Given Dr. Chapell's sterling resume (but for his recent indiscretion), one of his supporters should step up and offer him a "Theologian in Residence' post at their church.
That actually is one of the best suggestions I've heard yet of what to do with Dr. Chapell.
I am not a fan of his for a long list of reasons, many of which are not really his fault but rather saying that he fits the PCA well. Many of my criticisms of and concerns with Dr. Chapell would be made about his denomination (or better put, what his denomination puts up with), not just about him. Furthermore, I place a strong emphasis on personal conversion and an emphasis on deep personal conviction of sin that would generally be considered to be "too Puritan" for Chapell. That means even on the area where Chapell is most appreciated, namely, his teaching on how to train young men to preach, I am in fundamental disagreement with him on both specific methodology and general goals and approaches to implementing those goals.
Beyond that, I've seen some of what he did at Covenant Seminary and it's hard for me think that he would not have had a huge fight with Abraham Kuyper if Kuyper had been the editor of a daily newspaper and a weekly church magazine reporting on church affairs, and founder of a university that included a seminary (i.e., what Kuyper actually was doing in the Netherlands) and Kuyper had turned his attention and his pen to Covenant Seminary and the Missouri Presbytery, if they had existed in the Netherlands in the late 1800s and early 1900s. There are a number of things Chapell has said, almost off the cuff as if he considered them to be not just normal but obvious common sense, that violate what in an earlier era would be considered basic principles of Reformed church government and how the three spheres of the family, the church, and the civil magistrate are to interact and are limited in what they can and should do.
HOWEVER -- Chapell is a well-known figure. He's going to keep writing, and if he doesn't, he should, because his legacy will be written about and commented on by others.
His actions have made it impossible for him to remain as a representative of the PCA, and it would not surprise me if part of why some in the PCA General Assembly voted to adopt the ARP statement on "kinism," rather than appointing a PCA study committee, was to express appreciation to the ARP and RPCNA, two of the denominations to which prominent ministers transferred who used to be in the PCA and were on Chapell's "hit list."
But Chapell can continue to be useful. Becoming a "theologian in residence," i.e., a retired pastor officially endorsed by a prominent church for a teaching and writing ministry, is a way for Chapell to continue his work (much of which I disagree with, frankly) and to do it, not as a "lone ranger," but under the formal endorsement and auspices of a major local PCA.
He can't do that officially for the PCA anymore, so he shouldn't be in that role at Covenant Seminary.
But he could perform that role, and quite possibly do it quite well, as a "theologian in residence" at a large and prominent PCA that shares his views and his approaches to how men should preach and how denominations and local churches should operate.
Again, I'm not endorsing Dr. Chapell or his views. I am in fundamental disagreement with him, far greater disagreement than the issue which ended his role as stated clerk. I've had this conversation repeatedly with a number of his former students, including men who agree with me on most conservative issues but like Chapell's approach to preaching.
But for better or for worse, Chapell represents a major stream in the PCA. That is, I think, why some of his supporters tried to keep him from being "cancelled."
Fine. Put him in an official role in a major PCA congregation, one large enough and important enough for its endorsement of him to carry weight, and have him continue that role under the auspices of a local church and its pastor and elders. That would be a better outcome than what may otherwise happen, namely, him writing books and articles and having his defenders say, "That's only one man's opinion," and his opponents say, "this is his presbytery's fault for tolerating him."
Personally I wish Dr. Chapell would just go into retirement, fish, plant flowers, or something else, so his books and his actions get forgotten. That's probably not going to happen.
Since that's probably not going to happen, let him keep writing but do it with some level of official status, not as an individual, and MOST EMPHATICALLY NOT as "the retired PCA stated clerk," which, while true, implies PCA denomination endorsement which would not be true.
