The PuritanBoard - View Single Post

R. Scott Clark · #24 (**permalink**) 03-28-2007, 11:44 AM

The PCA proposed a "J&R" method to the OPC c. 1986. The OPC was in the midst of her 50th anniversary celebrations, giving folk opportunity to think again about why the OPC was formed in the first place. In this context, the the OPC rejected the "Joining and Receiving" because they wanted a negotiated merger. The PCA, it seems to me, essentially said, "Here are the terms, take 'em or leave 'em." As a result of the failed attempt to unite several (mainly "new life" - infl. by Jack Miller's New Life PC in Phila) OP congregations left for the PCA.

Since then the two denominations have taken on rather different characteristics. The OP is more homogenous. It is much smaller (who ever used the analogy of a small town is on to something). It has probably proportionally more theonomists, supporters of Norm Shepherd/FV, and fundamentalists. It also has proportionally more old school types. The dominant approach to the confession in the OPC seems to be "system" subscription. Until recent years, most of her ministers (as John Muether has noted) came from the same school. With the proliferation of Reformed seminaries, candidates for ministry now come from a variety of backgrounds.

The mainstream of the OPC holds to system subscription and identifies with Old School (and some even with Old Side!) Presbyterianism (Old Princeton, Hodge, Warfield, Machen, Old Westminster etc).

There is a certain amount of fundamentalism (e.g., 6/24 creation defines the Reformed faith) in the OPC and their influence grew considerably after the counter-balancing progressive movement left for the PCA ca. 1989. The recent justification controversy may represent the apex of the fundamentalists revisionists (Kinnaird, FV) and the recent creation and justification reports probably represent the re-assertion of the old school/system approach as the dominant approach to Reformed theology, piety, and practice in the OPC.

Ten times larger than the OP, the PCA is much more diverse. There was an attempted merger between the OPs and the RPCES in the 70s. I believe the merger with the RPCES and the PCA in 1982. The premillennialism of the RPCES also brought into the PCA some of the old fundamentalist influences from the earlier in the 20th century. Having emerged fairly late from the mainline Southern Presbyterian Church, the PCA was rather broader (more inclusive of a variety of positions and approaches to the confession) than the OP. Today, the PCA is probably best described as a coalition of several groups:

1) Conservative (strict) subscriptionists (e.g., Pipa, Smith, Knight) who tend to be Southern Presbyterian along the lines of Dabney and Thornwell;

2) Progressive ("good faith") subscriptionists (e.g., Chapell, Keller) who tend to be Northerners and more closely aligned to and tolerant of American evangelicalism (and to revivalism) than the conservative/strict subscriptionists. This is also tends to be the PPT lot. This group also represents the pastor's group that disbanded a couple of years ago, the name of which I can't recall (led by Tim Keller and others).

3) Evangelicals (e.g., folks with strong ties to evangelical para-church organizations such as Crusade and the like) who have mainly a formal connection to Reformed theology, piety, and praxis. If you asked this group about the "RPW" or other Reformed distinctives you might get a blank stare. In this they are like the "traditionalists" except they are probably more theologically conservative. Both groups are most pietists.

4) Traditionalists (folk whose ties to the old So Presbyterian Church kept them in the PCA after the merger, but who don't identify strongly with the confession). These folk are in the PCA because their family has always been Southern Presbyterian etc. Before folk start screamng, every denomination (including my own) has this group.

5) Revisionists (e.g., a good section of the Louisiana Presbytery!; those advocating the federal vsion, paedocommunion, theonomy etc; those advocating the ordination of females to presbyterial or ministerial office). This group is certainly the smallest but probably the noisiest. This is an eclectic grouping that is not internally coherent (e.g., some of the FV are theonomists, some of the theonomists are not FV and both of those groups would reject the ordination of females). I group them together because these smaller groups are advocating the most radical changes in the PCA.

6) I'm not sure what to call the "system" subscriptionists who identify with the old school such as Will Barker. I don't know how large this group is. Maybe they are the silent majority?

7) The Twin-Lakes Fellowship includes folk from a variety of groups but is led by folk such as Ligon Duncan who tend to be confessional but come from different regions and different approaches to the confession in the interests of promoting the growth and planting of confessionally Reformed churches in the PCA.

These categories aren't meant to be definitive and certainly not pejorative but descriptive. I'm happy to revise these.