At my first presbytery meeting, way back in the mid-90s, there was a controversial case before the brothers.
One large church's delegates said that if the presbytery did not vote a certain way, they would drastically reduce their funding. 1/10
In one sense, I understand that. If you believe a ministry is altogether unfaithful, you don't want to send them your money.
But this was the ministry they themselves belonged to. And the threat was made as *part of the debate* itself. 2/
As such, it amounted to a form of the argumentative fallacy, "appeal to force" or ad baculum:
"If you don't vote the way we want, there will be negative results, not related to the actual matter before us."
It's bad Presbyterianism. It's bad ethics. 3/
That is what has most frustrated me about the polity matters now working their way through the PCA.
Too many ad baculum appeals have been made (not to mention appeal to the populace, appear to emotion, and slippery slope).
When what is before us are matters of polity. 4/
Our BCO is a tertiary document. We change and fill it so often, mine has literal duct tape.
Good men are allowed to disagree on what is helpful wording (Prelim. Principle 5), without being called "unconfessional" or "unfaithful" to the Scriptures. 5/
There has been an unhelpful politicization of the process from outside the courts.
Such that pre-judicial pressures are brought to bear on men to vote a certain way. Or face results.
When they may just like or not like the wording itself. 6/
In Presbyterianism - indeed, in Christian ethics - the means matter. We must do the right thing the right way.
Which means looking at the amendments themselves - the wording - and not just supposed or threatened results if we think a particular measure unwise. 7/
If you are reading this and think I am sub-tweeting you, I am more concerned with the process - and our life together as a denomination - going forward.*
We all have room to grow in our churchmanship, in presbyterianism - and in love and wisdom. 8/
I have had good men like T. David Gordon, Roland Barnes, and David Coffin teach me.
I have had many others put up with me and my poor Presbyterianism at times. Thank you.
Let's not have Paul or Apollos or Christ parties within the PCA. Let's argue more, and politicize less. 9/
* you are also welcome to contact me. If you don't already have my email, it's not hard to find. You don't have to ghost me just because we don't always agree. Christian fellowship is found in the sincere give and take of ideas, not winning or losing a debate. 10/10
As the pastor of a church in a college town, it's my privilege to introduce many students and others to the PCA. And then to recommend it further as they move on, trying to help them find a church near them.
I won't give numbers but after 17 years, it's been a few 1/10
But it's not automatic. We are but one small part of the larger Body of Christ (Book of Church Order 2-2). Sometimes there are other healthier or more fitting churches.
So what makes me want to recommend the PCA first?
It's been our overall "brand" as I see it. 2/
That in PCA churches, they will hear the Gospel of grace proclaimed clearly every week.
They will be reminded of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ on their behalf.
That even though they struggle with their sanctification, they are yet justified by grace. 3/
🧵 I finished Reparations by @dukekwondc and @_wgthompson. I read it slowly. For someone new to the idea, it was a lot to absorb.
But in the end - and this may make no one happy - I actually thought it was quite moderate in its proposals. 1/22
A central point is that we should proclaim the Gospel in our own context. And the long history of white control and racism is part of the American context.
If I was a pastor in Vietnam, I would want to know what the French, Japanese, Americans and communists had done. 2/
Moreover, the book helped me learn about and read African American thinkers that my normal course of reading would not have exposed me to.
Finished Poland 1939 by @Roger_Moorhouse. A masterpiece of well written and well researched military and political history, reminiscent for me of Wm. Shirer's "The Collapse of the Third Republic" (the fall of France).
Some takeaways:
1/4
1) War is hell. 2) Polish units did much better than commonly supposed. Their cavalry was actually quite effective at times. 3) Armored trains, so strange. 4) The German slaughter of civilians and POWs was widespread and evil. The racism was vicious. 2/
5) The Soviet backstab and class genocide was evil. 6) Germans & Russians clashed here & there, predictably. 7) The tepid UK/French response was predictable. But materially & geographically there was little they could do. 8) The Polish govt's flight to Romania is its own epic. 3/
I know growing up in the suburbs is supposed to be boring, but y'all, growing up just outside of DC in the '70s was WILD.
Here is a parade of neighbors that kept us on our toes (some names changed, because well, you'll see). 1/20
We'll start with Mr. Boiler. We had a small kennel of show dogs and when he got grumpy, he would spray them with a power hose through our fence, muttering and cussing while chomping on his cigar. 2/
We'd be in the basement watching reruns of Star Trek, and someone would yell down the stairs, "HOSE!!!"
We'd panic and rush outside to try to get the dogs in before they got soaked and ruined their coats. He'd continue to spray throughout the operation. 3/