Leaving or Staying? Responding to faithlessness in the PCUSA

This is the first part of a three part conversation between Viola Larson and Bill Crawford. It is being posted on my blog, Naming His Grace, but will be linked to at Bayou Christian Blog.


Viola: A fellow Christian, Renee, on Bayou Christian’s blog suggested that Pastor Bill Crawford and I write something together about leaving or staying in the Presbyterian Church USA. We thought about it, prayed about it and decided to give it a try. Since we are generally in agreement over the essentials of the Christian faith, (and not afraid or ashamed to name the essentials) and since we are in disagreement over other issues, we thought our conversation might be both helpful and interesting. We are looking at two questions: “What does faithfulness look like” and “How do we go about upholding one another?”

Bill: It is a sign of the times that I must first make this statement: I have made no official decision regarding affiliation nor has my congregation had any official conversations regarding the matter. The need to make that statement is one of the many issues that affect faithfulness at this time in the life of the institution called the PC (USA). My final year of seminary, I was blessed with the opportunity to spend a month in Scotland, where I made a practice of studying every pile of rocks and or bricks I could find, many of which were the remains of Churches destroyed during the Presbyterian Reformation. Why the violence? Because to leave something so important behind, there must be good reason and there most be enough social energy to gather breakaway momentum. It has always been more difficult to make the case that there is “a better way” than the case that “this is the only way” other wise our instinct to just live with it kicks in.

"What does faithfulness look like?"

Viola: I know this will be the question we have the most disagreement over. I think it is in fact what is driving the whole issue. I think biblically it revolves around the Lordship of Christ. We each want to look at the other and justify our own action but only in Christ can we find any kind of justification for any action we take. It is toward Jesus Christ and in Jesus Christ that we stand or fall.

First of all, I think I understand that those leaving are leaving because they feel it is the only faithful thing they can do. They believe that the Presbyterian Church USA has become so apostate that to stay and support it is unfaithful. I suspect others are leaving because they simply feel called to leave.

On the other side, the place where I stand, many believe that the Presbyterian Church USA can not yet be considered apostate and would not be until their official documents contain absolute heresy. And here too, some of us are staying simply because we feel called to stay. But the main problem I have is with the attitudes the different sides have toward each other. That is actually the main reason I wanted to explore these issues with Bill.

I don’t think it right when those staying malign those leaving. I know there is despair and a feeling of abandonment on the side of those staying, yet the Church is God’s Church and certainly He has not abandoned any part of His Church. I don’t think it right when those leaving malign those staying. I know there is a feeling of despair and weariness of the battle on the part of those leaving yet the Church catholic is God’s Church and he will not abandon any part of His Church.

“Blessed be the God and Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we are comforted by God. For just as the sufferings of Christ are ours in abundance, so also our comfort is abundant through Christ (2 Cor. 1:3-5).”

Still, I need to lay out what I believe is a biblical view of faithfulness. I believe faithfulness usually looks like an argument and the argument always entails, for the Christian, obedience to the Lordship of Christ.

The arguments are sometimes personal such as Paul and Barnabas’s argument over John Mark. (Acts 15: 36-40) (This, by the way, led to a greater mission field and more workers in the Kingdom of God.)

Another kind of faithfulness involves Church government. For example the Jerusalem Council making a decision about God’s grace to the Gentiles and what it means for both them and the Church since God included them in his promises.

Their faithfulness lies in their use of scripture to make the decisions and their use of church authority as a means of carrying out church directives. (Acts 15:1630) Both those in authority and authoritative letters were sent to enforce the decision.

In this case faithfulness can also be seen in the work of Paul and others who presented the true gospel to the Gentiles. But, there is unfaithfulness too. The “brethren” who go about preaching a different gospel to the churches which Paul founded and the Church leaders who seemingly do not discipline the disruptive brethren are unfaithful. And historically those early churches infected by a graceless and perverted gospel did eventually die.

And then there is the kind of faithfulness that confronts an argument and simply stands still in faithfulness, insisting on the truth of the Gospel. (Eph 6:13) This is the church to which John is writing his first epistle. The church was confronted by some early forbearer of Gnosticism which denied that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh. The false teachers in this church were also undoubtedly teaching that Jesus was not the Christ and that they had some greater or “new” knowledge that the others did not possess.

From the text we get the feel of Christians who were harassed because they stood their ground about the identity of Jesus Christ and who they were in him. The members, as they stood, watched their numbers dwindle, but were reassured by John that, “They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us; they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they are not of us.” (1 John 2:19)

And before anyone jumps on this verse and measures departing Presbyterians with it, let me remind the reader that those leaving in this text were undoubtedly returning to a culture that would gladly receive them, a culture which honored “enlightened belief systems” but excluded early Christianity because of its exclusive claims about Jesus Christ. These false members were joining an array of inclusive and pluralistic religious groups. To stay would have meant suffering with the church that existed at the time.

My point here is that there is a time for a faith that simply stands and lets God work out the details. One of my favorite preachers, Dr. Darrell Johnson, Professor at Regent College in Vancouver, tells of the time, shortly after he became a Christian, when walking home with his best friend, the friend gave him a choice. He must either renounce his faith or continue his walk home alone. He soon found himself walking alone while his friend took a different route. He said that was the loneliest walk he ever took but Jesus was with him. Faithfulness simply means following Jesus Christ which entails his Lordship.

And to end my part, I think that the viewpoint piece, “I am going to leave the PC(USA)But possibly not before my death...” written by Hans Cornelder of Presbyweb is still the best reminder of why many of us intend to stay in the Presbyterian Church USA.

Bill: I have the advantage of Viola having written first, therefore let me say an amen and restate her warning – affirming those who will stay while making a case for faithfully leaving this institution is as difficult as trying to fly between the ground and the fog. Whenever one makes a case, no matter how hypothetical, for leaving, those who would stay are criticized.

We all agree that the Bible must be our source for defining faithfulness. The witness of the Bible is clearly one of God’s faithfulness and humanity’s unfaithfulness. Also we can clearly see there is not one reference to what we today call denominations in the Bible. They did not exist until much later in history. The first important premise in considering faithfulness is to make a clear distinction between “The Church” and the “Institutional Church”. This distinction is at the heart of anyone considering “Leaving Faithfully” (I should note that many if not most who consider “leaving” reject that word – most would say “returning” or “journeying”).

A person who considers Journeying is likely to begin with the question of Holiness:
Leviticus 11:45 45 I am the LORD who brought you up out of Egypt to be your God; therefore be holy, because I am holy.

The debate over apostasy is incredibly complex. Many in the PCUSA assure us that there are no changes and that in our written documents there is Orthodoxy. This is true to a point. Many who have begun a journey are learning that words in our written documents do not mean the same thing to many of us. The Bible being “Authoritative” has proven not to mean the same thing as “Infallible”. We are also discovering that “Paper Orthodoxy” does not lead to” Orthodox Praxis”. I became all to aware in seminary that the words we use even the most common theological terms often do not have the same meaning. When the definitions of words depart from the Word, they become like the houses on my beloved gulf coast. Hollow shells that are full of emptiness. Paper Orthodoxy cannot preserve us.

Classic reformed theology states that the Church is represented where the Word is rightly proclaimed, where the Sacraments are rightly performed, and where Discipline is rightly practiced. The PCUSA clearly strikes out on two of those three. So in the classic sense there is no holiness. Therefore if we are not in a state of clear apostasy in one simple matter we are certainly suffering an “apostasy of a thousand cuts.”

So then one who is Journeying begins to ask, “If we are not holy as an institution must I remain as a faithful remnant?” If we accept the premise that the True Church exists where God calls it into being, then we acknowledge that the PCUSA is not the True Church (although it surely contains members of that Church). If the PCUSA is not the True Church (or the nation of Israel) then remnant theology does not apply. Journeyers would likely apply texts such as this to our situation:

2 Corinthians 6:16-18 16 What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people." 17 "Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you." 18 "I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty."

Classically the idea was for the Church to come out of the World. Other scriptures refer to the pushing out of those who reject God to allow them to receive the admonishment of the World in their lives (see the Letter of Jude). But what is one who is Journeying to do when the leadership of the institution is Worldly? How do you separate from a systemic breakdown of belief and practice? For over 30 years the renewal movement has attempted to follow this mandate and failed.

Matthew 28:19-20 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

For those who are journeying (and likely all others) this is the most important mission of the Church. They are discovering that the institution (PCUSA) is a hindrance in this pursuit. Their congregations are losing members, people are refusing to join them because of their institutional affiliation, they are distracted from sharing their faith locally. To remain and be holy is to continue to dispute but to leave is to let go and pursue the better thing. This journey is perceived as a calling of God as much as a response to facts that can be listed on a page. As they gird themselves for the trip, journeyers are beginning a transition from the dispute to the “new thing”. Whether one group or the other is the “True Church” really becomes an abstraction, as journeyers are growing more excited about the concreteness of a New Journey than the reason for starting the trip.