It is widely felt that too many ministers are leaving local church ministry today, and often for preventable reasons.
As part of the Pulpit and Pew Project at Duke Divinity School we were commissioned to gather new data on why this is happening. We carried out a large study in 2002 and 2003, and we published Pastors in Transition in 2005 (Eerdmans Press). Here we summarize some findings.
We studied five denominations: Assemblies of God, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, Presbyterian (U.S.A.), and United Methodist. We defined the target group:
"We are interested in everyone who was ordained in the past, who served in parish ministry full-time or part-time, and within the last eight years has left parish ministry in either of two ways: (1) left parish ministry for non-parish ministries recognized by their ordinations, especially hospital chaplaincies, military chaplaincies, campus ministers, teachers, and professors; or (2) left church ministry entirely. We will not study (1) persons temporarily without a job who are now actively seeking a parish ministry job, (2) persons who have retired or who have moved from full-time to part-time parish ministry, and (3) persons who left the parish to take denominational jobs such as presbytery staff or district superintendent."
We aimed for a random sample of about 200 from each denomination. Each denomination helped with sampling and mailing. No names were asked. Questionnaires went out in spring 2002, and the response rates varied from 19 percent in the Assemblies of God to 54 percent in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. The Presbyterian response rate was 38 percent. The numbers of cases were: Assemblies of God, 174; ELCA Lutheran, 291; Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, 106; Presbyterian, 173; and United Methodist, 219. Later we interviewed 90 of the former pastors by phone.
When I think of the classical Nicene marks of the church, I tend to think of four immovable inscriptions pointing to intimidating standards: "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic." Somehow these marks seem very distant and removed from our church life. Pondering these marks we need to be reminded that the life of the church is rooted in the Triune God whose life is not marked by immovable, petrified divinity but by shocking, self-giving, other-embracing grace as revealed through the life, death, and the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.
God does not exist in some kind of divine solitary isolation. The very heart of the divine life is community, the relationship of mutual self-giving love between the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Dynamic images of a dance rather than that of rigid hierarchy better expresses this understanding. The Triune God becomes the model for the life of the church. It, then, ought not be a hierarchical, self-seeking institution, but a community of self-giving and loving people, called, gathered, and shaped by the Triune God.
In the waning hours of the 217th General Assembly--the last morning, when nothing much of substance is brought to a tired bunch of commissioners ready to put their packed bags onto planes go home after an intense eight days--former moderator Rick Ufford-Chase rose to the microphone for a point of personal privilege. He had lain awake troubled by one statement the Assembly had approved and that concerned a matter close to his heart: borders. Most people know of Ufford-Chase's heart-felt work in Border Links. We have heard the stories of desperate people risking, and sometimes losing, their lives just for the opportunity to work in the U.S. so their families in impoverished areas of Mexico might live.
Circus-goers munching on pink cotton candy watch their favorite performing animals. At center ring, elephants saunter in, doing some heavy prancing as each links its trunk to a mate's tail ahead, lumbering in a circle. With music blaring, a trainer tosses them treats for standing on their hind legs. Sometimes, these gargantuan animals of the Midway are decked out with lacey pink sashes around their necks. How harmless and lovable they appear.
In the wild where elephants may become savage, a safari guide sternly warns tourists not to get near them. A charging bull elephant on the rampage is a killer beast.
Preachers recognize an elephant has invaded sanctuaries as it monopolizes every sector in national life. The elephant is the war in Iraq.
Preachers who desire longevity in their pulpits intentionally avoid mentioning the elephant. They fear pointing their gospel guns at the war, lest parishioners get upset and leave. Worse, disgruntled worshippers possess power to give a minister who preaches the "whole counsel of God" a pink slip.
Three recent developments have been of particular importance for efforts to uphold the rule of law and end the scandal of U.S.-sponsored torture and abuse in detention facilities abroad.
The first is the epoch-making Supreme Court decision, handed down at the end of June, in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. The Court ruled that the president is not authorized to create special military tribunals to conduct the trials of Guantanamo detainees. These tribunals failed to meet minimum standards of fairness as required under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or in a federal district court. Creating tribunals with inadequate legal safeguards oversteps the bounds of executive authority.
Now that the dust is beginning to settle on the decisions of this last General Assembly meeting, the meaning of the amended PUP report is finally becoming clear. The Office of the General Assembly (OGA) has published a document called "Constitutional Musings #11 on Examining Officers." Item six of this paper states, "An individual may declare a scruple concerning the appropriateness of a mandatory provision. But a governing body cannot excuse a mandatory provision, for it lacks the power to set aside a provision of the Constitution. However, a candidate may still be ordained or installed so long as she/he is still willing to comply with the mandatory provisions."
What the world needs now ... yes, is love, sweet love.
But what the world also needs now ... is some Presbyterian, intelligent, paradoxical, ambivalent, nuanced thinking.
What IS Presbyterian, intelligent, paradoxical, ambivalent, nuanced thinking?
Let's start by contracting that into an acrostic: PIPAN. PIPAN thinking is the ability to see issues in multifaceted ways without losing one's mind in the process. It can hold together affirmations that at least appear to be contradictory and yet are true only if each affirmation is retained.
For example, PIPAN thinking affirms that God is one, and that God is three.
PIPAN thinking affirms that Jesus is fully human, and that Jesus is fully divine.
It proclaims that God is totally sovereign, and that humans are held responsible for their thoughts, words, and deeds.
Editor's Note: This article was written for "Seasons" the newsletter of the Presbyterian Church at Tenafly (N.J.) that the Rev. Lindner serves as a parish associate. The church of 400 lies a few miles outside of New York City. Four persons related to the congregation were killed when the World Trade Center Towers collapsed on September 11, 2001.
Five years ago during those terrible days that followed the attack on the World Trade Center, the Children's Ministry Team asked me to meet with a group of our children to discuss with them the events of that day and their feelings. It was September 30, 2001, the second Sunday following 9/11 when I gathered a group of our Sunday School children together.
After we spoke for a few minutes I took out a pad and pen. When talking with groups of children I often make notes of the discussion. I do this partly to record and remember all that children have shared with me. Another reason is to avoid eye contact with children. I find that groups of children will more authentically engage with one another when they do not have adult eye contact for referral about "right" and "wrong" responses.
c. 2006 Religion News Service
There is no better place to forget that the United States is at war than in church. Three years after the invasion of Iraq, stories of bloody bombings and mounting casualties still top each day's news, but remain conspicuously absent from the discourse of most neighborhood churches.
For many of these congregations, the war in Iraq hits home only when they bury a soldier whom they last knew as a pimply member of the youth group with big dreams for the future. Until then, they may close their eyes and pray for peace, asking God to protect those in harm's way. Few, however, will ask with eyes wide open how people of faith are called to respond to this particular war. As a member of the clergy for more than 20 years now, I have some idea why this is so.
Presbyterians appreciate the effective way in which Presbyterian Disaster Assistance (PDA) has represented us, providing help in the wake of weather-related devastation from surges in both the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico. Along with humans internationally we have responded by giving goods and services to relieve the desperate. But those situations illustrate that we have been more oriented toward alleviating suffering after it happens than toward preventing it in the first place.
The PDA abbreviation might also be used to refer to another service, Presbyterian Disaster Avoidance, which in many cases is more important than assistance after tragedy strikes.
In memorizing the Westminster Shorter Catechism as a child, I was impressed by the way in which each of the "thou shalt nots" of the Ten Commandments is given a positive interpretation as well as a listing of what is forbidden. Question 68 asserts, "The sixth commandment requireth all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life and the life of others." The content of that Catechism is much indebted to the doctrine of John Calvin. Regarding the purpose of the sixth commandment, he commented: "The Lord has bound humans together by a certain unity; hence each person ought to concern himself with the safety of all. ... He who has merely refrained from shedding blood has not avoided the crime of murder."
Some of us were cautiously optimistic when we went to Birmingham to plead the cause for the Historical Foundation at Montreat. Overtures from twenty-one presbyteries, representing Presbyterians in ten states, had protested the closing of this valued institution, which had served the church since 1927, by the Committee of the General Assembly. Eleven advocates were attending the assembly to speak on behalf of these presbyteries, including myself, an advocate for Coastal Carolina Presbytery.
The Friends of the Historical Foundation had been working for more than two years to find a way to preserve the Historical Foundation. In less than three months the Friends raised nearly a million dollars in conditional pledges, a portion to be used for initial operating costs and the remainder for a self-sustaining endowment. An equal amount of endowment funds for the Historical Foundation was held by the Presbyterian Foundation. The Friends had also secured the promise of volunteers to staff the Historical Foundation. The value of their time was estimated at $200,000 annually. We were hopeful that the Salem overture, which provided two additional years for raising endowment funds, would be adopted, thereby assuring the continuing operation of the Historical Foundation.
Editor's Note: This is the second of a three-part series. An enlarged version of this and the other two articles may be found in the booklet, Bearing the Marks of the Church, published by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Office of Theology and Worship. Also available online at the Re-forming Ministry website: https://www.pcusa.org/re-formingministry/papers/wiley_charles.pdf.
I have great hope for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). I believe we are at a critical juncture in this denomination's history. At this time we need nothing more than we need honesty. Better public relations will not carry us forward to a better place; speaking the truth in love just might.
In that spirit, I offer four theses about the one holy catholic and apostolic church, one thesis for each attribute of the church.
Denominational loyalty. Virtue? Or vice?
Like national patriotism, denominational loyalty can engender sacrificial service and arm-in-arm teamwork.
Like national patriotism, denominational loyalty can blind us to our own ignorance, to our glaring mistakes, and especially, to the value and needs of those outside our circle.
On the other hand, denominational disaffection can launch outside-the-box missional creativity. And it can unleash a scorched-earth destruction of vital ministries and of tenderfoot believers.
Funny, but I don't remember our Savior calling for us to be denominational loyalists. But he did seem to promote loyalty of another kind.
One for all and all for one.
Whatever the verdict on Israel's second invasion of Lebanon, it should be clear to most Americans that our relationship to the Arab and Muslim worlds is being defined in Tel Aviv as much as Washington, DC. Seymour Hersh, in The New Yorker's August 21 issue, maintains that our Administration not only knew of Israel's plans well in advance, but wanted Israel to test our "bunker-blasters" and other munitions so we could better decide whether to use them on the bigger target: Iran's nuclear complexes.
This would be to argue that the current Israeli and US Administrations are joined not only in the philosophy of unilateral militarism, but in specific war strategies. Certainly the prompt US re-supply of Israel with high-tech munitions and our blocking a cease-fire until Israel was ready to accept one would further indicate our supportive role--and a far more overt one than that of Iran and Syria to Hezbollah. What will it mean for US Christians to be linked to a power that no longer pretends to be "an honest broker" for peace? How will we continue relationships with the Christian remnant communities that will face increased pressure from both Muslims and Jews in a region where extremism is likely to intensify?
Churches often have names that link them to their past, their founders, their history. Some of those names may mean little to the casual viewer of sign boards hung on the side of buildings. Signs bear such names as Presbyterian, Lutheran, Methodist, Episcopal or perhaps more modestly, Disciples.
Here, I am speaking of religious denominations that may have arisen out of an experience no longer our own. Some arose out of the conversion of one person, such as John Wesley, who had a life-changing experience and made the world "his parish." My own Presbyterian communion has a form of government that empowers lay people and has no bishops. A church I regularly attend has bishops, but also empowers laity. And so it goes.
Was it inevitable?
Media attention to the General Assembly's action on "The Trinity: God's Love Overflowing" focused almost exclusively on the paper's discussion of language used to speak of the Triune God. This tight focus was further restricted to one or two examples extracted from a selection of biblical and traditional images for God.
An editorial cartoon suggested that the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) was replacing "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" with language as silly as "rock, paper, scissors."
A nationally syndicated columnist seemed to think "Larry, Curly, and Moe" was a cute way to characterize her claim that the church considered "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" to be "patriarchal leftovers."
International mission by our denomination is ever renewing. Our national offices have encouraged creative new ways to connect people, congregations, and presbyteries more directly in responding to Christ's call to mission. I am encouraged that congregations show a growing interest in being involved.
Creativity comes from various sources and dynamics.
Working with synods, presbyteries, and congregations has been fruitful, although most of these have been preoccupied with a spectrum of concerns. They typically are not primarily focused on international mission. The creative ferment has also come from interacting with organizations and networks in the denomination dedicated to specific types of mission. Some of these organizations have been more vocal and concerned about the decline in the denomination's mission workforce and funding for international mission than have the governing bodies. Now, with the GAC shifting to devote more of its time and attention to meeting the needs of congregations and middle governing bodies, there are concerns that there might be a void into which others need to step to help the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) maintain a large and vital role in Christ's mission around the world. A number organizations and networks have announced initiatives this summer that appear to relate to that perceived need, even while the new GAC leadership and structure are busy working on how to rise to the same occasion.
Welcome to the season of experimentation. Like medical researchers desperately searching for a cure, some Presbyterians are kicking around innovative ideas, sending up trial balloons, and contemplating taking strides ranging from baby steps to giant leaps. They are proposing new kinds of connectionalism.
The backlash to actions of the recent General Assembly continues unabated. The initial outcry against the GA's responses to the reports of two theological task forces--one proposing steps for peace, unity, and purity of the church, and the other using some unfamiliar terms to lift up Trinitarian theology--has led to discussions and proposals for everything from redirecting funds, to operating as a shadow denomination, even to dividing the PC(USA) house.
How shall this faith community organize itself at such a time as this?
c. 2006 Religion News Service
As Mideast violence spiraled and power grabs dominated American politics, I told 100 teenage leaders of National Episcopal Happening they would need a "tough faith for a tough world."
By "tough faith," I didn't mean bullying religiosity or moral perfectionism. I meant a durable faith, with enough depth to handle a complex and challenging world, without turning mean, nostalgic or escapist.
Everything is changing. Economic competition is global. Capital and jobs flow easily across borders. U.S. teenagers will compete directly with Asians and Europeans. They won't be able to coast or to assume any continuities of privilege. The race will go to those who are prepared, not to those skilled mainly in television, video games and soccer.
We all agree on two things: we did have the 217th General Assembly, and the Report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church was adopted as amended.
Having been a member of the Task Force, I'm not surprised by the wide range of reactions to the Report and its Recommendations, since some version of most concerns was and is held by one or another of us on the Task Force. Of deepest concern to me are the doomsday prophecies that some have advanced in contesting the adoption of the authoritative interpretation of G-6.0108. Such prophecies can become self-fulfilling.
As always, participants in or witnesses to the same event have widely different perceptions of its meaning, ranging from negative to positive, based mostly upon the fears or hopes of what might happen in the future.
The ancient metaphor is operative: is the glass half-full or half-empty?
In the letter to the editor (link to "Asking the Tough Questions" and comment printed this issue), Outlook reader John Sheldon seems to be raising the possibility that the recent General Assembly has broken covenant. What does it look like to break covenant with God?
In the context of marriage we catch a glimpse of covenant breaking. One spouse engages in an extramarital affair, thereby violating the covenant. If the violator apologizes, and if the violated forgives, then the covenant is restored. If either partner for any reason does not enact such restorative acts, then the covenant breaks.
With just six years of combined parish ministry experience, two young clergywomen ventured from the East Tennessee valley to the mountains of Montreat for the Hope for the Church Conference. Although many twenty and thirty-something's are labeled with a strong aversion to anything institutional, such a label fails to fit either of us. Through our ordination vows, we have promised our lives to God's work through the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Buoyed by our experience sharing pews with some of the most seasoned leaders, we offer a glimpse of our hope for the denomination.
First, our hope resides in Scripture. Scripture gifts us with a narrative history of salvation revealing that God has always fulfilled God's promises. Abraham and Sarah, venturing into the unknown to follow God, were granted a child, as promised, and became a blessing to the nations. The Israelites grieved their exile, yet were ultimately delivered from aimless wandering by a faithful God. And after the crucifixion, when it seemed as if darkness had overtaken the world, God once more broke in to make all things new with the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
© 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.
There was no escape. On the Sunday morning following the adjournment of the 217th General Assembly, the Word of the Lord brought some comforting and challenging words into our life together. Thanks be to God.
In the lectionary readings for that Twelfth Sunday of not-so-Ordinary Time the psalmist sang, "How very good and pleasant it is when kindred live together in unity!" even as some Presbyterians in the pew were experiencing an unpleasant disconnection and all Presbyterians were newly aware of how very hard it is to live together in unity.
The Gospel reading from the evangelist Mark told the story about Jesus and the disciples in the boat on a stormy sea, winds blowing, waves beating and swamping the boat. We heard Jesus calming the waters and chastising the disciples for their lack of faith.
I'll save you the trouble -- we ought to split the church.
There, I've said it so you don't have to even though you wanted to say it, but you just couldn't bring yourself to do it. Never mind, no need to thank me.
Before you naysayers get all worked up, just sit back and think what this means for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Finally, you and your side can go and do what you know the church ought to have done all along. That is, if only those pesky ________ (fill in the name of your least favorite advocacy group) were not around any more. Now, with them gone, you and yours will have free rein!
Of course, there are a few loose ends. We'll have to settle who'll get what: Foundation funds, seminaries, pension assets, and so forth, but that shouldn't be too big a deal. Surely, we can come up with some kind of equitable formula, based on the number of people who go with what part of the split. Giving up some assets in order to get what we think God wants is a small price to pay, after all!
© Copyright 2026 The Presbyterian Outlook. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Statement. Website by Web Publisher PRO
