A Snapshot of the PCA General Assembly
A couple of weeks ago, the PCA
held its annual meeting in Greensboro, NC.
I wanted to share a single instant from the Assembly that, I believe,
reflect an all too pervasive reality in our denomination. In 2016, one of the Presbyteries (regional
court) made a worship bulletin with an image of Jesus on the cover. A minority report sought to cite this as
being out of accord with our doctrinal standards which say that the second
commandment forbids, “ the making any
representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly
in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature
whatsoever…” Although some people
do not hold to this position, it is unequivocally the position of our
church. Those who do not agree are the
exception. During debate, which
eventually upheld the minority report, it was clear that this issue was an
issue of conscience for some of the men.
In order to demonstrate the inappropriateness of the image, the minority
report unwisely reproduced the image.
When the exception was upheld, a motion was made to remove the image
from the official records of our court as it is as much a violation for the GA
to publish an image of Jesus as it is for a Presbytery. This seemingly innocuous request, despite its
obvious consistency, was met with vigorous opposition from the members of the
National Partnership (a secretive society in the PCA who are committed “to
fight and vote until the fabric of the PCA better reflects what we hope.”)
The National
partnership says that its third purpose is “Greater love
for the Brethren through resourcing and communication. We share ideas and
uphold our good faith subscription to the standards, preferring charitable and
respectful dialogue over the action of courts in settling theological
differences.” In a later email, one of
the leaders describes the National Partnership as being “a
movement toward less stridency and a more diverse and outwardly focussed (sp)and
gracious denomination.” What
troubles me is the total inconsistency of such a statement with the unloving
choice to fight to keep an image of Christ in the minutes. The image is clearly out of accord with our
standards. The removal of the image does
no harm to anyone. The image causes some
men to struggle with their conscience.
Why fight. It came across as
mean-spirited, contentious, and obstructionistic.
This fight revealed two things to me. First it appears that to too many men,
claiming to adhere to a standard means nothing.
It is harder to allow an external standard to guide our actions than to
do what I want to do. I am sad that so
many elders in the PCA do not submit themselves to the confession they profess
to uphold. Secondly, the National
partnership seems to operate with a hermeneutic that allows them to interpret
the confession or the Bible in any way they wish. They consistently ignored the clear meaning
of a passage in favor of a “faux-sophisticated” interpretation that denies the
clear meaning of the text. This reminded
me that I want to be honest with my heart and the text. When I find a passage of Scripture difficult,
may I have the courage to change my heart before I seek to interpret away the
meaning of the text.
