Why We Left the Episcopal Church
January 10, 2007
Within the Presbyterian franchise of the Christian church, we keep a weather eye on our Episcopalian friends. Their battles against a post-modern society today will likely be ours tomorrow. Read more
Spinning off the Presbyterian Publishing Corporation
September 23, 2006
Michael Kruse is a member of the General Assembly Council, and I was glad to hear him say that it is time to sever the relationship between the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the Presbyterian Publishing corporation.
Kruse Kronicle: Time to Drop “Presbyterian” from the Presbyterian Publishing Corporation
After two years on the General Assembly Council, I have come to a conclusion. It is time for the Presbyterian Church (USA) to sever its relationship with the Presbyterian Publishing Corporation (PPC) and take back the Presbyterian name. The PPC has effectively demonstrated that they are not capable of make sound decisions that honor the denomination. I will present two episodes to illustrate why I believe this to be the case.
With the mainline PC(USA) feebly entering its end game, the additional irritation of the PPC connection is not welcome and not needed. At First Presbyterian, Quincy, IL, we are struggling to decide whether the path of obedience to our Lord Jesus leads toward leaving the denomination or toward remaining as a faithful remnant. Spinning off the PPC can not begin before 2008, which mercifully takes it off our current list of concerns.
Thank you, Michael, for sharing your mind on the matter.
Dave, whose personal Presbyterian platter is full to overflowing.
Am I an evangelical?
September 7, 2006
I think I’m having an identity crisis. Within Christian ranks, where everybody seems to carry a label of some sort, am I an evangelical, a Calvinist, a progressive, a classical Christian, an orthodox Christian, a fundamentalist, a modernist, or “none of the above?” I suspect that the people I hang around with at church have formed their own ideas about which niche I belong in, and I’m also pretty sure that many of these perceptions would come as a shock to me.
Since “evangelical” seems to be the label du jour these days, I picked up a little book called Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism by George Marsden. He begins his book by saying, “A fundamentalist is an evangelical who is angry about something.” Hmmm. I don’t usually feel angry, but maybe if I read on I will learn something.
That seems simple and fairly accurate. Jerry Falwell has even adopted it as a quick definition of fundamentalism that reporters are likely to quote. A more precise statement of the same point is that an American fundamentalist is an evangelical who is militant in opposition to liberal theology in the churches or to changes in cultural values or mores, such as those associated with “secular humanism.” In either the long or the short definitions, fundamentalists are a subtype of evangelicals and militancy is crucial to their outlook. Fundamentalists are not just religious conservatives, the are conservatives who are willing to take a stand and to fight.
Well, that’s a starting point at least. It would be clearer if we knew exactly what an evangelical is.
To provide a little historical perspective, it turns out that American protestants of the Civil War and Reconstruction period believed that a Christian millenium was not far away. This was an age of revivals that seemed capable of bringing the majority of the citizenry to Christ. There were campaigns against drinking, sabbath-breaking, prostitution, and the Roman Catholic church. Only slavery seemed an obstacle to America’s becoming a righteous Christian nation.
What actually happened was the “Gilded Age” of evangelicalism.
The era marked by the assassination of two presidents and the impeachment of another, a stolen election, and a reign of rampant political and business corruption and greed, was well named by Mark Twain. A veneer of evangelical Sunday-school piety covered almost everything in the culture, but no longer did the rhetoric of idealism and virtue seem to touch the core of the materialism of the political and business interests. It was a dime store millenium.
Reaction set in and we entered the era of the crusades (1890-1917). Fundamentalism was the disappointed reaction of Bible-believers after World War I failed to usher in universal peace, and it came to be identified with literal Bible belief and a rejection of the modern culture. So we have a broad evangelical movement that includes angry fundamentalism at its conservative end and a Billy Graham style “peace with God” at the other. It’s interesting that denominations are not an important part of the mix.
Among evangelicals there is a general disregard for the institutional church. Marsden observes that, “Little seems to hold it together other than common traditions, a central one of which is the denial of the authority of traditions.”
I have come to the conclusion that I no longer strongly identify with the mainline (oldline) Presbyterian Church, it’s rich evangelical heritage in America notwithstanding. I am fairly comfortable with what I understand of the evangelical movement, more comfortable with the fundamentalist end of the evangelical continuum, which includes Reformed (Calvinist) theology.
Dave, who could have saved a lot of time by just saying “yes.”
Thinkers Anonymous
July 14, 2006
Here is a cautionary tale, courtesy of friend James Tuckett, “The Old Gray Dog.”
It started out innocently enough. I began to think at church meetings now and then — just to loosen up. Inevitably, though, one thought led to another, and soon I was more than just a social thinker.
I began to think alone — “to relax,” I told myself — but I knew it wasn’t true. Thinking became more and more important to me, and finally I was thinking all the time.
That was when things began to sour at home. One evening I turned off the TV and asked my wife about the meaning of life. She spent that night at her mother’s. I began to think on the job. I knew that thinking and employment don’t mix, but I couldn’t help myself.
I began to avoid friends at lunchtime so I could read Augustine, Calvin, Machen and Sproul. I would return to the office dizzied and confused, asking, “What is it exactly we are doing here?”
One day the boss called me in. He said, “Listen, I like you, and it hurts me to say this, but your thinking has become a real problem. If you don’t stop thinking on the job, you’ll have to find another job.”
This gave me a lot to think about. I came home early after my conversation with the boss. “Honey,” I confess, “I’ve been thinking..”
“I know you’ve been thinking,” she said, “and I want a divorce!”
“But Honey, surely it’s not that serious.”
“It is serious,” she said, lower lip aquiver. “You think as much as those TULIP-lovers, and TULIP-lovers don’t make any money, so if you keep on thinking, we won’t have any money!”
“That’s a faulty syllogism,” I said impatiently.
She exploded in tears of rage and frustration, but I was in no mood to deal with the emotional drama.
“I’m going to the library,” I snarled as I stomped out the door.
I headed for the library, in the mood for some Tozer. I roared into the parking lot with a Barnhouse tape playing and ran up to the big glass doors. They didn’t open. The library was closed.
To this day, I believe that a Higher Power was looking out for me that night. Leaning on the unfeeling glass, whimpering for Spurgeon, a poster caught my eye, “Friend, is heavy thinking ruining your life?” it asked.
You probably recognize that line. It comes from the standard Thinkers Anonymous poster.
This is why I am what I am today: a recovering thinker. I never miss a TA meeting. At each meeting we watch a non-educational video; last week it was “Porky’s.” Then we share experiences about how we avoided thinking since the last meeting.
I still have my job, and things are a lot better at home. Life just seemed…easier, somehow, as soon as I stopped thinking. I think the road to recovery is nearly complete for me.
Today I took the final step………… I joined a mainline denomination!
Presbyterian pile-up
June 20, 2006
Events have conspired to keep me topside and out of the orlop for a few days. I am serving on a jury in a circuit court criminal case through tomorrow, and what time is left goes to reporting on the Presbyterian General Assembly for my church website. If you are morbidly curious, hop over to here.
Dave, doing a bit of hopping himself.
If you admit to being Presbyterian…
June 14, 2006
you might want to take an occasional peek at this site, otherwise take a break. Most of my time for the next 10 days will be spent trying to make sense of the 217th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) for the members of First Presbyterian Church, Quincy, IL, mostly, but you are welcome to peek.
The purpose of this post is to let you know why my usual sense and nonsense may not be making its (almost) daily appearance from down here on the Orlop. It’s summertime, after all, so the respite should be welcome to most.
If there is anything left of my mind after wrestling with a contentious church conference for ten days, I’ll be back to my more or less regular postings on or around June 22.
Dave, still believing that being Christian and being Presbyterian often overlaps.
The “Presbyterians” Code
May 22, 2006
Kruse Kronicle: The “Presbyterians” Code
More disconcerting for me today was to learn that “Presbyterians” is really code in the form of an anagram. Rearranged it spells “Britney Spears!” Hmmmm… What are we to make of this???
Sorry.
Dave, hanging his head.
What’s up at GAC?
May 2, 2006
For those interested in what is going on within the Presbyterian Church (USA), this link will help a lot.
Kruse Kronicle: General Assembly Council: The Big Picture
Thank you, Michael Kruse, for your labors in the GAC on our behalf.
Dave
Meet the Press excludes mainline church voices
April 21, 2006
Kruse Kronicle: Meet the Press excludes mainline church voices
Of course, the interesting question that so many of us mainline types refuse to ask is, “If we are so ‘mainline’ how is it that the media can be so dismissive without impunity?” Maybe it is because we have become the sideline instead.
Yep! When are we going to wake up?
Dave, not holding his breath.
Teach for understanding’s sake
April 4, 2006
As a sometimes struggling adult Bible study leader, I generally agree with what Bill Tammeus writes from Kansas City.
Kansas City Star | 04/01/2006 | Teach for understanding’s sake
Authority in our culture has lost much of its appeal and credibility. If either of these teachers had presumed simply to announce what we, as Presbyterians, are obliged to believe about these subjects, the reception would have been — how to say this? — chilly.
We Presbyterians don’t do anger too well, but we can be top cabin at chilly. We’re not called the “Frozen Chosen” for nothing.
It is certainly not wise for a teacher in church to push what “we Presbyterians are obliged to believe,” but doctrine is important. The martyrs thought it more important than their lives, and they were no dummies.
The search for truth always involves hard questions, but at the end of the day the discussion leader has the obligation to stand forthrightly for truth as it is revealed in the Bible and to say why he or she so believes. Ultimately, the Holy Spirit is the Convincer, but the leader should beware of grieving the Spirit by shoddy preparation and fuzzy thinking.
Dave, getting a little nervous about teaching from the Bible.
