Presbytery of Boston
by Rev. Richard Brondyke
Boston Presbytery is one of the smallest presbyteries, boasting only about 3500 members and 25 churches. It has experienced declines in membership in many congregations, but growth in other congregations in the last 20 years. The history of the presbytery of Boston begins later than many presbyteries on the East Coast— mostly arising from a wave of immigration from the Maritime provinces of Canada in the 1880s and 1890s. In recent years, those joining the presbytery have been a diverse group. We now have four ethnic churches and a number of congregations with significant ethnic diversity.
Our presbytery is not without its struggles, one I have now shared as pastor of Fort Square Presbyterian Church (Quincy, MA) for 21 years. As part of the rather liberal Synod of the Northeast, Boston Presbytery reflects many of the struggles currently found within the Presbyterian Church (USA) as a whole. The larger congregations here have traditionally been orthodox and evangelical, but votes in the presbytery represent diverse theological movements. We have several “More Light” churches, including one that has publicly announced its defiance of the constitution, specifically G-6.0106b. Votes on controversial issues have generally gone the way of progressive and liberal theology. All of the votes on sexuality issues for the last 10 years or more have gone against the standard of fidelity and chastity in G-6.0106b.
But we have seen change that reflects the persistent engagement and involvement of many over the years. This year several votes on controversial issues were decided by one vote; the winds of change may be in the air. New ethnic churches in the presbytery generally reflect a commitment to orthodox theology and adherence to the constitution. Faithful presbyters have involved themselves in the work of theological renewal in the presbytery…and by God’s grace have had an impact. It is not that we have been without controversy, but somehow we have, by God’s grace, managed to continue to hold together as brothers and sisters in Christ.
Reformed theology reminds us that all the glory for anything helpful belongs to God; nevertheless there are aspects of involvement that we have found important over the years in our efforts. Good attitudes, persistent prayer, and active engagement are at the heart of those efforts.
We have discovered that the mind of Christ is crucial if we are to have any influence (Phil. 2:5). We have sought to remind each other how vital humility is in our involvement in presbytery; adherence to Biblical orthodoxy should never be an excuse for arrogance or pride in our relation with others. Furthermore, a recognition that we do make mistakes, the willingness to apologize and keep good relationships, as best we can, is vital if we are to work effectively.
We have tried to see others as real people, not just as people to convince. Caring for the concerns and needs of fellow presbyters fosters healthy relationships within the presbytery. That concern makes a difference in the midst of difficult presbytery debates. We have tried to treat those with whom we disagree with respect even while boldly standing for Biblical truth. Many years of active service have demonstrated to people that we care about the presbytery and its work even if at times there have been strong disagreements.
Prayer has, for many years, been at the heart of renewal efforts within our presbytery. A group of renewal minded pastors has met every other week for 10 months out of the year for many years now. Though not everyone is able to attend every meeting, the commitment to pray is there. Our prayer group has recently begun praying for each and every member of our presbytery. We support each other by sharing concerns and needs, and then uphold each other in prayer. Out of these relationships has come a desire to work together to see the Lord exalted in our presbytery. Naturally, we pray for “issues” before the presbytery, believing that God will do His work as we bring our concerns to the Lord.
One of the benefits of such prayer times has been a sense of what God might have us do to make a difference in the presbytery, as well as the courage to work together in many different areas. We do not see ourselves as “saviors” of the presbytery, but rather servants of the Lord who have made ourselves available to the Master.
We do stay in touch with issues in the denomination and how they may impact Boston Presbytery (at least one of our members is routinely involved in denominational renewal work). We do get involved in the presbytery, believing that it is only as participants in the process that we will make a difference; at times we have had to cajole each other (in a friendly way!) to get our members involved as well. Members of our group have served in significant and important positions within the presbytery. We have followed the simple rule that if we are not involved, we have no one to blame but ourselves. The polity of the denomination is a wonderful tool that should be valued as we seek renewal within the presbyteries. Our motto has been 2 Cor. 4:1-2, “Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart. Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.”
Finally, we have been avid supporters of new church planting efforts, particularly ethnic churches and have seen fruit borne in the presbytery by such efforts. This is an area where we continue to hope to make a difference and be encouragers and supporters of efforts to reach out with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Such efforts are always worthwhile! Ultimately our efforts at renewal are not a great secret; we have simply sought to be faithful to the call of God upon our lives to serve Him!
Bringing renewal to our presbytery is not a short term effort. It takes time, effort, wisdom, prayer, and the moving of God in our midst. Such renewal may not happen in the particular way that we might have planned. God is still sovereign and so we trust him with the future—our own and Boston Presbytery’s.
Presbytery of National Capital
by Dr. Peter James
National Capital Presbytery serves the Washington DC metro area. We represent 111 churches and 41,000 members in Northern Virginia, suburban Maryland and the District of Columbia. I have been a member of National Capital since I came to Vienna Presbyterian Church in 1979.
National Capital has long been regarded as a liberal presbytery. When confronted with the defining social issues of our day, National Capital turns left. Historically, our presbytery votes 80% liberal and 20% conservative on gay/lesbian issues. Our presbytery’s liberal majority is bolstered by the high number of specialized clergy serving the metro area.
But the ground is shifting at National Capital. Through the years, I have witnessed a steady swing from hard left to moderate. Nearly every pastor called to a church in Northern Virginia in the past ten years has been more theologically orthodox than his or her predecessor. Most votes are considerably closer these days; likely two thirds liberal and one third conservative. There was a time when conservatives were small enough in number to fit inside a phone booth (for those of you who can remember what a phone booth looks like!); now we are a minority to be taken seriously.
For all the denominational homage paid to diversity, conservatives evidence a growing ethnicity within our ranks. New immigrant Christians attending our churches are decidedly more conservative than American-born Presbyterians.
Conservatives meet monthly in our presbytery. The logistics of getting people together is formidable. Roads divide and traffic snarls. It’s no simple feat to rally conservatives.
The biggest challenge facing conservatives is not resistance from liberal minded colleagues; truthfully we don’t have our own house in order. Even among conservatives, there is division in the house.
Some within our ranks are loyalists. We are more conciliatory in tone and approach. We would rather stay and fight than leave. This group believes denominational structures can be redeemed.
Likewise there is a contingent of conservatives in National Capital who are restless and dissident. We are more willing to cut and run. We believe the denomination is already apostate and are ready to go a new direction.
Don’t get me wrong, conservatives aren’t at each other’s throats, but neither do we present a united front to the church. I long for the day when like-minded Presbyterians can come together as one.
Presbytery of Elizabeth
by Rev. Kenneth Macari
Elizabeth Presbytery is a good place for ministry and mission! Elizabeth Presbytery is home to 50+ churches in the central to western section of New Jersey. Its boundaries spread from the cities of Elizabeth, Edison and Perth Amboy which are contiguous to New York City all the way west to the Pennsylvania border. Diversity is very evident with churches ministering to inner city, booming suburban, old industrial small towns and even, rural populations. Over one hundred language and people groups are to be found within the presbytery’s boundaries.
Elizabeth Presbytery is one in which classic confessionalist evangelical witness can thrive and not just survive. The style and tone is moderate. Theological dialogue is sincere and effective. This is seen in classic confessionalist energetic participation in presbytery meetings, activities and committees or units other than just the “evangelism” committee. The current moderator of presbytery as well as the previous two moderators would be representatives of the broad evangelical viewpoint. Presbytery’s Nominating Committee for commissioners to both General Assembly and the Synod of the Northeast intentionally seeks out candidates from the entire theological and ecclesiastical spectrum. This was true for me as I represented our presbytery to the General Assembly held in Long Beach, California in 2000.
The recent presbytery task force on the PUP Report was theologically and ecclesiastically balanced. Presentations were made during presbytery meetings. Discussion groups candidly brought to light the many concerns and trepidations of commissioners. A post-PUP dialogue leadership team will be formed to model the further articulation of the five theological premises affirmed in PUP. To complement this, a theology and worship group has been convened to plan for more creative, explicitly Trinitarian worship at presbytery meetings. I will be involved in both of these groups.
On another note, it is exciting to participate in presbytery’s prioritization of immigrant new church developments and other paradigms of cutting edge ministry. Currently, Elizabeth Presbytery has a strong commitment to Korean, Portuguese and Hispanic new church development. The presbytery also partners with member churches in outreach to recent immigrants from Indonesia, Ghana, Madagascar and Kenya. The latter group is the mission priority for my session at Edison Community Presbyterian Church.
Finally, there are frequent times when like-minded and like-spirited pastors gather for mealtime prayer and fellowship. These times focus on mutual encouragement and accountability. More activities like this are in the works. All in all, the Presbytery of Elizabeth is a good place for the classically confessionalist evangelical to minister.
Presbytery of East Tennessee
by Rev. Malcolm M. King III
The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is a denomination in crisis. We are losing members at an alarming rate. Undesignated giving has dried up so much that the denomination has cut back on its missionary personnel and staff support for mission. And far too often, instead of working together to proclaim the gospel message to the world, PCUSA pastors and members find themselves apologizing for how “others” in this body are hurting the cause of Jesus Christ.
At some point I realized that I couldn’t wait for someone else to do something to help the congregation I am serving, or this denomination in which I have been ordained. If I wanted change, if I believed that Christ our Lord was calling us to rise above our theological and institutional differences, and if I really wanted to experience the abundant life Jesus offers instead of drowning in this chaotic mess, then I had to find some way to act, if only on a very small scale.
And so I did.
We have 77 churches in the presbytery, and we are evenly split between conservative and liberal congregations. Generally, the smaller congregations are more conservative, while the larger congregations are more liberal, or “middle of the road,” with the exception of Signal Mountain which is both our largest and most conservative congregation. I began by inviting our Wednesday night Bible study group to examine closely the PUP report as it was being presented to the General Assembly, and I encouraged every session member to make this study a part of their Lenten journey. The study was difficult. We struggled to understand some very convoluted arguments and often found ourselves in deep disagreement with the PUP arguments we did understand. But we completed our task and one of the results of our journey was a congregation with many members who knew more about our denominational connection (or lack of it) than they had known previously.
The session took this study as an opportunity to sit down and list what we think is essential for a Church of Jesus Christ that desires to be faithful to Scripture. And we shared that list with our congregation and asked them for input. We didn’t stop there, however.
Acting on a challenge given by Gerrit Dawson at the 2005 Coalition Gathering, our small, nine member session contacted the session of the largest congregation in our presbytery (East Tennessee) and invited them to sit down with us and talk. We asked them if we could share with them our understanding of what should be essential for a Church of Jesus Christ. We had no intention of “converting” them, and no intention of setting up some para-presbytery alliance. Our only goal was to let a sister session know what we believed and why we believed it, so that our work together in the future might be more productive and faithful. And, after many attempts to find a place and a time that would be convenient to all concerned, it was agreed that our session would leave immediately after worship one Sunday and drive 3 hours to meet with our sister session.
We opened with prayer. Members of both sessions made opening comments about what we believed and how we thought of ourselves as disciples of Jesus Christ. And then we gathered around tables to enable each session member to articulate his or her current thinking on the essentials of faith. After much discussion we offered everyone the opportunity to pray and then we gathered to break bread together.
That initial meeting encouraged me to contact other ministers in our presbytery to find out what their sessions were doing to determine what they thought to be essentials of the faith. So far we meet on a regular basis for a light lunch and heavy conversation about what God is calling us to do in this part of His vineyard. And we have tentatively set up an October meeting for multiple sessions to gather and discuss the essentials of our faith.
While presbytery meetings are opportunities for one or two elders of a session to meet and greet with elders of sister sessions, there is seldom room for doing theology or talking about faith. What I hope we will learn to do is find a place where a deeper understanding can be found regarding what we believe as Presbyterians and how we can live as members of this denomination.
Now that the PCUSA is post-Birmingham, a part of our conversation session-to-session will most likely take up some of the responses to the work done by the General Assembly—work that has perhaps deepened the crisis before us. Where this conversation will take us I have no idea. I appreciate, however, the recently published Declaration of the Constitutional Presbyterians to help us center our conversation around Scripture and the Confessions, while being faithful to the Book of Order and its claims on us.
Our engagement with sister sessions and our plans for future engagements has energized our session and they have asked me to offer a 13 week sermon series based on the 13 affirmations made in the Declaration of Constitutional Presbyterians. It is our hope that as Ordinary Time winds down and we enter Advent, that this series will enable us to start the Church year with a new attitude and a renewed sense of hope that we are being faithful to our commitments to the God we know as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. To Him be all glory, honor, and praise.
Presbytery of the Peaks
by Rev. Dr. Robert McRae
A little over a year ago a group of pastors and elders in the Presbytery of the Peaks began a support/network group which we call Believers United. We meet regularly as a group of about 20 or so folks to give encouragement and support to each other and to plan ways that we might move forward faithfully in the PCUSA.
With its office in Lynchburg and with 139 congregations within our borders, the Presbytery of the Peaks is the result of the merger of two former PCUS presbyteries, Fincastle and Blue Ridge, as well as eight predominately Black UPCUSA churches from Southern Virginia. Peaks is a mix of theologies and ideologies ranging from the very conservative to the extremely liberal.
If the decisive votes on ordination standards (particularly G-6.0106b) in recent years are any indication, the grass roots of Peaks hold firmly to Biblical standards. In 1997 we voted 139 to 86 in favor of Amendment B (G6.0106b). In 1998 the vote was 68 to 160 to reject an attempt to delete G-6.0106b. In yet another vote in 2001 Peaks rejected a further attempt to delete G-6.0106b.
In Believers United we seek to be a Presbyterian renewal network for sessions and individuals within the Presbytery of the Peaks, as well as, an encouragement to those in other presbyteries. We held a presbytery-wide conference on sexuality and the PUP report in the Fall of 2005. Since 80% of the congregations in the Presbytery of the Peaks have fewer than 100 members, and many have no pastoral leadership, we felt that communication was an important role for Believers United. We have sent out three one page, 8 1/2x 14 newsletters to every installed pastor and clerk of session in the presbytery informing them of important issues and suggesting resources. These can be viewed at our web site: www.believersunited.org.
In our presbytery, GA commissioners are nominated by the nominating committee but no information is given to the presbytery on their qualifications for selection. One of the sessions in Believers United passed an overture to request that nominees be required to respond to questions about their knowledge of Scripture and the Confessions and whether there were any areas of the Constitution they did not support, specifically G-6.0106b. Although the overture lost in the vote at presbytery, we realize that many presbytery commissioners were unaware of the process and the need for the overture. We hope as the newsletter continues to raise issues, presbytery commissioners will recognize their responsibility to know and evaluate the qualifications of the GA commissioners they elect.
In the wake of the Birmingham GA, four regional gatherings were held in the Presbytery of the Peaks, at which time our general presbyter and one or more of our four commissioners sought to interpret GA actions. Our Believers United network was represented at each of the four gatherings and challenged the GA commissioners’ interpretation that “nothing has changed.” This, even though PUP member Barbara Wheeler was asked on the floor of Peaks Presbytery in November, 2005, whether an affirmative vote on PUP would make possible the ordination of unrepentant, practicing homosexuals and whether this would be a change in PCUSA standards. She said, “The short answer to that question is ‘Yes’.”
In seeking ways that we might move forward faithfully, one pastor in Believers United and the session of the church he serves has sent an overture to the presbytery affirming G-6.0106b as the standard for ordination/installation in Peaks Presbytery with no exceptions.
Regardless of the PCUSA stance or that of the Presbytery of the Peaks, at Believes United we are encouraging pastors and sessions to find ways to let it be known that we intend to hold to all constitutional ordination standards, especially G-6.0106b: “fidelity in the marriage of a man and a woman or chastity in singleness.” We hold that the church as the Body of Christ in any age is forever called to raise up valiantly a standard against the erosion of an ever-changing culture. In the words of the prophet Isaiah: “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the Word of our God stands forever.”
Presbytery of Middle Tennessee
by Elder John Boone
A loosely knit and organized group of folks have come together in the Presbytery of Middle Tennessee to try to foster the historical and traditional faith. We have met together for luncheon meetings and have used e-mail for discussion of issues and to stay in contact.
An overture to change our church’s ordination standards and the potential effects of the Report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity tended to actuate our coming together. A local chapter of the Covenant Network active in our presbytery also caused some to feel the need for a countervailing presence in our presbytery.
We feel particularly blessed that our efforts to “get the church out” and encourage a “no” vote on the overture brought to our presbytery to change the ordination standards, resulted in a defeat of that overture by close to a 2 to 1 vote.
We have found that we are a diverse group in backgrounds, styles of worship, theological underpinnings and geographical settings. We have also found common ground for working together, however, with Scripture as our (and the Church’s) guide for faith and practice. Our getting together and working together has encouraged us and has given us hope for the future. We anticipate our group staying together, staying in contact with one another and working together to effect a more Biblical position in our presbytery and the PCUSA.
Presbytery of Mississippi
by Rev. Michael Herrin
There seem to be quite a few folks in the PCUSA who say the PUP report didn’t really change anything. They say that it strengthened presbyteries’ abilities to examine candidates. They insist that the PUP report wasn’t a big deal. If there are any of these folks in the Presbytery of Mississippi, they are a tiny minority. Before, during and after the General Assembly, this presbytery has been overwhelmingly united in its opposition to PUP, and to any dilution of our constitution’s ordination standards.
Before the General Assembly, the presbytery submitted an overture suggesting some critical changes that needed to be made in Recommendation #5 of the PUP report. The presbytery’s main concern was that, in allowing candidates to declare “scruples,” the PUP report did not make any distinction between a candidate’s belief and practice. Candidates have always been allowed some leeway in their beliefs, but they have always been required to “be governed by the church’s polity and abide by its discipline.” The presbytery offered amendments to the PUP report that would have restored this necessary and historic distinction between belief and practice, and the presbytery advocated strongly for their adoption. Neither the GA Ecclesiology Committee nor the General Assembly plenary took our advice, and PUP was approved, granting sessions and presbyteries the ability to allow candidates to ignore clear constitutional mandates.
In preparation for such an outcome, the presbytery also took steps, before the General Assembly even met, to mitigate the disastrous consequences of PUP. We approved a press release, containing a brief summary of the seven overtures that the presbytery sent up to the General Assembly. In the press release, we announced our belief that Scripture is the Word of God and God’s guide to us for worship and life. We condemned the PCUSA’s one-sided attempt to punish Israel through a policy of divestment. We announced our stand on the Biblical and confessional standard of marriage as between one man and one woman. We announced our belief that life begins at conception and thus our firm opposition to abortion, except in the rarest of cases.
And, of course, we announced our intention to uphold Biblical, confessional, and constitutional standards for ordination. We stated clearly that we would “not allow practicing homosexuals, adulterers, or anyone engaged in sexually immoral conduct to be ordained and/or installed as deacons or elders in any congregation of the Presbytery of Mississippi.” We stated that we would “not allow practicing homosexuals, adulterers, or anyone engaged in sexually immoral conduct to be ordained and/or installed as ministers of the Word and Sacrament by the Presbytery of Mississippi.”
After the General Assembly’s decision to adopt PUP, the presbytery held a called meeting on July 13. At that meeting, we adopted the following resolution:
The Presbytery of Mississippi does hereby,
Declare that the action of the 217th General Assembly in the passage of Recommendation 5 of the Peace, Unity, and Purity Task Force Report, is a grievous error seriously lacking Biblical, Confessional and Constitutional integrity, and of such magnitude that it places the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in a state of constitutional crisis, requiring that the Presbytery of Mississippi re-evaluate the nature of its relationship with the General Assembly,
Reaffirm its strong conviction that all constitutional requirements for ordination, including G-6.0106b, are binding on all the sessions and presbyteries of the Presbyterian Church, (U.S.A.), and none are subject to being considered “inessential” by any governing body of the Church,
Reaffirm its resolution that no exceptions to the requirement that all deacons, elders and ministers must “live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or in chastity in singleness” will be allowed within the jurisdiction of this Presbytery, and
Resolve that any governing body of the Presbyterian Church, (U.S.A.) which abrogates this requirement has broken fellowship with the Presbytery of Mississippi. Ministers from such unbiblical, unconfessional, and unconstitutional presbyteries will not be received for membership in this presbytery unless they personally affirm their belief in and their willingness to be governed by this requirement.
After adopting this resolution, the presbytery appointed a task force to explore what other steps we need to take during this time of constitutional crisis. The task force is currently meeting and will report to the next stated meeting of presbytery on October 19.
Presbyterian Campus Ministry
by Rev. Randy Bare, Westminster House Executive Director
As recent articles in the New York Times and other papers around the country have demonstrated, there are some new wineskins in Presbyterian Campus Ministry. After decades of decline, God is breathing new life into decaying campus buildings and the ministries they house. Over a century ago, the PCUSA had a national strategy. Follow the students who have grown up in our churches as they enroll in the burgeoning State Universities. Invest major dollars into new facilities that will house programs for those students, the church’s future leaders. The PCUSA took great pride in campus ministry: “the oldest continuing mission beyond the local congregation.” Today, that pride has long since evaporated. Funding cuts, focus on congregational survival and intra-denominational conflict has led to a desperate situation. Land and buildings that our visionary forebears sacrificed to purchase so that campus ministry could happen have been sold. Those that are left are often crumbling, years of deferred maintenance having taken their toll.
But at the University of California, Berkeley, the story is different. The foresight of our Presbyterian predecessors gave the PCUSA a large property in a prime location in the heart of the campus. Coupled with new Board leadership and a campus minister with a vision for reaching students and faculty, this ministry went against the trend.
The Vision of Westminster House is inspiring:
- Engage the campus community with the good news of Jesus Christ.
- Encourage personal spiritual growth through Bible study, worship, fellowship, and service.
- Offer a welcoming residential community for students, staff and faculty in keeping with the Christian tradition of hospitality.
- Provide opportunities for students and faculty to act and witness for social justice in the spirit of Jesus and the prophets, through advocacy, seminars, conferences, travel to third world countries and work with the poor and oppressed.
- Create a flourishing center of cultural and theological exchange in which the great themes of “mere Christianity” can be celebrated, discussed, critiqued, embraced, and enacted.
The problem was how to find the funds to make this ministry happen.
The San Francisco Chronicle put it this way in a recent article on Thursday, August 24, 2006:
As college students across the country return to campuses over the next few weeks, more and more will be moving into church-sponsored dorms—a trend that can trace its roots to the corner of College Avenue and Bancroft Way in Berkeley. There, just across the street from the UC Berkeley campus, the Presbyterian Church renovated its Westminster House campus ministry building a few years ago and added a dorm for 125 students. Besides a room, students there are offered Bible study, theology classes and social justice projects.
It was a success at Cal, where student housing is always an issue, and soon religious denominations around the country took note. Mark Elsdon, the pastor of Pres House at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, which is building a 280-bed student residence hall, said many campuses looked to Berkeley and said that if it could be done there, it could be done anywhere. “Berkeley isn’t the friendliest to organized religion,” Elsdon observed. Now, a growing number of campus ministries—from UC Davis and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo to universities in Wisconsin and West Virginia—have added student housing or are exploring the idea. The movement has been fueled by a rising interest in religion and spirituality among college students and a push by campus ministries to find new sources of revenue to support their programs and to attract more students.
Many of the ministries saw the success the Rev. Randy Bare had at Westminster House and sought his advice—giving him an additional calling. He now works half-time running a consulting company that works exclusively on housing projects with nonprofit ministries and churches near college campuses. He said he is involved in projects all over the country, including in Berkeley at the United Methodist Church, which plans to open student housing with 112 beds in fall 2008. The church dorms generally house several students together in a suite, have student residential assistants as supervisors and offer much of the traditional programming that is found in campus dorms elsewhere. Westminster House is kicking off the year with an ice cream social and a group trip to Angel Island.… Although the ministries hope to attract more students to their programs and services, there is “no religious test” to live there, and residents can be anything from agnostic to a range of religions, from Catholic to Jewish to Muslim,” Bare said…. Those who think they will be giving up on the college experience shouldn’t fear, said Frances Loreto, 18. “I was sort of hesitant because I first thought it would be less social than the dorms,” she said. “But the parties here have been pretty exciting. I felt that I wasn’t missing out on any of the partying experience.” Some students and their parents said they were attracted by the ties to religion in the student housing. When Rosemary Lopez of San Diego heard that her son Gilbert wanted to attend UC Berkeley, she told him, “Over my dead body.” “We are born-again Christians, and we had heard of it as a liberal, radical campus,” she said. Then a friend told her about Westminster House, which also opened a second location for 44 students nearby. “We felt a little more comfortable with that,” Lopez said. “It seemed like a safe environment. Knowing that there is a Christian presence on the Berkeley campus makes us feel more comfortable.” The cost for students—about $10,700 for a double at Westminster House—is slightly more than that of traditional campus dorms. The housing provides a regular revenue stream for the ministries. With churches cutting back on funding for campus ministries, they are looking for other sources of revenue, and their valuable property near campuses provides the perfect opportunity.
Clearly, not every campus will be able to capitalize on this trend. But, in a field of ministry so strategic, yet so chronically underfunded by our denomination, the risk of developing student housing and new program space, like the risks our forebearers took a century ago when they purchased these properties, will make it possible for today’s college students to be tomorrow’s leaders in the church.
Presbytery of San Joaquin
by Rev. Dr. Clark Cowden, Evangelist Presbyter/Stated Clerk
The Presbytery of San Joaquin has begun the long, hard process of attempting to move from a regulatory agency model to a mission agency model. The most important issue facing the North American church today is its missional transformation. People, programs, services, conversations, and structures all need to be transformed. Since no one really knows for sure how to do this, where do we begin? We begin with prayer, with listening to the Scriptures anew, with listening to each other, looking to see what God is already doing in our communities and doing our best to join the missional work the Lord has already begun.
We began in January of 2005 by voting to take a year’s sabbatical from our regular presbytery meetings. We scheduled a series of conversations and begged for feedback from our congregations around missional issues. We spent a year learning, exploring, and listening to one another. At the end of the year, we shared what we had learned, and discovered three things:
- We still have a LOT of learning to do. We have only scratched the surface. Every time we gather, we need to spend time learning together.
- We are passionate about starting new churches. We have two New Church Developments that we are moving forward on, and we will work together to help these flourish.
- We needed to enter a new time of discernment around some confusing denominational issues.
So, in January of 2006, we formed a Denominational Cabinet. About 15 people met for two hours, once a month, for prayer, Scripture, and discussing the implications of the proposed PUP report. We learned a lot from each other, saw our differences, discovered differing viewpoints that we did not know existed, and tried to understand what God was doing. We wrote a paper to attempt to give guidance to our presbytery. This group concluded their work in June of 2006.
In August of 2006, we started our next phase. We opened up the Denominational Cabinet to others in the presbytery, brought in more people, and called it the Future Discernment Team. This team is meeting once a month for two hours, discussing the implications of the actions of the General Assembly. While greatly beneficial, it is like trying to get solid footing on shifting sand. Every few weeks, new letters and opinions are produced that stir our emotions, that cloud our understanding, and that make us question why we can’t seem to get clear, consistent answers.
We are learning to live together in a new way. We are building a new kind of connectionalism. We are trying to learn to live in ambiguity and uncertainty and faith. It’s hard to be in ministry when you wake up every morning, just waiting for the “other shoe to drop.” What will it be today? But, God is faithful, Christ is standing in the middle of the mess with us, and we are attempting to wait upon the Lord for our directions. In spite of the tornado swirling around us, we know Jesus is with us in the eye of the storm. We know that God is in control of the future, we know that He is in control of the church, and we know that He is in control of the future of the church. We put our hope and trust in Him!
This feature first appeared in Theology Matters, Vol. 12, No. 4 (Sep/Oct 2006).
