I have recently read some accounts of how W. A. Criswell, a Texas businessman, and a young seminarian--who later became a well-known president of the Southern Baptist Convention--came up with a plan a generation ago to move the Southern Baptist Convention away from liberalism. The Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church also seemed to be falling into liberal hands at one time, but was brought back to orthodoxy.
I'm also thinking of an article I saw many years ago in the publication of the Covenant Fellowship of Presbyterians back in the days of the PCUS. Someone was complaining about how the denomination had been "stolen" by liberals. The author of the article said, in effect, "No, it wasn't stolen; you gave it away."
I was thinking of all these things as I reflected upon the recent conference of the Presbyterian Global Fellowship in Atlanta, the adoption of Recommendation Five of the "Pup" Report at the PC(USA) General Assembly which seems to provide more leeway concerning the ordination of gays and lesbians, the varying reactions of churches and presbyteries, and the future prospects for orthodox theology in our denomination. I am truly thankful for the tireless efforts of our renewal groups and reform-minded organizations in the PC(USA.) Conservatives are, by their very nature, often less activist than their liberal counterparts. We seem to shy away from controversy and get weary of "the fight," whatever the fight is! We desire to keep the peace, either by simply quitting the battle or withdrawing from the association entirely. So we have people and congregations leaving the PC(USA) and others who simply sit on the sidelines.
I can respect the principles of those who feel they must leave the PC(USA), especially in light of recent developments. (For ten years, I took the same course, and went into the EPC.) Many legitimate and well-grounded theological arguments can be advanced to support such a position. This is not, however, the course I intend to pursue.
What I cannot respect is the concerned Presbyterian church member or pastor who simply retires from the battle to sit on the sidelines and do nothing. I think of the story of two men talking to each other. One was trying to convince the other to volunteer for a worthy community project, but the second man wouldn't hear of it. Finally after hearing all of his excuses, the first man said, "And besides, you don't like chocolate cake!" "What's that got to do with it?" the second man asked. "Not a thing in the world," said his antagonist, "but since you're not going to participate in the project anyway, one excuse is just as good as another."
That's the way I feel about those who continually complain about the situation in the PC(USA), but resolutely sit on the sidelines and do nothing about it. They have lots of excuses--most of which are totally irrelevant! I call it "creative non-involvement," because they continually try to come up with new and creative reasons for doing nothing!
I believe the Presbyterian Global Fellowship provides one creative, dynamic, and exciting avenue for doing *something to try to get the missions ministry of our denomination back on track. It isn't the whole answer, of course, and I don't think it even purports to be the whole answer; but it's a start. It is a beginning toward making us "externally focused," as they liked to say in Atlanta.
We still have to address the problems of the theological direction of our colleges and seminaries, the lack of enforcement of proper church discipline and ordination standards, the election of a new stated clerk when the current term comes to an end, the method of choosing commissioners to General Assembly and synods from the various presbyteries, and the left-wing social and political bias of denominational pronouncements. These are massive problems; but they'll never be solved, or even addressed, by "creative non-involvement."
Evangelicals and conservatives must be willing to speak out, using every resource available--including avenues such as this blog. We have to support each other and give up some of our stubborn independence. We have to let it be known that we are willing to serve on presbytery committees, help in various kinds of presbytery and other denominational service projects, show up at informational meetings, be active in our local churches. We have to get our hands dirty and be consistent participants in the machinery of church affairs.
We have to stop thinking about merely being involved in a defensive holding action that moves from one issue to another. We have to have a vision of the kind of church we believe God wants, and move toward accomplishing that vision. I believe that congregations need a Long-Range Planning Committee. I also believe we need a long-range vision for our PC(USA), and I don't believe the formation of that vision should be left totally to the "professionals" and bureaucrats in Louisville. We need to be constructively involved, prayerfully discerning, positively energized, and optimistic about the hope before us in the presence of a sovereign God.
