33 comments

1. Great! Just ordered reveiw copies of both books. Thanks for the lead.

2. *review

3. I like this “plan” that Jon Payne has shared with us. The reason I like it is because it is not really a ‘plan” at all- and certainly, it is not a strategy. Rather, it’s a simple call to “doing church” in the manner God has clearly decreed.

   I get nervous about all strategies for 3 reasons:

   1. The Church has been built by Jesus and has flourished for 2ooo years now without a strategy. Isn’t it amazing that no strategy is found in the book of Acts? That is, no “plan” outside of the ordinary ministry means God gave (e.g., prayer, godly lives, faithful “2 kingdom” citizens, people humbly being called to different people, etc.).

   Simply put: It seems that in the Scriptures, God NEVER calls us to come up with strategies.

   2. I have sat in on a truckload of strategy sessions with different ministries. They have all come to nothing. The flurry of activity, brainstorming, surveying, and cultural analysis dissolves like foam on a coke, yet all the while the Kingdom is quietly growing like a mustard seed outside of our high tech approaches.

   Simply illustrated: What was “strategic” about the Son of God being born in a cave in Bethlehem?

   3. It is remarkably easy to make bad decisions on surveys, cultural analyses, statistics. We end up invariably becoming theologians of glory and embrace worldly methodologies. Malcolm Muggeridge said it well: “Christianity is not a statistical view of life.” Statistics and strategies, while well meaning and sincere, simply are doomed to fail, for they have as it’s posture the theology of glory. I say this as one who is a “recovering” theologian of glory. I really want to manage God and use high-powered strategems, rather than humbly trust Christ to build His Church through small, weak, and foolish things. Yet, it is in the small and weak things that the beauty of Christ shines forth.

   Simple conclusion: The Church will flourish under the theology of the cross.

   I am not a member of the PCA, therefore I hope I am not out of line for sharing my thoughts. I respect and love the PCA however, and like Martin shared the other day, I appreciate their concern and hard work. Truly, they want people to be reached for Christ, to feel loved and for Christ to be glorified.

   Thank you, Dr. Clark, for posting this (if it gets posted!).

   chuck fry

4. This response is equivalent to responding to a basketball coach’s instruction on how to run a motion offense with the response, “But coach, isn’t the point to score the basketball?”

5. While young folks like me are cynical in general toward strategies and other artificial mechanisms for church engagement with society (i.e. evangelism explosions and four spiritual laws), there is another aspect of this whole effort that particularly disturbs me: talk (however hypothetical) of leaving NAPARC.

   You (generic) old folks wanted an ecumenical community because that was the thing to do for twentieth century modern-minded types, so you got it. Instead of joining one of those disastrous lowest-common-denominator unions, you created a Reformed ecumenical community. Denominations kept their distinctives intact, while celebrating a common subscription to either the Westminster Standards or the Three Forms. This collegiality is exemplified at WSCAL.

   Yet now, folks like Chappell are talking about splitting this ecumenical community in the name of mission? At the same time that there is a surge of “young, restless, and Reformed” types (however defined) that are searching for transcendence, tradition, and doctrinal integrity?

   Who would join in this more “missional” alliance with the PCA? Surely not groups with more in common with them than the confessional bodies of NAPARC. Any sort of alliance outside of NAPARC would require some form of theological reductionism and indifferentism–of the sort that has descended upon the denomination that I am now leaving (the EPC) and the CRC.

   Reformed Christianity–the fullest flowering of Christianity according to Warfield–is not only true, but it is beautiful. Often times we polemicize opponents into the ground in the name of truth, only to forsake the beauties inherent in Reformed theology. We each remember the first time we encountered the beauty of this truth–whether in our first reading of the Old Testament in a Christocentric light or in the dawning respect for ancient creeds and confessions that help us declare the truth of Scripture with one voice.

   If we want that voice to be heard with greater frequency in our society, than we must declare the beauty of our truth, rather than simply try to pretty it up by forsaking the true bonds of fellowship with Reformed brethren.

6. Brilliant! Thanks for posting this.

7. I would also like to see a renewed commitment to properly distinguish between law and gospel in the proclamation of the Word from the pulpit, teaching ministries of the church, and in the home.

8. Wonderful! Heart-breakingly wonderful!

9. baddison11, I can understand why you would say. I agree that it is not yet a strategic plan, per se. However, I think it points us toward a more adequate strategic plan.

   Let me take your analogy. A coach comes along with a detailed plan for a motion offense. Yet there is no part of the plan that actually mentions scoring. It’s all about passing and movement.

   Jon Payne has set forth some of the fundamentals of scoring. Now, the plan has to be re-adapted to include the idea of actually scoring baskets.

   I’m sure there are probably holes in the analogy, but that’s something of how I see this.

10. Wes,

    Thanks for your response. My only point is that there has to be some kind of strategic plan and just saying we should believe these things doesn’t move to how they are implemented.

    I find issue with some of the overtures, particularly pulling out of NAPARC, but that is where discussion needs to be. It shouldn’t be on saying we don’t need a strategy we just need to believe X,Y, & Z. At best this view is simplistic and at worst at assumes that people do not affirm what has been listed above.

    But back to my analogy briefly. One can discuss the merits of the motion offense, perhaps it is inconsistent with either the philosophy (lets say represents the Confessions) or the strengths (this will be our context in North America) of the team. But there are numerous options and it would not be illegitimate to suggest, well maybe we should run the triangle, or flex, etc. This is actually addressing the situation.

    Just saying, NO OFFENSE! Just score the ball! Doesn’t actually help anything and I would think that any leader would rightly ignore such criticism.

    As a member and a hopeful minister in the PCA, the question isn’t what should our values be, it’s whether those values are reflected in our mission. Let the debate focus here so that everyone involved in the conversation can be sharpened.

11. Friends, the “PCA Strategic Vision” is, in large part, a strategy to reverse the downward trend of the denomination in terms of numerical growth, unity, financial support and cooperation. The framers of the vision, I believe, have the best intentions of making the PCA a stronger, healthier denomination. This effort should be commended. However, after reading the document, one cannot help but wonder if the remedy for the downward trend in the PCA is off target. Perhaps our downward trend and disunity is less due to cultural irrelevancy, missional narrowness, ethnic insensitivity and safe places for women and young people, and more a consequence of our unwillingness to give ourselves wholeheartedly to what God has promised to bless in the lives of His elect.

    From my perspective, our greatest need as a denomination is to renew our commitments to the 17 points listed above, commitments which Reformed and Confessional Presbyterians have held for centuries precisely because they believed that they were biblical and would effectually cultivate growth, unity, mission, sacrificial giving and cooperation. I understand that some will say, “Yes, I agree with the 17 points, but we need to do more than this to bring renewal to the PCA.” Do we? If these 17 points (not an exhaustive list, but a start) were fleshed out and made available to every presbytery/session in the PCA to implement into their philosophy of ministry, would we not enjoy the kinds of renewal that we all earnestly desire? What we need more than anything in the PCA is a warm, winsome, consistent, serious, joyful, positive expression of Reformed and confessional Presbyterianism that unashamedly and courageously applies the theology of our Confession to the way we worship, preach, teach, write, shepherd, discipline, serve, evangelize and plant-churches (Domestic and International).

    From our experience at GPC, applying the Reformed Confession in this manner cultivates unity, inspires evangelism and mission, stimulates prayer and Bible reading, fosters sacrificial giving, encourages biblical piety and warmly welcomes women, minorities and youth to worship God according to Scripture and employ their God-given gifts in service of their neighbor. This vision, I believe, would unify our beloved denomination in what God Himself has clearly promised to bless.

12. Dr. Payne,

    Once again, very compelling. Thank you.

13. Has the PCA lost more members than it gained this past year or two? Are there numbers for this? If so, is there more to this than simply that church attendance and membership is down all across the board in the U.S. the past few years?

    Thanks

14. The trajectory of growth in the PCA has not been on the same kind of incline in the last couple of years as it has in the past. Part of that, however, is because Coral Ridge PCA purged their roles for the first time in a long time, decreasing the denominational numbers by many thousand with one swing of the administrative ax.

15. Rev. Payne,

    I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, I just don’t think you’re presenting an alternative to the PCA overture.

    HOW do we implement the things you are suggesting? I do think it would be good to remind many PCA churches of your 17 suggestions, this would certainly give a direction for the way forward. But in what ways do we implement them in our context?

    • This brings me back to the Peter Drucker quote, “It is better to get the wrong answer to the right question than the right answer to the wrong question.” Dr. Payne’s 17 points, at least, seem to be presenting the right question.

      In finding the right answer, it may not be necessary to spend two years reinventing the wheel. There are certainly quite a few reformed churches that are doing a fine job of implementing most, if not all, of Dr. Payne’s 17 points, right now. The right answer may be as simple as documenting how that is being accomplished and reproducing it in a form that can be implemented throughout the denomination as a whole.

16. I suppose this would be a good topic of discussion, wouldn’t it?

    For a start, it would be helpful if our Reformed Seminaries would consistently teach and exemplify to our NAPARC ordinands a faithful expression of Reformed Confessionalism, that is, an expression – as listed above – where our practice is informed by our Reformed Confession … and not by something else. In addition, we could, as mentioned above, flesh out the above points – or similar points – and strongly encourage our presbyteries to grapple with them and apply them with more diligence and care. As a denomination we could renew our commitments to these priorities through intentional pre-Assembly seminars and conferences or regional meetings. Or we could make these points a priority in some of our denominational media outlets and in our large agencies.

    I’m not prepared to set up flow charts and graphs. But I think that such a strategy would begin to help foster spiritual renewal in our PCA camp.

17. Responding in part to Dr. Payne’s notice that cleaning up the Coral Ridge membership produced a noticeable impact on the denominational stats:

    Where can we find these numbers? I’m not a statistician, but I would like to see some numbers (across time) and broader analysis. I recall hearing the pastor of an OPC church making his arguments for departing the OPC for the PCA because it was a denomination more in tune with his congregation. That has happened many times; how often have the PCA numbers been reviewed while taking into account the various avenues that produce numerical growth as recorded at the denominational level?

18. baddison11,

    You have a fixation (kind of like an oral or anal fixation) with “strategies.” This kind of fixation is quite common among the pragmatic types. Dr. Payne’s 17 points may not be in the traditional sense of the word a strategy, but if you were to look at what the Reformers considered a program for Reform, Dr. Payne’s 17 points matches up quite nicely. I would point you in the direction of Calvin’s Necessity of Reforming the Church–not a strategy, per se, but he did offer up what needed to be done in order to Reform the Church. It was implemented quite nicely at Geneva. Dr. Payne is suggesting we need to do Church and missions in the way the 17 points suggest. Now there may need to be some additional things like steps to take in order to implement the 17 points in the denomination, but very little else needs to be done in order to implement the 17 points. Your cry of “We need a strategy” is really trying to dodge the issue set forth in these 17 points.

    • Brother, I’m just wondering what you’re trying to accomplish by this post…

      Just to add clarity to the discussion though, Calvin’s “Necessity of Reforming the Church” is about the theological errors of Rome. Strategy does not get you out of theological error.

      The question in the context of the PCA overture is HOW do we express the theology we hold to in the WCF in our present context in a winsome and persuasive way to the nation we are called to minister in.

      It’s not trying to dodge the issue, but actually to attack it in the most helpful way possible. We need to be reminded of these 17 points, but that is not what is being discussed in the overture, its how do we communicate these truths that we hold dear?

      • It’s not that we need to be reminded of those 17 points but that we ought to be doing what they recommend. Again, you’re fixated on a business action plan. You read Dr. Payne’s points as if they’re theological data that we ought to remind ourselves. I read his points as a program for Reform, or rather, as Brian Carpenter so eloquently pointed out a path to repentance. You are quite mistaken to read Calvin’s Necessity of Reforming the Church as being only about theological errors. It was a program for Reform. It was a manifesto for the Reformed Churches. It was a call to the Church to do as Calvin and other Reformers did. This is the problem with you pragmatists. You read theology as if its entirely divorced from practice, and can’t see how theology is to be implemented unless given charts, demographics, action steps, timelines, etc. Look, brother, it’s not rocket science. When Dr. Payne says, for example, that we need a renewed commitment to family worship, then in our churches we should start teaching our families in our churches to practice family worship and encourage them to that end. Why do you need charts, action steps, demographics and timelines for that?

        • Steven…

          First, you are not properly representing Calvin’s treatise. It was not telling Churches how to do everything. Believe it or not, different Reformed Churches had different liturgies and even different theologies.

          There was and is no monolithic Reformed consensus on HOW to worship and strategies for worship.

          Second, sir your suppositions on my orientation as a pragmatist make me incredulous. You are simply not listening to what I’m saying. Just because someone says they think there need to be strategic approaches to grow the chuch does not make them a pragmatist.

          You know one of the qualifications for an elder? Administration. This would include strategic planning.

          For churches looking to evangelize in this country, knowing HOW to effectively implement the Gospel is important. You know what the Reformers did? Translated Scripture into their native tongues. Even they were concerned with contextualization.

          The way the church worshipped in the 17th century SHOULD NOT be the way we worship today. Should we adopt the churches theology, absolutely! But this does not mean we do everything the same we they did things, that is just no responsible and is more capriciously dogmatic than Rome. This doesn’t make me a pragmatist, it actually makes me confessional. Calling me as such is either ignorant, or dishonest. Either way, you should apologize for making such rash and uninformed claims.

          • Brandon (Addison),

            Are you being facetious when you suggest that “strategic planning” is implied in the biblical term “economy”?

19. I am surprised at the idea that this strategy ISN’T. As someone who has only been reformed for about 7 years now, this felt like I was reading from the ‘subordinate’ standards of the WCF. To me it was one of the most brilliantly simple ideas on Church renewal that I have ever read. I am not a PCA member, but I am a Presby and this strategy is exactly what all of us should be doing. If you think that it needs more ‘flesh’, I recommend the directory for private and public worship found in the back of our old green book. Elders, visit homes and teach catechism skill and the art of godly conferencing to fathers, or other heads of households. Drop the liturgy to that listed by our divines and express the faith in truth and righteousness, not in relevance and insight. I for one am tired of seeing this same pattern being followed. I may be way off, but every other time this type of ‘cultural relevance’ discussion takes place, it seems we end up with open apostasy, aka PCUSA/CREC/RC…sorry for that last part, but that’s my view.
    Many thanks to Rev. Payne for calling the elders to their duties.
    Bob

20. “You have a fixation (kind of like an oral or anal fixation) with “strategies.” This kind of fixation is quite common among the pragmatic types.”

    Bad form. This sentiment could have been given more intellectual and persuasive potency if it wasn’t couched in such polemical language.

21. A renewed commitment to…

    “All this we will do…”? We need to remember that we do not have a covenant of works from God promising that he will respond with blessing if we pull the right levers (even if those are biblical levels). I agree wholeheartedly with these 17 things, but they need to be done because they are biblical. It is not a question of man’s church-growth strategies vs. God’s church-growth strategy; I think a better name for this list would be “a biblical church-health strategy”

22. Stephen,

    Point taken. However, I do stand by in substance if not in form by what I said. The pragmatists are fixated on having a “to-do” list that looks a lot like a business action plan. They want numbers and they want results, and both of these they want them fast or the whole thing is in dire straits. The Church has a “to-do” list from Christ: Preach the gospel, make disciples, administer the sacraments, faithfully perform church discipline. The church also has a time frame: “to the end of the age.” Anything more than this, could very well be from the devil.

23. I absolutely agree with your critique of pragmatism. That last comment was exactly the point to make. Thanks!

24. The 17 points are good. Like anything strategic the question is “how?” But they present a good vision, and doing things like applying them in the teaching at seminaries is good.

    I really think, in the end, this comes down to how each and every elder in the church takes up his call to shepherd the flock, and to shepherd each other. We tend to focus on the former and rarely talk about, much less practice, the latter.

    FWIW, I put a couple more thoughts up at http://missionpca.wordpress.com. Look for the pastor’s blog to the right under the calendar.

    Or, more directly: http://tinyurl.com/26m4pw5 for part 2,
    and: http://tinyurl.com/2ecbgtc for part 3.

25. How about a different way of looking at things? In 1 Sam 4 the Israelites go to battle against the Philistines and get their rear ends handed to them. So they go and get the Ark of the Covenant, thinking that will insure victory over their enemies. But it didn’t, and the Ark was captured. Many commentators note that this is because what God wanted was repentance and renewal, not a new strategy.

    In my mind the PCA stragetic plan is more like grabbing the ark and running back to the battlefield. What Dr. Payne has articulated is more like repentance and renewal. One calls us “forward” to who knows what? More bureaucracy, to be sure. More alientation of the confessionalists from their denominational leadership. More fragmentation of the denomination. I view this whole thing as a massive power play by the liberals against the confessionalists. We’re being told, “You guys are done calling the tune. We’re going to take your money and do what we want with it by lodging decision making power in commitees that are made up of the AC, Covenant College, and Covenant Seminary (shudder!) If you don’t give us your money, we’ll disenfranchise you and do what we want anyhow.”

    Frankly I don’t trust the crowd that created this thing. It starts out by belittling my concerns and accusing folks like me of being stuck in a culture of victimhood because we’re “reahashing stories of abuse in prior denominations.” By God himself, I am not! I’m raising a warning cry that what happened in those old denominations is happening right now in ours. I’m going to try to stop it. And no pointy-headed bureaucrat is going to stop me from doing so by howling about the Ninth Commandment.

    How’s that for an elephant in the room?

    Dr. Payne calls us back to the Old Paths, where we met with God in power and he transformed whole nations by His Spirit. And he can do so again, in spite of the countervailing cultural forces. God moves when his children repent and obey. We should try it and see.

26. Brian, as your official “Yes Man” I would like to offer from the depths of my bowels a hearty and boisterous “Amen, my brotha’ of anotha’ motha’!”

27. Steve,

    Love ya man. Need all the friends I can get right now.

    Blessings,
    B

28. Hi,

    I’ve had to reject some comments lately because they aren’t adhering to the comments policy. You can say what you want, within reason, Scriptural and confessional boundaries, but you have to take responsibility for what you say:

    http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/comments-policy/

    Try again.

Comments are closed.