I, geekrevThe closest you want to get to looking inside the mind of Shawn Coons.

This came into my email last week, and I find it interesting.  It was circulated at the Presbyterian Global Fellowship conference recently admist that talk of “being in the denomination but not of it.”  I’ll let the letter mostly speak for itself except to say that I think this is happening on the “other side” as well.  I think us younger liberal-ish types are less likely to officially align ourselves with groups like the Covenant Network and the Witherspoon Society - not because we disagree with them, but because we aren’t willing to see the party platforms in black and white, or to polarize ourselves that much.

Dear Pastors,
We are a group of evangelical, Presbyterian students from Fuller Theological Seminary deeply committed to following God’s call on our lives to ministry within the Presbyterian Church (USA). We are aware of many important conversations taking place, among groups such as yours, about the future of evangelicals within PCUSA.

Two major concerns have prompted this letter: First, as young evangelical Presbyterians, we comprise a fair representation of future evangelical pastors in PCUSA, and as such we earnestly desire to have a voice in important decisions about the future of our denomination.  Second, we have heard about the possible establishment of an evangelical synod within PCUSA. While the purpose of this letter is not to explicitly oppose or affirm such a synod, we do seek a venue in which to ask questions, voice our concerns, and participate in the decision-making process.

We have heard that, for evangelical Presbyterians seeking to be faithful to God’s word, the most immediate options under consideration are: remaining in the current structure and moving forward in uncomfortable unity, establishing a separate synod which would be theological rather than geographic in orientation, or leaving the PCUSA denomination altogether.

Speaking for a number of Fuller PCUSA students concerned about the unity of the church, we are very much opposed to the splintering of our denomination. Yet we are concerned that one proposed compromise – namely the establishment of an evangelical synod – appears to be either a “split without a split” or the first step towards a split within PCUSA.

We deeply desire to engage in dialogue with pastors such as yourselves looking to move our denomination forward. We wish to understand more about the biblical and constitutional precepts on which a non-geographic synod would be founded. We especially seek to understand the practical implications of this synod for the future unity of PCUSA.

Please consider ways to engage us in conversation, such as invitations to meetings where pastors are already convening to discuss such issues, hosting events for seminary students and other young leaders in your own churches, or visiting Fuller where we would be honored to host a discussion forum. We think you will discover in these conversations that evangelical

Presbyterians of our generation are less likely to think of the sexuality question as a fault line in the denomination, and more likely to consider issues like witnessing to a just society and restoring creation as defining points in the church. Consequently, a statement or action by pastors without input from our generation might alienate the very people who represent the future of the church.

We recognize that many of you bring years of experience, perspectives informed by history, and prayerful consideration to these important decisions about the future unity of our denomination. It is our hope that this letter is the beginning of future conversations; the start of an opportunity to learn from each other as we seek, together, to be faithful servants of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ.

At our church tonight the Peacemaking Committee held a showing of “For the Bible Tells Me So.“ It’s about the church and homosexuality and I recommend it to everyone.

Here’s a question that’s been nagging me since then:  Imagine there is a gay youth in your church (most churches don’t need to imagine it because it’s true whether you know it or not).  What is that youth’s perception of how their church is going to accept them if it was known that they are gay?

Many Presbyterian churches are somewhere between tolerant to unoffocially welcoming.  In many of these churches a lot of the adults know that gay people are welcome in the church, but if it’s never publicly said  then I wonder how many of the youth know?  And given that gay youth are more at risk for suicide I wonder if it is a gross sin for quietly welcoming churches to remain quiet about their welcome?

I’ve been asked to pass this interesting new site to you by a good friend of mine, Jim Moss.  He is setting up a website where people can share visions for the future of the church, and he has created a test site and would like you to help.

First, go to the following address:

http://www.reddit.com/r/churchvisions/

If you are not already a member of Reddit, you will have to create a username and password. After that, just check out the stories that are listed. Click the “up” arrow for stories you like and the “down” arrow for ones you don’t. If you’re feeling bold, add a story or two of your own that offers some sort of vision for the future of the church - whether it’s something that is already happening or that is a distant dream.

If this test is successful, a more expanded version will be created!

We recorded a podcast yesterday for Decently and in Order about the recent actions of the Presbyterian Global Fellowship and Presbyterians for Renewal. I haven’t had a chance to upload that podcast yet, but I share with you some further thoughts I’ve had.

Here is some of what Vic Pentz wrote on the PGF blog:

“The options now remaining seem to be: 1) to live with the new ascendant ideology; 2) to enter into the legal complexities of trying to get permission for one’s congregation to be dismissed to another denomination; or 3) to find a way to be “in the denomination but not of the denomination.” This third option is the one Presbyterian Global Fellowship affirms.”

“…The Presbyterian Global Fellowship seeks to be a parallel society living a new vision for the church within the PC(USA).”

and from the PFR website:

“It is clear that the PC(USA)’s confession of the Lordship of Jesus Christ and commitment to our Reformed confessions has weakened to the point that we can no longer assume a common framework of conversation….For the sake of our witness to the Gospel, we believe it is necessary for the different visions of Christian faith and life in the PC(USA) to be expressed in formally distinct bodies without a formal split in the denomination. Such possibilities have been discussed hypothetically under the rubrics of non-geographical or “missional” presbyteries and synods.”

Did I read that right? Are they proposing a system that would officially create the dreaded “local option” they have been up in arms about ever since the PUP report supposedly instituted it? Now that the larger denomination’s discernment of God’s will is not their own, is it OK to have local option on such a scale as we’ve never seen it before?

This is a disastrous proposal.

I wonder what Vic Pentz would think if a group of folks walked into his office at Peachtree and said,

“Pastor, we are very displeased with your leadership and the recent decisions of the Session. We think you have led Peachtree into a state of unfaithfulness to our Lord and that you have abandoned Biblical principles. So we declare that Peachtree is in a state of apostasy.

But we love this church and we are committed to transforming it from within. To that end we will be in Peachtree Presbyterian Church, but not of it. We will be forming a parallell society of certain members within this church.

We will shortly be requesting the Session to reorganize the existing worship services so they are no longer organized around time or style, but by membership - one service for those who are faithful to Jesus, and one service for you and the rest of the Session. We will also be directing our financial giving away from the annual operating budget and specifically towards funds and ministries that we deem faithful to the Gospel.

Thank you for understanding, Pastor. We will be actively working to replace you and the members of Session, and we will be actively seeking to overturn all your decisions. We will also be separating ourselves from the larger body of Peachtree members throughout the entire life of the church. I am sure that you can see how we are being faithful members of this church and living up to our membership vows.”