Posted by : Shawn in (Geek, PC (USA))
Letter from younger PC(USA) evangelicals.
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.
i am grateful that my sisters and brothers at Fuller sent this letter.
Perhaps it is time for us youngin’s to step up and call for unity. i know that i am not the only young adult in this denomination who is tired of watching sex being used as a wedge to destroy what belongs to Christ while at the same time ignoring the issues that he brings us together to work on.
Does anyone honestly believe that God cares more about us ordaining an lgbt person than the fact that around 30,000 children will die today because of poverty? Or of our wanton destruction of creation?
I agree, I’m fairly traditional theologically, but I’ve had a hard time understanding why being ‘evangelical’ meant that you also had to be a ’social conservative’ or why that meant you had to read the Bible to exclude lgbt from ministry.
Ready to play … you’ve been tagged.
rah rah rah! i’m so with you. on the liberal side of the fence, i mean, and not caring about the fence.
I am a Fuller grad. Was this letter signed? I have serious doubts many students at Fuller actually agree with the main point of this letter. Yes, it may be from a group of sudents at Fuller but a group could be 3 or 4. I think they are trying to appear larger than they are.
Matt,
I had similar questions about the number of people signing the letter since it came to me through email with no signatures.
I’m still interested in knowing.
Shawn, would it be okay to publish this in our Synod newsletter?
Hi All,
I am one of 18 Fuller students from Presbyteries across the country who signed and circulated this letter. I was just made aware of the posting and conversation here by Bruce Reyes-Chow’s link to it on his recent Moderator posting. So, to answer your question, the number is 18. Of course not everyone was in agreeement - but those made uncomfortable were only made uncomfortable by the one line that seemed to negate the importance of sexuality (which was not the intention) - not uncomfortable with the desire to maintain unity. Feel free to contact me with any questions about it: megan.handley@yahoo.com.
Megan,
I am guessing the one line that you refer to is “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. ” If so, those in your group who signed on were right not to agree with that statement for it does promote the idea you said yourself said you do not want to communicate, the issue of sexuality isn’t important.
If you wish to have this letter receive a wider circulation I strongly suggest you improve that part statement to more accurately reflect what your group is trying to say. otherwise, your letter will do harm in the debate on the topic of God’s revealed truth on this subject.
“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.”
Matt, I don’t think this promotes the idea that the issue of sexuality isn’t important. On the contrary, I understood this sentence to say that the signers of this letter mostly agree with the renewal groups current stance on homosexuality. What the sentence communicated to me was that the signers of the letter aren’t willing to make this “the issue” that defines our denominational wrangling.
I heard it akin to what the PCA has done with the ordination of women. They have said that there are more important issues that define who we are as Christians and Presbyterians.
Shawn, yes, you are exactly right. I think part of the problem is that people read into things (the above sentence included) the polarized messages of this debate. We are trying to find a middle ground and way forward without compromised our convictions.
Matt, perhaps this letter published in the Outlook will help clarify where we are coming from:
http://www.pres-outlook.org/opinion/43-letters-to-the-editor/7829-re-editorial-letters-to-friends-pub-aug-4-11-1825-2008.html
In response to your recent “open letter” series, the problem with any label is that most of us don’t fit neatly into categories. Take “conservative-evangelical” and an emerging generation of PC(USA) pastors from Fuller Theological Seminary.
We identify as evangelicals, but if you talk to many of us — including those who take a conservative view on the sexuality/ordination issue — you’ll find we are adamantly opposed to a denominational split.
Rather than seeing sexuality as the fault line, we are praying for creative solutions that would maintain unity while respecting purity. We fear a splintering church will have dramatically negative consequences for the primary issues we want to address — especially witnessing to a just society, building missional churches, sharing the Gospel with post-Christian generations, and protecting God’s creation.
Does this make us “liberal-progressives” or “centrist-ecclesiasts”? While we have much in common with these brothers and sisters in our commitments to justice and church unity, we often differ on the very foundations of our personal faith: an uncompromising commitment to Biblical authority and Christ-centered theology.
So where do we “next generation evangelicals” fit in? We are not ready to give up unity for the sake of purity, nor purity for the sake of unity. We stand firm in our commitment to Biblical authority, yet we want to remain under the shared umbrella of PC(USA). We recognize the battle fatigue of many veterans in this struggle, but we are not ready to give up the fight. And we are earnestly seeking a voice in the future of our denomination.
Megan Handley, M.Div. student
Fuller Theological Seminary
Inquirer, Presbytery of the Pacific
Pasadena, Calif.