There is no need to despair because of what the General Assembly did not do this year or because of a few hostile and misleading headlines. Instead, those who genuinely and passionately care about preventing abuse, ministering to abuse survivors, and calling abusers to repentance (remember that is the purpose of the Church Court), should study our Constitution and seek ways to make the Church Courts more effective at fulfilling the roles given to them by her King.

Amending the Constitution of the PCA is a difficult task by design; it takes the approval of two General Assemblies and the consent of two-thirds of the Presbyteries. It is not something that can be done lightly or speedily. Many on the conservative and/or confessional side of the PCA were frustrated by the pace at which the PCA amended her Book of Church Order (BCO) to fortify the Church against the Saint Louis Theology/Revoice.
TE Charles Scott Williams first raised the alarm regarding the deviations emanating from Nashville and Saint Louis in 2016. Now, seven years later, the PCA seems to have reached a consensus on what our Constitution needs in order to close the door to “Side-B” and Revoice. But it will not be until 2024 until the most recent of those amendments can go into effect.
Likewise this year, many were disappointed when the General Assembly rejected proposed amendments to her Constitution that purported to help the PCA respond more effectively to allegations of abuse.
I. On the “Tragic” Assembly
Some have decried the actions of the Assembly in rejecting these proposals. If you read the news or follow social media, you might presume the PCA is rife with all manner of abusers.

In an article published in Christianity Today, Covenant College alumna Emily Belz decrees: “The Presbyterian Church in America Has an Abuse Crisis Too.” In which she cites self-styled, but unnamed, “advocates” who assert the PCA typically handles things badly.
The Baptist News Global announces: “Conservative Presbyterians reject four proposals to curb sexual abuse. But we must question: what would these four ‘rejected’ proposals have done to ‘curb’ sexual abuse?
The Tennessean claims the PCA limits who can be called pastor, elder, and deacon while at the same time rejecting “abuse measures.” But did the PCA actually reject abuse measures? And would these measures actually do what they claimed?

These are the sort of headlines about which TE Tim LeCroy warned us. They seem to imply the PCA is negligent regarding abuse. But is there proof for the headlines?
II. On Not Being Reactionary
If you believe the (social) media hype, the PCA is a communion that cares more about ensuring women are not addressed as pastor or deacon than about protecting women and other vulnerable people from abuse. TE Charles Stover has already written thoughtfully on this matter and exhorted us to remain calm.
Rather than react hastily to media headlines, the Church ought to remedy well rather than speedily any defects in her Constitution.
The Church must not yield to reactionary rhetoric and manipulative reporting. This is not to say reforms are not needed or would not be helpful. But neither ought we assume there is a crisis simply because some people loudly assert there is one.
As saints and as elders in the Kingdom of God, we must not submit to the tyranny of headlines and Tweets, but instead take stock of what is true, where we are, and what our duty is.
A. What Is True?
Does the PCA care more about who can use the titles of ordained office than protecting people from abuse? Well, maybe. But is that wrong? Isn’t usurping a church office a form of abuse? Isn’t gaslighting someone into thinking she’s a deacon – when our Book of Church Order clearly declares she cannot be a deacon – a form of abuse? Perhaps abuse is not even properly understood.
But I will not grant the premise: it is not the case that the PCA cares more about regulating the use of officer titles than protecting the abused. People in various media have asserted this, but they have not proven this point.
B. Where Are We?
The PCA did not simply reject four overtures aimed to protect victims from abuse.
It referred back the proposal related to background checks for further perfection. In doing this, the Assembly recognized merit in the proposal, but also that the overture was not yet ready – as currently written and amended by the Overtures Committee – to be implemented by the Assembly. Amending the PCA Constitution does not work on the schedule of the news cycle, so the Church must not react to headlines.
Indeed, the Assembly rejected an entirely novel proposal to permit atheists (i.e., fools; cf. Psalm 14:1) to give testimony in the courts of the Church. To add this provision to our Constitution would undermine the teaching of our Confession of Faith on Oaths and Vows:
The name of God only is that by which men ought to swear, and therein it is to be used with all holy fear and reverence; therefore to swear vainly or rashly by that glorious and dreadful name, or to swear at all by any other thing, is sinful, and to be abhorred (WCF 22:2).
How can the members of a Church Court in good conscience administer an oath to an atheist, given what the PCA confesses regarding oaths and vows?
Yes, the Assembly also rejected Overture 14, which aimed to restrict Christian lawyers from participation in the Courts of the Church. Why did the Assembly do this? Because the proposal demonstrated partiality and was entirely “without Biblical authority.” Can you think of a better, more honorable reason to reject a proposal?
However, the narrative peddled by the media is completely undermined by the Assembly’s ratification of a very important change to our constitution, which does more to protect alleged victims of abuse than any of the failed overtures sought to do: the Assembly adopted Item 8.
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by C.R. Carmichael |
Wednesday, April 26, 2023
Arrogance is at the root of our problem, as pride arrives just in time to initiate the tragic fall (Proverbs 16:18). We may be technologically advanced, but it isn’t helping us if we wield our latest digital tools as weapons against God….Thankfully, all is not lost because God is still in control, the Spirit is still moving, and salvation is always near with the redeeming power of Jesus Christ—f we only have faith.

Understanding the Digital vs. the Analog
So what is meant by putting forth the metaphorical argument that “the Digital” of transhumanism is an evil and dangerous corruption of the righteous design of “the Analog” established by God for the fruitfulness of mankind?
Technically speaking, digitization is the process of converting analog information like an object, image, document, or signal into a computer-relatable language encoded with a mathematical combination of “ones and zeroes.” Though its primary function is to speedily generate and disseminate data, it has become a darling of transhumanists because digitization can also be used as a powerful tool to transplant reality and, according to journalist Gil Press, “encourage the replacement or augmentation of the physical with the virtual or online presence.”
Of course, the “physical” that they desire to replace is nothing less than the creation of God, which, in a rhetorical sense, is the “Analog” of God. This is so because long ago He spoke the world into existence and saw that everything He had made answered the plan which His eternal wisdom had conceived; and “Behold, it was very good” (Psalm 33:6-9; Genesis 1:31).
Why call it the Analog? Think of an analog watch built with a traditional clock face and hands. Back in the days before digital watches, it was just a “watch.” But now, to differentiate it from the digital display, we call the very first watch, “analog.” The name is an example of a retronym, which is defined as a word created to avoid confusion between older and newer types of creations, usually because of advancements in technology.
From a Biblical standpoint, therefore, the Analog can be broadly defined as the elemental state of the world as originally created by God (even after the “generation loss” caused by the Fall), and the Digital can be viewed as the latest attempt by man to improve upon or completely remake that original design by digitization or digitally-driven science and technology.
Today, most people would likely assume that the digital process is superior to the analog. But such is not always the case. In the area of sound recording, for example, many audiophiles will tell you that digitization has not served us well. As often reported by those who have ears to hear the difference, the digitized music presented in compact discs and streaming audio can generally sound compressed, lifeless, bass shy and synthetic; whereas analog from vinyl records and tapes has “a physicality and immediacy in the sound of musical instruments” that is “warm, airy, and much closer to a live performance.”
The public at large, in fact, seems to agree with this assessment. Worldwide sales of vinyl records have increased sharply in recent years as people everywhere have rediscovered their fondness for the analog listening experience which, as one audio engineer tells us, “feeds the soul” because it most faithfully captures the original signal and waveform of God.
Indeed, according to mathematician Katrina Morgan, there is a credible scientific reason for this perception. “Analog captures a physical process,” she explains, “whereas digital uses mathematics to reduce the process to finite bits of information. What, if anything, is lost in that reduction is difficult to pinpoint. But the limitations of math in replicating reality may factor in to the difference in listening experiences reported by so many vinyl lovers.”
If Morgan’s general assessment is correct, there is a real danger of corrupting reality when we try to copy it with a binary conversion process that is inherently limited and reductive. Is it not prudent, then, that we ask what other aspects of God’s “analog” world are not improved by digitization?
The Increasing Dissonance of the Digital
To put it plainly, human beings are not computerized robots; we are image-bearers of God formed from the earth and comprised of flesh, soul and spirit (Genesis 2:7; Zechariah 12:1; Matthew 26:41; 1 Thessalonians 5:23). While the Digital is nothing but a “hall of mirrors, deterministic, cold and sterile,” we as part of the Analog are “numinous, reverberative, warm and fertile.”
Can we not spiritually discern the important difference? Our earth and sea is vast and spacious and teeming with life, and it vibrates with His wisdom, eternal power and divine nature (Romans 1:20; Psalm 104:24-25). Did God not create the physical world with these nurturing properties so that mankind could “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28)?
Surely, this is why the Analog has a pleasing full-spectrum resonance, and the reason why we find that there is an increasing dissonance in the world when we blindly pursue a conversion to the Digital.
For decades, digitally-driven science and technology has been touted for their revolutionary capacity to usher in a new age of health and well-being, and yet in many ways our lives do not appear that much improved. Perhaps more than ever before, we are finding our highly-digitized world struggling with a malaise of the spirit, a strange wave of sicknesses, and the menacing advent of unexpected death. So why does it seem we are no longer truly thriving on this earth?
Statistically, we are in poorer overall health, despite amazing advancements in diagnostics, trauma medicine and other specialties. The CDC, in fact, has recently reported decreases in life expectancy and increases in obesity and drug overdose rates. Fertility rates have plummeted 50% over the last 70 years, post-pandemic deaths rates are up by 40%, and three million more people between the ages of 16-64 have been added to the U.S. disabled population in the last two years.
Even worse, our usually-resilient young people are now more prone to serious health problems. The incidence of cancer in people under 50 has increased around the world. Millennials have also noticed a spike in strokes among their peers, as 10% of U.S. victims are now under the age of 45. And the autism rate among American children (which back in 1970 only affected one in 10,000) has now dramatically risen to one in 36 (CDC).
Truth be told, something very strange is going on when public school systems are scrambling these days to provide more classroom space for the rising number of psychologically troubled or special-needs students.
Read More
Related Posts:

We are grateful for the men and women who serve in our government, but for every great leader, there are hundreds who are insufficient for the task and who cannot seem to find solutions to the problems within and the threats without. Many lead with devious agendas. Some are even diametrically opposed to Christ’s kingdom. But there is a King and a kingdom that has a Ruler sufficient for the task. And we are glad and grateful to let the government of this Kingdom “rest on His shoulders.”

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us and the government will rest on His shoulders. (Isaiah 9:6)
Have you ever seen a government with which you were completely pleased? We’re grateful for our government in America, as broken as it is, that was foundationally built on a Judeo-Christian base and has been led through the years by many noble, just, and, at times, even godly men and women. But any government of this world is most often the source of endless bickering and confusion: higher taxes, greater control and burdens, and increasing dissension.
 What if there was a government ruled by a perfect ruler, and it led to perfect peace?
A Perfect King
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. (Isaiah 9:6)
Isaiah prophesied of a coming King who would build a new Kingdom, and He came to build that new government 2,000 years ago. Those of us who know Christ and have, by God’s grace, chosen to place our lives under His ruling hand have found nothing but joy and satisfaction with His administration. He upholds His kingdom with “justice and righteousness.” He is a ruler who always makes the right choices at the right time in the right way for the right purpose. He is wonderful in His counsel, all-powerful in His leadership, fatherly in His rule, and a Prince whose ways always lead to peace.
Read More
Related Posts: