12 June 2024
.
.
“But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand.” [Ezekiel 33:6]
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” [Ephesians 6:12]
Presbyterians Week Headlines
[1] A Great Book – Evangelicals and Abortion – A Review by D. Clair Davis
[2] No Exceptions, No Executive Committees, No Book of Church Order Changes
[3] New Book – God’s Man from Brooklyn: The Story of a Twentieth Century Minister
Additional Articles of Interest
—
[1] A Great Book – Evangelicals and Abortion – A Review by D. Clair Davis
Cameron Fraser’s book, Evangelicals and Abortion, is just remarkable. It not only covers the most crucial discussions through the centuries but also gives a compelling overview of many aspects of other areas of Christian theology that relate meaningfully to abortion. While its primary church setting is within the evangelical side of Protestantism, at times just about every other segment of the church has its abortion struggles revealed. This comprehensiveness is a thorough listing of sources for further research, both from footnotes and in the text itself.
What do we learn? So much, especially of the many attempts that have accomplished so little. In our wealthy culture it can be very hard to promote the radical lifestyle changes that pregnancy and years of childcare require. Sacrificial living is hard to promote even for Christians. So, showing how abortion is wrong just isn’t enough. Your own loving lifestyle is what your credibility needs: “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” John 13:35
People can be persuaded into having those children, but can they be still a burden? Should our deep love for each other include willingness to ourselves becoming adoptive parents? Is that one’s choice or obvious responsibility? How should we come to see how we are all called to care for each other when the issue is unwanted children? Unwanted because too hard?
Can we end abortion politically? That looks so doubtful, the many paths in this look very hard indeed. Shouldn’t our efforts and prayers focus instead on how the church of Jesus should express compassion to unwanted babies and mothers?
This book is so full of everything. You can see how one of those old controversies continues and then suggest how we can learn from that and do it better this time around. Or, you can work on that missing pastoral care, for those tempted to abort and those caring for them. I have chosen the second, it seems to be the book’s climax!
Either way, thank you Cameron!
The book can be purchased at a forty percent discount by entering the code CONF40 at checkout on https://wipfandstock.com/9781666784510/evangelicals-and-abortion/
It is available on Amazon and other outlets, without the discount.
Kindle is $7.26 on Amazon
Clair Davis is emeritus professor of Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary
+ Christian Observer, Post Office Box 1371, Lexington, Virginia 24450, christianobserver@christianobserver.org
[2] No Exceptions, No Executive Committees, No Book of Church Order Changes
When I realized back in 2018 that it was going to be necessary to start a new denomination, one of the first things I did was to study what went wrong with the PCA, the PCUS, and other reformed denominations. If we forget the past, we are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past. Thus, when Vanguard was being started, I visited churches many places and told all of them that Vanguard was going to operate according to three principles—no exceptions to the Westminster Standards, no executive committees (or church sessions), and no changes to the BCO. As we have grown, we have taken in new churches and ministers who might or might not be familiar with the principles that we started with in the beginning—and why they are important. It bears repeating on a regular basis.
Let me start with the most important principle—that of no changes to the Book of Church Order. Most ministers have come from denominations, perhaps the PCA, where annual changes to the BCO are the norm. It is easy to develop the idea that such changes are right and good. Au contraire. As one who studied in great detail all the annual changes to the PCA’s BCO, I can tell you that 99% of those changes were to the section called the Form of Government. And almost all of those changes were to move the denomination incrementally into a more hierarchical form of government. In fact, as I studied out those changes, there was only one which I felt was a good and necessary change and it came from me. It was good enough that the OPC also changed their BCO by adopting the same language. I won’t go into the details of that change in this article. I wish I could show all of you year by year the changes that have been made. Most of you, if not all of you, would then understand why I feel so passionately on this subject. The PCA has been destroyed as a denomination by annual overture changes to their polity. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply uninformed. Not all churches in the PCA have been destroyed by those changes and not all presbyteries have yet been destroyed by them either. But the denomination has been and there is now no turning back from that status. It simply cannot anymore be called a truly Presbyterian denomination, but, instead, is some form of Episcopalianism. Why? Because the BCO has been radically and irreversibly changed to the point that it cannot be fixed. It has been changed to the point that it codifies top down church government at every level of the church courts. That is not Presbyterianism.
In 1975, the PCA and the PCUS had BCO’s that were for the most part very similar. I have copies of both of them still in my library. They were small. The PCA’s BCO was 107 pages, including the Directory of Worship and various recommended special services, such as funerals, marriages, etc. The PCUS BCO was 133 pages. The 1925 PCUS BCO was 218 pages in a book that was only 4 inches by 6 inches. That 1925 book had everything that is necessary to operate a Presbyterian denomination. In drafting up everything about our present BCO in Vanguard, I also studied the BCO’s of earlier Presbyterian denominations. For the past 200 years and more, there has been great unanimity in the basic principles of church government for all Presbyterian denominations—at least with respect to their initial BCO’s. Then, the BCO’s are changed. Liberalism comes in. The denominations go progressive. The changes to the BCO and the rise of liberalism go hand-in-hand. Changing the BCO is like letting the camel get his nose under the tent. There is then no way to stop the camel from getting inside the tent and taking over.
Of course, some people will respond: Why should changes to the BCO be disallowed since there might be changes that are good? Here is the answer. Scriptural church government is based on the unchanging Word of God. The Bible doesn’t change and neither do those Scriptural principles. God gives us principles—not canon law. Canon law gives exhaustive detail on what must be done in every specific case. There are very few principles in the Scripture where the government of the church is spelled out with exhaustive detail. Matthew 18:15-18 is the most basic principle in the Bible for all church discipline and is operative in almost every situation with very, very, very, very, very few exceptions. In my 48 years as a minister, I have never seen any situation at any church court level where Matthew 18:15-18 was not the first step that had to be taken. The requirements for church officers given in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 are Scriptural principles. The New Testament also clearly teaches that church government is grass roots—not top down. Paul advised the churches he started—such as the Corinthian church—what they should do, but it was those churches that had to take the action. Paul did not rule over them. Rather, Jesus is the Head and King of the Church. That theological point applies to our church government also.
Biblical church government gives us the right principles and then allows for the exercise of discretion by the church courts. No BCO can account for every possible scenario. I am reminded of what John said about the things Jesus said and did in John 21:25 and I paraphrase it to apply to church government. If every scenario was covered by a specific rule the whole world could not “contain the books that would be written.” The Scripture gives us enough information to govern the church wisely, but no more than is absolutely essential. The Scripture does the same thing concerning marriage, child rearing, church attendance, the content of worship, the right way to keep the Sabbath day holy, etc. It is man that is never satisfied with God’s great principles and has to turn everything into legalism. They make the rules: a rule for everything and everything according to the rule. That is man. He is a legalist at heart. Man loves rules because he can redefine them to allow for his own practices while using them as a club to hit others over the head. God is not a legalist. He gave us only ten commandments which are sometimes called in Scripture His “ten words.” Man—even redeemed man—is not satisfied with God’s ten words, and especially not the reduction of those “ten words” into only two great commandments. So, man wants rules—more and more rules. And when some situation arises for which there is not a rule, man likes to establish even more rules, somehow thinking that enough rules will result in better behavior—but it never does. Has the great swelling of the BCO’s of most denominations resulted in greater spirituality and evangelism and obedience? No, not at all. Those rules just give the legalists that have worked their way into positions of power more ability to club others over the head with those rules. That is all. Nothing more, nothing less. So, you should remember this point. The exercising of discretion by a church court is allowable and is not at all the same thing as routinely governing by the exceptional clause. It is just the opposite.
Second, allowing officers to take exceptions to the Westminster Standards has greatly contributed to the downfall of Presbyterian and Reformed denominations. Where in the Westminster Standards do you find the framework hypothesis on creation or theological evolution or same-sex attraction or cultural Marxism or the Federal Vision heresy? Of course, the answer is nowhere. Initially, the PCA allowed the taking of exceptions to the Confession but would not allow those ministers to preach their exceptions. Well, who was watching those ministers to make sure they were not preaching their exceptions or subtly introducing heterodoxy/heresy by insinuations and by creating doubts? No one. Then, the numbers of those who took exception to the Standards grew and grew and finally issued in “good faith confession.” One minister took 58 exceptions to the Standards. He must have been a LOT smarter than that learned Assembly that met for six years in crafting the Westminster Confession of Faith. As for me, I am just not that smart. Thus, I stick with the Standards. You should also. In fact, you cannot be an officer in Vanguard unless you do. We require full subscription, not ipsissima verba subscription. We do not believe that the Confession always uses the very best language or that the words of the Confession are on a par with Scripture. The Scripture is verbally and plenarily inspired. It is inspired in every word and fully. It is without error. No human document is the same. The Westminster Confession of Faith does cover every subject matter. It says nothing directly about abortion. There is not a separate chapter that covers the work of the Holy Spirit. Yet, what it does say is true in the whole. The Confession has served the church well. If you quibble about what it teaches, then you belong in a denomination where exceptions are allowed. Vanguard will never apologize for requiring officers to fully subscribe. There are plenty of denominations that will allow those who have exceptions to be officers there. Without exception, mental reservation, or equivocation, Vanguard requires officers to fully subscribe. If that ever changes, then this denomination will have a short life span.
Third, executive committees or church sessions is the primary way that churches exercise hierarchical powers. Let me make this very, very clear. There is no situation in which a committee ever has any authority to act for or instead of the court. Not one. Committees can investigate, examine (such examination is not the secret examination of ministers or officers. It is the preliminary looking into a situation only), and recommend to the court. Only the court has the power to take action. Committees never do. I suspect that this is the one area where most people are confused because most pastors and officers have functioned in denominations where executive committees were the norm.
When I was in the army reserve/army, I was an officer. I retired as a Colonel. I had no command authority. My responsibility was to serve. I could counsel, preach, witness, etc. I could not tell other people what to do. That is how committees in true, Scriptural Presbyterianism must operate and are required to operate. They serve the court. They carry out the assigned responsibilities. They report back to the court with full disclosure of everything. They cannot take matters into their own hands or decide what they will or will not communicate to the court. They do not have that authority. They can never have that authority.
In my former presbytery in the PCA, there was a situation where a chairman of the shepherding committee came to the court and asked for the presbytery to give his committee the power to go and talk with a certain pastor and church. He justified his request by saying, “We all know there are problems in that church.” I asked him, “Why, do you need ‘power’ to go and talk with a church or pastor? If you are only going to talk, then call him and ask him to meet you for a cup of coffee.” Of course, that was not what that chairman wanted to do. He wanted to go to the pastor and say, “Here is what we think you should do and if you do not we are going to make you do it.” No committee in a Scriptural Presbyterian denomination ever has that kind of power. That is lording it over others which is denounced by Christ, Peter, Paul, and the whole of Scripture. That is hierarchy which is not Presbyterianism. That is Episcopalianism not Presbyterianism.
When denominations operate according to executive committees, they actually give committees more authority than even commissions have. Commissions can preliminarily act for a court, but then their actions have to be approved or rejected by the whole court before it becomes the action of the court. In my time as a minister in the PCA, I invariably found that every committee acted as though they could assume the power of the whole court and act in their place, even though the BCO clearly said that they did not have such authority. I guess their thought process was that they would act for or instead of the court unless the whole court stopped them from doing so—which almost never happened. I will give you one example from personal experience. My first call was to a two-church field in Mississippi where the two congregations had long had a very acrimonious relationship. A problem developed early on since it was simmering just below the boiling point. The Advisory Committee met with all the elders of that congregation and gave me a laundry list of things they wanted me to do. Their “advice” was without the authority of the court. I prayed about what they had given me and decided it was not the best advice in that situation. Then, the Advisory Committee met with us again and said to me, “We told you to do certain things and we believe the Holy Spirit was guiding us.” Such committees like to use the “super-spiritual Christian card” in those situations to justify their desire to lord it over others. I responded to them, “Well, I prayed about it also and I believe the Holy Spirit told me that the Advisory Committee was authorized only to give advice—not commands.” They did not like it, but what could they say? They didn’t have the power of presbytery.
The primary reason why governing by executive committees is wrong is because the BCO says the power of the church belongs to whole assembled body of elders that comprise the court. It does not belong to any committee of the court. It does not belong to a commission until that action is approved—or denied—by the whole court. The power of the court can never be disbursed to any smaller group of the court under any circumstances. Someone might reply that Vanguard allows evangelists. Yes, but they execute what the court has already decided. They do not act with the power of the court apart from the approval of that body. And, primarily, their work is truly evangelistic.
Another reason why executive committees/session is wrong is because of the doctrine of total depravity—the first of the five points of Calvinism. Total depravity tinctures everything even the Christian does until the day of his death. The apostles had that problem even with Christ in their midst. Jesus was leading them to Jerusalem where He was going to be crucified and here was the debate they had: Who is the greatest among us? That problem has plagued every denomination from the foundation of the Church. As George Whitefield often said, “There is a papist in every man’s heart.” That is, there is the desire to rule over others and to be legalists in every person’s heart. The most common way this papist attitude reveals itself is through what is called imperious Presbyterianism. Imperious means “assuming power or authority without justification.” It is assuming by our position in the presbytery that we have the authority to tell others what to do or to make decisions for the court without justification. Executive committees are guilty of acting like papists. Rather, any time a committee assumes power that has not been directly given to it by the court then it is acting in an imperious way. Vanguard must never allow or permit any committee to act in such an imperious way.
It is common for people to function the way they have been trained. Yet, Vanguard is different in doctrine and practice. We all must rethink how we do things lest we fall into the same errors of others. It is common for people to think that the problem with denomination X was the people who ran the show—not the rules by which they operated. Our secular government in the US is now making that same mistake. We hear people tell us that the US is going to make socialism work even though it is failed everywhere else it has been tried. Socialism is a failed economic system and cannot work. It did not work in Germany or Russia or China or anywhere else. Likewise, imperious Presbyterianism is a failed ecclesiastical system. It has never worked. It cannot work. Vanguard was started to practice Scriptural Presbyterianism and we must hold to that.
Now all of these three problems coalesce into one—the problem of allowing changes to the BCO. The other two can never gain traction in a denomination that faithfully operates according to grassroots, Scriptural Presbyterianism. But, if changes to the BCO are permitted, the other two will grow like wildfire and the denomination will be lost. Denominations go the way of their various books of polity. That is why the PCA has zero chance of ever being turned around. As long as their hierarchical BCO remains in place, the denomination cannot be turned around. Yet, I do not know a single person in the PCA who even realizes that the future is hopeless for them unless the denomination can roll back their BCO to what it was in 1975. Meanwhile, they continue to make changes to their BCO every year which subtly and incrementally move the denomination in a more progressive direction. That is not the future for Vanguard Presbytery. We must learn from their mistakes. But not follow their practices.
Dewey Roberts, Pastor of Cornerstone Presbyterian Church in Destin, Florida
+ Vanguard Presbyterian Church, PO Box 1862, Destin, Florida 32540, (850) 376-3166, drob9944@aol.com
[3] New Book – God’s Man from Brooklyn: The Story of a Twentieth Century Minister
Frank Edward Smith sailed the high seas in the U.S. Navy, before jumping ship in California. As a U.S. Army soldier, he fought in Europe during World War II. He had skills in a number of trades, including butcher, carpenter, and metalworker. A high school dropout who never attended college, he would eventually graduate from theological seminary.
During the Great Depression, he had no money but wooed and won the hand of a pretty young lady who came from a family of wealth. Straight-laced—he took his coffee black—he would dress appropriately and even with a touch of class, but never flashiness. A straight shooter, you always knew where he stood; furthermore, for him, right was right and wrong was wrong. Of course, he was not always right—and he was humble enough to admit when he was sometimes wrong—but he was always principled. At the same time, his earnestness and seriousness about life must not obscure his fun-loving nature.
He was not an academic, but he was smart and thoughtful and creative in his sermons. As a pastor, he listened to folks carefully and empathetically. He was a regular guy who related well to people of all backgrounds and classes.
He never pastored a large church, nor did he publish any books. But he was a faithful churchman who served the broader church as well as local churches. He was instrumental in the organization of three congregations. He was a founding father of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). At the age of 62, a time of life when other men would be thinking of retirement, he became a missionary to his native New York, thereupon being numbered among the first PCA church planters in the Northeast. A year before his death, he was honored by being appointed to preach at the PCA General Assembly. He was ordained for Thirty-Eight years, from 1955 until he died in 1993.
He was, we could say, an ordinary fellow who did extraordinary things. And he was empowered to do so because of God’s grace in his life which produced faithfulness to serve Him.
I knew him well. We pastored in the same congregation for thirteen years. He was my ministerial mentor and my friend. Most importantly, he was my father.
In this volume, I have tried to present the story of a flawed but redeemed man and to do so by painting the backdrop of the times in which he lived. I trust that this book—one of the first biographies of a PCA founding father—will appeal to those who would benefit from his example, and to all who simply love a good story.
Frank J. Smith, Ph.D., D.D.
+ Christian Observer, Post Office Box 1371, Lexington, Virginia 24450, christianobserver@christianobserver.org
Additional Articles of Interest
– Pope Francis Again Welcomes Group of ‘Transgender’ Males, Homosexuals at Vatican Audience
– Disabled Canadian Man Reveals He’s Been Offered EUTHANASIA Multiple Times by Hospital Staff
– The Bird Flu Operation Is Looking Like a Repeat of the Covid Operation. So Are the Vaccines Safe?
– SHOCKING DATA FROM PHILIPPINES: Half a Million Excess Deaths, 1 MILLION LESS BABIES BORN Since 2020
Comments are closed for this Article !