The Orthodox Presbyterian Church: Where Shall We Go?

What I am going to say may be different from what you expect. Let me share a little about my background so you understand from where I am coming.

I have been a pastor in the OPC for twenty-one years. I led my first congregation (Pilgrim Presbyterian in Metamora, MI) into the OPC in 1985. Prior to 1985, Pilgrim was a Congregational church for 107 years. My personal acquaintance with the OPC was through the Presbytery of the Midwest. My intellectual acquaintence with the OPC began shortly after my conversion in 1971 at Shelton College, a small Christian school now defunct. Shelton was under the control of Dr. Carl McIntire, a leading minister in the Bible Presbyterian Church and the director of the "The Christian Beacon", Inc. Yes, it was a newspaper but it was also much, much more. Who can say for sure. The Twentieth Century Reformation Movement was somehow connected to it. All of the hotels and B&Bs were part of the Christian Beacon, Inc.

McIntire and the Bible Presbyterian ministers teaching at the college, taught us that J. Gresham Machen was the original inspiration behind the BPC and, by subtle inference, the founder of the fundamentalist Twentieth Century Reformation Movement. The Christian Beacon, Shelton College, Faith Seminary and everything appended were the fruit of what that great man started. They owned Machen as their own. However, the truth can never be blurred for long. With many others I discovered a more accurate picture of reality. Before I entered Faith Theological Seminary in 1974, I was disillusioned with everything McIntire-related. I became a rebel in the "movement". On the shores of the Atlantic, newly married, working as a painter on the "movement's" crumbling resort buildings in Cape May, NJ, I wrote an essay on reformation (since discarded) in which I worked through my thoughts and feelings on the "reformation movement". It was not a reformation -- it was more like a reaction. My wife, Josephine, and my friends thought I was loosing my faith altogether because I was questioning the great leader -- Carl McIntire.

To fast forward, I lasted at Faith for only one year. With other rebels, I slipped over to Westminster Seminary to hear a lecture by Paul Woolley on the separation of the Bible Presbyterian Church from the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. I also read "The History Behind the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod", by George P. Hutchinson. My eyes at last were opened and I became a great admirer of everything OPC and Westminister Seminary. However, in the course of events and a few years later, I became the pastor of Pilgrim Reformed Congregational Church in Metamora, Michigan.

The Othodox Presbyterian Church is a denomination whose elders and congregations reflect the highest theological, ethical and intellectual stardards of our times. I believe this is also true of other orthodox presbyterian and reformed denominations today. Having attended many presbytery meetings in several presbyteries and having been a commissioner to three general assemblies, I have witnessed brotherly love, fairness, a conscience to do what is right and a passion to know and do God's will as revealed in his Word.

Those things must be said; however, no believer, session, congregation, presbytery or synod is without fault and the need to see its faults. We are all subject to blind spots and, as our Lord taught us, we like to indicate the splinter in our brother's eye while we ignore the beam in our own. There is a place, however, for pointing out these splinters to one another in the spirit of love while remaining mindful of our own, many short comings.

In seeking a true perception of things, I have challenged myself to consider whether the OPC changed since I became a part of it or whether I have changed. I believe both things are true. People change and so do institutions like the church. The church changes because believers pass on to be with Lord, taking with them their unique perspectives, perceptions and experiences. New believers arise to take the place of the old, bringing with them their new understandings and orientations. This is what makes the church dynamic.

From the time I became acquainted with the OPC I perceived it as a broadly reformed and presbyterian church, acknowledging the best of all reformed traditions. I also saw the church as evangelical and intellectual. I recall several things going on when I first began attending presbytery as an observer: the question of joining and receiving into the PCA was in progress, many churches were using James D. Kennedy's "Evangelism Explosion" program and Home Missions was following a more relevant and pragmatic approach to planting new congregations.

Joining and receiving failed. Unfortunately, little effort, or weak effort, has been made to revive organic union with our sister church. I hear teaching elders say things they would never publish -- that union will "never happen," insinuations that the PCA is not as consistently reformed, etc. Usually, the criticism focuses on situations within congregations. I also hear concern that becoming part of the PCA would weaken the "distinctive reformed witness of the OPC." I detect in this an emerging pride and conceit. Should one be proud that he has come to know the Lord? Should one be proud that he is a Calvinist and not an Arminian? Should a denomination be proud that it is not like other denominations who are in some ways "weaker and compromised with the modern culture"? The danger is exclusivity and a warped celebration of ecclesiastical diminution as an indication of true peity in the midst of an evil world and a compromised church. Becoming marginal is somehow a badge of God's favor.

In "Fighting the Good Fight", by D. G. Hart and John Muether, the authors lament the weak growth of the OPC (and I think in 2006 a decline in membership will be noticed), with these words: "Whatever the reason, America has proven to be rocky soil for the OPC." Upon reading these words, I wondered if the OPC has not made itself rocky soil for so many of the people the Lord is drawing to himself. The OPC seems to be weak in knowing how to attract people. Has it become expert in repulsing them?

The church of Jesus Christ is growing and the OPC is not part of it. I am encouraged that Evangelism Explosion is no longer used. The program has good content but the method is more like something concocted by a pushy salesman. There is nothing in it of a true reformed evangelism coupled with winning people to the Lord by building relationships of love and trust. However, I fear that in 1987, the General Assembly may have "thrown out the baby with the bath water." There is some justification for the strong criticisms of Lewis Ruff's philosophy on church planting. Many believe he was "commercializing" the church. While there is some truth to this, consider that most churches, even OP churches, use some degree of commercialism. It's called advertising. Most churches think of ways to attract people to visit their worship services. Isn't that a good place for people to hear the gospel? Since Lewis Ruff resigned in 1987, many have been more zealous about making new converts more "self-consiously" reformed than making them followers of Christ. Jesus did not say, "Go into all the world and make sure that people become 'self-consiously' reformed right away and appreciate all the distinctives of the OPC." He commands us to "Go and make disciples." Church planters write about their efforts to make their reformed witness known in the community. The community does not even know what is reformed. Church planters should make very clear their witness to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. Promote Christ first. Show him in clear, unadorned Biblical language. To let the community see Jesus Christ first is the most reformed thing one can do.

I love the reformed faith. It reflects the teachings of Scripture and gives all the glory to God. But learning it takes time. The expressions of the reformed faith emerged in a 16th the 17th century context. It is a context that most people don't understand. It takes a lot of time for people to wrap their minds around that context. The Westminister Confession of Faith was written in complex 17th century prose, difficult for people to read today. I remember reading an article by Ross Graham published in New Horizons in which he wrote that church planters when preaching should refer often to the Westminster standards. I don't think so. People will only be confused. The people whom the Lord is drawing to himself want to hear the Word of God. They respond well to it. Giving them the Confession of Faith too early sends the message that the words of men are somehow as important as the Word of God. The church planter should infrequently, if ever, refer to the secondary standards in the message. Seekers and new converts want to see that Jesus and the Word are preeminent. Scriptural truths packaged in old rhetorical formats must be carefully taught in a setting where misunderstandings can be carefully addressed. At Rockford Springs, we offer a continuous class on the Shorter Catechism using G.I. Williamson's book. New members are refered to that class for further study. This process has worked very well.

I believe that Orthodox Presbyterian congregations do not have to be small. I believe many Orthodox Presbyterians want them to be small so they can protect all of the "distinctives." My concern is that the church can become so distinctive that it seals its own fate to extinction.

Is fine tuning theology a healthy process? I suppose this is best evaluated by the following question -- "And the practical benefit of this fine tuning for the people of God is?" The criticism I often hear from believers is that the OPC is too cerebral. The OPC, thanks to Westminister Seminary, is blessed with scholars and intellectuals. Where these scholars are, intellectually, is far, far beyond the average Christian, so far that they are beyond the comprehension of most others.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is simple. I believe in keeping it as simple and as clear as Jesus intented it to be. While some say this is "dumbing down," I call it speaking in a "known tongue" so that those seekers who enter our worship service will not think I am "out of my mind" or living in an ivory tower. (Check out 1 Corinthians 14:23. Let's beware of speaking in "reformed tongues.")

I believe the healthiest thing for the Orthodox Presbyterian Church is to study how it can become broader rather than how it can become even more distinct. Church planters should be introduced to the writings of men like Gary MnIntosh, George G. Hunter III and Merton P. Strommen (authors who have written informed and intelligent works on church growth and church management). I believe the OPC should actively pursue organic union with other orthodox presbyterian denominations. The "distinctives" forged in the OPC will never go away even if the OPC dissolves into another church. Those distinctives will always remain a part of the discussion of the church that is continually reforming itself. My hope is that the Orthodox Presbyterian Church will come to an end as we know it, that it will dissolve into a larger presbyterian witness in which its dross will be consumed and its gold refined. The truth in all its beauty can never be extinguished.