The term Christian Nationalist sends the wrong message to both those outside the church and those inside the church.  Therefore, I simply do not use the term.  I prefer the term Christendom. When I speak of Christendom, surprisingly most people in the church today have never heard of it.  I find this ironic because America (with all her warts) at various times in history could be judged as an example of Christendom. We have been living off that borrowed capital for years, but it is hastily running out.

America is at war—not literally as in the shedding of blood.  At least, not yet.  However, we have not been this divided since the advent of the Civil War.  History does tend to repeat itself.  It appears to me that total anarchy is on the horizon, and the 2024 presidential election could easily trigger this event.
On the one hand, we have a political party (with a president in the White House) that is pro-abortion up to the point of birth, a proponent of homosexual marriage, and an advocate of the mutilation of children in the name of transgenderism.  With this party in power, we are now a nation that is known for Drag Queens teaching children at public libraries, open United States borders, and monetary inflation that steals purchasing power from every household.
On the other hand, we have a second political party in this country that is pushing back on some of these issues, although not all of them. For Bible-believing Christians the present political and social disorder is very appalling.  Most biblical Christians have lost hope in both political parties.
Some Christians are looking for a rapture very soon.  They believe they will escape what could be a coming calamity.  Others, like myself, believe that this is simply the judgment of God on our nation, and this is something we all must face head on.
The issue before us is very simple.  America has changed religions.  From a nation where political laws were based on the Ten Commandments, our nation has been commandeered by those who despise God’s law.  This new religion controls almost all landscapes of our country including the political, the educational, the military, the media, and even the arena of large business corporations.  It is quickly infiltrating the church.
The Evangelical Church is a mess and unable to respond.  Most pastors are silent from the pulpit in order to avoid conflict. Other pastors in the name of the separation of church and state (or the separation of two kingdoms) believe that only the church should be under the law of God, and it is alright if the state legalizes abortion, homosexuality, and the freedom to choose one’s sex. They promote the idea that the church is spiritual and the Bible has no authority over civil magistrates or unbelievers. Persecution is our calling and we should welcome it. It is the way of glory.
Thus, out of desperation and grief, there has arisen a new movement calling itself Christian Nationalism.  It is a backlash against the current war against Christianity.  It is partially a replacement movement for a silent church.  Leaders include Marjorie Taylor Greene, a U.S. House Representative from Georgia, and Lauren Boebert, a U. S. House Representative from Colorado.  Al Mohler, who has spoken against the use of the term in the past, now seems to be warming up to it.
For several reasons, I am opposed to adopting or using the term Christian Nationalism as a response to the present anti-Christian crusade.  I believe the term will do more harm than good.  My reasons are as follows.
First, no one has defined the term Christian Nationalism.  There is no consensus on what it means.  Cultural theologians, both liberal and conservative are attempting to give it meaning, seeking to be the first in line to claim that honor.
Secondly, it is all happening so fast that it makes my head swim.  It may be time to just sit down and do more thinking about it rather than bellow the term in frustration.  Proverbs 25:8 tells us to be cautious about arguing our case too quickly. This is wisdom that is needed in our day.
Thirdly, the term nationalism will be associated with the Nazi Nationalism of Germany before World War ll.  Since the mainstream media is pushing this narrative too, and since they control much of public opinion, biblical Christians who are vocal will be called Nazis.  In the case of our present President of the United States, he has already called people like me Semi-Facist.  The FBI has become a political arm of the present regime, and many vocal Christians will likely come under considerable scrutiny (like the My Pillow Man).
Fourthly, no one that I know believes that the church should rule the state.  In the Old Testament there was a separation of the realms of Moses and Aaron.  In the New Testament the power of the sword belongs to the civil magistrate and not to the church.  This idea of the church ruling the state is simply a false conflagration to scare the ignorant and to create a false phobia.
The separation of church and state is biblical.  However, no one can separate religion and state.  Every state will be dominated by some religion, whether it be Christianity, Islam, or (now in the case of America) Neo-Marxism (see my book Critical Race Theory and the Church – A Concise Analysis).
I have the same frustration as both Representatives Greene and Boebert, but I have a better name for what they want to see.  It is called Christendom!  It is a word that has been in use for hundreds of years.  It does not have a pejorative connotation tied to it.  It simply refers to a nation that, either by a consensus of the people (democracy) or by royal inheritance (Great Britain), is a culture governed by Christian principles and as such will be blessed with peace and prosperity.
In Christendom the church-state separation is respected.  The ten commandments are the basis of a civil society.  The laws of the state should reflect in principle the laws of God.  No one is forced to go to church.  After working six days, God gives us a day of rest.  The dignity of life is to be protected, even those in the womb.  Adultery is treason against the family because God created the family for security and protection. Opportunity is based on merit, and not on race or color.
The term Christian Nationalist sends the wrong message to both those outside the church and those inside the church.  Therefore, I simply do not use the term.  I prefer the term Christendom.
When I speak of Christendom, surprisingly most people in the church today have never heard of it.  I find this ironic because America (with all her warts) at various times in history could be judged as an example of Christendom. We have been living off that borrowed capital for years, but it is hastily running out. The bank account is almost empty.
Only a full-orbed gospel can create a true and lasting Christendom.  The hearts of the elect must first be changed through the power of the Holy Spirit.  In Christendom, good Christian men will become leaders in all the domains of life. This is the only way to stop the present slide toward insanity and suicide.  Remember, all who hate God love death (Prov. 8:36).  Not all men in a Christian nation will be Christians, but in spite of their rebellious hearts, they will reap some of the blessings of God.
There is much that could be said about this topic.  I cannot deal with it all here.  I am not sure that I am capable.  But I plead for my Christian brethren to dump the term Christian Nationalism and use the term Christendom.  Then, let the real conversation begin.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

We all struggle with the darkness of all types of sins.  My entire case for submitting the original overture is that the “public” announcement (like in Christianity Today) of constantly struggling with any particular sin disqualifies a man from holding office in the church.  The key word here is not the word “struggles” or even the word “sin,” but rather the word “public.”  What is public is a man’s reputation.  A man may fight privately with all types of sin which do not have dominion over him, but once he comes out of the closet and names those sins publicly to the whole world, he loses his eligibility to hold office. 

I appreciate the recent article in The Aquila Report, Clarity on Overture 15, by Ryan Biese.  It provided more precision in stating what Overture 15 actually says.  In this post, he takes issue with a public statement recently made by the PCA Stated Clerk summarizing the Overture as meaning that “the desire itself is disqualifying.” On the contrary, this Overture speaks of “men who describe themselves as homosexuals….” Mr. Biese is correct.  There is a big difference here.
Our Stated Clerk refers in this same public presentation to the fact that he had brought together in the same room those who are in opposition to each other on this issue.  Supposedly, this discussion produced a compromise resulting in Overtures 29 and 31. However, the Stated Clerk misjudged the PCA as a whole.  Overture 15 came out of nowhere like a misfired missile.
Well, I was not in the room! I have always been an outlier. Maybe I should have been in the room, since I was the originator of Overture 15 that came from Westminster Presbytery (in Southwest Virginia and Northeast Tennessee).  It originally came from the Session of my former Church who asked for my advice before they submitted this overture to our Presbytery several years ago.  The Overture was approved by our Presbytery, and then in good and proper parliamentary fashion disappeared at the 48th General Assembly in St. Louis.  This was what I call the first disappearance.
Early this year (2022) before the meeting of the General Assembly in Birmingham, I submitted the overture again to Westminster Presbytery, but it was lost when it was sent to a Committee. I think it was inadvertently lost in the transmission from the Clerk of Presbytery to the Chairman of the Committee. This was the second disappearance.
Because it was lost, I later reminded Presbytery that it had vanished.  I also reminded them that I had submitted it at the previous Presbytery meeting.  At this point I had finally made a decision to withdraw it altogether.  I was thinking that the Lord must have a purpose in what appeared to be some type of providential evaporation of this overture.  So, the overture was sent back to the same Presbytery committee to act upon my request to withdraw it from any further consideration. Later, a member of that Committee, representing the Committee as a whole, called me and asked that I not withdraw it, and that it be presented to Westminster Presbytery a third time.  I agreed, and it was adopted by Presbytery and sent to the General Assembly.  So, the “big one” (now Overture 15) almost did not make it to the General Assembly.  God works in mysterious ways. Just think—and we would never have heard the famous speech by Dr. Palmer Robertson!
As I have mentioned before (Overture 15 – The Tipping Point for a Split in the PCA? – July 18) in The Aquila Report, I expect BCO Changes in Overtures with numbers 29 and 31 to be to be adopted by 2/3 of the presbyteries and then pass by a majority vote at the next General Assembly.  Victory will be declared and everything will go on the same in the PCA, except there will be a few more churches leave our denomination.  From a statement that Greg Johnson made on the floor of the General Assembly this year, he appears to be able to live with these changes in the Book of Church Order, so that should tell you all you need to know about them.
Let me add a little more precision to the meaning of the original overture which was slightly edited by the Overtures Committee in Birmingham.  The word “Identify” was changed to “describe.”  Evidently, for some major reason, the word “identify” is a bad word in this context.  Better to speak of those who “describe themselves as homosexuals.” I don’t particularly like this change in wording, but the Overture belongs to the Church now and not to me.
My original intent in what has become Overture 15 was not to disqualify from office in the PCA anyone who struggles with sin, either homosexuality, incest, or even bestiality (or even theft or murder). Don’t be shocked about incest and bestiality, especially as some college students are now taking litterboxes with them to their classrooms.  This is not the reason I submitted the original overture.  I do believe that homosexuality, incest, or even bestiality are more heinous sins.  They are perversions of God’s created order. They are more specifically called abominations by God.  However, even this was not the reason I submitted the original overture.
We all struggle with the darkness of all types of sins.  My entire case for submitting the original overture is that the “public” announcement (like in Christianity Today) of constantly struggling with any particular sin disqualifies a man from holding office in the church.  The key word here is not the word “struggles” or even the word “sin,” but rather the word “public.”  What is public is a man’s reputation.  A man may fight privately with all types of sin which do not have dominion over him, but once he comes out of the closet and names those sins publicly to the whole world, he loses his eligibility to hold office.  The biblical basis for this is that a man who holds office must be of “good repute with those outside of the church” (1 Tim. 3:7).  In a wicked society like today, this public announcement that a man is a homosexual may be viewed with admiration by those outside the church, but in the context of the biblical era, it was shameful. Letting people know that we struggle with sin in general is biblical (Rms. 7), but once we begin to name them particularly and talk about them all the time, then we move beyond the exemplar of the Bible.
Thus, I believe that a man may struggle constantly with homosexual desires and still hold office in the church.  As long as it is private and he keeps it private.  We all have private sinful thoughts and tendencies that are only known to us and to God.  However, if we have concluded that they do not have dominion over us, and by God’s grace we can handle them in a biblical fashion, then we may legitimately deduce that we are not disqualified from holding office.  There is no biblical requisite that we publicly broadcast our particular struggles. Once a man comes out of the closet, especially as he identifies himself with the genre of homosexuality in terms of dress and various other signals, he loses his reputation and the right to speak God’s Word authoritatively.
Contrary to the PCA Stated Clerk, the mere existence of the desire of homosexuality is not the issue.  The issue is neither self-identification (or self-description) as long as that self-identification is private.  However, public acknowledgement to the world is a whole different matter.  At least it was to the Apostle Paul.  My intent of the proposed amendment to the BCO was specifically about those who publicly describe themselves as homosexuals.  The publication of the existence of a man’s lust to those outside the church makes it very dangerous to the individual, to those who sit under his oversight, and to young people who are tempted to experiment with the unknown. It will definitely change the attitude of the next generation. It spreads like cancer, especially in a woke culture.  In addition, it hurts the reputation of the church.  It damages the gospel of Jesus Christ. It disqualifies a man from being an ordained representative of our Savior.
A generation known for humility and extreme privacy (such as the World War II generation) has produced a generation that appears to need public recognition, whether it be for righteousness or for sinfulness.  So, it is not a matter of temptation, sinful thoughts, or even private self-assessment. It’s a matter of the public reputation of a man who has been given the right by the visible church to speak publicly in the name of God.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

Neo-Marxists are re-creating history, inventing a new language, targeting the Christian family, and are seeking to eradicate the two sexes that God created in the Garden of Eden. Children are being chemically castrated and physically mutilated in order to change genders. A justice who sits on the Supreme Court who cannot define what a woman is.  This is the tip of the iceberg, and worst of all it is seeping into the church through false guilt and misplaced pity.  Or, perhaps, and just as dangerous, your church may be ignoring this monster altogether claiming that they are being faithful stewards by concentrating on “spiritual” matters.  

The Protestant Reformation was one of the paramount events in the history of the world.  The Westminster Confession of Faith may be one of the greatest man-made documents ever prepared by the church.  The doctrine of justification by faith alone is the crux of our hope in Christ.
Contrary to what I witnessed a number of years ago, Reformed churches today have become uncompromising in teaching and protecting the great truths coming out of the Reformation period. Only a few decades ago, there were just a few of these churches, at least in the South.  I am a witness to that, having been ordained for over fifty years.  Indeed, every generation must be diligent in protecting these truths because every generation produces its own heresies. If the Reformed Faith is not aggressively taught, it will be lost. Reformed churches will die.  I have witnessed this too.
However, if we remain in the culture of the Reformation period without expanding our defense of the faith against modern insurgent movements bent on destroying our beloved church, then we are in great danger.  We are failing the very people over whom we are called to be shepherds.
Sitting through presbytery ordination examinations for these last fifty years, it has become obvious to me that there is a major flaw in the seminary education of our young men preparing for the ministry. They have no knowledge of that which is a real and present danger.  Later as pastors, they don’t read outside the box of what they were given in seminary.  It’s not what you hear from the pulpit that is the problem.  You are probably hearing orthodoxy every Sunday.  It’s what you don’t hear from the pulpit that concerns me.
The greatest threat to our nation and to the modern church today is Neo-Marxism.  If you do not know what that is, then someone has failed you in your Christian walk. With all due respect to my godly brethren in the pulpits, probably your pastor will be hard-pressed to explain it.  Neo-Marxism is the great white elephant in the room.
Neo-Marxism is a religion.  It is the most dangerous modern enemy seeking to destroy Christianity.  It has infiltrated almost every institution in America from modern universities to the civil government. It is capturing our public education system.  It is foundational in courses taught in graduate business schools.  Results based on Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) scores set the religious direction of our corporations.  It is the religion that undergirds three of the largest investment institutions in the world – Blackrock, Vanguard, and State Street.
Neo-Marxists are re-creating history, inventing a new language, targeting the Christian family, and are seeking to eradicate the two sexes that God created in the Garden of Eden. Children are being chemically castrated and physically mutilated in order to change genders. A justice who sits on the Supreme Court who cannot define what a woman is.  This is the tip of the iceberg, and worst of all it is seeping into the church through false guilt and misplaced pity.  Or, perhaps, and just as dangerous, your church may be ignoring this monster altogether claiming that they are being faithful stewards by concentrating on “spiritual” matters.
Seminary instruction is heavy-weighted on the side of soteriology and missiology.  There are no classes on Neo-Marxism.  The very weapons that seminary students need to fight against the modern tenets of Satan are avoided. It’s the great failure of American Christianity.  The reasons for this failure are numerous, and I cannot go into those here.
This is a diatribe. It’s not an introduction to a book.  It’s really not a short article written for edification. It’s one way to handle my immense frustrations with the modern pulpit. Remember, I have been in the pulpit myself for over fifty years.  Maybe that gives me a right to say what I am saying.  What better way to conclude this short diatribe than by a quote attributed to Martin Luther.
“If I profess, with the loudest voice and the clearest exposition, every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christianity. Where the battle rages the loyalty of the soldier is proved; and to be steady on all the battle-field besides is mere flight and disgrace to him if he flinches at that one point.”
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The following is the wording of Overture 15 approved by the General Assembly: “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.”

The Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) is divided over whether men who describe themselves as homosexuals (even though they claim to practice celibacy) should be able to hold the offices of elder or deacon in the Church. This division was evident at the 49th General Assembly (GA) in Birmingham, Alabama, where the Majority Report of the Overtures Committee recommended a motion to deny Overture 15 from Westminster Presbytery.
However, a Minority Report of the Overtures Committee that recommended a slightly edited version of Overture 15 was adopted by the Assembly. A motion to make the Minority Report the main motion was adopted by a vote of 1099-1049.  This was only a 50-vote difference. If this procedural vote had failed, the Minority Report (and Overture 15) would have been dead in the water.  This Minority Report has now become a proposed amendment to the Book of Church Order (BCO) which must pass a vote of 2/3 of the presbyteries. Then finally, it must pass by a majority vote at the next General Assembly in Memphis, Tennessee.
Overture 15[1] cuts to the chase and lays the cards on the table. It is short and concise.  It basically says that men who describe themselves as homosexuals, even though they claim to practice celibacy, are disqualified from holding office in the PCA.  It gets to the root of the problem that is causing the division in the PCA.  Because it is so succinct and to the point, the wording itself should not be a major issue of contention.
Its brevity should circumvent typical objections to both language and parliamentary procedure, even though some will object because they don’t like the word “claim,” and others because the amendment could better be placed in another part of the BCO.  I have heard other PCA elders call the language inflammatory and unloving.  However, there is not much wiggle room here.  Basically, a man is either for it or against it.
As Dr. Palmer Robertson alluded to in his speech on the floor of the Assembly, Overture 15 draws the line in the sand. The line has been drawn and the future of the PCA will be greatly impacted by this vote.  I don’t think most people in the PCA realize how serious this is.
I expect that Overture 15 will fail to get the required number of presbytery votes needed in order to be presented to the next GA as a change to the BCO. This effort is viewed by many in the PCA as the last possible attempt to change the direction of our beloved Church. If this proposed change in the BCO fails, then the battle might very well be over. It may be said that the conservatives fought well, but they lost.  The question then becomes what will happen after that. What happens in the PCA if Overture 15 fails?  I see three possibilities.
First, there could be some who will try again.  More overtures next year?  Some may fight on. However, many of the conservatives in the PCA are tired of fighting, and I think the number of new overtures on this issue will drop dramatically, if not disappear altogether. Every option available has been pursued including judicial action, study reports, and changes to the BCO, but all these have failed to stop the direction of the PCA.
Secondly, this could lead to a split in the PCA. However, the problem with this scenario on a national level is that there is no leadership for this type of movement. Without leadership, it just will not happen. Maybe in another 5-10 years, but not now.  The Gospel Reformation Network (GRN) does not appear to be making any plans for this.  No one else of any stature has stepped up to the plate.
I don’t expect any split in the PCA. The tepid overtures this year on this issue, which define sanctification in generic terms, came from some of our most conservative presbyteries. Only Westminster Presbytery (Northeast Tennessee and Southwest Virginia) had the temerity to submit a forthright overture like 15.
Unless there is a confident move on the part of come in the PCA, she will remain intact.  Overture #29 will be adopted.  It will be used as a tool to say that the problem has been resolved. Attendance at the GA by ruling elders will drop, and the PCA will then move more in the direction of the progressive left. History will not look kindly upon my generation.
Thirdly, I think the most likely reaction will be that more individual churches will leave the PCA, and either seek membership in the OPC or the ARP.  Vanguard Presbytery is not an option because within a two-year period, that group has already experienced a division which resulted in a new denomination of only a very miniscule number of churches.
As a charter member of the first General Assembly in Birmingham, Alabama in 1973, this is all heart-breaking for me.  It seems providentially ironic that at the 50th General Assembly celebration of the PCA, the vision of our founding fathers will be the beginning of the end. The dream that these men had just fifty years ago will disappear.
I would plead with all the readers of this article that they contact their teaching and ruling elders and encourage them to vote for the passage of the Proposed Change to the Book of Church Order reflecting the content of Overture 15.  I encourage you to send this article to all of your friends in the PCA.  The PCA was founded by the grassroots, and I believe that only the grassroots can save her.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
[1] The following is the wording of Overture 15 approved by the General Assembly: “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.”
Related Posts:

Even though the PCA consists of men who love the Lord and love our standards, it is greatly divided.  The future still looks dim, but light continues to shine in the most unusual places at the most inopportune times. I attribute this to fervent prayer. Never discount the providence of God to change things.  My fear today in the modern evangelical world is that energized holiness is being replaced by quiet piety, and therapeutic theology under the guise of love has replaced the Law of God. 

I was not there, but I watched most of the 49th PCA General Assembly (GA) online. I’m actually elated, if only for a short time.  Let me tell you why.

The enrollment was the largest ever with 2380 commissioners registered. I don’t have the demographics, but this indicates to me that many ruling elders from our most conservative churches, especially in the southern states, turned out in large numbers. People in the pew are angry with the direction of the PCA.  I know of a number of churches who sent commissioners telling them “to fight for the truth.” These churches had not sent commissioners to the GA for many years.
If the National Partnership (a progressive caucus of well-known leaders in the PCA) was active, its influence was not detected. No doubt they lost on a number of key issues. It is encouraging to think that the National Partnership (NP) cannot overrule the actions of the commissioners at the General Assembly. The NP has endured bad PR over the last year, and they have not recovered.  What we saw in the Assembly was a “popular revolt.” The candidate of the conservative Gospel Reformation Network (GRN) was not elected as Moderator, but unlike the Southern Baptist Convention who elects a President with numerous powers, the PCA elects a moderator of the assembly whose influence stops after the Assembly.  Highly capable and virtuous men are usually elected as Moderator, and such was the case again this year with the election of RE John Bise.
The first major victory for the conservatives was the vote to withdraw from the National Association of Evangelical (NAE). The NAE has become part of the woke movement, and their political statements do not reflect the sentiments of most members in the PCA. This proposal has been before the Assembly on a number of occasions in the past, but was always defeated, usually after a speech by Dr. Roy Taylor, the former Stated Clerk.  Respect for him has always been so high that he would usually tip the vote in the direction of staying in the NAE.  Not this year!  The vote to leave was approved by a 60-40 ratio.  Taylor filed a protest, but that was all he could do.  The Assembly had spoken.
The major event again this year was the issue of homosexual officers. The proposed amendments to change the Book of Church Order last year failed, but this did not stop the grass roots from coming back again. Two new overture numbers you now need to remember are 15 and 29.
Overture 29 cleaned up the language of the proposed changes to the BCO that failed last year, and was easily adopted. It will be sent back to the presbyteries for a 2/3 vote, and I suspect that it will pass not only at the presbytery level, but also at the GA meeting next year in Memphis. I call it the generic overture. It reflects the position of the Ad-Interim Committee Report on Human Sexuality which has been widely praised by the PCA as a whole.  TE Greg Johnson rose to say that he could accept the wording of this proposed change to the Book of Church Order (BCO), but he also said that it was not kind and loving enough to the gay community. This confirms my point in a previous article in The Aquila Report that the language of this Overture can be so tweaked that it will change nothing “Targeting Homosexual Officers in the PCA Again: Are We Being too Nice?”
The “Jack in the Box” of the whole Assembly was Overture 15 which came out of Westminster Presbytery.[1] This Overture to amend the BCO was submitted last year but was rejected by a simple reference to the actions of the Assembly on other related overtures.  Last year it disappeared into the darkness.  The original wording stated, “Any man who identifies himself as a homosexual (even if his practices celibacy in that self-identification) shall be disqualified from holding office in the PCA.”  It was edited slightly before passage.  One of the weakest arguments against this overture was that it proposed a change to the wrong place in the BCO.  A common strategy in assembly meetings is death by procedural maneuvers.  It did not work this time.  Many members of the Assembly were “hungry” for a statement like this.  Concise and to the point!  Early in the debate, one commissioner rose and stated his disappointment with Overture 29 since it did not speak specifically to the issue of homosexual identity.  What was he going to tell his congregation at home?  He knew he needed some good news, and Overture 29 did not give that to him. He was told to wait until the consideration of Overture 15.
The highlight of the Assembly was the appearance of Dr. O. Palmer Robertson who has been absent it seems for decades. I sat under Dr. Robertson as Professor of Old Testament at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia (1969-1972).  Robertson has been serving in Uganda as a missionary for 25 years and it appeared to me that he has not been keeping up with all the dialogue about homosexual officers. However, he was like a man resurrected from the past who spoke a different language than what is heard today in seminaries and progressive churches.  He spoke with intellectual passion and read Romans 1:26-28.  He pointed to the word “perversion” and how words like “sodomy” and “sodomite” were not used any more.  I believe his speech tipped the Assembly to approve Overture 15.  If nothing else comes from this Assembly, then at least modern seminary-trained teaching elders now are able to see how much seminary training has changed over the last 50 years. To listen to Dr. Robertson’s speech go here.
Overture 15 passed by an initial vote of 1094 to 1044, just a 50-vote margin. Yes, I understand what most people are saying about this.  It will never pass the high threshold of 2/3 of the presbyteries.  I will say two things about that. First, I never thought it would even make it to the floor of the General Assembly for a vote, but I was wrong. I don’t think it will pass the presbytery vote either, but I could be wrong again.  A year is a long time, and sometimes providential events change the course of history. Second, even if it does not pass the high bar set by the BCO, it was a moment of jubilance anyway.  It was needed to encourage the souls of those who have been losing most battles in years past.  I’ll take the joy and wallow in it for a while. If all the conservatives who have left the PCA would have stayed and fought with us, the victories would have been larger and sweeter.
Other items to note include the fact that 25% of the Assembly voted not re-elect the current Stated Clerk. This was highly unusual.  However, the missing link in the Assembly was the absence of any discussion about the $13.5 million taken by the PCA Boards and Agencies from the federal government (via the Small Business Administration) during the covid crisis.  See the Aquila Report “PCA Committees and Agencies Received At Least $13.5 Million From the Small Business Payroll Protection Program in 2020.” Under what was called the Payroll Protection Program (PPP), these entities received money from the federal government in the form of loans.  If those loans were properly used as restricted by the federal government, then they were forgiven.  They never have to be paid back. The PCA is proud of her heritage of not getting involved in political matters (except by way of humble petition), but when it comes to taking free money from the State (taxpayers of whom many who are not Christians), there appears to be no conscientious objection. Nothing was done illegally, but it’s amazing how the modern church can take taxpayer money for free from the State and use it for building of the Kingdom of God. The same civil government that legalizes homosexual marriage and is pushing ungodly transgenderism is the same entity that we go to when we need money. The same State that is targeting the church as an enemy has become our trusted philanthropist in a time of need.  What every happened to the separation of church and state?
Even though the PCA consists of men who love the Lord and love our standards, it is greatly divided.  The future still looks dim, but light continues to shine in the most unusual places at the most inopportune times. I attribute this to fervent prayer. Never discount the providence of God to change things.  My fear today in the modern evangelical world is that energized holiness is being replaced by quiet piety, and therapeutic theology under the guise of love has replaced the Law of God.  But brethren, I am hopeful!  Take heart, we who love the PCA are in this for the long run.

Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
[1] The following is the wording approved by the General Assembly: “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.”

Related Posts:

My intent here is…simply to remind the PCA generally and the GA commissioners specifically, that the Bible plainly teaches that an officer in the church must be above reproach and have a good reputation with those outside of the church.  Men who publicly proclaim their status as homosexuals (even though they practice celibacy) should not hold office in the PCA. That is the issue before the GA, and not the views of Missouri Presbytery with regard to her own failures.

Just a few days before the 49th General Assembly (GA) of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), all Presbyteries and their members (which would include all commissioners to the 49th GA) received in their personal email inbox a communication from Missouri Presbytery (MOP).  This was sent from the Stated Clerk of MOP to the PCA Stated Clerk who then forwarded it to each individual Presbytery Clerk. Each Presbytery Clerk then decided whether to send it on to the members of the Presbytery.  The email was a response of MOP to the judicial decision of the PCA Standing Judicial Commission (SJC) in SJC 2020-05 (TE Ryan Speck v. Missouri Presbytery), to make amends to their errors in dealing with Revoice 18 in order to protect the peace and purity of the PCA.  This was to be done in part by interacting with the Ad-Interim Report on Human Sexuality.
After reading the report I came to one conclusion.  It is good Public Relations (PR), but nothing changed with regard to the ordination of men in the PCA who publicly identify as being a homosexual. It does not alter the need for a change in the Book of Church Order.  It should not negate the numerous overtures sent to the GA by various presbyteries to deal with this issue.
It does not deal with the main issue of whether Greg Johnson (and now others) in the PCA should continue as ordained officers, even though they have publicly proclaimed that they are homosexuals, and that this orientation is fixed.
My intent here is not to get into the substance of the report of MOP sent to the clerks via the GA Stated Clerk, but simply to remind the PCA generally and the GA commissioners specifically, that the Bible plainly teaches that an officer in the church must be above reproach and have a good reputation with those outside of the church.  Men who publicly proclaim their status as homosexuals (even though they practice celibacy) should not hold office in the PCA. That is the issue before the GA, and not the views of Missouri Presbytery with regard to her own failures.
I’m not sure that I have ever received a communication from another Presbytery via the Stated Clerk of my own Presbytery. I can understand this being placed into the minutes of the General Assembly, but I am concerned that a document that could so easily sway the Assembly should be sent out in such a fashion, so close to the meeting of the Assembly itself.  It is my opinion that only a Presbytery itself (voting as a court in session) has the right to choose what documents should be received and distributed among its members.
My fear is that as a result of the timing, the means of distribution, and the content of this communication, it may only further divide the PCA.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

Love is speaking truth in order to prevent sin.  As Side B homosexuality ordination has been active now for several years, it is becoming normalized.  Unless we take drastic action quickly, it will become the accepted theological view for the next generation. 

Those who personally know me think that I’m one of the nicest guys in the world. Maybe it’s just that I am shy and backward, and they take that for being nice! To get the truth about me you will probably have to talk to my wife and my children. The dictionary defines the word nice in terms of being pleasant and agreeable. Nice people tend to avoid conflict and any direct confrontation. They move through the back entrance to get to where they are going.  Being nice is not always a bad thing.  To survive in the pastoral ministry today, you probably need to be nice.
As I was reading the proposed overtures to the 49th Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) General Assembly (GA) on the issue of homosexual officers, the first thought that came to my mind was the word ‘nice.’
After a few years, the definition of Side B homosexuality has finally become clearer.  It is now rather apparent that Side B is considered a state of being wherein there is basically no hope of change.  Orientation is fixed. Thus, in the minds of most conservative elders in the PCA, Side B homosexual officers are now unacceptable. Each one of the overtures seek to restrict Side B homosexuals from serving as officers in the PCA.  With the exception of one Overture 15, I would classify them all as being rather indirect and nice.
These overtures can basically be boiled down to four separate overtures.  1) Overture 12 from Hills and Plains Presbytery denigrates “juxtapose[d] identities,” but begins the Overture by using language that officers “are well served (italics mine) when they can be honest about their present fallen realities and their hope for sanctification.”  2) Overture 20 and Overture 23 from North Georgia Presbytery and Southeast Alabama Presbytery are almost identical to each other.  The proposed change would disqualify “those who identify or describe themselves according to their specific sins.”  They also speak about those men who need to “demonstrate maturity (italics mine) of faith and growing conformity to Jesus Christ.”  3) Overture 29 from Pittsburgh Presbytery does call for a change to the BCO that would disqualify men who “deny the sinfulness of fallen desires, or who deny the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or who fail to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions.”  However, they go on to say in Overture 31 that “the officers of the church must exercise great care (italics mine) to not normalize those sins in the eyes of the congregation.”  Here, they are being really nice.
4) Overture 15 is not considered to be so nice.  It plainly seeks to add to BCO 7-4 the following words. “Men who identify as homosexual, even those who identify as homosexual and claim to practice celibacy in that self-identification, are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America.”  It’s very candid and to the point.  This proposed change is not considered nice because it is deemed by some as being too direct by using the word “homosexual.”  I have been told that homosexuals should not alone be targeted because there are many other sinful conditions that need to be addressed.  They tell me that it’s unfair to corner homosexuals.
Overture 15 is a duplicate of a one sent by Westminster Presbytery to the 48th General Assembly.  It disappeared in the parliamentary process last year. I suspect it will do the same again this year.
I believe the time for being nice is over.  We are in an emergency, and in crisis periods, it is time to be direct and to the point. Consider the following:

Love is speaking truth in order to prevent sin. As Side B homosexuality ordination has been active now for several years, it is becoming normalized.  Unless we take drastic action quickly, it will become the accepted theological view for the next generation.
Being loving and direct is what most people in the pews are expecting out of their leaders. Rather than dissecting words that are Jeopardy clues or insinuations, why not just be direct and get to the point.
In addition, it should be noted that Overture 15 is not dealing with church members, but only with church officers who must be above reproach in their public recognition as clergymen.
Conservatives in the PCA don’t want to be viewed as being political. Politics is a dirty word in their circles. There is no such group working behind closed doors to move the Church in their direction.  This disassociation with politics may be considered a kind of badge of honor.  Their attitude is that ‘if we have the numbers, we will win.  If we don’t, it’s God’s providence and we are called to acknowledge God’s providence.’
Some say that the BCO is not the place to speak to this issue. I would tend to agree, but we live in extraordinary times and in such times, we must do extraordinary things. Changing the Westminster Confession of Faith is nearly impossible and would be almost sacrilegious to most Presbyterians.  It appears to me that changing the BCO is our only option.
Conservatives have lost their case in the Standing Judicial Commission (SJC). The Ad-Interim Committee Report on Human Sexuality did not help their cause at all.  The two overtures this year asking the General Assembly to assume original jurisdiction will just be sent to the SJC.
Some say that such bold language as used in Overture 15 will not be well-received in the presbyteries. The PCA as a whole seems to be saturated with the characteristic of niceness.  They say that it is better to be cautious and come through the backdoor – and have something – rather than being direct about it and have nothing.  This may be true.
Sometimes, it’s good to hit hard and fast. Rather than being nice over time, it is best to be loving and direct in the present.  It’s better to remove the imminent danger today than to wait and let and let it fester into something ugly later. A controlled explosion that detonates a ticking time-bomb is better than a delayed explosion by the bomb itself that will do much more damage.

I suspect some version of what I call the four nice overtures will be adopted this year by the General Assembly.  Ruling elders will be out in force again at the Assembly.  A new proposed change to the BCO will go back to the presbyteries for another vote.  This time it may get the needed vote by presbyteries.  It may pass the final test next year at the 50th General Assembly.  Conservatives will consider this a victory.  However, in my opinion these overtures are so nice that they fall short of the wisdom of being transparent and direct. Those who are homosexual officers will tweak their language to pass the new standards. The new BCO words (and new language created by homosexual officers) will be debated and debated. More SJC cases may follow.
In conclusion, maybe being nice and indirect is better than just saying plainly that homosexuals are not eligible to hold office in the PCA.  In God’s providence, we shall see.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

In our battle to protect the doctrine of justification by faith alone, the Law of God disappeared from the church, and then it disappeared from America as a country.  Christendom was first killed by the church and then by the civil magistrate.  We need to consider looking at these events as a result of corporate sin, and providentially a warning sign from God.  Mental health experts cannot save us.  Education cannot save us. Politicians cannot save us. Sadly, even the modern church today cannot save us. Revival and Reformation are the only things that can save us as a nation. 

Like most other people, I’ve spent a lot of time the last few days watching TV about the murder of 19 children and 2 teachers in Uvalde, Texas.  Everyone has an opinion.  Generally, the solution among the political and media elite ranges from a call for more gun-control, more mental-health expenditures, better security at schools, improved training for the police, and better police equipment for dealing with these calamitous and horrendous events.  I have not heard much about more education.  I think the modern generation has given up on education as a cure for all the evils in the world, except maybe for fighting against what they call racism.
The only person I heard who seemed to be asking the right question was Greg Gutfeld, not particularly one of my favorite TV personalities. He asked the question as to why these massacres were a such a common occurrence today and were not so just fifty to seventy years ago.  What has changed in America?  Well, he was at least getting close to asking the right question. It was a good question.  But, like most other commentators I’ve heard, he really does not have a clue as to the right answer.
Jesus was once asked about tragedy and massacres. In Luke 13: 1-5 he was asked about a tragedy in Galilee which occurred without any apparent reason. It just seemed senseless.  There was nothing evil done by the victims that would call for such carnage.  It appears that the people were just worshiping God, and suddenly their “blood was mixed with their sacrifices” (v. 10).   A bloodbath, of all places, in the house of worship.  He went on to speak about not only that tragedy but also about another dreadful event that killed 18 people at the tower of Siloam.
His answer today would seem rather abrupt and terse. He made sure first that they understood that such human disasters are not always correlated with some particular sin on the part of the victims. There was no sin on the part of these Galileans that was any greater than other Galileans.
But, what does he say?  I tell you “unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish.”  He speaks to them not only as individuals, but also as a corporate people.  He goes on in the following verses (6-9) to give a parable about the barren fig tree, and how it will be cut down unless it starts to produce fruit. The caretaker of the tree asks for more time before the tree is cut down, and the owner appears to be compassionate and grants more time.  However, the owner reminds the caretaker that the tree’s day of being cut down will indeed come unless it produces fruit. That tree was cut down in AD 70 with the complete destruction and devastation of Jerusalem.
The reason for such providential injections of heart-rendering calamities into society is very often a result of the awful religious condition of that society. In other words, our culture has rotted, and senseless tragedies can be viewed as a warning sign.  Israel had rejected the Savior and they would face judgment unless they repented.  Such events as the Galilean catastrophe and the Siloam disaster cannot be tied to the condition of the victims in particular, but to the condition of religion in the nation as a whole.
America was once a part of Christendom.  Even though not everyone was Christian, the values of the Christian faith permeated not only the church, but also civil society as well. Her culture had a Christian base.  Our eighteen-year-old boys used to go off to war to fight for their country, but now some of them take up arms and murder our own people, especially our own children who are the most vulnerable of all.
Jesus’ answer can only be understood in terms of religion.  In a secular world, religious answers are not relevant, because religion is not relevant.  But as Christians, we know that the religious condition of the people is the most relevant issue of all.  We know why America has changed in the last 50-70 years.  America has cast off the Christian Faith as a nation, and we are suffering the consequences of that rejection.  Rampant divorce, broken homes, abortion, pornography, homosexuality, adultery, and mass-shootings are the result of a change in religion.  Unless we repent and turn back to the Triune God as a nation, things will only get worse.
Who then is to blame?  I blame the church.  The church has ceased to be the salt of the earth.  Liberalism captured the church in America in the early 20th century.  Rapturism captured the church in America in the mid-20th century.  Radical Two Kingdom Separation (R2K) has captured the church in America in the early 21st century.  We have now been told that the two kingdoms refer only to the battle between God and Satan, and how dare we cross over the holy line of telling the civil magistrate that he is accountable to the God of the Bible.  I believe that the Law was never meant to convert nations, but it can be a restraint on 18-year-old boys full of hate and anger.
In our battle to protect the doctrine of justification by faith alone, the Law of God disappeared from the church, and then it disappeared from America as a country.  Christendom was first killed by the church and then by the civil magistrate.  We need to consider looking at these events as a result of corporate sin, and providentially a warning sign from God.  Mental health experts cannot save us.  Education cannot save us. Politicians cannot save us. Sadly, even the modern church today cannot save us. Revival and Reformation are the only things that can save us as a nation.  And even if we see Revival and Reformation, it will take decades to see the resultant fruit that may be the only hope to recover our nation.  Get ready for a long hard ride!
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The intent of this text is to forbid men from identifying as women and women from identifying as men. It is a reaffirmation of the creation ordinance that God created both male and female. Creation of mankind is binary, and this text adds the additional tenet that our sex-identification at birth is permanent.  

“A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God (Deut. 22:5).”
The transgender movement has created another victim class in America.  Bruce Jenner (who dresses like a woman and goes by the name Caitlin) recently became a regular contributor on the politically conservative Fox News Channel.  Richard Levine (who dresses like a woman and goes by the name Rachel) is the Assistant Secretary of the United States Department of Health. He, with his closet of dresses and cosmetics, publicly represents my country and sets policy for me and my health. He was recently declared a “woman of the year” by USA Today magazine. Will Thomas (now known as Lia Thomas) is a man who competes with collegiate female swimmers and wins every race.
The consequence of transgenderism is far-reaching.  First, in our day, any discomfort of Christians with transgenderism is considered prejudice, if not sinful.  Secondly, the study of modern history teaches us that within a generation, a victimization class will quickly evolve into the mainstream ethnos of a culture.  Nationally-known individuals become role models of acceptable behavior, especially with the imprimatur of the media and civil government. The abnormal becomes normal. Thirdly, it is also generational. Young people are being challenged today on social media (and in some public schools) to examine themselves to see if they also need to transition from one gender to another. Mere exposure leads to curiosity which leads to experimentation, and this often results in a type of addiction. Without the rudder of biblical ethics, our youth are the most vulnerable targets of this crusade.
As expected, this movement is bleeding into the church.  As if Christian parents do not already have enough to worry about!  Now they must fret that Johnny may come home one day and tell them that God made him the wrong sex. He may say that he feels like a girl trapped in a boy’s body. The road to gender change is fearful. It may begin with only a name change, but it can move to other stages such as 1) wearing dresses, 2) hormone therapy or, even more radical, 3) gender transition surgery.  For most evangelical parents, this would be like a Richter ten-point mega-earthquake hitting the house.
The Book of Deuteronomy speaks very clearly to the issue of transgenderism. “A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God (22:5).”
Prior to verse 5 in this chapter, Moses tells us how to love our neighbor.  He gives several practical examples.  If our neighbor loses anything, and we become aware of it, then we are to help him to recover his loss.  This may require safe-keeping if we do not know to which neighbor it belongs, or if our neighbor is away from home. Negligence here is considered sinful (Deut. 22:1-4).
Mother birds who are nesting must be protected from death so that we may prolong not just the life of the mother-bird, but also our own — “so that you should prolong your days” (v.7). Compare this promise of long life with Paul’s words regarding the 5th commandment promising long life: “Honor your father and mother (which is the first commandment with a promise) that it may be well with you and that you may live long upon the earth” (Eph. 6:2-3).
Fences do in many cases actually make good neighbors, especially when there is potential danger on our property (v.8).  We don’t grow corn, cotton, and soybean in the same field (v.9).  It’s impossible to pull a load with a donkey and an ox hitched together (v. 10).  Mixing wool and linen together only makes sense when both are pre-shrunk (v. 11).  Tassels on clothes were to remind the Israelites of the commandments of God (v. 11; Lev. 15:39); although, since we have the written word of God today, we do not need such reminders.
In the midst of all this wisdom and exemplary acts of kindness, there is verse 5.  Our approach to it should be the expectation that it too instructs us as to what constitutes both wisdom and kindness.
First, it should be noted that the text is not simply about the style of clothing.  It says nothing about what is fit for a man or a woman to wear. It’s not about women wearing pants or men wearing pink shirts.  It’s not about humorous school skits where boys dress up as girls. The style of clothing will change from culture to culture over time (even though I still cannot in good conscience wear a pink shirt). A Scottish kilt is not clothing designed for women.  It is the apparel of a man which signifies patriotism as well as giving advantage in movement skills, especially during war. The concept of the freedom of conscience allows both men and women considerable latitude in clothing style in a variety of particular social venues.  The most important characteristic of dress for women is modesty (1 Tim. 2:9).
The intent of this text is to forbid men from identifying as women and women from identifying as men. It is a reaffirmation of the creation ordinance that God created both male and female. Creation of mankind is binary, and this text adds the additional tenet that our sex-identification at birth is permanent.
What is prohibited here is dressing daily as the opposite sex (within the boundaries of a particular culture that has adopted a certain dress code) so as to nullify the biological sex that God gave you.  This text forbids one sex from seeking to transition into the other – or identifying as the other after God has made you what you are.
It is an abomination to God. It is something that disgusts God because it is contrary to his character and his creation ordinance. Because it is disgusting to God, it should be disgusting to us.  This is wisdom, and actually it is kindness too.  It is a call to repentance and faith in Christ. To uphold this truth is love.  It may be tough-love, but it is love nonetheless.
The evangelical church tends to be far behind the curve in dealing with moral issues as they arise in society. We tend to appoint study committees which take years to come to a conclusion.  We tend to write reports in language that only few people can understand, and with too many words like “therefore” and “nevertheless.”  We need to be bold and clear in dealing with this matter because the Bible is bold and clear. The future of our children depends upon it.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.

I believe a majority of those in most PCA presbyteries are opposed to Revoice and all that it represents.  The failure of Overtures 23 and 37 was not a vote for Revoice Theology. Those who denigrate the PCA with this line of thinking are ignorant of the PCA and her presbyterian procedures. I believe that anyone identifying as a celibate homosexual (SSA) would be rejected for ordination in most PCA presbyteries today.

As someone who voted against the Proposed Changes to the Book of Church Order (contrary to my Presbytery which voted heavily in favor of the changes), I would venture to suggest some reasons why the proposed changes failed to gain the necessary votes by presbyteries.
First, I believe a majority of those in most PCA presbyteries are opposed to Revoice and all that it represents.  The failure of Overtures 23 and 37 was not a vote for Revoice Theology. Those who denigrate the PCA with this line of thinking are ignorant of the PCA and her presbyterian procedures. I believe that anyone identifying as a celibate homosexual (SSA) would be rejected for ordination in most PCA presbyteries today.
Secondly, I believe that the battle is not over, but just beginning.  Numerous new overtures will come before the 49th General Assembly this year in Birmingham, Alabama.  Expect in the next few years a new look in regard to the membership of permanent committees and agencies.  Also, expect at least one overture to change the structure of the Standing Judicial Committee (SJC). The losing side has been knocked down, but this will only arouse their enthusiasm to recapture the PCA. They now know how the opposition (NP) works, and they are much wiser in regard to how to fight.
So why did the proposed changes fail?  Unlike presidential elections in the United States, we do not have access to “exit polls” that give us a clue as to why men voted as they did.  However, by following discussions on the Internet, and by looking at maps, three reasons can be identified.
First, the language of the proposed amendments was confusing.  The proposed amendments were in essence a distilled version of the PCA Study Committee on Human Sexuality.  The authors of the proposed changes tried to capture the nuances in this Study in short statements, but that is nearly an impossible task.  Many presbyters simply voted against the changes because the language was too confusing. The baffling meaning of the placement of commas and the impact of parenthetical statements became a stumbling-block for many voters.
Secondly, if the changes had passed, it would have made no difference.  Even with new language in the BCO, the ultimate decision resides in the courts themselves meeting on any particular day.  Men in the courts will interpret the BCO in accord with their own theological presuppositions.  Greg Johnson is already a teaching elder in the PCA and he will remain as one regardless of any changes in the BCO.
Thirdly, we’ve all seen those maps of recent national presidential elections.  The east coast (from North Carolina northward) and the west coast are blue.  Also, the large cities in the United States are generally blue.  Fly-over America (rural America) is red.   Here is a surprising fact.  If you were to create a map of the PCA presbytery votes, and place it as a template over a similar map of the United States presidential popular vote, then there would be almost a perfect match.
Indeed, the voting demographics of PCA presbyteries tended to follow the voting demographics in the recent elections for the president of the United States.  The connection is uncanny.  Progressive Presbyterian elders on the coastlines and in the big cities tended to vote like progressive politicians, and conservative Presbyterian leaders in fly-over America tended to vote like conservative politicians.
Theology and geography tend to be common bed-fellows. It’s similar to the old North-South geographical division of the Civil War.  The number of new presbyteries is growing, and these new presbyteries are being created in larger cities and outside of the southeast.  Most seminaries that feed the PCA are now much more progressive.  The younger seminary graduates, as the whole, are much more progressive than the older generation, and they tend to gravitate to the coastlines and to the larger cities. This is a third reason for the failure of the BCO changes.  Just look at politics in America, and you will understand what is happening in the PCA.
Conservatives in the PCA should not be discouraged. The battle is not over. They had only weak weapons with which to fight in this round.  They underestimated the power of their opposition. Actually, we still have the numbers to win.  They should remain in the battle long-term for the sake of the PCA and for the sake of our children’s children.  Hopefully they have learned a great deal, and will be ready to fight more wisely at the next General Assembly.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.