Posted on 02/17/2011 6:14:50 PM PST by Gamecock
An AP article was sent to my computer which many might find interesting. Sometimes my computer dates things incorrectly, but never before has an article appeared this early. You will of course note that the writer shows a typical secular reporter’s ignorance about the Reformed faith, but otherwise it seems to be fairly written, though poorly edited in parts. Also, it would have been strengthened by more direct quotes from the actual participants, but I guess we should be glad for any press.
Here is the AP story: July 1, 2020
Classical Protestant Resurgence: how the PCA got its mojo back Part 4 of the Series, “Religion in Post-Obama America” Associated Press, Atlanta
Ten years ago, many thought that the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) was at a crisis point. Years of stagnant growth and divisiveness had taken their toll. In an effort to stem the tide, many prominent men within the PCA urged it to change her tack or risk irrelevancy. An effort was made to broaden the PCA’s appeal by severing its ties with doctrinally similarly aligned, but smaller denominations in favor of cooperation with larger and growing movements.
However, a surprising thing happened. Unconvinced that such a change in tactics was called for, the denomination instead chose to reemphasize her distinctives -- doctrines such predestination of an “elect,” the baptizing of infants, and the necessity of churches being connected in regional bodies called presbyteries. Many feared that such a doctrinal approach would weaken the PCA and make it less appealing to the newer generations of Christians which appeared to be flocking to newer movements such as the so called “emergent” churches of the day and the Acts 29 Network (now on its third iteration as the Acts 31 network).
Perhaps a greater challenge to the PCA came from allies within the Southern Baptist Convention. A renewed interest in Calvinism among Baptists of various kinds – ironically fueled in part by the success of the PCA – stemmed some of the PCA’s momentum as many younger Calvinists chose to practice their faith in a Baptist context. The PCA was no longer the newest and coolest Calvinist kid on the block. It had lost its mojo.
It was understandable then that some of the PCA leaders, wishing to keep up a perceived momentum from its earlier decades of rapid growth (due in large part to whole churches transferring in from other denominations), pushed for the PCA to accommodate herself to changing demographic trends.
What could not have been foreseen was the growing cynicism of the newer generations towards the marketing which had been directed towards them by these newer movements. Many recognized that the “emerging” churches had essentially employed the same strategy of the much maligned Willow Creek “church growth” strategies popularized in the suburbs of the 1980s and 90s. Only this time, instead of syncretizing Christianity with the American suburban sub-culture, the emergents syncretized the Christian faith with the gentrification sub-culture of American cities. (See Part 2 of this Series: “How religion played a role in the re-segregating of the American urban landscape.”) As sociologists have since shown, both rounds of syncretism served to accommodate evangelical Christianity to the predominant relativism of American culture, to the extent that doctrinal distinctives were often played down in hopes of churches appearing more open minded and relevant to the issues of the day.
At the same time, many of these disillusioned younger Christians found themselves attracted to the bold Calvinism found among a variety of Baptist preachers of the time, men such as John Piper of Minneapolis, Mark Dever of Washington, D.C., and Marc Driscoll of Seattle. These ministers supported doctrines such as predestination and held to a strong view of the church, and yet rejected Presbyterian principles such as standing presbyteries and baptizing infants in favor of local church autonomy and baptizing only those who could recount some sort of credible conversion experience. And while these popular Baptist ministers cooperated with other denominations, they made no bones about their distinctive Baptist convictions. Such humble confidence in the midst of the emergent, relativist landscape proved attractive and successful.
Against this backdrop, the PCA held their annual General Assembly in late June of 2010. Leaders from across the denomination were urging a new direction and a renewed emphasis on numerical growth in order to “be part of what God is doing in the world.” After days of debate, the denominational rank and file rejected such an approach in favor of a return to their roots as a Calvinist denomination, including those convictions which distinguished them from both the emergent churches and their Calvinist Baptist allies.
At the same time, there was a renewed emphasis across the PCA on doing the simple things well – preaching from the Bible, emphasizing the doctrine of “justification by faith alone” as central to the Christian life, praying in small groups, and taking church discipline seriously (that members must uphold their vows to follow Christ or face correction from church leaders). An emphasis was placed on local ministry rather than embracing a one-size-fits-all national strategy.
But this counter-intuitive approach to church growth paid off. Younger Christians of all backgrounds were attracted to the authentic, simple approach to faith which did not overly concern itself with marketing or social trends. At the same time, they were drawn to the certainty and stability which the PCA presented, and increasingly convinced of the Biblical rationale for infant baptism and standing presbyteries, once the PCA began to aggressively promote its views. Of course, a fine line had to be walked, both not to alienate other Christian denominations and to ensure that its own members did not confuse secondary matters with more essential matters such as the divinity of Jesus. But somehow, they pulled it off, and have seen steady numerical growth 7 of the past 10 years.
With the precipitous decline of the historically larger PC(USA), the PCA now appears on the cusp of becoming the largest Presbyterian body in the United States, with the Evangelical Presbyterian Church not far behind.
books that introduce children to Christ are always good
There is also the OPC (Orthodox Presbyterian Church) that is not mentioned in the article. Look up J. Gresham Machen some time. The OPC split from the PCUS (I think that’s what it was called back then) in 1936.
c. "If you do not know the Five Points of Calvinism, you do not know the gospel, but some perversion of it..." Fred Phelps, "The Five Points of Calvinism, The Berea Baptist Banner, Feb 5, 1990.
d. "I do not ask whether you believe Calvinism. It is possible you may not. But I believe you will before you enter heaven. I am persuaded that as God may have washed your hearts, He will wash your brains before you enter heaven." C.H. Spurgeon, Autobiography of Charles H. Spurgeon, n.d., American Baptist Society.
e. "We believe with the great Baptist preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, that Calvinism is just another name for Christianity." John H. Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism, 1991.
f. "We hold and assert again and again that the truth which Calvin preached was the very truth which the apostle Paul had long before written in his inspired epistles, and which is most clearly revealed in the discourses of our blessed Lord Himself." C.H. Spurgeon, Autobiography of Charles H. Spurgeon
g. "Calvinism is evangelicalism in its purest and only stable expression." B.B. Warfield, Calvin and Augustine, ed. Samuel G. Craig, 1956.
h. "Calvinism is the Gospel and to teach Calvinism is in fact to preach the Gospel." Arthur C. Custance, The Sovereignty of Grace, 1979.
Da ya go displaying your ignorance over the biblical use of the word “wine.” Justify your drunkeness via Jesus and the wedding! No, Jesus never drank strong drink and He didn’t create 150 gallons of rotten juice to throw a drunken party. Jesus Christ never created anything tainted, and fermented juice is tainted. What He created was good and pure — not purtrid and corrupt! It’s down right blasphemous to suggest such a thing.
you would find Jainism fascinating — have you read about it’s philosophy? It holds to pretty much the same world view as in your posts.
That’s not correct — Piper has not indicated that he is a Marxist. If we wish to teach him, it is better not to make aspersions.
I'll offer you a slightly different perspective. The church abrogates the demand for socialism. The church provides for her own in their hour of need. If someone is unable to give, the deacons will approach that person not to chastise but to see if maybe they need assistance. Speaking from experience: our own church, in our own hour of need, wrote us a check for $500.00. There was no grilling involved. This is exactly what a church is supposed to do.
You might argue this is socialistic ("from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs") but consider that in an ecclesiastical - not political - context, it in fact undermines and reduces the demand for political socialism by easing the burden of society's neediest members.
Your sentiments are bolstered, of course, by slick-tongued charlatans posing as preachers who demand moral rectitude of others and forgiveness for themselves, but you paint the entire church with this brush to the detriment of your own credibility.
Shh! Your intruding logic interferes with the delivery of the message. You know, the one meant to convince us to choose to believe that we can't choose to believe.
I suppose that somewhere, out there, there may a Calvinist who possesses enough faith in his spin-off religion to NOT try to convince people that there's no convincing people.
Sounds like prayer is MUCH needed for a hard heart.
Hoss
Actually, no -- you're just posting to contradict, not argue, or "prove" anything. Buy that's good--the longer you're here, the more chance we have to reason with you and share with you the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.
Claiming there is no God does not invalidate Him. Besides...what if you're wrong?
Hoss
Blanket false statements are made all the time on the religion forum.
Well, the Devil stays busy, going to and fro, seeking whom he can devour, right?
Hoss
Nah. My God is a loving God, not the Jovian god of the bornigans.
The PCA is a Christian church. The PCUSA is not any more. The PCUSA can be friendlier to the Catholic Church, but only to the subversives within the Catholic Church, not to the real Christians. And this is why I don’t get why the Calvinists are so bent on attacking the Catholic Church: they keep presenting the miscreants and heretics as if they represent the real Catholic church.
When the Catholic Freepers aren’t defending the real Catholic church from Calvinist attacks, they’re (righteously) ferocious about cleaning up the liturgical abuse, the misdirection away from spiritual matters to corporeal matters, the Kumbaya Kommunists (I just made that up. You like?)
The Calvinist theological attacks have a good side: the Catholic counter-arguments help us Catholics learn from one another. But the scandal-mongering probably convince most people that both sides are a bunch of miscreants. If someone is belligerent enough, and simultaneously attacks the Catholic Church while arguing that the Catholic Church teaches salvation through works, the average person will walk away thinking that person is a jerk and that the Catholic Church teaches salvation through do-gooderism... and if he’s friendly enough to Catholicism, might just start believing in salvation through do-gooderism!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.