As I listened to John Bell's sermon (link) I thought I was being ushered back into the remembered richness of the Presbyterian/Reformed tradition that nourished my beginnings as a pastor, a tradition that the Outlook has maintained fearlessly over many decades. That emerging tradition was patiently replacing a spurious ecclesiology that supported social injustice. The Outlook was courageous in that enterprise, and was willing, for the gospel and the church's sake, to "be shown the door" if necessary, to speak the truth about church and society.
Ernest Trice Thompson and Aubrey Brown, the first two editors of this paper, in teaching, preaching, and writing, helped to establish in the warp and woof of the church the overturning of the noxious doctrine of the "spirituality of the church" that had become the confessional stance of the PCUS (Southern Church) when we broke away from the national body. As we formed the new denomination in 1861 at Augusta, Ga., we declared that the church's vocation was not to be concerned with the outward condition of human beings, but with their souls only -- which were destined for salvation or damnation. That "faith statement" set the church on a course separating not only charity from justice, but even of separating charity from evangelism. And it was a long, hard road on which to return to the whole gospel for the whole church, and officially to repudiate (in the 1930s) that separation.
Among the obscure items I collect to amaze my students and annoy my colleagues is the by-now-long-useless fact that in 1869 Alexandrine Tinne was hacked to death by the Touaregs. Alexine was an incredibly rich, incredibly beautiful, incredibly brave woman who, at enormous expense, attempted to explore the White Nile and its tributaries.
Obligatory summer visits to our family requires a road trip from Pittsburgh to Nashville to Albuquerque to Denver to Milwaukee. This duty is rendered pleasant by minor league baseball games all across the country. In my secret heart I still believe if I had not gone to the seminary I might have gone to the baseball hall of fame.
Every body, or to be precise – every mind, needs three reading lists. The first will contain the essential books of your field. The second list will offer solid insights into and felicitous expressions of one's individual and community interests. The third is just plain fun to read.
The scientists in my family have devoted considerable time and effort to educating me in the rudiments of modern physics. For example, "Einstein's Theory of Relativity" is widely mentioned but some of us do not know exactly what to make of it. I rather assumed that Einstein had somehow demonstrated to the satisfaction of the scientific community that everything in the physical world is in relation to everything else in the physical world, which theologians have understood for a long time.
When I was a little boy we played cowboys and Indians happily unaware of the political incorrectness of our behavior. By today's standards we were not properly trained in inclusiveness. Instead, we learned that aggressively incompatible lifestyles could not go on at the same time and place. For example, Indians hunted over the territory and cowboys grazed on it.
Scripture lesson: Mark 13
With all due respect to Holy Scripture, this is some great Advent sermon fodder. There is Isaiah 64's cry to come down; Psalm 81's plea to come to save us, and the thrice reiterated restore us," and, I Corinthians 1's invitation to patiently wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ.
But when it comes to interpreting Mark 13's imperatives to stay alert and keep awake from a Reformed theological perspective, we who live after the publication of some 62 million copies of The Left Behind series (not to mention some two-thousand Advents, more or less), have our work cut out for us. The mild-mannered Christianity Today once referred to LaHaye and Jenkins' series as a multi-"volume post-rapture, dispensational soap opera." But this stuff--page-turning intrigue and hair-raising climaxes notwithstanding--is not harmless entertainment. It's theology.
Editor's Note: This challenge to Reformed churches is included in a report to representatives in the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC) by its president, Clifton Kirkpatrick. It references the 2004 WARC meeting in Accra, Ghana, at which Kirkpatrick was elected president.
The Book of Proverbs in the King James Version has a wonderful phrase, "Where there is not vision, the people perish." The most important thing we will do at this meeting is set a vision, purpose, and priorities for the Alliance and begin to shape our life around them. What we need to recapture the hearts of our churches is a compelling vision, purpose, and program so that the message of Accra can renew our churches and through them our world.
The core callings that we are proposing for your consideration for WARC are:
· To covenant for justice in the economy and the earth.
· To search for spiritual renewal and renewal of Reformed worship.
· To foster communion within the Reformed family and unity within the church ecumenical.
· To interpret and re-interpret the Reformed tradition and theology for contemporary witness.
· To foster mission in unity, mission renewal and mission empowerment.
· To build churches that are truly inclusive of all the people of God.
· To enable Reformed churches to witness for justice and peace.
... We believe these core callings are not only the basis on which we should organize the Alliance but also are the core callings that should be at the heart of every Reformed Church so that WARC becomes a corporate expression of our shared values and our common movement to transform the world to the purposes of God.
Some years ago John Burgess wrote an essay for The Christian Century in which he described the drain on the ordinary life of the PC(USA) by coalitions with "reform" agendas for the denomination. To whichever coalition or covenant group you belonged, the dedication and resources with which you once strengthened the church for mission, service, and witness, now went into lobbies that were hungry for power, for theological dominance, or for political control. Burgess' article was written in the '90s. Has anyone calculated the hundreds of thousands of dollars which, since then, have been contributed to the Covenant Network, the Presbyterian Coalition, PFR, and the Confessing Church movement, and the like -- in staff salaries, speakers' fees, and travel for conferences, phone bills, office equipment, and the like? If those sums of money were prudently managed and spent, they might eliminate AIDS in a medium-sized African nation.
Editor's Note: In the October 31 issue of The Presbyterian Outlook, Nelle McCorkle Bordeaux, a member of the Presbyterian College Commission, wrote a guest viewpoint on her concerns about the commission final report. The leadership team of the commission now responds to her concerns.
As the leaders of the team that guided the work of the Presbyterian College Commission to explore what it means to be a liberal arts college in covenant with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), we wish to respond to the recent "Guest viewpoint" of Rev. Nelle Bordeaux.
We are deeply disappointed that a member of the Commission has so significantly misrepresented the recommendations of the Commission and the intent of the college's Board of Trustees in regard to the criteria for faculty membership at Presbyterian College. The Commission did not recommend that the faculty of Presbyterian College 'no longer need to be Christian,' but just the opposite. In the 'Findings' regarding 'Faculty Membership' we state, 'We agree that the expectation should be that 'faculty will be members of a Christian church...'' We do then go on to say that, while we "support the initiative of the Board of Trustees to make a limited number of specific exceptions to the requirement of membership in a Christian church,' we 'encourage the Board to state more clearly and concisely its intention to have a faculty of committed Christian scholars with appropriate exceptions being made for outstanding scholars of other faith traditions who would enrich the life and mission of the college.'
Editor's Note: This sermon was preached at the 66th meeting of New Hope Presbytery of Rocky Mount, N.C., on October 15, 2005.
Scripture texts: John 15:12-17; 1 Peter 2:9-17
Though our U.S. Constitution was produced by a congress consisting mostly of Christians, the first clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of an official religion. The apparent irony goes deeper when we acknowledge the contributions of Christians in the formation of our government, beginning with the revolutionary war itself. This was something particularly true of Presbyterians. Historian Lefferts Loetscher1 said that the fires of the American Revolution were fanned from Presbyterian pulpits sufficient for the British to describe it as "the Presbyterian Rebellion." When King George III asked what the trouble was in the American colonies a member of Parliament replied our "colonial cousins had run off with a Presbyterian parson."
The organizing pastor of First Presbyterian Church New Bern, John Knox Witherspoon, was the grandson and namesake of the only clergyman to sign the Declaration of Independence. (I'm required to say that!)
Whatever you may think of the disestablishment clause, the biblical wisdom and Reformed theological stamp that shaped our Constitution is unmistakable. Its principal author, James Madison, was educated at Presbyterian Princeton where he was a student of John Witherspoon. Remembered as "The Father of the United States Constitution," Madison helped produce what Lutheran historian Martin Marty has called "a thoroughly Calvinist document." Marty claims that the Constitution supplies the checks and balances any Presbyterian would love, for the unspoken implication found throughout, "is the conviction that while humans have a great capability, self-interest would always turn them against the common good if left to themselves."2
This Thanksgiving, as Americans sit to break bread and count their blessings, Bob Dole and George McGovern want them to think about the men, women and children all over the world who do not have enough to eat.
These men -- one a Republican, one a Democrat, both former U.S. Senators and presidential hopefuls -- have written a new book called "Ending Hunger Now."
Their basic argument is this: There is enough food being produced in the world. Millions do not need to go hungry, while others gather around tables piled with food, if governments and individuals have the political will to spend enough money to make it stop.
Dole was traveling out of the country and could not be reached for comment. But McGovern, now 83 and living in South Dakota, took time for an interview. "I'm trying to live to 100," he said. "There are so many things I still want to do."
Outlook national reporter Leslie Scanlon interviewed McGovern and Donald E. Messer, a professor of practical theology and president emeritus at The Iliff School of Theology in Denver, where he directs the Center for the Church and Global AIDS.
Here are excerpts from those conversations.
I stirred up a controversy with an editorial on Commissioned Lay Pastors and Interim Ministers. I haven't tallied the "Amens" and the "No ways," but I am grateful that discussion has opened on these topics, as well as on the hand-wringing assertion that we have (or are about to have) a minister shortage.
One respondent found my editorial confusing; some of you were "hurt" by what I said. I am not against Interims or CLPs, but there is serious weakness in the church's use of both positions that has led to loss of membership, the demoralization of Ministers of the Word, and confusion about the role of pastors.
CLPs are particularly useful when such persons emerge from indigenous congregations or communities, receive theological and ecclesiastical training, and then serve in those communities to build up a congregation until it calls a Minister of the Word. On the other hand, I think it is bad policy (and bad faith) to take good elders from strong churches and train them to be lay pastors in churches that cannot afford a "real pastor." Why don't the rich churches in a presbytery give enough so that every congregation (or linked congregations) has (have) a Minister of Word and Sacrament? Are rural churches any less deserving of a Minister of the Word than those large churches that can afford three or four? What is the presbytery's role here; do they continue to be market driven? It takes no imagination to follow a McDonalds strategy of New Church Development. It takes faith and reason for a presbytery to "cover" a region or urban area with the good news of the gospel lived out in Presbyterian congregations. Those who defend the presbyteries for the wrong reasons ought to ask churches of 2,000 members to hire CLPs to lead them.
Following the terrorist bombings this summer in London a website came to international attention. Its message was simple: "I am not afraid." One would be hard pressed to find a more defiant and timely message of hope for a conflict battered world. I have begun to wonder what it might mean for our church to affirm this message too in the midst of its own conflicts.
There is a kind of holy fear, of course. George MacDonald writes: "Where it is possible that fear should exist, it is well it should exist, cause continual uneasiness, and be cast out by nothing less than love." MacDonald sees fear as a kind of provisional reverence that eventually will evaporate in the presence of the purifying fire of God's love.
The paragraphs below begin a sermon by William L. Hawkins on Christian disestablishment, preached at a meeting of New Hope Presbytery on October 15. In a time of increasing, irreversible religious pluralism, Hawkins exalts the value of congregational life. He argues that because we have long been unable to rely on the institutions of government or education to under gird a Protestant or Christian culture, the congregation has become the place where everything we do matters as it never has before. You will read this engaging, inspiring sermon next week in the Thanksgiving issue of the Outlook. But it is the origin of our nation and Constitution, described here, which illumines the present religious divide that troubles our nation's soul.
Though our U.S. Constitution was produced by a congress consisting mostly of Christians, the first clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of an official religion. The apparent irony goes deeper when we acknowledge the contributions of Christians in the formation of our government, beginning with the revolutionary war itself. This was something particularly true of Presbyterians. Historian Lefferts Loetscher said that the fires of the American Revolution were fanned from Presbyterian pulpits sufficient for the British to describe it as "the Presbyterian Rebellion."
The Book of Order, so far as I can determine, does not allow for retroactive revocation of ordination. I think this means I can probably safely admit now that I do not like chicken. Left to me the colonel from Kentucky would still be a corporal from Tennessee. I have never made a big issue of this situation because I am not trying to feather my nest.
Every time I deliver a sermon people come up in wonderment and ask where I learned to preach. However, I never get to tell them because they immediately fall to the floor laughing and roll away. I am, of course, glad to see people being happy, but I would like to answer that question.
Click here to read Ben's editorial, 'Minister Shortage'
Ben Sparks has written thoughtfully in these pages about the response of our denomination to the apparent shortage of ordained ministers. His words are wise, and his description of a program to enhance the commitment and skills of younger, and more recent seminary graduates leads me to think that the time has come for such an approach. May that work increase.
If I am correct in my understanding of what Ben says about the role of interim pastors, I agree with him at this point. In my opinion, while interim pastors provide useful services, they may also slow down the process of "filling pulpits" more quickly, since having a temporary pastor can seem, to the congregation and its committees, to keep the status quo. No matter that competent, trained persons who do this worthy work are encouraged to assist the church in embarking on a program of re-visioning, there is the possible perception that the interim pastor can hold the fort, visit the sick, celebrate the sacraments, and provide other services. And, they can.
Presbyterian College's commission to examine the school's "church-relatedness" has reported to the board of trustees that its faculty no longer need be Christian. While I was honored to serve on this commission as the Savannah Presbytery's representative, I believe this recommendation is outrageous, misguided, and embodies a bizarre approach to embracing diversity.
The report of the Commission, chaired by Allen McSween of Fourth Church in Greenville, S.C., makes the formal finding that "the faculty is the key element in the education of students to fulfill the mission of the College" (Report of the Commission, p. 9). With that statement, I am in complete agreement.
After recognizing the faculty's key role, however, the majority of the members of the commission then recommend that the faculty of this Christian institution no longer need be Christian. With that recommendation (Report, Recommendation Number 3, p. 10), I am in strong opposition and, therefore, submitted a minority report. How the majority can advocate such a change is simply beyond my poor comprehension as a minister of Christ's gospel and an advocate of Christian education.
I hasten to point out that there is nothing wrong with the recommendation in and of itself. Indeed, the wording of the recommendation is, I suspect, intentionally benign. The recommendation is that the College insure that new faculty members are oriented to and embrace the distinctive mission of the College. And who could oppose a professor understanding and supporting a college's mission?
From Leslie Scanlon's review of the Committee on the Office of the General Assembly's decision to close the Montreat Historical Society for financial reasons, we learn that a storm has been whipped up. The destruction of that storm will be felt far beyond Montreat. If that location is closed, 30,000 visitors a year to that small town nestled in the Blue Ridge Mountains outside Ashville, N.C., will morph into a much wider community of disgruntled Presbyterians, not only across the South, but from all over the United States and in other nations.
Consider the ill-tempered mood of the church regarding our major disagreements: divestment, the ordination of gays and lesbians, and beliefs about salvation in the name of Jesus Christ alone. In our agitated state, we lose 40,000 plus members a year. Is it not odd, in those circumstances, that COGA voted to close the Montreat center on the report of a committee of three persons, not one of whom is from the Southeast or "represents" Montreat? Do they knowingly invite us into another fray guaranteed to provoke persistent irritation and anguish to thousands of Presbyterians, whose support is needed for the church's future, as well as for the preservation of this collection in optimal form?
I am thankful for the work of the Peace, Unity and Purity Task Force, for modeling a way of speaking the truth in love to one another and to the church, even if there is no clear "prescription". Patience, forbearance, and faithful engagement are marks of the church that are easily overlooked in a results-oriented society. Affinity groups have also been tackling the presenting issues of the day for decades, especially the issue of ordination standards. However, I have come to realize that the options for renewal we have currently are not enough.
In the post-modern age, we have come to the end of Enlightenment rationalism with new paradigms for thinking emerging. As children of the Reformation, we are still too deeply rooted in Athens. The birth of Protestantism occurred, of course, when the Roman Church, very much under the influence of Thomas Aquinas (who borrowed heavily from Aristotle), was countered by Luther and Calvin, both influenced significantly by Augustine, a neo-Platonist. That the Western church is influenced by Plato/Aristotle is not any more noteworthy than that the Eastern (East Asian) church is influenced by Confucius/Lao Tzu. But in the church in America, I am convinced that our Platonic dualism has led to a national bipolar disorder.
In his prophet's call to repentance in Matthew and Luke, John the Baptist warns those who have been drawn to his revival not to place their hope in their ancestral connection to Abraham, for "God is able from the stones to raise up children to Abraham." (Mt. 3:9)
I thought of that warning as I read an article by Mark Lilla in the New York Times Magazine (September 18, 2005) called "Getting Religion, My long-lost years as a teenage evangelical." This University of Chicago professor tells of his awakening to the Scriptures through one of the small groups that proliferated in the "Jesus Freak" movement of the 1970s, and of his eventual fall out of faith. He grew up Roman Catholic in a monotonous blue collar Detroit suburb, and at age 13 he decided he was an atheist. A year later he attended a Christian rock concert and on the way out was given a colloquial translation of the New Testament, which he sat up all night reading. That New Testament opened his mind to a new world. Immersion in that New Testament also began the transformation of his intellect.
I confess that I used to think how much better our denomination would be if those who held to theological positions different than mine would opt to go elsewhere. I have a feeling my liberal colleagues felt the same about my fellow conservatives and me. I learned, however, that all of our voices are important.
Many people will lift up recommendation #5 as the single most important part of the report of the Theological Task Force. I believe, however, that recommendation #1a is the most important. It reads: "The Task Force recommends that the General Assembly strongly encourage: every member of the PC(USA) to witness to the church's visible oneness, to avoid division into separate denominations that obscure our community in Christ, and to live in harmony with other members of this denomination, so that we may with one voice together glorify God in Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit."
I was working in my study a couple of days after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks when my secretary informed me that the Moderator of the General Assembly was on the phone. That's not something that happens every day in Lakeland, Fla., so I picked up the phone with great anticipation. Jack Rogers was calling from Louisville. We talked about the recent tragedy and how the G.A. offices and the Lakeland Church were responding to the emotional and spiritual needs of people. Then the moderator asked me if I would serve on the Theological Task Force, and I responded with a resounding "yes." I had heard about the formation of the Task Force, and had even sent the three moderators a few suggestions of people I felt would make good members for such a committee. I did not include my name on the list, but was both honored and humbled to be selected.
I have come to recognize an important form that denial often takes in my life, perhaps in yours as well: the denial that people I disagree with have anything to teach me.
In 2001, the 213th General Assembly created a Theological Task Force to wrestle with the issues that are uniting and dividing us as Presbyterians. They were praying that with the help of the Holy Spirit we might lead the church in discernment of our Christian identity and of ways that our church might move forward, furthering its peace, unity, and purity. For this task, three former moderators collared 20 Presbyterians as different from one another as they could possibly be -- 20 Presbyterians who under ordinary circumstances would never dream of hanging out together!
So much of the diversity within our church is reflected on our Task Force that when he first met with us, Stated Clerk Cliff Kirkpatrick told us his office had received no complaints about the make-up of the Task Force, but that the question he had been asked repeatedly is "How will they ever get along?"
Does our church have a shared sense of Christian faithfulness? Or has the celebration of personal freedom rendered us incapable of agreeing on what a "manner of life [that is] a demonstration of the Christian gospel" looks like?
Predictably, response to the report of the Theological Task Force on the Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church has focused on the effect its recommendations might have on the contested issue of the ordination and installation of "self-affirming, practicing homosexual persons." Many conservatives in the church distrust recommendation 5, seeing in it a back door opening to "local option." Many liberals in the church are distressed by recommendation 6, seeing it as a failure of nerve that maintains an unjust prohibition.
The Task Force's mandate was far broader than the ordination controversy, of course. It was asked to lead the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A .) "in spiritual discernment of our Christian identity," and to address specific issues of disagreement and conflict: biblical authority and interpretation, Christology, ordination standards, and power. Over a period of four years, Task Force members have worked faithfully and well on the full range of matters before them, but it was inevitable that the issue of ordination standards would push the church's consideration of the others into the far background. Christological controversy receded in the wake of the General Assembly's overwhelming affirmation of "Hope in the Lord Jesus Christ." Scriptural authority and interpretation remains an issue in the church, and is unresolved by Task Force members' general agreement that Scripture is authoritative for them.
© Copyright 2026 The Presbyterian Outlook. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Statement. Website by Web Publisher PRO
