PCA politics

[rmwilliamsjr]

I read "By Faith", but i'm really ignorant of the politics inside the PCA.
I read the earlier thread on the big tent, i have an idea of the personalities involved in some of the issues as the same names keep coming up, but i'm bothered about this article.

The PCA's Apostasy: No More Lines in the Sand - TeachingTheWord Ministries - Equipping the Scripture-Driven Church

i've looked for more info on Paul M. Elliott, without much success.
Could someone help me out here?

first, what is TeachingtheWord ministries and who is P.Elliott?
second, how can i get a quick handle on what is going on in my denomination in these issues?

i see ordination of women as deacons and the creation reports(the OPC has one as well)
i've heard of federal vision.

i'm not interested in the issues as much as an outline of the people, places like seminaries involved.
maybe someone could sketch things out for me so that my reading would be a bit easier as i would know how some of the pieces fit.

idea:
i think greenville seminary is to the right of the other seminaries which feed TE's into the church.
Westminsters>RTS>Covenant>Greenville


thanks

 

[Edward]

I'd recommend reading the Aquila Report rather than (or at least in addition to) ByFaith. Aquila presents a more balanced range, ByFaith pretty much sticks to the 'party line'.

 

[rmwilliamsjr]

thanks for the recommendation, i subscribed to their rss feed.

 

[Romans922]

Is your

Westminsters>RTS>Covenant>Greenville

your representation of left to right seminaries that feed the PCA?

It would probably be more like <Covenant-RTS (since they are all lumped together)-Westminster-GPTS>. This is based on historic presbyterian seminaries. Westminster would probably have more northern influence, whereas GPTS is going to have more southern influences.

Wayne Sparkman, our local PCA historian, may know who P. Elliott is...

What issues specifically are you referring to? I only see the ones after that question so I'll address those.

Ordination of women as deacons: There have been many attempts over the last 5 or so years to get a study committee formed to look into this issue, that was defeated. Last year the BCO was amended, that actually strengthened the non-ordination of women as deacons view. The BCO is very clear that ordination is for males only, including the office of deacon. However, there are some churches (not anywhere close to a majority) who either, a) ordain women as deacons wrongly, b) don't ordain women as deacons but 'commission' them to the office and they serve as equals on the board of deacons; but the men are ordained, c) men/women are not ordained at all to the office, but both are commissioned so as not to show favoritism to males over females by ordaining the males. I think those are the basic ways some of those churches have chosen to go about it. The rest of the churches in the PCA only ordain men as elders/deacons.

Creation: Since the creation report over 10 years ago that allowed for various views, literal, framework, analogous, day-age) the creation days part of the Westminster Confession is taken as an exception to our Standards since the PCA also has what many call a 'good faith' subscription (They don't wholeheartedly subscribe to everything just the main essentials). But over the past couple years it has been apparent that there are few who hold to theistic evolution. Most notable in the PCA who you'll hear about are primarily Tim Keller - PCA Pastor in NYC and Jack Collins - professor at Covenant.

Federal Vision: It seems that a few presbyteries have put up with FV in their regions. And some of the time this has been challenged by a small minority in those presbyteries (namely, Pacific Northwest Presbytery (Peter Leithart); Missouri Presbytery (Jeff Meyers); Souixlands Presbytery (Greg Lawrence and Josh Moon) and Louisiana Presbytery (Steve Wilkins)). There are other presbyteries that harbor FVists (Metro New York Presbytery, Ohio Valley, Iowa, and SE Louisiana). Either they have flown under the radar or they are keeping their heads pretty low that presbyters don't know they are there or don't care. But rest assured these are just a few men who seem to talk really loud and you hear them.

So I think those are the main issues, I'd recommend reading Wes White's blog. While he has a particular (more conservative view), he does get most of the issues fair play (and most of the issues he posts on have to do with creation and FV (and less lately on women deacons). Also The Aquila Report is a news source. They are not really bias at all. They seem to just report the stories, and a lot of them are PCA related.

Look at the posts that posted before me, I agree with Edward.

 

[Jack K]

Richard, you shouldn't get too alarmed based merely on that article. If the issue with a handful of Federal Vision pastors were really as simple as "they teach baptismal regeneration and deny justification by faith" well, then they would have been removed long ago. But the article conveniently failed to mention that these pastors deny that they teach such things, and that this has made these cases more complicated than the article suggests.

The PCA still takes doctrinal subscription seriously. Not as seriously as some would like—but I contend the denomination is not as easily accomodating as that article makes it look. There is conflict within the PCA between more traditional churches/pastors and more accomodating ones, and this sometimes results in folks on one side or the other trying to make the opposing side look far more dangerous and devilish than they actually are. You should chat about it with your pastor if you have further concerns, and beware of articles that take an alarmist tone. Alarmists are usually exaggerating to score points.

 

[Wayne]

I assume that Paul Elliott is the son of Edwin Elliott, late owner of The Christian Observer.

One of my concerns in such discussions is the tendency of some to look at the transgressions of one or a handful of churches (or even a double-handful)
and from that, assume that the entire denomination is that way, or that it has officially bought off on whatever issue is under examination.

For balance, I would recommend reading The Arraignment of Error, by Samuel Bolton [SDG, 1999] - (this really needs to be reprinted again).
A 460 page exploration (in good Puritan fashion) of why God allows error in the Church, and what to do about it.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

No relation. The Elliot in question was one of those that left the OPC over the Kinnard case was he not? Originally in the micro Presbyterian WPC?

 

[PointyHaired Calvinist]

Paul Elliott started the ERPC, thinking it would begin massive migration out of the PCA/OPC (but never got over 6 congregations), then left when he rejected Presbyterianism and became a Baptist. He is a John Robbins / Trinity Foundation supporter who sees a Federal Visionist under every rock. (Not that I agree w/ FV at all.)

The late Edwin Elliott was a pastor in the RPC (Hanover Presbytery), and publisher of the Christian Observer. So far as I know he is unrelated, and their methodologies differ by many degrees.

 

[Scott1]

While it's easy to look for "issues" among God's people and in a denomination, it really is easier to see the PCA in a good light. It is bucking the trend of mainline denominations and is growing slow but steady, and now in every state in the United States.

Lots of good things going on everyday- and the few "issues" identified are off the radar screen for the average congregation, because they are, by God's grace living out covenant community in a biblical, reformed and Presbyterian way. Not perfect mind you, but about the business of living the Christian life.