# This one may cause me to leave PCUSA - Gay Clergy



## Grymir (Jul 1, 2008)

Hi everybody. I'm serious for once in this thread. I ran across this - PCUSA Assembly Approves Deleting Gay Clergy Ban| Christianpost.com - I've been debating whether to stay or leave. I don't have many choices where I live. But this one really gets to me. This is even worse than Barth being quoted in a Sermon in a good way. What would y'all do. Is this a final straw issue to any of you?


----------



## JonathanHunt (Jul 1, 2008)

It would be to me, yes. But there are many very solid believers (for example in the Church of England) for whom it does not seem to be.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jul 1, 2008)

Tim -

I'm sure that for many, the 'last straw' is long ago passed in the PCUSA - women in the eldership and the pulpit. I would personally never be part of a church wherein the submission required of me as a member would be to women ruling in positions of authority over me. 

That being said, if I WERE still part of such a congregation, this is just another sign of the fact that the PCUSA is a grievously unfaithful denomination. I couldn't stand it any longer if I were you. (but then in the Quad Cities there isn't much there, is there?) I don't envy your position, Tim. Will pray...


----------



## toddpedlar (Jul 1, 2008)

I know there are no OPC, PCA, RPCNA, or URC churches anywhere near you in the Quad Cities, but there is a Reformed Baptist church (Sycamore Baptist Church) in East Moline - something of a drive to be sure, but I would check it out.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jul 1, 2008)

Todd, why has then been no plants by any of these denoms I wonder; two small a demographic?


----------



## skellam (Jul 1, 2008)

I have followed with dismay the most recent PCUSA General Assembly. It is very sad to see this denomination slipping further into lawlessness. They are not preaching the word faithfully and certainly not exercising church discipline rightly and, therefore, not exhibiting the marks of a true church. I think many congregations are starting to realize this and exiting to the EPC. Al Mohler had a good take on this whole thing.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jul 1, 2008)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Todd, why has then been no plants by any of these denoms I wonder; two small a demographic?



I don't know - the Quad Cities is quite a large area, so I don't know why there aren't any Reformed churches there (actually there are a couple RCA and perhaps a CRC there, but no 'tr' denominations). Eastern Iowa is EXTREMELY Catholic and Lutheran, though so breaking in is probably seen as very hard to do. It would be akin, perhaps, to trying to plant a Methodist Episcopal church in extreme Northwest Iowa or extreme Northwest Washington, both of which are EXTREMELY Dutch. There is an OPC congregation in Independence, quite a way from the Quad Cities (where Lon Wadkins is a member) and a PCA in Walker, not too far from Independence. The nearest congregations otherwise are in Des Moines. 

It's quite a difficult situation in much of Iowa - and some of it has to do with demographic, but I do long for some reformed presence here, and for those in the Quads - it's sorely needed.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 1, 2008)

I do not want to be the bearer of the obvious but I know for a fact that the PC (USA) has been ordaining active and open homosexuals for a while now.

Also there is a RPCNA church in Washington, IA. As well as in Morning Sun, IA.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jul 1, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> I do not want to be the bearer of the obvious but I know for a fact that the PC (USA) has been ordaining active and open homosexuals for a while now.
> 
> Also there is a RPCNA church in Washington, IA. As well as in Morning Sun, IA.



They have been ordaining them, but now it's codified as a denomination-wide official policy that it's allowed - big difference there. Caveat, though - at present it's only at the GA level. In order for it to take effect, it must be ratified by (a majority of?) the presbyteries and then again at the next GA. 

I didn't suggest the RP churches simply because they're an hour and a half or more from Davenport, but of course those are also options if the drive is acceptable.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 1, 2008)

I very recently emigrated out of the PC (USA) and know what you are saying is true. However, In my humble opinion, I think there are more grevious things already codified in the Book of Confessions. 

As far as the RP churches I figured they were too far but just wanted to make them known...


----------



## BobVigneault (Jul 1, 2008)

What we are seeing now is just the logical and practical result of the failure to hold to the authority of Scripture many years ago. That should have been the last straw. Without the authority of God's Word then each church does what they 'feel' is right in their own eyes. Without the authority of Scripture there is no force that will turn back the march of human depravity.

Homos and women in the pulpit are not the shocking events, diminishing the Word of God to myth and pretexts is the shame of the church.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jul 1, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> I very recently emigrated out of the PC (USA) and know what you are saying is true. However, In my humble opinion, I think there are more grevious things already codified in the Book of Confessions.



Van Til's analysis of the Confession of 1967 is priceless on that score; very succinct, and a good analysis of the death spiral the PCUSA has been in since (and before) Van Til's time.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 1, 2008)

Great minds think alike Todd. I had Van Til's analysis of '67 directly in mind.


----------



## KMK (Jul 1, 2008)

BobVigneault said:


> What we are seeing now is just the logical and practical result of the failure to hold to the authority of Scripture many years ago. That should have been the last straw. Without the authority of God's Word then each church does what they 'feel' is right in their own eyes. Without the authority of Scripture there is no force that will turn back the march of human depravity.
> 
> Homos and women in the pulpit are not the shocking events, diminishing the Word of God to myth and pretexts is the shame of the church.



I agree. I would also add that this is the logical course when a church refuses to take a stand against any kind of lust outside the covenant of marraige between a man and a woman. Once we wink at divorce and remarriage, for example, we start down a slippery slope.


----------



## A5pointer (Jul 1, 2008)

BobVigneault said:


> *What we are seeing now is just the logical and practical result of the failure to hold to the authority of Scripture many years ago. * That should have been the last straw. Without the authority of God's Word then each church does what they 'feel' is right in their own eyes. Without the authority of Scripture there is no force that will turn back the march of human depravity.
> 
> Homos and women in the pulpit are not the shocking events, diminishing the Word of God to myth and pretexts is the shame of the church.



Bob nailed it right on the head. There should be no surprise or shock as things spiral downward without an objective standard to appeal to. I also am without better options in my area. I choose to stay as our congregation is confessional and equally disgusted with the actions of our denomination. We are known in the area for this as many from Tenth in Philadelphia attend our services while vacationing in Ocean City. We are always discussing leaving as a congregation but just don't get to around to the pain it would be to do so. Some feel we can be witnesses and light to the denomination but I think there is no turning back for the PCUSA. Our Pastor looked very dejected when he returned from GA on Sunday. He seemed to have been hopeful that progress could be made but this GA seems to prove all is lost.


----------



## Casey (Jul 1, 2008)

Grymir said:


> I don't have many choices where I live.


Tim, actually, the OPC Presbytery of the Midwest is exploring the possibility of planting a church in the Quad Cities area (it lists "Bettendorf / Davenport"; see here, scroll down to the bottom where it says "Areas of Interest"). Our Regional Home Missionary is Rev. Jim Bosgraf and I highly recommend you contact him. There may already be other Reformed families meeting for Bible studies in your area (maybe, I don't know, but this is usually how plants start). Every individual and family seriously interested really helps and I'm sure he'd absolutely love to hear from you!


----------



## jaybird0827 (Jul 1, 2008)

Grymir said:


> Hi everybody. I'm serious for once in this thread. I ran across this - PCUSA Assembly Approves Deleting Gay Clergy Ban| Christianpost.com - I've been debating whether to stay or leave. I don't have many choices where I live. But this one really gets to me. This is even worse than Barth being quoted in a Sermon in a good way. What would y'all do. Is this a final straw issue to any of you?


 
The final straw for us 23 years ago was the effect of the reunion of the PCUS to the UPCUSA forming what is now the PC(USA). We were PCUS at the time. It was my responsibility as a husband and father for being under sound teaching. 

The watershed issue at the time was women in the clergy and that they were also forcing acceptance women in the eldership. We actually had a woman in the congregation, married with two small children. She said she just didn't "feel called" to be a mother but she did "feel called" to the ministry. She was greatly aided and abetted by the minister as well as supported by her husband. We left for the PCA.

There is no way I would tolerate a ranting, raving, s*d*m*te as any lawfully ordained elder, let alone a lawfully ordained minister. 

You're right. You've done what you can. You have fought the good fight. If it wasn't time to leave before, it is now.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jul 1, 2008)

Tim,

I'm not the one to speak on this issue since I left my own mainline denom for the exact same reasons. For me, like Benjamin, there were other things about any mainline group that struck at the heart of the Gospel before the homosexual issue. However, it was a "straw that broke the camel's back" situation for us.

Mohler's comments are spot on:



> Meeting in San Jose, California, the Presbyterian Church USA, the liberal branch of American Presbyterianism, moved to approve homosexual clergy on June 27, 2008 -- a date that may well mark a final blow against biblical orthodoxy in that denomination.



Tim, I grew up in the ABC and the last two years after leaving have been exceedingly painful for me and for many of my other "lifer" colleagues. Still, we left as a judicatory (So. Cal./Az/Hawaii - 270 congregations) rather than as individual churches. But, the direction was clearly set and we were unwilling to live with it any longer. 

And, yes, as Benjamin indicated, this is not the first time that the PCUSA ordained active homosexuals, merely the codifying of it. Most mainline groups have been doing it and looking the other way for some time. 

In the ABC, our ruling board of 120 (or so) had at least two openly homosexual clergy on it, one who was on the executive committee, nominating committee, biennial program planning committee (2003 and 2005), and the search committee to select the General Secretary (top paid employee of the denom)! And, like the Corinthians, they were so proud of their tolerance and open mindedness.

So, for what it's worth, this date will probably go down as the day (if the 1967 confession didn't convince you already and the changes to the HC at this GA) when the PCUSA officially closed the door on pretending to be a biblical denomination. I would not stay.


----------



## Grymir (Jul 1, 2008)

Thank you very much y'all for your input. This is a tough issue.


----------



## raekwon (Jul 1, 2008)

How is (or how do you expect) your local church to react to this news?


----------



## Grymir (Jul 1, 2008)

I'm pretty sure they will take a stand against it. My local church is fairly conservative and they have stood against what the General Assembly has been doing of late. They are not conservative in the sense that I am, but more of a middle of the road/Barthian kind.

(Note-DMcFadden, that is why I don't like Barth so much. I read him and couldn't understand how people could even say he was any kind of theologian, and His dialectical method has permeated the church from the top down. ie, The Bible isn't God's word, but the place where he meets his people. )

And that is my cause for concern. But this stuff influences the people in it, and I do have to protect my family. The social interactions with other married couple reveals they don't have a Biblical marriage, but more of a worldly one. My wife and I haven't had Biblical role models, as I used to be a Liberal, and we need the examples. There are a couple of Couples that we follow, who are more conservative than me, and they have been a good influence on us. But a worldly view of everything isn't good. Especially when it comes to the Bible. We've been o.k. so far, because my wife and I are well grounded, and talk about such things. ie, "Tim, where did they get that from??" But it is getting worse and worse. And that is my reason for taking a pause and re-evaluating our church.

To complicate things, I am a Sunday School teacher, and have taught against what goes against the Bible. From the ordination of women/now gays too, and the wrong view of the Bible, and they haven't thrown me out. But I think these latest anti-Bible decisions from General Assembly will trickle down and eventually permeate the church, as they are already there epistemologically. Hence my question and seeking of advice.


----------



## Hippo (Jul 1, 2008)

I have a certain distaste for Anglicans who are making a stand over gay bishops when they seem to have had no problem remaining Anglicans when bishops were denying the existance of God or the physical resurection.

I dont know if the PCUSA has accepted similiar heretical statements in the past, but if it has I would see such matters as being much more serious than sinful clergy.


----------



## Scott1 (Jul 1, 2008)

In prayerfully assessing this, you might find this helpful from Presbyterian for Renewal, which is working from within the denomination for reform. They announce a major change in strategy after the actions taken at this year's General Assembly:

Presbyterians for Renewal


----------



## danmpem (Jul 1, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> Tim, I grew up in the ABC and the last two years after leaving have been exceedingly painful for me and for many of my other "lifer" colleagues. Still, we left as a judicatory (So. Cal./Az/Hawaii - 270 congregations) rather than as individual churches. But, the direction was clearly set and we were unwilling to live with it any longer.
> 
> And, yes, as Benjamin indicated, this is not the first time that the PCUSA ordained active homosexuals, merely the codifying of it. Most mainline groups have been doing it and looking the other way for some time.
> 
> In the ABC, our ruling board of 120 (or so) had at least two openly homosexual clergy on it, one who was on the executive committee, nominating committee, biennial program planning committee (2003 and 2005), and the search committee to select the General Secretary (top paid employee of the denom)! And, like the Corinthians, they were so proud of their tolerance and open mindedness.



I remember going through that with the ABC. It was the first time I had ever been in a local body that was leaving a denomination.

I find it funny that this is considered an issue of homosexuality or church leadership. Before any of that, it's about the authority _and priority_ of scripture (everyone these days says scripture is the authority). It's no secret that we've been watching the PCUSA dissolve rapidly over the past several years; but, for me, it's not so much an atrocity that they have such radical criteria for clergyman. It is a heartbreak, though, that what once was a more orthodox denomination is now saying, "Did God really say that?"


----------



## DMcFadden (Jul 1, 2008)

Scott1 said:


> In prayerfully assessing this, you might find this helpful from Presbyterian for Renewal, which is working from within the denomination for reform. They announce a major change in strategy after the actions taken at this year's General Assembly:
> 
> Presbyterians for Renewal



I don't know how instructive our experience was, but the ABC also had a renewal group (American Baptist Evangelicals). They fought for years against the trends and finally decided to disband (not long before my judicatory pulled out) concluding that it was a lost cause and that the time, effort, and mission money could be better spent being "for" something rather than spinning our wheels being "against" the heresy in the ABC.

If American church history teaches us anything it is that no liberal denomination has ever been successfully turned around toward truth. The seeming exception of the SBC may actually prove the case since it was never one of the "mainline" seven and had never gone as far as the PCUSA or ABCUSA.


----------



## danmpem (Jul 1, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> Scott1 said:
> 
> 
> > In prayerfully assessing this, you might find this helpful from Presbyterian for Renewal, which is working from within the denomination for reform. They announce a major change in strategy after the actions taken at this year's General Assembly:
> ...



 What do you mean by one of the "mainline" seven? I thought the SBC was one of the biggest denominations in the U.S.


----------



## yeutter (Jul 1, 2008)

When they would not ordain Walter Wynn Kenyon [because he would not ordain women,] but would receive Marvin Kaseman from the United Church of Christ even though he denied the divinity of Christ in any meaningful sence of the word, I left the mainstream Presbyterian Church.
I wonder what percent of the board were once UPSUSA or PCUS; the parent denomination to this mess that now pretends to be presbyterian


----------



## yeutter (Jul 1, 2008)

danmpem said:


> : What do you mean by one of the "mainline" seven? I thought the SBC was one of the biggest denominations in the U.S.


I suggest we start calling the mainline churches the sideline churches.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 1, 2008)

yeutter said:


> danmpem said:
> 
> 
> > : What do you mean by one of the "mainline" seven? I thought the SBC was one of the biggest denominations in the U.S.
> ...


----------



## danmpem (Jul 1, 2008)

yeutter said:


> danmpem said:
> 
> 
> > : What do you mean by one of the "mainline" seven? I thought the SBC was one of the biggest denominations in the U.S.
> ...



Oooh.  I gotcha.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jul 1, 2008)

danmpem said:


> yeutter said:
> 
> 
> > danmpem said:
> ...



Just call them social clubs.


----------



## CDM (Jul 1, 2008)

I prefer biblical terms: Synagogues of Satan.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 1, 2008)

mangum said:


> I prefer biblical terms: Synagogues of Satan.


----------



## Jared (Jul 1, 2008)

We don't have any conservative reformed churches where I live. So, I decided to visit the LaFollette Presbyterian Church (PCUSA). I was very disappointed. I had hoped that they would be somewhat conservative. But I found out when I went they they had women teaching Sunday school classes and preaching, not on the day that I was there thankfully, but they do that quite often I guess. Needless to say, I won't be going there.

The church that I go to is egalitarian but the pastor is a male and there are no female elders. They hardly ever have women teach, so it usually works out okay. Lately, however they have been having women teach on Wednesdays. On those nights, I find somewhere else to go. 

I would like to plant a conservative "reformed" church in my town at some point, but I don't feel that now is the right time. There really isn't much of a demand for a church like that here. I hardly know any reformed people here and the only ones that I do know are the ones who go to the PCUSA church and they like Karl Barth.  

I know this is slightly off topic, but I do know of a of one guy that I think is close to embracing the doctrines of grace. All of the preachers pretty much that he listens to are "reformed". His favorite preacher is Paul Washer. Yet, he still says that he doesn't like monergism. I would like for you guys to pray for him, 'cause he's really close to goin' all the way.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jul 1, 2008)

danmpem said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > Scott1 said:
> ...



Mainline is a term of art, technically designating the following denominations: ABCUSA, Disciples, ECUSA, ELC, UMC, PCUSA, UCC. They WERE the main denoms before the evangelical post-war explosion and all part of the NCC. SBC never considered itself part of the National Council of Churches scene or part of the "mainline" despite their size. Most identifiably evangelical denominations affiliated with the National Association of Evangelicals, not the National Council of Churches. So they are, by definition, not part of the mainline seven.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jul 2, 2008)

> I suggest we start calling the mainline churches the sideline churches


Yes, the *mainlines *are rapidly becoming the *sidelines* just a matter or years away from being the *flatlines*.


----------



## bookslover (Jul 2, 2008)

Grymir said:


> Is this a final straw issue to any of you?



You need to leave. Even if there are no orthodox churches around you, you _still_ need to leave. God will honor your leaving, and He will be with you even if all you can do is worship at home for awhile.

As for the orthodoxy of the PCUSA, that ship sailed more than a hundred years ago.


----------



## Thomas2007 (Jul 2, 2008)

Why don't you find a few other likeminded Reformed believers and approach the OPC or another conservative Presbyterian denomination about starting a Church plant in your area.


----------



## Poimen (Jul 2, 2008)

Timothy:

You asked 'what we would do?'. I respond: leave and don't look back. 

The Christian Reformed Church has been going down this road for a long time and my father decided that we needed to leave as a family many years ago (but it still isn't as bad as the PCUSA).


----------



## BJClark (Jul 2, 2008)

Grymir;

Where is YOUR Pastor and YOUR congregation at on this issue? That is also what I'd be looking at..IF they are in agreement with lifting the ban, then I would say LEAVE.

If they are NOT agreement then maybe you could suggest THE congregation as a WHOLE join another denomination..

If there are only a handful within your congregation who are NOT in agreement, maybe they would be willing to speak to a reformed denomination and ask about starting a church plant in your area...something that could grow..


----------



## py3ak (Jul 2, 2008)

A5pointer said:


> BobVigneault said:
> 
> 
> > *What we are seeing now is just the logical and practical result of the failure to hold to the authority of Scripture many years ago. * That should have been the last straw. Without the authority of God's Word then each church does what they 'feel' is right in their own eyes. Without the authority of Scripture there is no force that will turn back the march of human depravity.
> ...



Scripture takes a different approach: _have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them_. We are not a witness to Belial by partnering with him in the supposed work of the ministry, but by reprobating him and all his evil in the strongest, clearest terms we can find. When a denomination will not take action against open heresy, in order to heed the apostolic admonitions about false teachers, we can only distance ourselves from them. That is a regrettable state of affairs probably resulting from years of accumulated unfaithfulness in discipline; but if that is where you find yourself, the way forward is clear.


----------



## yeutter (Jul 2, 2008)

bookslover said:


> As for the orthodoxy of the PCUSA, that ship sailed more than a hundred years ago.



A hundred years ago? OK, what benchmark would you use to identify departure from orthodoxy. The old PCUSA affirmed the fundamentals as recently as 1919. B. B. Warfield was teaching at Princeton into the 1920s. 
Granted they did reunite with the amyrauldian wing of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church about 100 years ago.


----------



## sotzo (Jul 2, 2008)

> This is even worse than Barth being quoted in a Sermon in a good way. What would y'all do. Is this a final straw issue to any of you?



What's wrong with quoting Barth???


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 2, 2008)

sotzo said:


> > This is even worse than Barth being quoted in a Sermon in a good way. What would y'all do. Is this a final straw issue to any of you?
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with quoting Barth???



He is heterodox.


----------



## Galatians220 (Jul 2, 2008)

Grymir, I've been watching this thread closely, and my heart goes out to you and your family. More than you can imagine.

Question for you: have you others in league with you? Like about 3-5 families?

We were in a similar position two years ago... *We had nowhere to go.* There are plenty of PCUSAs around here. There is just one PCA in a county to our north that's largely a "rock 'n' roll heaven;" there is one OPC that wasn't my cup of tea. Roughly 65% of our neighbors are Roman Catholics; some other large percentage are Hindus or Muslims; others are mainline Protestants, Arminian fundies or, on the other end of the spectrum, atheists or whatever. Useless, right? Nope! I rolled up my shirtsleeves and got to work. I found that little coterie, that core group who wanted pure, Biblical preaching, teaching and the real Gospel. Now we're up and running, and we're doing well enough that we know, Lord willing, we will be around next year. Financially speaking, at least...

I wouldn't encourage anyone to do what I did, though. It takes a *LOT* of effort, time, a never-say-quit love for the Lord and His people, wherever they may be. It takes perseverance, a ton of humility and patience, and money, too. Do it only if you think you can *love* doing it and the Lord is leading you. Pray over it unceasingly: that's the most important part. 

When deciding whether or not to take Step One towards this effort, I looked at the other side: where were we going to worship? Was it reasonable for us to pick up and go somewhere else? (Like "Michigan's Holy Land," Grand Rapids...) *No.*

I had to do what I did. Had no choice. It was a labor of love for the Lord. Now every Sunday, as I hear the people coming in and greet them, one after another, I take no personal pride in it... It's been HIS work, HIS idea; we were just the means He used. Does He mean to use you as well? Oh, if He does, you will be blessed!

You have just been added to my daily prayer list (well, actually, everyone on this board is already on that). I pray that you'll find a place "to land," as we called it before we embarked on our own effort. 

God bless you, Grymir.

Margaret


----------



## Ivan (Jul 2, 2008)

Galatians220 said:


> Grymir, I've been watching this thread closely, and my heart goes out to you and your family. More than you can imagine.
> 
> Question for you: have you others in league with you? Like about 3-5 families?
> 
> ...



What wonderful encouragment!!!


----------



## bookslover (Jul 3, 2008)

yeutter said:


> bookslover said:
> 
> 
> > As for the orthodoxy of the PCUSA, that ship sailed more than a hundred years ago.
> ...



Well, that was a general statement: a hundred years ago, more or less.

By the time Warfield died in February, 1921, the liberals were well on the way to gaining control of the ecclesiastical machinery (boards, committees, etc.) of the denomination and, in only a few more years (1929), they successfully re-organized Princeton Seminary, forcing most of the conservatives out. The reason they were so successful is that they had been working on taking over the denomination for several decades beforehand. Think about the Briggs trial; think about the confessional revisions that were attempted late in the 19th century, etc.

As for the reaffirmation of the fundamentals in 1919 (a point I'm a little obscure on, I'll admit), a good question to ask would be: in what sense did the liberals at that time "affirm" them. With crossed fingers?


----------



## Grymir (Jul 3, 2008)

Thanks y'all for the input. So much stuff, I don't know where to start. 

Sotzo, Barth denies the Bible is the written word of God for starters. His dialectical approach to theology is epistemologically flawed. Like Backwoods said, he's heterodox at best. He teaches that we can only know about God in relationships, not in the correct way of understanding the propositional truth's that God put in the Bible. In his 'preaching and prayer' he actually wrote that a pastor should never mention sin as it relates to people, but only mention sin when it comes to Jesus (His cross specifically). His modernistic theology permeates my church, and as Luther said, if we neglect that place where the church is being attacked at this moment (doctrine), we are not doing the job of a theologian. I could go on, but if a little dweeb like me can see his many trouble spots, I have to wonder how he became so popular. (Answer - People don't do polemics anymore in the mainline/sideline church's. Hence we see church's slipping away) Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one that can tell we're getting therapeutic sermons (ie, what we need to do for God, for Him to like us), and not the gospel and what Jesus did for us.

Margret, That's good advice. I started teaching some of my local friends long before I went to church. We do have a local core, but I don't know if they would commit to such an endeavor. But where the Lord leads, the Lord provides. This is an idea that I haven't thought of. There are alot of hungry people out there that want God's truths, and I promised God that I could teach better than any liberal, and would teach His word accurately if I was given the chance. And less than a year later, I was. My first church took the time to help translate the knowledge that God put in my brain (by reading and study, not some weirdo way) and apply it in a teaching environment. I will give it prayerfull consideration.

BJClark - unfortunately, most of my congregation is to the left of the pastor, who is to the left of me. (Who isn't to my left anyway, besides my wife?) I think that they don't care to much. Or worse, agree.

py3ak - your advice has really struck me. I've been contemplating what you said all day. What you said will make a big difference in what I do. Lightness and darkness don't mix. To compromise with evil is to invite it in. Thank you for your words.

Poimen - Not looking back will be the hardest part. Wondering if I made the right decision.

Casey Bessette - Thanks for the information you gave me. I will be contacting the OPC. One person can make a difference.

Bookslover - Thank you. That we may be we will be doing. Eventually I know that a good church will be found, but until then, I know that you are right.

To the rest of y'all - Sorry if I didn't mention you by name, but I really appreciate all that everybody said. I'm leaving for a 5 day, 4 night camping trip with my wife. So feel free to add your comments, and I will reply when I get back. This is a hard decision. God Bless y'all - Grymir


----------



## Galatians220 (Jul 3, 2008)

Well, Grymir! You're already a tested and true leader - and it sounds as though you *do* have _people_... It helps that you're a guy (I started out as just a lone woman, making phone calls - and then my husband jumped on board. And then some from his Friday morning men's Bible study, including its teacher... And then we were "off to the races!"  ).

You said something up there that really impressed me that maybe this is something you should consider: "where the Lord leads, the Lord provides." Yes, He absolutely and positively delights in this!

And where He breaks your heart for want of worship of Him, He will most definitely provide for you, and for the others you bring with you. He doesn't want us to "wander;" *He dearly loves to gather us.* I pray, Grymir, that He'll open door after door for you, that you'll either find or start a solid place in which Christ is exalted and the Gospel is faithfully proclaimed, week after week.

Again, may our Savior's grace in abundance, mercy overflowing and love everlasting be with you.

Margaret


----------



## Grace Alone (Jul 9, 2008)

Hi, Tim,

This is actually my first post here! I have been reading for a few weeks but saw your post and wanted to reply, so I joined!

We were members of the PCUSA for the first 15 years or so that we were married. I would say we were nominal Christians at best. Over time, the Lord opened my eyes to be alarmed with some things going on in the denomination, and to make a long, long story short, we left (with my husband's approval) and joined an ARP church in another town for 2 years while the plans were put into place to begin a PCA church in our town. The Lord specifically raised up people out of that PCUSA church to start the new PCA one. We joined that mission and stayed with it for 12 or so years until leadership issues caused us to have to leave (let me just say generally that it was more broadly evangelical than we would like, and there were some other leadership problems). We have now been attending another ARP mission with very godly leadership and a firm foundation, praise God, but we are having to travel about 25 minutes.

My husband's parents are very attached to their PCUSA building, memories, and friends in another state, and we are so grieved that they have not felt the need to leave even though there has been a PCA church in their town for a few years now. To be honest, I don't see how you or they have stayed this long. I believe you are on a sinking ship and they have passed the point of being a true church.

I hope you will contact the PCA or OPC and talk to them about your situation. Our currrent church planter/pastor was called to this location with NO core group! It was started by a faithful ARP mother church in a nearby town and the Lord has blessed!

I will pray that the Lord opens doors for you and your family to be in a Bible believing church.

Blessings,
Jan


----------



## Grace Alone (Jul 9, 2008)

One question. Does anyone have good links to this latest action that we could send my husband's parents? Thanks!


----------



## yeutter (Jul 9, 2008)

the Presbyterian Layman can be found at The Layman Online The Institute of Religion and democracy can be found at Institute on Religion & Democracy (IRD)


----------



## Grace Alone (Jul 9, 2008)

yeutter said:


> the Presbyterian Layman can be found at The Layman Online The Institute of Religion and democracy can be found at Institute on Religion & Democracy (IRD)



Thanks so much! We subscribed to the Layman for them years ago, but I didn't even know they had a website. We'll send them the links, thanks!


----------

