I call on all members of the National Partnership to repent publicly of insults, besmirching the church, and obstructing the work of the church councils. I call on you to relinquish your committee memberships. I hope that some of you will. But for those who don’t, I plead that you find another denomination more to your liking, rather than tear the church apart through the exercise of discipline.

Like many within the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), the National Partnership email trove has saddened, angered, and grieved me. I have read many articles regarding the emails, and they do not paint a pretty picture. Are those articles slanted? Is the picture that they paint accurate? I found out for myself by writing Natural Language Processing code to analyze the emails. And I remain saddened, angered, and grieved. This article delineates some of the more troubling passages I discovered. I have tried to provide larger quotes to demonstrate that the quotes are not out of context. My purpose is not to rehash what has already been published, but to call the National Partnership to repentance.
I am saddened by the use of personal insults. Consider the following email texts:
“Jun 28, 2019, 11:39:13 AM
…No one can stop us from becoming this kind of denomination. The denomination we were at the end of worship last night. No one. We are the majority, and if we gather around the Gospel there will be nothing to stop it. If we keep preaching to the dry bones.”
“Mar 26, 2013, 3:24:51 PM
…Finally: my greatest concern about the negative blogging we’ve seen this last week is the degree to which men are willing to engage in one-way conversation. The other person is by necessity diminished in these conversations. To me this is not just an ethical code violated but a grievous dishonor. Loving our enemies/opponents has to involve representing their character and beliefs charitably. Inquiries about the NP by one of these bloggers or PERSON 1, PERSON 2 or PERSON 3 would not only have served the public trust but would have dignified me and you by giving us a chance to define ourselves. Let’s not fall into the same soup by failing to pray for our opponents and represent them truthfully in every forum.”
“Jun 27, 2019, 9:49:14 AM
(This is important. Frank wicks is the board recommendation. Wiley is a harsh antagonist of the seminary. Why would we want him on the permanent board. Let’s defeat this)”
Dry bones. A reference to Ezekiel 37. Am I dry bones, dead, without the life of the Spirit because I do not agree with the author’s vision for the PCA? How can that not be the obvious conclusion when Paul tells us in Ephesians 2 that outside of Christ, we are spiritually dead?
While I appreciate the author’s concern for ethics and his prayers, I am astounded that he would refer to his opponents within the PCA as enemies. In Phil 1: 17-19, Paul refers to enemies of the cross as people “whose god is their appetite, and whose glory is in their shame, who set their minds on earthly things.”
I am saddened by the liberal use of harsh words to define those who do not agree with the NP.
“Feb 20, 2019, 12:52:42 PM
Are those who struggle with SSA not allowed in the fellowship of half-blind jackasses looking for the Glory of the Lord?”
Well, yes, they are allowed. They are just not allowed to be elders. We call upon all people everywhere to come to church, be a part of our fellowship, sit under the discipline of the Word of God, repent of their sin, and accept Jesus as Lord of their life. But once again, I am saddened by how easily a minister of the Gospel can dehumanize his co-workers in the Gospel.
I am saddened to an even greater degree by the insults to the church. There are many references to the PCA as unhealthy and ugly. No, you won’t find those words. But you see an earnest desire for the church to become healthy and beautiful, which implies it is currently not either of those things.
“Jan 30, 2019, 3:49:04 PM
My sense is that the next 3-5 years of assembly work will shape the next forty years of the PCA. If we are clear in advocating for greater health in the Presbyterian Church in America, we will all be part of a more beautiful, more orthodox denomination for Kingdom work around the world.”
“Jul 2, 2021, 8:34:46 AM (7 days ago)
…Perhaps the next way you’ll move things forward is on the floor of your presbyteries as you lead debate on overtures we passed. Or maybe it’s time for your presbytery to bring something to the Birmingham assembly that moves us in a healthier direction.”
“Jun 30, 2021, 9:39:46 AM (9 days ago)

Nominating Committee advice. Following the NC close of nominations we will send out a guide for those of you not always familiar with the candidates. In some cases we may not have a recommendation, but in others there may be a candidate whose experience and views would align more clearly with a healthy PCA. Thankfully in all those cases both men will be brothers in Christ and worthy of honor.”

“Jun 11, 2021, 6:33:46 AM
Many of you have heard about the letter drafted by PERSON 1and several other contributors. I was not one of the principal authors, but I am grateful to see it out in the world. I’d commend it to you as one way that we can help guide a healthier denomination.“
Was the church healthy when Elijah called out: 10 He said, “I have been very zealous for the Lord, the God of hosts; for the sons of Israel have forsaken Your covenant, torn down Your altars and killed Your prophets with the sword. And I alone am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.” (I Kings 19:10, NASB, 1995)
I think it was. God answered Elijah by saying: “18 Yet I will leave 7,000 in Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Baal and every mouth that has not kissed him.” (I Kings 19:18, NASB 95)
I am saddened when we substitute our judgment for God’s. I think we should hold the church in high regard as in “The Church’s One Foundation”
1 The church’s one foundationis Jesus Christ, our Lord;we are a new creationby water and the Word.From heav’n he came and taught uswhat perfect love can be;through life and death he sought us,and rose to set us free.
4 Yet we on earth have unionwith God, the Three in One,and mystic, sweet communionwith those whose rest is won.Oh, happy ones and holy!God, give us grace that we,like them, the meek and lowly,may live eternally.
I am angered at the secrecy. Almost every email until June 23, 2021, contains a privacy banner like:

“Confidential: this information is not to be shared without permission of the sender”
“The following communication is confidential and may not be shared without the permission of the sender”
“Please do not share without the permission of the author”
“This communication is private, it is not to be shared without permission from the sender”

There are 66 references to “confidential” or “confidentiality” within the emails. Consider the following email texts.
Jun 26, 2019, 8:16:07 AM
He loves us, and we serve him before we serve committees or churches, or nefarious and clandestine secret PCA societies.
While it is admirable that the National Partnership serves the Lord before all else, why are clandestine secret PCA societies listed in the list of subservient loyalties? Given that the subject of the verse is “we”, the National Partnership, this is extremely dangerous.
Mar 20, 2013, 7:40:14 AM
National Partnership: A New Group in the PCA

The Aquila Report has picked up on our existence, which is not a problem. It was never our intent to exist as a secret society. In fact, I would prefer for the information to be disseminated now rather than right before the Assembly so that suspicions the minority might have about our aims can be dealt with now, rather than provoking prejudices (a secret faction!) that could derail our business at the Assembly.”
“Jun 25, 2021, 11:00:18 PM
We’ve always been about privacy here. Not secrecy, privacy. And why should we have privacy? Let me tell you why. Just today slander from a white supremacist website was spread about me in a PCA Facebook group because I dared to set the record straight about some of the untruths being said about the PCA and homosexuality. And it’s not the first time it’s happened to me.”
Despite the protestation that this is privacy, not secrecy, this has all the hallmarks of a secret society:

A hidden membership role
References to NP Presbyteries
Secret voting guidelines sent to members only

Jun 17, 2021, 9:01:05 AM

“Attached is the initial advice concerning overtures to the 48th GA.”

Jun 25, 2019, 10:46:16 PM

“UPCOMING:
Tomorrow AM: Wednesday’s schedule, important votes, etc.
Tomorrow PM: Final overtures advice
Thursday AM: Thursday’s schedule, important votes, etc.
Thursday AM: Nominations advice

June 07, 2018,

This is the first draft of the 2018 GA overtures advice book

References to “our” members on committees
Deleted websites like: thenationalpartnership.com
A member only National Partnership Facebook page
There are just under 250 references to the following words:

Vote
Voted
Voter
Voters
Votes

The email trove reveals an elite, secret society of ministers within the PCA seeking to thwart the rule of Christ over His church. You bet I’m angry. Christ is the head of the church. He rules through the Holy Spirit, working in the hearts of His elders. How is this anything over than an attempt by a minority to circumvent the majority?
I am angered at the mocking of those who seriously try to abide by the Word of God. I Peter 2 begins with a sober warning.
“2 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2 Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3 and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.”
A secret society that has an objective to force the acceptance of Revoice theology. Yes, I’m suspicious.
I’m angered at the arrogance. If Christ is the head of the church, and according to our theology, He is, then why do the members of the National Partnership assume He is not leading well.
“Jun 11, 2021, 6:33:46 AM
Many of you have heard about the letter drafted by Mike Khandjian and several other contributors. I was not one of the principal authors, but I am grateful to see it out in the world. I’d commend it to you as one way that we can help guide a healthier denomination.“
“Jul 2, 2021, 8:34:46 AM (7 days ago)
…Perhaps the next way you’ll move things forward is on the floor of your presbyteries as you lead debate on overtures we passed. Or maybe it’s time for your presbytery to bring something to the Birmingham assembly that moves us in a healthier direction.”
The flip side of these comments, as alluded to above, is that the PCA is unhealthy. That we do not listen to the Holy Spirit directing us in the courts of the church. These comments indicate that the National Partnership received a special revelation and authority.
I am angered by what appears to be a lack of integrity. A person with integrity is the same person in public and private. I thought the “Looking Forward Together” article was a thoughtful call for unity. I especially appreciated this passage.
“Be assured that our desire is not to vilify or attack those who disagree. When offered respectfully, we firmly believe that our internal challenges and those who disagree with us make us stronger. We all know that Satan, “the accuser of the brethren”(Revelation 12:10) would have no greater joy than for us to be divided as a denomination over matters that we should debate charitably and truthfully in order for iron to sharpen iron! We believe that sharpening of one another to labor together for Christ requires that we also be honest about some perspectives being advanced in recent months that we believe are not healthy for our church or for Christ’s mission.”
Then I saw the emails referring to non-National Partnership members of the PCA as opponents, enemies, dry bones, and jackasses. So which attitude is the real attitude of the National Partnership?
I am grieved by the coarse language in one email.
“Jun 22, 2021, 3:47:55 PM
When I started the HUE project, I very much expanded my world – praise the Lord, but also the flip side is WTF was I doing all this time.”
Paul, in Titus 2, says,
“6 Likewise urge the young men to be sensible; 7 in all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified, 8 sound in speech which is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us.” (NASB, 1995)
Would any elder in the PCA use this language on the floor of the GA Assembly or in a sermon? Are we not called to be transformed rather than conformed? I work with brilliant, hard-working, and dedicated men who only have one word for expressing emotion. I expect better from elders in the PCA. Even more disappointing was the lack of correcting emails or an apology email,
I grieve over the missional sentiments that discount the relational work performed by the good people of the PCA every day. The authors of the NP emails operate with the assumption that PCA is not healthy or beautiful and that we are not welcoming. The “Beautiful Orthodoxy” conferences, which are promoted in the emails, have this goal:
“The goal of [Beautiful Orthodoxy] is to bless the work of the Kingdom in the PCA. We believe it is time to promote a declaration that we don’t have to choose between biblical/doctrinal fidelity and gospel beauty (love for the poor, joy, warm and welcoming churches, passion for justice, ethnic diversity and appreciation, utilization of the gifts of women, the church as a hospital for sinners, etc.).” (https://www.beautifulorthodoxypca.com/)
God’s people have never made that choice. To the best of our ability, we have carried out both aspects of the great commission, teaching and disciplining. Although I do not believe that the church as a hospital for sinners is an orthodox view of the church. Proponents of the missional church argue that unbelievers do not come to church, so they never hear the Gospel. That the church must somehow become more acceptable to the current culture to be heard. And yet, we’ve seen this story played out before. It’s a story with a sad ending.
People suffering in the bondage of sin are in a state of misery, no matter the age or the culture. They come to Christ as the Holy Spirit turns their heart of stone into a heart of flesh. And He often uses His people to draw them to the church where they hear the Gospel message. And they hear the discipline of the Word. They begin the process of sanctification and the mortification of their sin. Let’s celebrate the work done by His people rather than bemoaning the church and trying to find work arounds.
And I grieve over a lack of repentance after the publications of the emails. As far as I’m aware, no one from the National Partnership has stood up and publicly repented of creating a secret society that seeks to short circuit the presbyterian process. I find this disheartening. As elders who preach a Gospel of repentance, shouldn’t we be the first to repent?
I am hopeful. Evidently, the Lord pricked a conscience of an NP member who released the emails.
I am hopeful. The last GA rejected the machinations of the NP.
I am hopeful. The PCA is a true church that has remained faithful to the great commission. Our churches continue to preach, teach, and make disciples.
I am hopeful that the PCA continues as a true church and will practice discipline despite the pain and turmoil. I hope it does not come to this, but it needs to happen if public repentance is not forthcoming.
So I call on all members of the National Partnership to repent publicly of insults, besmirching the church, and obstructing the work of the church councils. I call on you to relinquish your committee memberships. I hope that some of you will. But for those who don’t, I plead that you find another denomination more to your liking, rather than tear the church apart through the exercise of discipline.
I am hopeful. Jesus still rules His church. We may have to break fellowship with those who secretly obstruct the church government and espouse Revoice theology, but the church will continue. I hope and pray that it does not come to that.
Al Taglieri is a Ruling Elder in the Providence Presbyterian Church in York, Penn.

To frame the issue as a question, does God’s Word warrant the inclusion of a paragraph in our BCO that disqualifies from ministry (as Deacons or Elders) “men who describe themselves as homosexual?” Having wrestled with this question, I believe that the answer is yes. Indeed, I am more and more convinced of the biblical genius of Overture 15. To understand how I reached this conclusion, we would do well to walk through a few preliminary matters.

This year, twelve proposed changes to the Presbyterian Church in America’s (PCA) Book of Church Order (BCO) will come before the denomination’s eighty-eight presbyteries for consideration.[1] Three of the twelve proposals address aspects of ministerial qualifications and examination.
Perhaps the most talked-about item is that which resulted from Overture 15 before the 49th Stated Meeting of the General Assembly. Upon the proposal’s successful passage by two-thirds of the presbyteries and ratification by the 50th General Assembly, a new paragraph will augment Chapter 7 of the BCO (on Church Officers in general) as follows:
7-4. Men who describe themselves as homosexual, even those who describe themselves as homosexual and claim to practice celibacy by refraining from homosexual conduct, are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America.
It is undeniable that the substance and phrasing of this proposed addition to the BCO has attracted special attention before,[2] during,[3] and after the 49th General Assembly. Already, the post-Assembly discussion on this proposal has been unsurprisingly vigorous on both sides of the issue.[4]
It is not my purpose in this brief post to respond to any of the missives that are already circulating the Internet. Instead, I intend to explore the biblical propriety of what this proposed addition to the BCO will do upon ratification: specifically banning (and thus, singling out) homosexual self-description by those who hold spiritual office in our Church.
To frame the issue as a question, does God’s Word warrant the inclusion of a paragraph in our BCO that disqualifies from ministry (as Deacons or Elders) “men who describe themselves as homosexual?” Having wrestled with this question, I believe that the answer is yes. Indeed, I am more and more convinced of the biblical genius of Overture 15. To understand how I reached this conclusion, we would do well to walk through a few preliminary matters.
Christ the King over His Kingdom
The preface to the BCO opens with a glorious description of Jesus Christ as “The King and Head of the Church.” The third and fourth paragraphs set out the place reserved for Christ to rule and govern the Church as His Kingdom.
It belongs to His Majesty from His throne of glory to rule and teach the Church through His Word and Spirit by the ministry of men; thus mediately exercising His own authority and enforcing His own laws, unto the edification and establishment of His Kingdom.
Christ, as King, has given to His Church officers, oracles and ordinances; and especially has He ordained therein His system of doctrine, government, discipline and worship, all of which are either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary inference may be deduced therefrom; and to which things He commands that nothing be added, and that from them naught be taken away.
In this exalted language drawn from Scripture and our doctrinal Standards, we read of Christ reserving to Himself both decisive authority over His church and the means of communicating that authority. In the publication, preservation, and propagation of His Word, He has established and continues to build up the Kingdom of Heaven in and as the visible church.
The Westminster Confession of Faith defines the visible church as “the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ” (WCF 25.2).  Geerhardus Vos likewise argued in favor of understanding “the visible church as a veritable embodiment of [Christ’s] kingdom.”[5] Vos made the point that though the Kingdom of Heaven is fundamentally spiritual and ultimately more expansive than the church, it nonetheless finds visible expression in the visible church as one manifestation among many.
If Christ the King rules over the church as His Kingdom,[6] then we must evaluate every proposal affecting the government of His Kingdom – including the qualifications of that Kingdom’s officers – against the record of the King’s righteous administration of His Kingdom in times past. What has Jesus done in the past to inform our deliberations in the present as He continues to rule over us by His Word and Spirit?[7]
Christ the King in His Kingdom
When “Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to Himself a true body, and a reasonable soul” (WSC 22), He descended from heaven to earth to inaugurate His heavenly Kingdom. Thus, His preaching ministry was one of glad tidings of the Kingdom of heaven (Matthew 4:23ff), proclaiming the gospel of release, recovery, and redemption (Luke 4:16-21; Isaiah 61:1, 2).
While it is entirely proper and necessary to speak of Christ doing something new in His earthly ministry, His mighty deeds of deliverance in the first century A.D. cannot be divorced from His mighty deeds of deliverance recorded in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. Indeed, the Old Testament background of Christ’s kingship is crucial for understanding rightly what He intends for His Kingdom today.[8] Christ came not to destroy the essence of the Kingdom of old, but to fulfill all its purposes in Himself (Matthew 5:17). His ministry is one of reformation and fulfillment, not of abrogation and invention.
How did Christ righteously administer His Kingdom when its visible expression was that ancient nation of Israelites dwelling in the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Two passages of Christ’s royal charter come to mind as especially relevant to our consideration of the proposal to disqualify any man from ordained office who would describe himself as homosexual.
In the first place, we consider the record of righteous King Asa’s 41-year reign over Judah in 1 Kings 15:10-24. We are told that “Asa did what was right in the sight of the LORD, like David his father” (v. 11). Indeed, “the heart of Asa was wholly devoted to the LORD all his days” (v. 14). Interestingly, the very first example of Asa’s David-like righteousness before God is that he “put away the male cult prostitutes (KJV: sodomites) from the land and removed all the idols which his fathers had made” (v. 12). Exegetically, the parallel construction of these two clauses (“put away… and removed”) suggests that both of Asa’s commendable acts of reformation concerned the religious worship of the Kingdom (i.e., the visible church of Asa’s day). The evidence of Asa’s true and lively devotion to the Lord consisted in his expulsive ban of “the male cult prostitutes,” or “sodomites” from the religious worship of the people of God.
Read More

[1] You can read a helpful primer of the twelve items here (thanks to Larry Hoop and byFaith). You can track the progress of the proposals here as the presbyteries vote upon them (thanks to Scott Edburg and Joshua Torrey).
[2] See Scott Edburg, “New Overtures for a Pressing Concern.”
[3] For example, see “Great Speeches of PCAGA49,” which includes links to the floor debate surrounding Overture 15. Watch the speeches by RE Matt Fender, TE Richard D. Phillips, and TE O. Palmer Robertson for the best examples of the argument presented at the 49th General Assembly in favor of Overture 15. Consult as well The Aquila Report’s helpful transcription of Dr. O. Palmer Robertson’s speech.
[4] See the following opinion pieces on The Aquila Report: Joe Gibbons, “Exploring Overture 15 from the PCA General Assembly;” Larry Ball, “Overture 15 – The Tipping Point for a Split in the PCA?;” Luke Kallberg, “A Response to “Exploring Overture 15 from the PCA General Assembly” – Revised;” as well as Jared Nelson’s fine piece on this site, “Stepping Up to Overture 29.”
[5] Geerhardus Vos, The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Church (New York: American Tract Society, 1903), 161. Readers can find a .pdf version of this excellent little book for free online here.
[6] For a classic biblical theological presentation of Christ Jesus as the incarnate Shepherd King promised and anticipated in the Old Testament, see F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Development of Old Testament Themes (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1969), 100-114.
[7] If ever you find yourself wondering “what would Jesus do?” the better questions to bring to Scripture are “what did Jesus do?” and “what is Jesus doing?”
[8] For a helpful presentation of the relationship between the Kingdom of God in the Old Testament and in Christ’s teaching, see Vos, The Teaching of Jesus, 11-25.
Related Posts:

We have been commissioned by the Word of God himself, Jesus Christ, to go into all the world with his truth. It will not be our ingenuity or our volume that gives the word of God its strength. Its power is inherent. It is truth, and it will stand forever. It will be a light to our feet and a lamp unto our path (Psalm 119:105). If we abide in his word, we are truly his disciples, and we will know the truth, and the truth will set us free (John 8:31-32).

We are a people clamoring to be heard, but when the flood of voices drowns their own, many people will raise their pitch and resort to all kinds of hyperbole to gain an audience. Even journalists have degraded their profession by using misleading headlines to coax us into clicking their links. From politicians to personal trainers, it seems few are immune.
Contrary to Thoreau, many people are no longer living lives of quiet desperation. Instead, they broadcast their distress like a distorted siren. I suppose the world has always been this way; after all, there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Still, with the introduction of the internet and social media, it all seems amplified these days.
As the world continues shouting for attention, truth has fallen in the streets (Isaiah 59:14). Our culture has replaced reason with emotions. Instead of talking about issues, we voice our feelings, trumpet our offense, and label those who disagree with us as evil. Personal attacks rule the day. We judge people for their judging, unaware of our hypocrisy. In a world that believes truth is relative and autonomy is the highest value, anything and nothing can be stated as truth, and those who disagree will be labeled as bigots.
He who shouts the loudest is the winner. We shout on television, online, and with our pocketbooks, and increasingly we see people starting to shout with violent protests. Since we can no longer reason, anyone who believes in truth and threatens the dogma of relativism will be bullied. Might makes right is the only logical outcome in a culture that denies truth.
It should not surprise us that many people use the word “hate” like a bully uses his fists: to dominate and intimidate.
Read More
Related Posts: