The expressed desire of some New Wineskins participants to leave the denomination is as old as the church itself. Case in point:  the 1920's.

The expressed desire of some New Wineskins participants to leave the denomination is as old as the church itself. Case in point:  the 1920's.

My grandfather, Edwin Rian, was a part of the formation of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church in the early 1900s. The same accusations of theological liberalism we are hearing today were being spewed to urge professors and students to leave Princeton Seminary and the denomination in search for a more doctrinally pure church. For over 20 years of his life he committed himself to the OPC. He served as president of Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia as well as other leadership positions in that new denomination. At first he was on fire about this new movement. But as time passed this purer church could never become pure enough. One group within the OPC split off to form another purer church and that group split one more time. Eventually, although his theology never changed--he remained a staunch conservative all his life--his ecclesiology did change!  He recanted and returned to the United Presbyterian Church, believing that a church driven into existence by this desire for purity will judge itself to death. I believe he came to see that secondary to an orthodox faith is a faith of ortho praxis.

Right beliefs are of utmost importance but a right heart even more so, thus the psalmist prayer for a clean heart. Of course, we all remember that Jesus told his followers that they would know them by the love they had for one another. Name calling and demeaning each other demonstrates to a world that Presbyterians are more concerned with every jot and tittle than with rejoicing in the glory of the risen Lord and proclaiming the grace he offers to the world.

I don't think God gives any person or interest group the whole understanding of divine truth. Perhaps purposely God gives each of us a different piece so that we must rely on each other.

I was reared in the Presbyterian Church from evangelical missionary parents. During that time my father became more liberal while my mother remained a moderate conservative. In the course of growing into the church and faith I began as most do, believing that I had all the right answers. It was my task to convince people of the truth I had so cleverly deduced from scripture, prayer, and the world. However, God kept placing before me people with views quite different than mine.

I found that two people I respected and loved, my parents, held very different views. I knew they were both loving, both intelligent, both preachers of prayer and dedication to God's truth. I discovered often that although the core of my view did not change the character and subtle contours did.

I came to see that people with vastly different views than mine who hold them in faithful trust ALWAYS have something to teach me about the nature of God and being a faithful disciple. For example, though I do not hold a verbal plenary view of scripture, the devotion and commitment of the people who do have nurtured in me a hunger and desire to read scripture. Their passion for faith is crucial for our life together. I would hope they would also see that God has placed something in the hearts of moderates and liberals for them to hear as well.

Tom Evans,
EP Sheppards and Lapsley

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (4)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

wrote on March 15, 2007

Title: New Wineskins Tom, Thanks! Having spent some time in the RCA and knowing something about the CRC, the drive for purity is chasing after fool's gold. It's been a fatal flaw in our ranks since our inception - when we trumped ecclesial relationships with theological camps. The heart of love is humility, and humility is the heart of kindness and grace toward one another. Each of us has only a portion of the truth; together, in faith, hope AND LOVE, the whole truth claims us, and Christ is His name, not dogma or catechism. And if numbers prove merit, then Jesus was clearly wrong to challenge the orthodoxy of Jerusalem. Sure, we have much to learn, who doesn't. But woe to those who claim exclusive title to be the 'teacher' while demeaning those who 'need to learn.' We've all been there and done that - usually in our younger years. Maturity, however, brings grace in most instances - e.g Billy Graham. For others, only a hardening of the mind and heart. Blessings, Tom Eggebeen Interim Pastor First Presbyterian Church Harbor Springs, MI 49740

wrote on March 09, 2007

Title: Pastor, Ainsworth Community Church I have tried to read every statement available from New Wineskins and other, similar groups. In the end, I could not find one compelling argument. To illustrate, there is quite a lot of focus on the scrupling concept. Those opposed to it declare that we have altered ordination standards. But this argument is full of holes. Yes, I'm aware of the presbytery that has taken one of the PUP authors under its care and of this individual's comments about what PUP has allowed him to do. Such challenges and opinions are nothing new; the fact remains that nothing has changed in our ordination standards. Furthermore, the Layman--true to its usual biased perspective--and similar organizations have accused the PCUSA of redefining the Trinity. Anyone who has bothered to read the study that was presented to the last General Assembly would know that this is a bold-faced lie. The Trinity has not been redefined, it has merely been suggested that Christians might benefit from learning about the myriad of ways to relate to and speak of God. Frankly, if people want to leave the PCUSA bad enough, bless them and let them go. I just wish that, in leaving, the disputants would do so without spreading such grossly inaccurate facts. Of course, there is one thing I find humorous in all of this. PCUSA churches wishing to unite with the EPC refuse to accept scrupling in regard to such things as gay/lesbian ordination. But the EPC embraces a philosophy of not arguing over 'non-essentials' (though, it seems one might be apt to squabble over what ought be categorized as 'essential' and 'non-essential'). Ironic, isn't it?

wrote on March 08, 2007

Title: Pastor, Milford Presbyterian Church 'I don't think God gives any person or interest group the whole understanding of divine truth. Perhaps purposely God gives each of us a different piece so that we must rely on each other.' - Amen! I wish more of us would allow ourselves to be enriched by traditions we otherwise wouldn't agree with. As a young pastor one thing that grieves me is when I see people in our denomination failing to be challenged by each other and by other traditions, assuming that we, as God's Chosen, have no need of the insights or ways of knowing God of those who disagree with us. I saw a lot of prejudice on both sides in seminary, and it's a shame.

wrote on March 07, 2007

Title: First Presbyterian Church, Cuero, Texas I think the OPC is a phenomenal denomination! I have the greatest respect for their strong stand upon the solid rock of the gospel and for their love of missions done in the Reformed faith. We have MUCH to learn from these dedicated servants of Jesus Christ in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. I am also thankful to God that our OPC brothers and sisters have taken the difficult and rewarding path of preserving the truths of the Refomation for the 21st century, where we have failed. Their seminaries of Westminster in Philadelphia and Westminster California are bastions of both solid evangelical and Reformed thinking but they are making an impact in America for Christ. Thanks be to God for the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and all of our brothers and sisters in the PCA, ARPC and EPC. They are my encouragement in these dark days for the PCUSA. PS--They're growing and planting new churches all throughout the USA! In about 50 years, they'll probably overtake us in numbers, the way we are going today!

Show/Hide comment form