PCA vs. OPC

[Pilgrim]

Nice wrap up, Chris, particularly for one outside the PCA and Presbyterianism. I took the liberty of tweaking one of your dates.

Thanks. I was too lazy to look up the dates on the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (not today's EPC) and the RPCES. I learned that history when I was in Presbyterian circles a few years ago. It was mainly gleaned from a couple of longtime pastors (both of which have served in a relatively large number of Pres/Ref denoms,) John Muether and others. I've occasionally delved into the PCA Historical sites as well, which are very helpful.

I have a B.A. in history so I seem to continue to gravitate toward history. Maybe I have "missed my calling" and should have gone into church history? Well, I suppose it's never too late.

---------- Post added at 01:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:33 AM ----------

Both OPC and PCA are committed to God's Word and the blessed gospel of Grace. On the local level, go where you hear the gospel for your life the clearest. On the denom level, hard for a small church to be comfortable in a much bigger one. The RPCES gave its Covenant seminary to the PCA and its Francis Schaeffer outlook. For me the bigger story right now are the 140 congregations finally leaving the PCUSA and not feeling at home in either, but only in the EPC. How can we send a welcome to women without ordaining them? DCD

This is a bit of a bunny trail, but I know that a good many complementarians in the EPC feel some angst about this large influx of egalitarians and female officers into their denomination, although most of them are thankful for the number of churches that have left the PCUSA.

Of course the EPC has always allowed for latitude on the issue, but in many respects it's been on paper only. My understanding is that prior the establishment of the New Wineskins Presbytery for the former PCUSA churches, there have only ever been a small number of female TE's and a great many churches had a policy against female RE's as well. I believe at least two Presbyterys forbid women elders altogether, if not all women officers. If and when the transitional New Wineskins Presbytery is dissolved and the former PCUSA churches become normalized (for lack of a better word) and become members of the various regional presbyteries if that is what they want to do (assuming they are approved) if the envelope starts getting pushed with female elders, I think we'll likely see a number of more conservative EPC congregations looking to move elsewhere. Maybe to the PCA or ARP. Some of them are at least mildly charismatic so I don't know how that would play in those denominations.

 

[Notthemama1984]

I believe at least two Presbyterys forbid women elders altogether, if not all women officers.

I wish all female officers were forbidden, but I am not aware of any Presbytery that states as such. The Central South (who I am a part of) has stated that they will not allow for a female TE, but I think that is as far as they have gone.

 

[Scottish Lass]

Of course the EPC has always allowed for latitude on the issue, but in many respects it's been on paper only. My understanding is that prior the establishment of the New Wineskins Presbytery for the former PCUSA churches, there have only ever been a small number of female TE's and a great many churches had a policy against female RE's as well. I believe at least two Presbyterys forbid women elders altogether, if not all women officers. If and when the transitional New Wineskins Presbytery is dissolved and the former PCUSA churches become normalized (for lack of a better word) and become members of the various regional presbyteries if that is what they want to do (assuming they are approved) if the envelope starts getting pushed with female elders, I think we'll likely see a number of more conservative EPC congregations looking to move elsewhere. Maybe to the PCA or ARP. Some of them are at least mildly charismatic so I don't know how that would play in those denominations.

There's already been some tension between the EPC and ARP in our joint church-planting program. We used to be paired together for some of the assessments, but it was often difficult to get the groups to agree on worship, goals, etc. So now we meet together in general sessions but break out separately for some of the practical assessments.

 

[Scott1]

As the original post concerns two close biblical, reformed denominations, it might be helpful that the latter comparisons with the EPC might be a very different discussion.

Perhaps another thread for that.

(If previous threads are a guide, be sure to fasten your seat belts, first.)

 

[Pilgrim]

I believe at least two Presbyterys forbid women elders altogether, if not all women officers.

I wish all female officers were forbidden, but I am not aware of any Presbytery that states as such. The Central South (who I am a part of) has stated that they will not allow for a female TE, but I think that is as far as they have gone.

I thought it was RE's too, but apparently that's not the case. If you allow female RE's then the back door has been left open and there is no grounds whatsoever (other than tradition or prejudice, which usually doesn't last long) for forbidding female TE's (a distinction I am not convinced is biblical anyway, but I digress.) Even a large number of female RE's may be enough for some churches to leave since that has been somewhat rare in some Presbyteries in the past.


Other than concerns over losing church property, a commitment to egalitarianism may have been the single biggest issue keeping more conservative congregations in the PCUSA until the past few years.

Of course, there are tons of churches, Presbyterian, Baptist, nondenom, etc. who are officially comp. but who have women teaching coed adult Sunday School, who have women "sharing" from the pulpit (which sometimes includes reading and teaching from the Bible) but they either can't or won't see how this contradicts Paul's teaching. Anything goes with many of them so long as no woman has the official title of pastor.

Edit: Since I already posted this I'm not going to delete it (unless the mods choose otherwise,) but I won't comment anymore on the EPC since it's hijacking the thread. No doubt I'm one of the main offenders of all time on the PB in hijacking threads.

 

[SRoper]

I like to use a political analogy (please don't stone me!); OPC=constitution party, PCA=republican party. In my humble opinion.

That's a bit of a bad analogy since Constitution Party=irrelevant and OPC=relevant. The Paedocommunion/FV thing in the PCA will die down eventually given that the PCA's temperament is very much against that particular direction. It's one of the things that Rev Keister and Tim Keller would definitely agree on.

I'm not sure Keller would agree. From his writing he seems to see the FV as within the big tent of the PCA.

 

[Philip]

I'm not sure Keller would agree. From his writing he seems to see the FV as within the big tent of the PCA.

Where exactly does he do this? From my understanding, he's usually placed on the other side of the spectrum from Wilson et al.

 

[D Clair Davis]

I'm at Redeemer Seminary in Dallas, in NTP. Your welcoming women into lay leadership is a good resolution, and just right, I think. It's when there's room for women only in casserole duty that there's a problem. The EPC seems more welcoming, why? DCD

 

[Edward]

I looked at your picture on the school web site, and don't recall having met you. (My eyes aren't that good, but in that picture, you look a bit like Brad Bradley). I've probably just heard your name mentioned in connection with a casual discussion of the seminary. I'm sure that we'll run across each other sooner or later.

 

[Shawn Mathis]

"who have women teaching coed adult Sunday School"

Chris, thanks for bringing that up. One of the exams I witnessed in the PCA had a man who agreed with that position. He, of course, nuanced it but
that was the sum of it. He also passed.

 

[SRoper]

I'm not sure Keller would agree. From his writing he seems to see the FV as within the big tent of the PCA.

Where exactly does he do this? From my understanding, he's usually placed on the other side of the spectrum from Wilson et al.

Oh he's not FV by any stretch, but I understand him as allowing the FV within the diversity of the PCA. Take for example this passage from "What's so Great About the PCA" (2010):

So the PCA has fair representation of all the historic branches of Presbyteriansim. There are some Old Siders, a lot of classic 'Princeton' Old Schoolers, a lot of conservative New Schoolers, and some interesting combinations. Consider the Federal Vision, which is (to my mind) doctrinalist and (conservative) culturalist, combined with a strong anti-pietism. Most strongly opposed to them is the Old Side (doctrinalist, very anti-pietist, very anti-culturalist) approach of Westminster, California. Also, in the last two decades, a social reformist branch has grown up that combines the 'high church' emphases of Reformed thinkers of the Mercersburg School (essentially Old Side in its communal sensibilities) with the social justice impulses of the New England revivalists. Despite a similar commitment to church tradition and the sacraments, its members are more politically liberal than those sympathetic to the Federal Vision.

Or this quote from the same:

This idea of a ‘big tent’ Presbyterianism which is nonetheless conservative (unyielding on Biblical inerrancy and Reformed soteriology but open to both Old School and New School emphases) explains the PCA’s history well. When the PCA began, it put behind itself the controversies that had fractured smaller Reformed bodies in Scotland, the Netherlands, and the U.S.—it allowed confessional exceptions on the Sabbath, it did not press any one millennial view on anyone. As controversies came along—over Mission to the World’s cooperative agreements, Mission to North America’s church growth methods, confessional subscription, the days of creation, theonomy, the federal vision—in each case the PCA “reaffirmed her loyalty to the broad middle of the Reformed tradition.”

 

[Philip]

Oh he's not FV by any stretch, but I understand him as allowing the FV within the diversity of the PCA. Take for example this passage from "What's so Great About the PCA" (2010):

Not necessarily. I also recall him (in the same article) as describing Charles Finney as being within the pietist wing of the Reformed tradition, but that doesn't mean that he would consider Finney to be within the big tent. I think he's simply describing the elements of the PCA that gave rise to FV.

 

[LadyCalvinist]

I'd like to reply to this thread. I was a new member of a PCA church when the church went through a split. The associate pastor and two elders and a number of others would eventually leave the PCA for a nearby OPC church. I don't know what the dispute was about, but within a few years the PCA church included praise songs in the morning service and completely contemporary music in the evening service.

The OPC church started to use at least one selection from the Trinity Psalter each morning worship. Also, I found some people in the PCA church who were shocked that we were calvinistic in our doctrines, whereas the OPC church was more explicitly calvinistic and sabbatarian. I guess I would say of the OPC that I think it is more hard-core calvinist than PCA. HOwever, I must say that the PCA church was more involved in evangelizing than the OPC.

Also, just after I left the PCA church, they installed female deaconnesses.

None of these differences matter to me now as I am happily RPCNA.

 

[SRoper]

Oh he's not FV by any stretch, but I understand him as allowing the FV within the diversity of the PCA. Take for example this passage from "What's so Great About the PCA" (2010):

Not necessarily. I also recall him (in the same article) as describing Charles Finney as being within the pietist wing of the Reformed tradition, but that doesn't mean that he would consider Finney to be within the big tent. I think he's simply describing the elements of the PCA that gave rise to FV.

The only reference to Finney I could find was in a footnote:

Under the influence of Charles Finney, many New Schoolers earlier in the century had moved away from traditional Reformed views such as total depravity and the imputation of Adam's sin.

This doesn't seem at all parallel to the FV quotes. If Keller is not assuming that the FV is just another branch of the PCA, it is difficult to determine exactly what his point is.

 

[Philip]

This doesn't seem at all parallel to the FV quotes. If Keller is not assuming that the FV is just another branch of the PCA, it is difficult to determine exactly what his point is.

Maybe I'm just trying to be charitable to Keller, but it seems to me that he's simply suggesting that the verdict is still out on FV.