One person described the New Reformed Body (NRB) to me as a refugee camp just over the border. It is not where they plan to relocate long-term, but it is seen as a refuge on the way to a missional and evangelical connectional future they cannot yet describe, let alone see. They are simply fleeing toward the NRB with hope that it is not a mirage.

The Fellowship of Presbyterians (FOP) gathering of nearly 2,000 Presbyterians who share a disaffection for the theological and political trends which resulted in the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s elimination of “fidelity and chastity” from its ordination standards, was marked by great worship and a logistically impressive 48 hours of presentations and small group discussions. Although people did not leave with the clarity they had hoped for, three of the take-away words were context, tier and tone.

Context
It was openly acknowledged that each person present comes to the issues and challenges of the current denominational crisis in the PCUSA from an intensely individualized set of contextual realities. We share a global, national and even denominational context; our perspective on each is colored by our denomination of origin before Reunion, our regional context, our particular presbytery, our specific congregational constituency and very personal issues like relationships and feelings.

Members, elders and pastors see the landscape differently. Clergy ask questions about transferability, the maintenance of national peer relationships and pastoral concerns related to divided congregations. Members ask questions about the long-term witness of the church in their community, the property where their kin are buried and the fastest route “out” of an apostate denomination. Everyone wants to be a different kind of church, but not everyone means the same thing by different.

Beyond the personal and congregational context, every church exists within the context of a particular presbytery. People consistently observed during the gathering that their presbytery contexts ranged from friendly to openly hostile in terms of the treatment of evangelicals, particularly when it comes to any discussion of realigning their denominational affiliation.

It was a surprise to some that others were being treated poorly by Committees on Ministry (COM), Presbytery Councils or the presbytery executives. When you’re in a context where the majority of presbyters agree on the essentials of the faith and the ethical imperatives that grow from them (there are seven presbyteries where the vote on 10A was 70 percent or greater), you can do church largely unaware of the plight of those contending for the faith in the presbyteries that are hostile to evangelicals.

If your congregation is one that “birthed” a congregation to the Presbyterian Church in America at its formation and another congregation to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church in the 1980’s, your people are the ones who have always “remained” and the ones for whom women in leadership is a high value. Context matters.

Context also has bearing on the debate over property. If your church is in a state where neutral principles of law are applied to church property, you can enter into conversations with your presbytery about dismissal on equal footing. If, on the other hand, your church is in a state where the hierarchical deference method is used in deciding questions of ownership in church property disputes, the presbytery is operating from a clear position of strength.

Context, on all these levels, dictates how each individual present at the Fellowship gathering both heard and processed the presentation of the four (or five) tiers.

The umbrella and the four (or five) tiers
The FOP sees itself as an umbrella encompassing many different paths forward that they call tiers. This is diversity amidst unity. The tiers run along a spectrum of differentiation from the PCUSA to full separation from it. At this point, all tiers are more creative, entrepreneurial experiments than concretized realities.

Tier 1: Remain in the PCUSA but become a missional church connected nationally with the FOP.

Tier 2: Remain in the PCUSA but differentiate within the presbytery by overlaying the existing presbytery with another one, distinguishing the two theologically. Changes to the constitution via overtures from presbyteries to the 2012 GA, approval of and forwarding to presbyteries for ratification would be required to achieve this.

Tier 3: Remain in the PCUSA but differentiate within the presbytery by electing two COMs and two committees on preparation for ministry (CPMs) in each PCUSA presbytery and giving them the powers of a commission to allow for freedom of conscience on all sides on the issue of ordination. Again, amendments to the constitution via the overture process would be required to achieve this.

Tier 4: Differentiate or separate from the PCUSA through affiliation or membership in a proposed new Reformed body (NRB). The FOP will constitute the NRB at a “constitutional congress” January 12-14, 2012 in Orlando. Upon formation, it will be open to receiving minister members and congregations.
This tier has three sub-tiers:

• Affiliate membership – much like individuals can be members of one local church and an affiliate member of another (without voice or vote), the FOP proposes that congregations and ministers could be affiliate members of the NRB while maintaining their membership in the PCUSA or vice-versa.
• Union churches – this was likened to the union churches that are currently allowed with other denominations like the Cumberland Presbyterian Church.
• Full membership – this is the only option presented that achieves full separation from the PCUSA. It would be achieved by utilizing the dismissal process in a particular presbytery. The FOP also envisions an overture to the 2012 GA for a national gracious dismissal policy. That may or may not include a recommendation for removal of the property trust clause.

The FOP also anticipates that the PCUSA will establish the kind of relationship with the NRB that will allow for presbyteries to dismiss congregations to the NRB. This would be achieved either by the NRB joining an ecumenical body to which the PCUSA also belongs (like the World Communion of Reformed Churches or the National Council of Churches) and/or the PCUSA’s Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Relations establishing fraternal relations with the NRB.

The FOP acknowledges that there is a fifth tier: dismissal to another existing Reformed body, namely, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC). One of the original seven members of the Fellowship, Mark Toone, serves the Chapel Hill congregation that is exercising the EPC option along with a group of churches in Olympia Presbytery. He was not present at the FOP event and has been replaced on the Steering Committee by Tae-Hyung Ko. When asked if a church or pastor could go to tier 5 and still be in the Fellowship, FOP Steering Committee member, Jim Singleton responded that, “It is possible. We had not initially considered that. But it may be possible.”

Unity?
What unifies this group seems to be an unspoken but wholesale disaffection for the status of the PCUSA and an equally unspoken list of essential tenets and ethical imperatives by which all Fellowshipers are anxious to live. This “credo” certainly centers around Biblical orthodoxy as seen through the lens of Reformed and evangelical theology but that’s where the diversity begins. Even among this group, the essentials are undefined. Cutting directly to the proverbial chase: some here are five point Calvinists, many are not; for some here, ordination itself is not an essential, for others, women’s ordination is an essential.

Taking at look at the fourth tier option of a New Reformed Body will flesh this out.

New
New certainly means “not the way we’ve been doing church for a generation.” So, new means not old, but just how new do you mean? Would renewed do? Is your preferred new necessarily newer than New Wineskins or is that still too new? Is this new really just newest?

There is a genuine desire to stop doing it the way it has always been done, but exactly how it might be done is wide open. The words creative, entrepreneurial and missional are frequently heard. This is where the FOP finds intersection with Presbyterian movements like the theologically “near left’s” NEXT and where they depart from historic “renewal” efforts.

Reformed
Some in the FOP admit that Reformed is included in the description of the NRB in order that the new body qualifies to receive congregations dismissed from the PCUSA. For them, the word, like the word Presbyterian, has lost its meaning in a post-denominational, post-Christian culture. For others, Reformed means a return to the classical theology of the Reformers which is precisely what they want from a new body. How you understand the word Reformed and its relative importance to you seems to be influenced by the region of the country where your theology was cultivated and your personal experience of coming to faith. For those raised in the Presbyterian church and nurtured into the faith, the word Reformed tends to mean the five petals of T.U.L.I.P. and subscription to the Westminster standards. For those who came to Christ through para-church ministries like Young Life or through evangelistic crusades, the word Reformed tends to have a much broader definition.

There are groups and bodies that have already agreed upon essentials: San Diego and Santa Barbara presbyteries and the New Wineskins Association of Churches. There are ad hoc communities like Facebook’s Almond Branch and www.nationalcovenantpresbyterian.org where lists are already proposed. Whose list makes it to the Fellowship’s January 2012 meeting in Orlando and what essentials will emerge from that meeting as the “creed” of the FOP and/or the NRB is unpredictable.

Body
For the FOP, the new Reformed body is admittedly not equivalent to the Body of Christ, but desiring to be a connected and authentic part of it. Central are concerns about an intimate connection to Jesus and the global Church. The FOP is equally insistent that the NRB will not be equivalent to a denomination, as it has been understood and experienced in the PCUSA. But if it’s not a denomination, what is it and how do you describe it sufficiently to a congregation so that they will have the information they need to rightly discern God’s will for their particular future?

One person described the NRB to me as a refugee camp just over the border. It is not where they plan to relocate long-term, but it is seen as a refuge on the way to a missional and evangelical connectional future they cannot yet describe, let alone see. They are simply fleeing toward the NRB with hope that it is not a mirage.

Beyond tiers
Amidst great uncertainty, one thing is certain: there will be more meetings.

• Presbyterian Global Fellowship is planning regional meetings to facilitate transformation toward missional effectiveness for churches looking at all tiers.
• Committees of Correspondence are working through small groups formed at a meeting in Minneapolis following the FOP event to provide an infrastructure through which overtures can be pipelined to the 2012 GA and a national prayer effort facilitated.
• The New Wineskins Association of Churches is hosting a one day meeting, October 24 (both face-to-face in Pittsburgh and via interactive Webinar) to facilitate conversations with those churches interested in dismissal either to tiers four or five.
• Other creative entrepreneurial experiments are being tried in Greater Atlanta, Boston and elsewhere. With 173 separate presbyteries, the routes toward a new reality within or without the PCUSA will be diverse and context dependent.

Tone
The Fellowship places a heavy emphasis on tone. Admittedly, it is difficult to critique ideas without being accused of criticizing the people behind the ideas. However, an evaluation of the probability of the various options is necessary. All things are possible, but not all things are equally probable.

Past human behavior remains the best predictor of future human behavior for both individuals and in groups. So, even in a time when everyone wants to move beyond internecine squabbles and be church in new ways, we exist within a denominational reality that resists entrepreneurial change.

The “combined” track record of peeling off by layers bears its own witness. According to the Presbyterian Historical Society, since the formation of the first presbytery in 1706, there have been 18 “separations” and 13 “reunions.”

Separations among Presbyterians in the United States
1741 Old Side/New Side
1782 Associate Synod of North America
1793 Reformed PC
1810 Cumberland PC
1822 Assoc. Reformed Pres of the South
1833 Old Light/New Light
1837 Old School/New School
1847 Free PC
1858 New School/United Synod
1858 Assoc. Synod of NA/UPNA
1861 PCUS
1869 Cumberland/Second Cumberland
1906 some Cumberlands reunite with PCUSA and other split off
1936 Orthodox PC
1938 Bible PC
1956 EPC (as branch off from PCUSA)
1973 PCA
1981 EPC

Since Reunion in 1983, the track record among evangelicals in the PCUSA has included efforts for a Witness for Biblical Morality, an explicit “fidelity and chastity” ordination standard, the Coalition’s Union in Christ initiative, the Confessing Church Movement, Constitutional Presbyterians, the New Wineskins Association of Churches and Presbyterian Global Fellowship.

The self-perception of the FOP may be that they are the early adopters. But the perception from others is that they are at best a second wave. And from the perspective of renewalists, the FOP is simply abandoning the cause.

Which leads us into a conversation about conscience and yes, some stinky talk.

Admittedly stinky talk and necessary dirty work
No one wants to speak ill of the dead, but there’s no question that death stinks. The response of the people to Jesus’ command to remove the stone from the tomb of Lazarus may be labeled “stinky talk,” but that doesn’t make their declaration any less true. And yes, Jesus sees beyond to glory, He’s even been to hell and back, but that only amplifies a believer’s indignation when His sacrifice is dismissed and His Word intentionally suppressed.

Just because there is no “line in the sand” for some, does not in fact obfuscate the distinct lines drawn by God between what pleases Him and what brings Him shame. And although being a demonstration of the Kingdom of Heaven to the world in our emulating the example of the prodigals’ Father and transforming our grief into grace, we are no less constrained by the other great ends of the Church.

We are compelled to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ for the salvation of humankind. We are compelled to shelter, nurture and foster spiritual fellowship with the children of God – born not of natural descent, but born of God. We are compelled to maintain worship directed toward the Divine and not toward creaturely idols, even ourselves. We are compelled to preserve the truth of who God is as revealed in the Scriptures and to follow the truth, who is Jesus Christ. We are compelled to promote a social righteousness that is not divorced from the Gospel, but grows out of a Biblical understanding of who God is and who we are as sinful creatures in need of a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. He changes everything. He has the power to transform and redeem and renew and resurrect. As we resist speaking ill of the dead, let us not fail to exalt the Living One who alone is Lord.

Jesus wasn’t afraid to call a spade a spade and He did not shrink from controversy when the reputation of the Father was at stake. The time has come to speak truth and walk in the truth, wherever He leads. Let us all find the courage of our convictions. In the words of John Crosby, member of the Fellowship Steering Committee, “don’t duck.”

Carmen Fowler LaBerge is President of the Presbyterian Lay Committee and Editor of their magazine, The Layman. This article first appeared on The Layman website and is used with permission.

[Editor’s note: One or more original URLs (links) referenced in this article are no longer valid; those links have been removed.]