In fact, with prayerful, decisive action now to correct some things, the future is still both exciting and promising. But there is substantial reason to suggest it is in the initial stages of apostatizing. The patterns are disturbingly familiar vis-à-vis the former PCUS from which the PCA separated as a continuing church in 1973. Doctrinal authority goes first. Then church discipline. Ecclesiastical abuse follows.

Probably, like many in our denomination, I found the Resolution passed by the Session of Providence PCA in Fayetteville, N.C., and posted by their Pastor, Andrew Webb, in the article, 5 Reasons It Might Be Time To Leave The PCA, both startling and thought provoking.

Although there have been challenges before in the PCA, I generally have had an optimistic view about what God is doing in the denomination and about its future. Until recently, I instinctively would have responded in similar manner as Pastor Jared Nelson in his article, Staying PCA: A Confessional’s Counterpoint to Webb’s 5 Reasons.

Upon reflection, however, Pastor Nelson’s counterpoint reasoning needs more context and more analysis to help us all think in a more biblically incisive way about what confronts us in the PCA.

I will look at the counterpoint arguments made by Pastor Nelson in the order he presented them as he referred to the Resolution from Pastor Webb:

5. A Failure to Stand against Moral Compromise

Pastor Webb cites as an example the PCA’s Reformed University Fellowship (RUF) acquiescing to Vanderbilt University’s new Non-Discrimination Policy. Pastor Nelson responds that he is comfortable with the RUF decision because RUF’s reasoning that its leaders are not students, but are outside ordained PCA teaching elders who would not be limited by the policy. He reasons that having a presence on campus as a chartered student organization is preferred to not having one.

The policy essentially would pretend that no student is excluded from leadership of any student organization based on their beliefs. Presumably that would mean, amongst other non-sequiturs, a Buddhist could be student leader of a Christian organization, a pro-abortion activist could head the student Right to Life Chapter, a student advocating judicial activism could head the Federalist Society, and so on in the imaginary world of this policy.

In addition to the unworkable nature of the policy RUF agreed to, there are several other problems with what happened at Vanderbilt. In the words of Carol Swain, a Vanderbilt law professor and faculty adviser to the Christian Legal Society, “If we had all stood together, it would have been less likely that anyone would have had to leave campus.” (see “Campus Divide”).  Eleven of thirteen Protestant student organizations and the Roman Catholic student one united to oppose this restriction. Not only was an opportunity at Christian unity lost, but probably the chance to change the policy, and to make a bold witness for the Faith.

It’s hard to know how a policy like this might be enforced, but one wonders how a Reformed student para-church organization could minister biblical morals, Creation, God’s hatred of false religion, etc., under such restriction. How is RUF doing that now?

4. Failure to Maintain the Teaching of Scripture Regarding Six-Day Creation

Pastor Nelson explains this issue in terms of the 28th PCA General Assembly (GA) in 2000 adopting a Study Report that unanimously rejected evolution, but could not agree on a single age-of earth view as a matter of biblical theology.

The difficulty is evolution is now the issue, not age-of-earth views.

BioLogos, an organization which promotes evolution and undermines the inerrancy of Scripture, has been hosted and promoted by prominent PCA Pastors like Tim Keller. Ronnie Choong of Metro New York Presbytery has been freely publishing his works and teaching his odd notions of evolutionary theory in PCA circles for years. BioLogos was allowed to present, without contest, its teachings in a main seminar at the 39th GA.

3. Failure to Safeguard the Sacraments

As Pastor Nelson points out, the practice of the use of “intinction” in the Lord’s Supper is prohibited by the PCA Constitution. He quite reasonably suggests the remedy when the constitution of a confessional denomination is violated: education and church discipline.

The problem is the practice has spread to the point that intinction was practiced when the Lord’s Supper was administered at the 39th GA (2011). Overtures expressly prohibiting the practice ultimately were not adopted. In the meantime, Presbytery commissions and the 40th GA (2012) Overtures Committee produced dissenting and minority reports that in some ways supported this invention. These have effectively confused and neutralized enforcement of the constitution on this point. It does not appear that disciplinary action was taken against those who administered it at the 40th GA.

While the Book of Church Order and Westminster Standards already proscribe “intinction,” the reality is the lack of enforcement is emboldening others to engage in this invention. The practice is spreading.

2. Anarchy in Worship

Pastor Nelson focuses his counterpoint on the premise that since the PCA has not adopted as constitutional authority the Directory of Public Worship (except for its Chapters on Baptism, Sealing Ordinances and the Lord’s Supper); worship is therefore, not regulated in the PCA.

But the fact that the denomination has intentionally chosen not to bind itself to the rout liturgy of the Directory does not mean the Regulative Principle of Worship (worship is only what is specifically prescribed in Scripture) does not apply.

The Westminster Standards define that doctrine and the elements of worship; e.g., in the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter XXI, “Of Worship, and the Sabbath Day.”  There are seven of them. They do not include entertainment, interpretive dance, drama skits, etc. While these may be appropriate in other contexts, they are not to be a part of public or private worship as defined by the doctrine as summarized in the Westminster Standards.

The problem is the Normative Principle (anything can be done for worship as long as it is not specifically prohibited by Scripture) is being de facto adopted in place of the Regulative Principle. Not only is the biblical Regulative Principle not being taught, it has gotten to the point that the variation within PCA churches in worship styles has become extreme, uncomfortable and unpredictable.

This is problematic in a Reformed Church because it is Confessional. Its unity must be based on doctrinal agreement. Orthodoxy leads to orthopraxy in worship.

1. A Failure to Exercise Discipline.

Pastor Nelson shares Pastor Webb’s concern on this point, particularly in light of the recent “Federal Vision” case in which, after years of process, the Standing Judicial Commission (SJC) of General Assembly let stand the Pacific Northwest Presbytery’s acquittal of the “Federal Vision” proponent, Dr. Peter Leithart.

He concludes that it is not weighty enough to represent a breakdown of discipline in the church, the “third mark” of a true church, and cites the example of one Presbytery that was able to discipline a teaching elder for spreading federal vision theology.

But Pastor Webb points out the underlying problem – there is now an accepted systematic method whereby Presbyteries, in effect, determine their own doctrine with no effective accountability for it. The harm of false doctrine and heresy spreads and disunity flows when that happens.

The Session of Providence PCA is to be commended at least for the reasoned and biblically contemplative process of discernment they have advocated. While I would not reach the same conclusion, this is the job of a spiritual court. Pastor Nelson is to be commended for seeing a context of many positive things also happening in the denomination, and the potential for reformation within. With God, all things are possible.

I do not believe the PCA has lost the marks of a true church, Nor that it is apostate. Nor that it is on an irremediable trajectory of declension.

In fact, with prayerful, decisive action now to correct some things, the future is still both exciting and promising.

But there is substantial reason to suggest it is in the initial stages of apostatizing. The patterns are disturbingly familiar vis-à-vis the former PCUS from which the PCA separated as a continuing church in 1973. Doctrinal authority goes first. Then church discipline. Ecclesiastical abuse follows.

Scott Truax is a free-lance writer living in Cary, N.C. He is a member of Peace Presbyterian Church in America where he has served as a Deacon.