By Adam J. Copeland, Religious Dispatches
The directions are easy. Drive north; turn left just before you hit Canada. In recent months, I became accustomed to the two and a half hour drive from Fargo, N.D. to Bathgate, N.D. The Presbyterian church in Bathgate had asked to be dismissed from the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A). As chair of the task force to engage with the congregation concerning its possible disaffiliation, I made that drive north often. Out my window I saw the wheat, beans, and sugar beets planted in the fields rich with Red River valley soil. Then harvest came. As our meetings dragged into winter, one night my car’s temperature gauge measured minus 18 degrees Fahrenheit. Disaffiliation in North Dakota is not for the faint of heart.
Denominational rifts are everywhere. In 2012, a group of Presbyterians founded the Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians, calling itself a new Reformed body. Their website reports they now number 127 congregations and 213 pastors. Most of these come from the PCUSA. Beyond my denomination, there is a growing rift and talk of a possible schism in the United Methodist Church. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America has lost approximately 600 congregations in the past few years. The Anglican Communion views the Episcopal Church of the United States with increasing suspicion.
Aware of this context, I approached the Bathgate church eager to convince them to stay in the fold. At first I thought a few frank conversations and my young adult energy would turn them around. They just needed to know the truth about the PCUSA, I figured. Even as I began every meeting with prayer about being open to the Holy Spirit’s movement in our midst, asking for signs as to what new thing God might be up to in Bathgate, I was pretty sure in a matter of months they would choose to stay put. Change is hard, after all, and on the prairie it comes slowly.
50 Comments. Leave new
“I have come to sympathize with this perspective—practically speaking, what would the presbytery do with a church building in Bathgate?”
You didn’t sympathize too damn much, you still managed to get $20,000 out of them!
I affirm that separation from a denomination can be gracious if the parties involved practice Christian discernment. If we practice “holy indifference” to our agendas and preferences in order to pursue God’s leading. We can graciously change denominations if we have the same attitude that was in Christ Jesus (Philippians 2). We can graciously change denominations if we adhere to our Book of Order that states that no single denomination is THE Church of Jesus Christ. Changing denominations can be a positive move for the Church by aligning churches that share some common perspectives and pursuits that require churches to work closely together in mission. It can feed synergism and catalyze challenging ministry.
The church I serve, College Hill Presbyterian in Cincinnati, experienced a very gracious separation with the Presbytery of Cincinnati because the leaders of the Presbytery were seriously seeking God’s leading for the Church of Jesus Christ. Yes, we paid money but it made sense to help the Presbytery ease into the financial loss caused by our leaving. Even today we still work together in different ministries and support groups. So. Yes it can happen.
Pastor Drew,
I sure wish they were all that way, but I glad for your church. It’s so rare these days. If the leadership in Louisville would crack down on the presbyteries that are violating the gracious dismissal policy that was set by us to begin with, things might get better. However, since I firmly believe that they are behind this, nothing will change, and will only get worse.
Mr. Copeland doesn’t ‘fully’ understand why Bathgate Church left. Maybe he should look at the General Assembly votes over the past years.
It can’t be gracious if churches that don’t get their way go immediately to court when we all know the vote would have been morally binding on the Presbytery if it had gone the other way. I’m looking at you, First Presbyterian Houston.
Your view, Mr. Copeland, that “a denomination is better off with diverse congregations, liberal and conservative….” is probably valid but only up to a point. Beyond that tipping point, diversity results in so much bickering among each other that no one can accomplish any mission. Unfortunately the PC(USA) shot past that tipping point many years ago. Thankfully, many Presbyterians like the good folks at Bathgate are deciding not to contend with other Presbyterians any longer and devoting all their time and energy to the great commission.
Joseph goebels said it best, when you tell a lie long enough and loud enough, it becomes truth.
I am amazed and appalled that the extortion that was visited on this congregation of over $20,000 for a building the members built themselves has passed without comment.
Justified by “Rev Copeland” by references to the “trust clause” as if it were on the same plane as scripture.
Reminds me of the Johann Eck Confronting Luther with the same sort of bogus assumptions.
And I have the answer for why the congregation likely wanted to leave. Same one as Martin Luther. The PCUSA no longer looks for guidance to scripture.
Sorry “Rev Copeland” extortion of over $20, 000 from this struggling congregation is just plain evil!
Telling the lie long enough and loud enough may turn it into truth in the eyes of man, but not in the eyes of God.
I wonder what it was like when Goebels faced THE TRUTH?
Scott:
I don’t know if you’ll see this but I’m puzzled by your comment that First Presbyterian Houston is in court. In a decision that was widely reported in Presbyterian media a couple months ago, 64.5 percent of approximately 1,700 members voting supported leaving the PC(USA) for ECO but that vote fell 33 votes short of the required two thirds majority. The senior pastor and session who unanimously supported moving to ECO were disappointed by the outcome but it appears that the matter is settled for the foreseeable future and that the congregation will continue as a PC(USA) church without schism. I follow these issues pretty carefully and if FPC Houston is in court, I’d appreciate knowing the details. Thank you in advance.
Jim,
http://layman.wpengine.com/fpc-houston-files-lawsuit-seeking-clear-title-property/
Houston church?? You have a problem, and the problem is: The Apostasy, and one day Houston church, you will leave.
With all the “trust clause” money that’s flowing into PCUSA coffers, maybe Parson can find a nice hamas family to support.
Scott,
as usual, you are wrong. It has been and always will be 1st Pres. Houstons’ property, not your’s. Get over it.
Thanks, Scott. The link to the Layman piece on FPC Houston’s lawsuit to gain clear title to its property refreshes my memory. I did see that a couple months ago. In your lengthy conversation with Layman readers at the end of that Layman piece your position (which you reiterate here on Copeland’s piece) is that FPC Houston is behaving unethically by seeking title to its property after 64.5% of its voting members voted to leave the PC(USA), a solid majority but 33 votes short of the presbytery’s threshold for departure. Your view strikes me as a bit extreme on a question which is much more of a close call. Everything I’ve read about FPC Houston since the vote reflects well on the congregation. The senior pastor and session have expressed their intention to put their relationship with the PC(USA) aside at least for the foreseeable future and lead the congregation into reconciliation with each other and the presbytery.
Your view seems to be that because a solid majority vote to leave the PC(USA) failed by a razor thin margin of less than 2%, it’s unethical for the church seek title to its property while remaining part of the PC(USA). That view seems to lack balance and perspective. Surely you agree that an overwhelming majority of the congregation would vote to secure clear title to its property regardless of its present or future relationship with the PC(USA).
Nor is your view congruent with the legal realities of PC(USA) property issues in recent years. As you probably know, PC(USA) property trust clause claims to churches’ properties are settled in court by whichever one of two legal principles of trust law are followed by the courts in the state where the church is located. One principle affirms the PC(USA)’s trust clause claim, the other favors the congregation’s claims and the 50 states are almost equally divided between those two legal principles. In states where the legal environment favors the presbytery’s claims, presbyteries have been using that leverage to extract multi-million dollar payments from departing churches, hence the San Francisco presbytery’s windfall of $8.89 million which it demanded and got from Menlo Park. In states where the legal environment favors the church, congregations have been graciously agreeing to payments to presbyteries even though they can get title for nothing except for its legal fees if the presbytery is foolish enough to pursue a losing case. Having followed these issue for years, Scott, I can assure you that you don’t want to get into an argument over whether presbyteries or congregations have behaved the most honorably on property issues. It’s not even a close call.
Diversity and multiculturalism does not work, and who benefits? The pcusa has gone mad in its bending over backwards forgetting the Great Commission, the inspiration and authority of the Holy Bible, sidelining the Westminster Confession of Faith as a nice document with no meaning pushing instead diversity and multculturalism that will only divide not divide pcusa churches, but will cause many to leave the pcusa.
i posted another message here today addressing some of these issues.
what i’m finding out, the main problem is not the lay members, it’s the ministers.
if you’re interested i’d encourage you to look at the GA members, how many are getting paid a salary and/or benefits by the church. would be nice to have someone confirm my research, it appears that half of the GA is composed of what are called teaching elders, i.e. paid ministers.
of course they’re going to vote to keep their jobs, of course there’s a conflict with them voting on doctrine. duh. it’s so obvious now that i see it, i can’t believe it took me a month to figure it out. if they came right out and called them what they are, paid GA members, there would be nothing to discuss.
Rather than follow the lead of Washington, DC using executive order, churches negotiate to an illegal organization, the pcusa, and pay money to leave the denomination. The so called, “trust clause” once applied when once the pcusa was Biblical believing the Holy Bible was the Word of God, believing in the Westminster Confession of Faith, however, since 1926, 1929, and 1967 along with 2014, the pcusa no longer is a church, just a corporation, thus, forfeiting its right to claim any property. If Washington, DC can use executive order(S) to by pass Congress, so can churches do the same wishing to leave the pcusa, and we see what one does and gets away with it, why not pcusa churches wanting to leave the denomination.
I doubt FPC is being totally honest when they claim they don’t plan to leave if they get clear title to the property and the presbytery loses that leverage. They’ll just wait for the denomination to drift a bit further to the left then, despite that being expected and counted on, claim “we made our promise before THAT happened so our promise not to leave doesn’t count”.
New Covenant let Grace leave, and it is as roughly big and wealthy as First, for a payment that was a fraction of the value of the church property. I don’t see anything in the environment First is dealing with that justifies the usual “we didn’t get what we wanted, so Jesus said we could lie” attitude those of us personally familiar with First have grown accustomed to from it.
I never said it was my property.
Besides, who really starts a reconciliation with someone, like First is promising to do, with a lawsuit?
Scott:
Your view seems strangely contradictory and unnecessarily cynical. You concede that FPC Houston will likely leave the PC(USA) at some point in the future because the PC(USA) will continue drifting to the far left wing of Presbyterianism. But that inevitable departure has nothing to do with the property. If the presbytery’s dismissal policy remains in place, FPC Houston could do nothing on the property now and leave with the property in the future pursuant to the dismissal policy. However presbyteries are getting more vindictive with departing churches and the Texas courts (which are ruling in favor of congregations today) could change in the future. So it’s simply prudent for FPC Houston to secure title to the property now. FPC isn’t lying about anything.
The experience of Highland Park Presbyterian in Dallas is instructive here. In the early 1990’s, a 55% majority voted to leave the PC(USA) but, as in the case of FPC Houston, the majority vote fell short of the presbytery’s threshold. That outcome was the result of the revered senior pastor declaring that he would leave if the church pulled out of the PC(USA) so a decisive portion of the vote to leave defected to the “stay” side so as not to lose their pastor. The PC(USA) has continued its always inexorable drift to the far left wing so now 20 years later the congregation doesn’t want to contend with other Presbyterians any longer and overwhelmingly supports departure. Nothing in that evolution was bad faith or “lying” by Highland Park and there will be no bad faith by FPC Houston when they eventually follow the same path.
Not only do I hope 1st pres get clear title as they should, but leaves the PCUSA with a simple majority vote, it’s hard to believe that 33 people can hold 1600+ people hostage. And if the 33 people don’t like it, they can go the unitarian church were they will probably more comfortable.
I love how you guys, after reading a story where First says they’re not planning to leave, conclude that First will leave as soon as they possibly can legally arrange it, but their promise isn’t a lie.
It’s a lie. Lying is what First does.
Scott,
It’s 1st Pres building, and they are being held hostage by a back door stealing trust clause, why people think they are entitled to something they didn’t pay a dime for is incredible. Revisionist don’t tithe, they go to GA’s pass CRAP, and leave the rest of us to pay for it. First Pres like HPPC has done more on accident for the cause of Christ that Parsons and company have done on purpose with their assinine pronouncements from louisville.
I’m not a right winger nor a far leftest, but I’m sick and tired of people in my denomination thinking that they are entitled to things that the PCUSA did not pay for. Maybe if they called the exit price a “franchise fee”, and not gracious dismissal, maybe at least the churches going into it would know just to expect on the way out!
James, First Pres would have wanted the “get 2/3rds and you can leave” honored if they had gotten 40 more votes. They gambled, assumed they had the votes, and lost. If New Covenant had decided a successful vote wasn’t good enough after the fact you’d scream bloody murder about their tactics.
Sorry James. Rules are rules, and integrity is integrity. If First has any of the latter they will obey the former. If you think a little dishonesty is fine because of the PCUSA, remember, your ultimate opponent is the father of all lies. If you can support sinking to the level of your opposition, you’ve just written yourself a blank moral check.
James, how many of the people who “built that church” have been driven out by the evangelical hijacking of FPC, which is the flip side of the left’s hijacking of the PCUSA?
So, the voices of one-third of the congregation, whose ancestors built the Church with hard-earned money and who had the courage to stand against a campaign orchestrated by a small but vocal minority, are to be ignored?? The fact is that if the “leadership” of FPC had been in any way representative of the congregation at large, they would not have unanimously tried to take the Church out of the denomination. If the “leaders” had in any way been representative of FPC as a whole, it’s likely the message given to the masses would have been much more balanced, and the result even less of a vote of confidence in the “leadership”.
They’ve convinced they’re “reclaiming FPC for Jesus” – anything goes at that point. FPC sent out an email after the vote comparing themselves to the disciples mourning the crucifixion of Jesus. That analogy makes the people who voted to stay into the Romans who crucified him.
I’m surprised they had the self control not to compare the 1/3 who voted to stay w/ the 1/3 of the angels who followed Satan.
Scott, the 2/3 majority was set by the presbytery, and the presbytery knew damn well it was a high watermark, and tough to reach especially since they were working behind first Pres. backs to garner the votes not to leave. I can’t wait til this is cleared up in a court of law, then que the theme music from the movie Exodus, and watch them leave.
Scott:”James, how many of the people who “built that church” have been driven out by the evangelical hijacking of FPC, which is the flip side of the left’s hijacking of the PCUSA?”
I wish the evangelicals would highjack the church, then we wouldn’t have had this joke of a GA thats made us a laughing stock in Presbyterianism let alone Christianity!
So James, in other words, you admit FPC’s promise not to leave is a lie?
Scott,
1600 people want out of the PCUSA, don’t think for minute that because presbytery’s high watermark let alone the stunts they pulled behind 1st Pres back trying to stop them that in the end is going to stop them..The only thing the presbytery see’s is $30 million dollars, of which the presbytery DID NOT pay for. the presbytery let it be known they believe in the trust clause and the property is the presbyterys. There are no angels here, but if I had to pick a side knowing the tactics being used now on churches wanting to leave, well it’s a easy decision.
In other words, James, FPC is lying and you’re fine with that.
What did the presbytery do behind FPC’s back that it didn’t do to Grace?
Highland’s earlier vote was in the 90s. FPC will make its move next year, probably. Totally different.
“What did the presbytery do behind FPC’s back that it didn’t do to Grace?”
You are joking, right?
As for leaving, if and when they win clear title, the way things are why would the presbytery want them to stay when clearly they don’t want to be in the PCUSA, oh yeah they have 30 million reasons.
Scott:
I hesitate to continue as part of this conversation because it’s a little intemperate for my taste but I continue to be baffled by your nasty accusations, Scott, that FPC Houston is “lying, unethical,” etc. The 64.5% majority desiring to leave the PC(USA) is choosing at least for now to continue as part of FPC and the PC(USA). Given the history of PC(USA) church splits the last 20 years, that’s extraordinarily gracious. In every similar situation I’m aware of where a large church’s majority vote to leave fell short of the presbytery’s requirement (Highland Park Dallas, Covenant Fort Myers, FL), the majority left to form a new non-PC(USA) Presbyterian church. Nothing in a presbytery’s dismissal process binds any person’s or any church’s future course of action. The members at Highland Park Dallas who remained after the last vote are not “liars” because the PC(USA) has continued its steady leftward drift and now Highland Park members overwhelmingly want to leave.
I think perhaps Scott is not being sufficiently clear in a “conditional/hypothetical.” I believe he is saying that IF one were to accept the analysis of the situation provided by James H and others, in particular that FPC will depart at the first opportunity (after what is assumed to be a successful outcome to the lawsuit) THEN a natural conclusion would be that FPC is not being honest and is not honoring its covenant from before the dismissal vote. I don’t think Scott is necessarily agreeing that this is the case (other than saying that going to court is not very good evidence of entering a reconciliation in good faith) but Scott is arguing that if you accept the premise then you should accept the conclusion.
No James, tell us exactly what the presbytery did to First that it didn’t do to Grace.
I, and others here, expect First to leave the day after winning their suit, despite their promise not to. I consider that dishonest. Others are being cagey about that.
If conservatives were as forgiving of gay pastors as they seem to be of dishonest ones, they’d have no reason to leave the PCUSA.
Scott,
Dishonest pastors, are you kidding me,what do you call when louisville changes the rules on dismissal from somewhat reasonable to outright theft, are you defending that? I’m guessing you don’t serve on the session of your church I don’t know, I do know that if the session and the congregation want to leave, there’s not a thing your “dishonest pastors” could do to stop it, except find another church.
I’m still waiting to hear what new covenant did to first that they didn’t do to grace.
Scott,
It’s kind of like if have I to explain it to you wouldn’t understand.
Scott, “If conservatives were as forgiving of gay pastors as they seem to be of dishonest ones, they’d have no reason to leave the PCUSA”
Scott there are sooooooooooooo many other reasons to.leave the PCUSA. WOW
In other words, you can’t accuse new covenant of anything specific.
guest,
sorry your PCUSA family has been trying to kill, with that said walking away from property that was paid for by fatithful members is not only bad leadership and oversight, but also not faithful to the legacy of those who contributed to build a house of the Lord. Revisionist don’t tithe hence the trust clause, so they have to take what others paid for,it’s legal stealing. Letting them get away with it, now that is a crime.
Scott,
Goes back to what I said, if I have to expalin you wouldn’t understand. BTW are you in high school?
Thanks for taking sympathy on poor Scott, southeast, and trying to extricate him from the corner he’s painted himself into with his nasty accusations of FPC Houston all based on unknowable future events. I suspect these issues will resolve themselves in the same innocuous way that occurred at Highland Park Presbyterian in Dallas. Once FPC Houston gets clear title to its property, everyone on both sides of the stay/leave PC(USA) issue will probably be content to leave the matter on the back burner for a few years. The “leave” majority will be confident that time is on their side and the irreversible 40-year leftward drift of the PC(USA) will eventually bring the “stay” minority over to the “leave” side just as happened at Highland Park. At some point 3, 5 or 10 years from now, FPC Houston will vote to leave by an overwhelming majority. However given Scott’s obsessions, he’ll still be calling the good folks at FPC Houston “liars.”
In other words, you have no specific accusation against new covenant regarding what they supposedly did to first but not to grace.
Jim C, I’m evidently not the only one here who expects first to leave asap if they win their suit. I’m just willing to call that dishonest. Time may be of the essence, conservative individuals may leave on their own and leave the current leadership as a minority.
I’m a little embarrassed that I’m spending this much time, Scott, engaging you on your nasty accusations of FPC Houston all based on unknowable future events. I suppose if future developments substantiate your claims that FPC’s lawsuit for its property is part of a secret plot to promptly re-open the issue of leaving the PC(USA), your accusations will be vindicated. Although I notice you hedge your bets using only your first name so if you end up being wrong, no one knows who you are and you won’t be embarrassed. Given the likely outcome of all this, Scott, I suspect you’ll be relieved that no one knows who you are. Once FPC Houston gets clear title to its property, I suspect all sides on the stay/leave PC(USA) issue will be content to leave the issue on the back burner for a few years. The “leave” majority will be confident that time is on their side because the irreversible 40-year, leftward drift of the PC(USA) will eventually draw the “stay” minority to the “leave” side just as happened over time at Highland Park Presbyterian in Dallas. Then 3, 5 or 10 years from now FPC Houston will vote to leave by an overwhelming majority and given your obsessions, Scott, you’ll still be calling the good folks at FPC “liars.”
Time may be of the essence Jim. The leftward drift of the PCUSA may drive out individual evangelicals and leave FPC to the liberals. You don’t think individual conservatives may just walk out of the church to find a more compatible church home?
Scott “The leftward drift of the PCUSA may drive out individual evangelicals and leave FPC to the liberals.”
WOW, Scott keep drinking…….oh I mean keep dreaming, yeah thats what I meant, keep dreaming.
James, you, in addition to refusing to say exactly what New Covenant has done to FPC that they didn’t do to Grace, now think the leftward drift of the PCUSA isn’t driving individual evangelicals out?
Of course individual evangelicals are leaving all across the PC(USA), Scott. But you’re not addressing my complaint that you’ve been accusing FPC Houston for a week of being “liars” because of future events which at this point are unknowable.