Has Reformed theology been left behind?
A commentary by Robert P. Mills, The Layman Online, February 22, 2001
The General Assembly Council is now meeting in Louisville, where they will discuss, among other items, a Presbyterian minister’s denial, at a Presbyterian conference, of the historic Reformed doctrine of “Christ alone.”
At the same time, the Office of the General Assembly is distributing copies of overtures that will be considered by the 213th General Assembly when it meets in Louisville in June. Among them is an overture from Sierra Blanca Presbytery, which either was sent joshingly, with tongue firmly in cheek, or, if serious, provides an ironic commentary on the subversion of official theological reflection in the Presbyterian Church (USA).
A defense against fiction
While our denomination’s staff and elected leadership are vigorously defending the right of a Presbyterian minister to deny basic Christian doctrine at a Presbyterian conference attended by Presbyterians, Sierra Blanca is rushing to defend unwary Presbyterians from fictional books written by non-Presbyterians.
Overture 01-25 is titled, “On Communicating to Pastors that the ‘Left Behind’ Series is Based on an Interpretation of the Bible that is Not In Accord with Our Reformed Theology.”
The overture asks the assembly to “communicate to pastors and sessions throughout our church that the currently popular ‘Left Behind’ series of books and the movie based upon this series of books is based upon an interpretation of the Bible (specifically the book of Revelation) which is not in accord with our Reformed understanding of Covenant Theology.”
It further asks the assembly to “instruct the appropriate agencies of the General Assembly to provide assistance and resources to congregations where dispensationalism is causing confusion and dissension to the Reformed faith.”
‘Whatever’
The juxtaposition of the overture and the upcoming council debate rewards exploration at several levels.
First, there is the controversy caused by the Rev. Dirk Ficca, a Presbyterian minister and a keynote speaker at the Presbyterian Peacemaking Conference last summer. There he effectively advocated abandoning Jesus’ teaching, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6) and replacing it with the belief that everyone gets to God by whatever method they choose.
The biblical teaching that Ficca denied has been affirmed by the Church for two millennia. During the Protestant Reformation, it was crystallized in the slogan “Christ alone.” The alternative presented by Ficca is known as religious pluralism, the belief that all religious beliefs are equally valid and that there exists no acceptable method for choosing between them.
If Rev. Ficca and the elected and staff leadership now supporting his views are to be believed, an adequate replacement for “Christ alone” would be “Whatever” since, in their opinion, Jesus is just one of many valid paths to God.
Needless to say, this aggressive denial of Scripture is, to use Sierra Blanca’s language, “not in accord with our Reformed understanding.” And it has caused considerable “confusion and dissension to the Reformed faith.”
Yet, when faced with this threat from within, Sierra Blanca remained silent.
The silence of the lambs
Perhaps, in reference to this controversy, Sierra Blanca merely was following a precedent set by the 2000 General Assembly, which overwhelmingly denied the existence of any substantive theological differences within the PCUSA.
In rejecting an overture from Beaver-Butler Presbytery, which recognized eight areas in which evangelicals and liberals are unable to find common ground, one commissioner declared “We do not disagree over significant issues.” “Significant issues,” according to Beaver-Butler, include: biblical authority and interpretation, the atonement, sanctification and salvation. The commissioner’s opinion carried the day, as the assembly voted 453-71 to remain in theological denial.
In turn, the 2000 assembly simply may have been following the lead of the recent assembly that rejected a request to identify the “essential tenets” of the Reformed faith. What makes that refusal so puzzling is that our ordination vows ask ministers and elders if they “sincerely receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith …”
An affirmative response is required for ordination, yet Presbyterian officers are agreeing with that which does not exist, since the tenets officially remain undefined. Arguably, requiring officers to agree with a statement that no one is willing to make could cause “confusion and dissension to the Reformed faith.”
Yet on the issue of essential tenets, which would appear essential to the ability of pastors and sessions to distinguish between dispensationalism and “our Reformed understanding of covenant theology,” Sierra Blanca remains silent.
Reimagining theology
Perhaps what is needed is to have denominational staffers with theological expertise respond when theological issues threaten to cause confusion and dissension among the faithful.
Perhaps, but the last time that was tried, the staffers nearly had their heads handed to them. When Joe Small and John Burgess of the Office of Theology and Worship, composed a brief critique of the 1993 ReImagining conference, reaction was swift and furious.
Small and Burgess were publicly lambasted by many, including their supervisor, for daring to presume to disagree with statements made by non-Presbyterians at a non-Presbyterian event, this despite the fact that the conference was underwritten by a Presbyterian grant and attended by numerous high-ranking denominational staff members.
A pattern?
And now we may begin to see a pattern emerging.
A dispensational understanding of Christian theology is somewhat more conservative than the Reformed theology articulated in the PCUSA’s Book of Confessions. Rev. Ficca’s pluralism is far more liberal. Dispensationalism is attacked. Rev. Ficca is defended.
Beaver-Butler courageously identified areas in which beliefs and practices promoted by the PCUSA have departed from the Reformed understanding of Christian faith. Its request to recognize those distinctions was denied. Rev. Ficca was invited to keynote a denominational conference.
Even some principled liberals managed to acknowledge that aspects of the ReImagining conference went beyond the bounds of Christian faith and practice. Yet, when denominational theologians named those areas, they were pilloried – and the rights of Presbyterians to plan and attend similar events still are being aggressively defended. Now Sierra Blanca Presbytery wants denominational theologians to critique a conservative theological movement because it (allegedly) undergirds a popular series of novels.
The pattern that emerges from these few examples, to which others could be added, is that Presbyterian leadership seems promiscuously eager to pander to deviations from Reformed theology that veer to the left of our Reformed theological center, while pontificating against any perceived theological agenda that they identify as drifting toward the right.
As long as this pattern continues, other equally unhealthy patterns of division and decline will also continue to plague the PCUSA.