together and reinforce each other. “[T]he identification of Christianity with the dominant cultural and moral values of society at large” continued.i# So strong was that identification that an informal or extra-legal Christian ecology emerged across the country. Churches in general, and Presbyterian Churches in particular, were influential and established de facto even if de jure establishment no longer existed.
By the end of the twentieth century de facto establishment almost ceased to exist. Canadian theologian Douglas John Hall wrote that cultural disestablishment “is not just about the loss of numbers; it is about the loss of influence. …”#ii Said Hall, “Our continuing dividedness, our internal denominational strife, our failure to maintain our former prestige vis-Ã -vis nations and ruling classes and the various controlling institutions of society — all this has made it clear … that Christian triumphalism in the Protestant mode is a sham. …#”iii
Within the PC(USA)’s own governance and organizational structures symptoms of disestablishment are numerous: declining membership; aging membership; competition over financial resources; conflicts over theology and priorities; reductions in budgets, program, staff, and organizational structures; loss of trust in leaders, agencies, and institutions; politicized governance processes; and more. Each of these symptoms produces stress and anxiety within the PC(USA). As symptoms increase, stress and anxiety multiply and intensify, often to the point that leaders focus their time and energy on the symptoms instead of the critical challenge of disestablishment.#iv
Can we reverse our cultural disestablishment? Can the PC(USA) regain its lost influence and thereby reduce stressful and anxiety-producing symptoms? Probably not, but the PC(USA) need not respond to its loss of influence with resignation or despair. By receiving God’s gifts we have the necessary resources to cope creatively and compassionately with our new circumstances. Douglas John Hall argues that we should consider our disestablishment an opportunity. He wrote,
The Christian faith is being made free from its Babylonian captivity to political, cultural, racial, and (yes) religious structures to the end that it may be and become what in essence it is: salt, yeast, light — a vigilant and prophetic Diaspora in the midst of a global society. … Christians ought to embrace this possibility. Instead of waiting passively for the final waves of the long process of disestablishment to wash over us, we should seek actively to direct the process. The message of the divine Spirit to the churches is “Disestablish yourselves.” Do not wait for it to happen to you, but take hold of it, give it some purposeful direction, seek the possibilities that open to you. … Endings are not always tragic; they can also be new beginnings.#v
The PC(USA) can let disestablishment overrun it, or it can accept disestablishment as an opportunity and cope creatively and compassionately. Either way, disestablishment appears to be irreversible. Let us thank God for God’s gifts that bring hope and help.
Challenges that are less daunting and more clearly defined than disestablishment confront the PC(USA). Meeting these challenges might help us in meeting the challenge of disestablishment.
Infrastructure challenges
Transform congregations from voluntary associations to communities of faith, with attention to core tasks of worship, education, and spiritual practices. At first glance some may argue, “This is no challenge. Congregations have always paid attention to worship, education, and spiritual practices. They think of themselves as communities of faith and don’t need or want transformation.” Before assuming there’s no such challenge consider two questions.
1.What percent of the adult members of any Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) congregation have a basic working knowledge of the Bible and Reformed theology? How many have enough knowledge to give a simple explanation of Christianity to another adult? Note that my question is about a “basic” knowledge and a “simple” explanation, not a thorough knowledge or a complex, theologically precise explanation. I suspect that in most PC(USA) congregations the percentage of adults with a basic knowledge of Bible and theology is rather low; and my suspicion, if true, suggests that transformation of our congregations into communities of faith will be challenging.
2. Why does an elderly Presbyterian friend divide church members into two groups that she calls “one-hour Christians” and “two-hour Christians”? “One-hour Christians” attend Sunday morning worship and almost nothing else in her congregation’s life. “Two-hour Christians” attend Sunday morning worship and participate in other congregational service, educational, and fellowship opportunities. Much to her distress, she has observed that the number of “one-hour Christians” is increasing and the number of “two-hour Christians” decreasing. Is my friend’s observation accurate? If so, this is another indication that congregational transformation is a challenge.
Sociologist of religion Nancy Ammerman described the gravity of this challenge in her article, “Running on Empty.” She began by questioning some oft-repeated assumptions about membership decline:
For at least the past generation, mainline Protestants have been worried about declines in membership. One camp has taken up the rallying cry of the conservatives … who claim that theological “strictness” and clear church-cultural boundaries mark the path to reversing this decline. Others have claimed that the church’s aim is not to be “successful” by the world’s standards. If God wants the people to come, they will come.
After more than a decade of studying American congregational life … I am convinced that neither of these stances is helpful.#vi
Ammerman then connected membership decline to mainline Protestantism’s organizational minimalism, especially in worship and education. She noted that congregations exist to worship, teach, nurture people in the faith, and spread the gospel, and that meeting these purposes requires gathering a group of people. She recognized that gathering a group is difficult in a society so mobile that people no longer share the same congregation of origin, a common residential and work environment, or a common culture of values and practices. She outlined her research into how gathering into congregations actually happens and summarized her findings in words that offer scant comfort to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and its congregations: “One pattern especially stood out from this research: the religious groups that spend the least organization energy on the core tasks of worship and religious education are the mainline Protestant ones.”#
Ammerman contrasted mainline Protestants who put “all their hopes for creating a distinct Christian identity in the basket of Sunday morning worship for adults and Sunday school for children” with Catholics, Jews, African-American churches, and conservative Protestant churches that offer weekday education, courses for converts, Sunday afternoon programs, and Sunday school for all ages (including adults).#viii She surmised that the mainline Protestant pattern reflects the bygone de facto establishment when schools and civic institutions reinforced churches’ values and practices. Wrote Ammerman,
It may always have been bad ecclesiology to depend on the culture to carry the gospel, but today it’s also bad sociology. Churches that wish to perpetuate distinct Christian traditions need not become an oppositional counterculture, but they do have to tend more intentionally to building their own religious traditions.
Creating a community of faith out of people who don’t live near each other and haven’t known each other all their lives requires more than a few minutes at coffee hour after the service. Helping them figure out how their faith asks them to live requires more than even the very best preaching can provide in one Sunday service.#ix
After disestablishment the challenge of transforming congregations from voluntary associations to communities of faith may be the biggest challenge the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is facing. It might also be one of the keys to coping with our cultural disestablishment, but it won’t be easy. We will have to confront it congregation by congregation, in 11,000 different places. In some places it will require generations of effort, and denominational structures at every level must re-direct their energy to lend their support. The good news is that we already have God’s gifts that we may use in confronting this challenge: Reformed theology, affluent and educated members, vital congregations, diverse leadership. We must learn to employ these gifts effectively and creatively if we are to heed God’s call to transform our congregations.
Identify, call, train, and support leaders for a disestablished Church in a changing, postmodern world. By “leaders” I mean the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s core leaders: ministers of Word and Sacrament, professional educators and musicians, elders, and deacons. The health of the whole PC(USA) is directly related to the health and the spiritual and emotional maturity of these core leaders. If the PC(USA) intends to cope effectively with the challenges of disestablishment and a changing, postmodern world, it must identify and select faithful, compassionate, and inwardly secure core leaders, leaders with a clear sense of call and purpose who are able to weather thoughtfully the chaos and over-reactivity surrounding them.
Meeting this challenge will mean paying more attention to candidates for ministry and candidacy processes, having the courage to say “No” to those who lack the necessary leadership gifts, and providing greater financial support for candidates. It will mean paying more attention to theological education generally and to the PC(USA)’s own theological institutions, encouraging greater dialogue between the Church and its seminaries, and providing more funding for theological institutions. It will mean greater emphasis on identifying, calling, and training elders and deacons. Instead of looking for names to fill vacant positions, officer-nominating committees need to challenge their congregation’s wisest and most faithful members to accept office. Pastors and sessions must acknowledge that a one-day retreat or a two-hour evening class is not adequate officer training, especially not for a disestablished Church in a rapidly changing environment. Meeting this challenge will also mean more emphasis on the leadership and the teaching roles of pastors and church executives. Congregations and governing bodies benefit when pastors and executives can be relieved of administrative details in order to lead and teach.
Like the challenge of transforming congregations, confronting the leadership challenge won’t be easy; but again there is some good news. We have gifts, God’s gifts, which we may put to use to identify, call, train, and support core leaders: Reformed theology, affluent and educated members, vital congregations, diverse leadership.
I have called these two challenges “infrastructure” challenges.#x In a city or town infrastructure refers to streets, utilities, schools, and a variety of civic and service institutions, basic facilities that undergird and make possible a community’s economic and cultural life. These facilities are usually material in nature. They are seldom glamorous, often overlooked, and absolutely essential. In the Church, infrastructure is not material. If necessary, we could survive without buildings. To us infrastructure refers to people and relationships, to theology and ideas. These are the basic building blocks that under- gird and make possible a faith community’s life and mission. They, too, are seldom glamorous, often overlooked, and absolutely essential. Because they are essential, we dare not ignore the challenge of transforming congregations or our leadership challenge.
Mission Challenges
Major metropolitan areas. American metropolitan areas are not merely an increasing number and concentration of people. They are giant economic and cultural engines. Their influence is felt worldwide and often overshadows the influence of third world countries. Because these areas are so powerful economically and culturally, they function as magnets, attracting diverse groups of people in large numbers, especially young adults, those with creativity and imagination, those with the energy and the will to get ahead, and those who want to make a difference. Those so attracted become fuel for the engine that attracted them, making metropolitan areas vitally important to all, even those who do not reside in them.
For the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) major metropolitan areas are our twenty-first century domestic mission fields. Lots of people move to those areas. To spread the gospel, to have an effective mission, the PC(USA) must anticipate and follow the movement of these people. We are already an urbanized Church. Our mission challenge is to become more urbanized, not because we enjoy urban amenities, but because Christ is present among the thousands migrating to our cities.
Sadly, we haven’t always had an effective mission in metropolitan areas. Our research into urban phenomena and mission opportunities was sometimes insufficient and untimely. Our specific mission efforts have too frequently relied on cheap, quick, or unfocused approaches as opposed to the better, sustained, and clearly defined approaches that were needed. We seldom gave adequate attention to identifying, calling, and training leaders for mission in our major metropolitan areas. To meet this mission challenge, we must change course and direct far more of our time, energy, and money to mission in the giant urban areas in which most of us reside. This inevitably means that more resources, lots of them, need to be applied to new church developments, church transformations, and creative or experimental forms of urban mission.
Once again, there is some good news. We are not bereft of resources to meet this challenge. Consider the gifts of affluent and educated members, vital congregations, and diverse leadership. The cultivation of these gifts may be an essential prerequisite to confronting the challenge of major metropolitan areas.
Racial-ethnic and new immigrant communities. In three states (California, New Mexico, Texas) there is currently no ethnic majority. No racial segment in any of these states is as large as 50 percent, and demographers predict that by around 2050 there will be no ethnic majority nationally. Such population changes reflect not only a difference in birth and death rates among various racial-ethnic constituents, but also new immigration patterns. People from different countries and different cultures are coming to the U.S. in record numbers; and, barring changes in the U.S. immigration policy, this trend will likely continue.
For the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) with its predominantly white, Euro-American constituency, racial ethnic and new immigrant communities pose a mission challenge that is far more than anticipating and following the movement of new people. This challenge involves crossing language and cultural barriers that are sometimes invisible but always real. How can a Church deeply and obviously rooted in Euro-American culture witness to the gospel among those with radically different cultural assumptions and heritage? How can the PC(USA) build bridges between its own internally dominant culture and the cultures confronting it on the streets or in shopping malls?
From a mission perspective the PC(USA) has no choice but to become multi-cultural. The challenge of mission in racial ethnic and new immigrant communities demands that we move beyond our own cultural security, habits, and assumptions and learn to listen to new voices and see with fresh eyes. Fortunately, help is available to meet this challenge. Think of the gift of the Reformed tradition with its message of God’s love for the world, a love not limited to one culture, one race, or one nationality. Think of the gift of diverse leadership and the variety of voices already being heard among us. Think also about our record of effective, cross-cultural mission. Our nineteenth and twentieth century missionaries built bridges to other cultures. We can learn from them.
Vision
My vision of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s future emanates from my observations regarding God’s gifts and God’s call to meet challenges. When I envision the PC(USA) of the future, I envision a Church that:
· Receives and cultivates with joy and thanksgiving the gifts God has given it.
· Hears and obeys joyfully God’s call to confront the challenges before it.
· Employs with prayer and imagination God’s gifts in confronting the challenges.
My vision is not a blueprint, plan, program, or specific objectives to be completed on a schedule.xi# It merely outlines or sketches some of the elements such a plan might include. It is the vision of one who loves the PC(USA) and wants it to be faithful to God and to thrive, knowing that these two wishes can sometimes be contradictory. It is the vision of one who experiences a deep contradiction in the PC(USA), a contradiction between a Church that seems richly blessed on the one hand, and is on the other hand mired in self doubt and self pity, unable to obtain perspective on itself or to identify its strengths and its challenges. I yearn for something better. I yearn for a Church that knows and celebrates God’s awesome generosity in chaotic circumstances; a Church that will not let the anxieties of the moment deter it from God’s call to confront real challenges; a Church with the courage to risk God’s generosity, its only source of strength, in service and witness to the world. God willing, I believe the PC(USA) can be this kind of Church.
Endnotes
#i. Douglas John Hall, The Cross in Our Context (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 160.
#ii. Ibid, 161
#iii. Ibid, 174.
#iv. For a discussion of the characteristics of an anxious society, see Edwin H. Friedman, A Failure of Nerve (Bethesda, MD: The Edwin Friedman Estate, 1999), 73-116.
#v. The Cross in Our Context, 169
#vi. Christian Century, 28 June 2005, 8
#vii. Ibid.
#viii. Ibid.
#ix. Ibid, 9
#x. I am indebted to Gary Luhr for suggesting the word “infrastructure” to me.
#xi. For a discussion of prophetic visions, see D. N. Premnath, Eighth Century Prophets (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2003), 183-188.
John L. Williams is executive for the Synod of Mid-America in Overland, Kan.
