GA 2011 Virginia Beach

Well, next week is the PCA General Assembly. I'll be blogging during the Assembly (GA) again; I hope more than last year - it'll keep me from speaking as much. This year's GA is in Virginia Beach - nice. The best deal my assistant could find was a beachfront cabin near the Assembly. [[Turns out, beachfront is not so beachfront. 10 minutes from the beach.] Life is hard.

Here are some initial impressions on the issues for this year:

1) Funding of the Administrative Committee - Last year's debate centered on AC funding and the vision for our denomination. The supporters of the AC were able to push the plan through, very painfully. The rancor left a bad taste in everyone's mouths and it got voted down resoundingly in the Presbyteries. I have no idea why the members of the AC thought is was appropriate for our denominational employees to come up with a plan to force us to give money for their initiatives and salaries and then decide how to punish or "forgive" individual churches. Aren't we supposed to be telling them what to do and not vice versa?

2) Vision for the PCA - The "powers that be," who for good and ill got us where we are today and consist mostly of middle-aged white guys, are going to continue to "lead us" in adopting strategies to reach racial and ethnic minorities, young people and the poor. They will be largely opposed by pastors who work with racial and ethnic minorities, young people and the poor. Since the pastors who matter most are the ones who pastor the largest and wealthiest churches, the wealthy pastors and their friends in the AC and other denominational agencies (which they control), they will likely continue to take the lead in fixing the problems which they have both identified and created. We all hope that this year they actually use data in examining the problems and Scripture in looking for solutions.

3) Heresy in Missions - The "Insider Movement," which is a missiological strategy for reaching Muslims by telling them they do not have to leave Islam, join a church or get baptized, has been a hot topic for discussion in mission circles. One presbytery has submitted an overture condemning an Insider Bible Translation and calling for a study committee.

I have been told by a reliable source that Mission to the World (MTW), our denominational mission board, supports the condemnation of the translation but not the study committee because they have already studied the issue. Don't take my secondhand report as gospel, but if it is true (which will be revealed on the floor, most likely) there are several troubling things to consider. [Update: On May 9, the Committee on MTW passed a resolution making minor editorial changes to the motion on the translation and striking the erection of a study committee. The language is troubling indeed: "Rationale for Omitting the Study Committee MTW has conducted extensive research and has numerous resources and tools available to assist local churches in evaluating insider movements."

First, one of MTW's experts on Insider Movements left MTW in frustration over the issue, dissatisfied over MTW's handling of Insider situations in the field.

Second, I contacted MTW weeks ago for copies of their "studies" on the issue and have never received any response. Do any actual studies exist? Their former expert says "no."

Third, Dr. Paul Kooistra is a godly man and an effective administrator and fund raiser, but he's no theologian or missiologist. With the most important controversy in missions now brewing, we need to bring in the big guns in scholarship and missions. And, since a study committee would examine our denomination's involvement with Insider Movements, it would warn us or clear MTW of any problems. But if MTW is doing all of the examination, the fox is watching the henhouse.

Of course this is a common failing in our denomination, witness the placement of Bryan Chapell (the head of our seminary) on the Standing Judicial Committee. Denominations almost always fall by way of the seminaries, so why would you put the head of the seminary on the commission whose purpose it is to provide judicial oversight over the seminary? In the PCA it doesn't matter, because they're all Good People - until they're not.

Worldliness & Method in the PCA

I'm come to this year's General Assembly with as much consternation as I've ever experienced coming to one of these things. Over the years, I developed a progressively more jaded attitude towards our denomination as a organizational entity. It's a funny thing, as a people bound by a common confession of faith and as churches working for God's kingdom, I love our denomination. As an organization we look impressive, but I'm deeply frustrated and ashamed of what is below the surface.

Don't get me wrong, it's could be so much worse. I can't imagine how Catholics feel about some of the things which lurk below the surface of their waters. I'm grateful that I don't have to apologize to people for child molesters or homosexual clergy.

The problem with the PCA is our core worldliness. I don't think we're that much more worldly than other denominations, we're just better at it. When it comes to emulating the wisdom of the Western business world, we do it better than most others. We're worldly, but we're competent. Our permanent ministry heads are excellent administrators. Other denominations make the mistake of hiring scholars to run their seminaries and missionaries to run their missions boards. We know that you don't have to be an expert in theology to run a seminary. You don't have to be a battle-scarred missionary or a cutting-edge missiologist to run a missions organization. You need to be an effective administrator and fund-raiser. And that's what we have....it makes me embarrassed.

Since the temptation for all of us in the American church is to accept the idols of our own culture, the PCA's method of managing ministry with the tools of the business world resonates with most of our churches. We like the fact that the head of our seminary is good-looking, well-dressed, well-spoken and polished. We'd rather have him than someone who is a gifted theologian but dresses oddly and is a little crusty in his demeanor.

When you start to look underneath the veneer of what we're doing, one of the consequences of this type of ministry is that sophisticated scholars, cutting-edge missiologists and battle-scarred missionaries tend to get forced out when they challenge the decisions of the bureaucrats. I spent a couple of hours with a someone who has been forced out after challenging some things our denomination is doing. Administrators often don't respond well to dissent or boat-rocking. The concern that I have is that the competency, management and institutional survival often seems to have become the de facto goal, rather than the Kingdom building which is always the stated goal.