Gairney Bridge

I drove six hours (one way) on Monday to attend a presbytery meeting, my first since accepting the call to pastor my current church. It was an eventful presbytery, as it is the first time that I can recall that two (not one, but two!) churches in our presbytery requested to leave the denomination. Unlike the PCUSA, these two churches are not pulling out because of liberal concerns (thank goodness) in the ARP Church. Actually, both are leaving for entirely different reasons, and the way this was approached by each church was also remarkably different. Even though these incidents are matters of public record (i.e., they are part of the minutes of presbytery and thus this is not idle gossip), I will not mention the names of the respective churches so that it does not appear I am pointing fingers at anyone.

In the case of the first church, this has been a long time coming, I’m afraid. It is a church, located on the Gulf Coast of Mississippi, and one that was affected by Hurricane Katrina. There was a good bit of physical damage to the structure (mainly roof and ceiling damage), and other ARP churches pitched in to help out with repairing the damage (one church in Florida, for instance, sent skilled crews from the church to provide the labor at no cost). Other churches gave generously to help offset building costs. I personally went down with a truckload of food, water, and other supplies (donating by 4 churches in northern Mississippi) so that the church could distribute these in the community. Now, less than two years later, the church wishes to leave the denomination. Why? Because the presbytery would not approve their current preacher, who will not submit to the confessional standards of the denomination. The church has rebelled against the wishes of the presbytery, and would rather leave the denomination rather than submit to the authority that it promises to submit to when it originally joined the ARP.

The other church, located in Arkansas, is leaving over the issue of paedocommunion. While I am greatly disappointed that these brothers in Christ would leave over what I see to be a theological novelty, they have approached the issue with great humility and respect. Everything is being done orderly by the church, and the church and pastor have agreed to submit to the authority of the presbytery while all of the necessary procedures are taking place. And if things do not work out with the denomination to which they are seeking membership, they would like to remain part of the ARP Church (and respecting the ARP’s stance on paedocommunion).

Neither of these are “done deals” (the presbytery will attempt reconciliation before dismissing the churches), but this will probably only delay the departure (which is very prudent, since it prevents hasty decisions on both sides). I write this only to demonstrate the right way and the wrong way to handle disagreements. While I disagree theologically with church #2, they have handled the situation as Christians should. How much good could be done in the body of Christ if brothers would bother to treat each other with this sort of love and humility.

Update: One more comment I’ll make — another difference in these two situations is that the first church I mentioned will most likely become independent (”independent presbyterian” — now there’s an oxymoron that rivals “Roman Catholic”!) if/when it is dismissed, while the latter church is requesting to be dismissed so that it can become part of another presbyterian-like body that will have ecclesiastical oversight over the church. One again, the distinction speaks volumes.