Let’s admit that General Assembly is the easy part. The great task of shepherding is the hardest task we have as elders, and the one in which so many of us, (myself included) fall short. God help us be the kind of elders he would have us to be for the sake of Christ, his church, and the gospel.

[Editor’s note: These are the slightly edited remarks of Presbyterian Church in America ruling elder Brad Isbell at an Assembly-wide seminar, “The Future Glory of the Church: The PCA We Envision for Christ’s Purposes,” at the PCA General Assembly in Birmingham, Ala., on June 22, 2022.]
I must begin by acknowledging the great debt I owe to the two PCA pastors I’ve served with and whose teaching I have enjoyed over these last 18 years—Dr. Duncan Rankin and Dr. Nick Willborn. Few men in this room have had the privilege of serving with more thoroughgoing, learned, and principally committed Presbyterians. Their commitment to our doctrine and polity has always been infectious. I must also say that I serve on a faithful session, with men of whom I am not worthy, and who all excel me in gifts and faithfulness. And I serve a wonderful church. We learn by hearing and reading, by studying, but also by seeing and doing. Presbyterianism walks the halls of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Oak Ridge, Tenn., and the officers and members there have been my best teachers. I love them dearly.
But none of us love our churches as Christ loves his church.  He has told us in his word how his church must be ordered and what her simple mission is. Biblical church government is Presbyterian church government. Our polity is not optional.  It is not one polity among many.  It is not a spare musical score that suggests endless improvisation. It is not a hindrance to any worthy goal. Thus, my hope and vision for the future of the PCA is that she remains thoroughly and simply Presbyterian—maybe even becoming more Presbyterian, certainly not less.
As I read the scriptures and our standards, to be Presbyterian is to encourage and demand the full participation of all elders (ruling and teaching, from small churches and large churches) in the governance and shepherding of the church in courts of every level. We don’t need to be Acts 29 churches, which is to say more networked than denominational and led more by more great men and charismatic pastors than officers. We do not need to be endlessly creative and innovative, always designing something new rather than valuing simple, biblical polity. No, we need to be Acts 14 and 15 churches, relying on the ordained officers God provides, officers accountable to one another in binding ways. There is a great tendency, it seems to me, for churches to be more staff-led rather than officer-led. This is not the way, if you’ll pardon a pun related to our denominational logo and all the Star Wars memes it has inspired.
To be Presbyterian is to be biblical. To be Presbyterian is to be led by presbyters—elders of both kinds, ruling and teaching. We see little differentiation between the elders in the New Testament, a principle we call the parity of elders, a principle explicitly enshrined in our Book of Church Order, the manual and rule book of our polity. Too often, this parity, which concerns both authority and numerical representation in the courts of the church, is an on-paper principle rather than an on-the ground reality. Why should we insist on this party of elder principle? Well, first because the scriptures teach it (and that ought to be enough), but there are also obvious practical reasons for insisting on this distinctive.
Here are several reasons:

It’s good for the sheep, the members of the church. The burden of teaching and shepherding cannot (and ought not) be borne by pastors and paid staff alone. Our people need ruling elders.
It’s good for pastors. We’ve all heard the stories of a wave of pastoral resignations and burnout in the last two years. My suspicion is that many of these men were in church plants (which lack their own local sessions) or in churches without a well-developed ministry of ruling elders. Pastoral survival and longevity require good ruling elders.
An emphasis on elder parity also increases diversity in the courts and councils of the church. Ruling elders are naturally and necessarily a more diverse lot than our teaching elders are. Many lack graduate degrees. In economic and cultural terms they are more diverse. Ruling elders come into everyday contact with the cultural zeitgeist and the practical consequences of secular theories. Some of these theories and paradigms may intrigue the bookish pastor in a coffee shop but may be viewed in an entirely different way by ruling elders. With this century’s mounting cultural crises, we need the different perspectives of ruling elders to correct and guide the ministry and mission of the church.
And lastly, the parity of elders is essential to maintaining orthodoxy. Retired Stated Clerk Taylor wrote this: “The PCA was started primarily through the efforts of Ruling Elders.” Why was this? Maybe because they had the money and time to devote to the formation of a new denomination. But maybe it’s because they were not part of the pastors’ club. Presbyteries and General Assembly can become pastors’ clubs, where getting along can become more important than fidelity and frankness. We need ruling elders because our doctrine, which is not complex and does not require a specialist degree to comprehend, is always under assault. Understanding and defending our orthodoxy is every elder’s job.

And here’s a related bonus point: the nature of the church and her spiritual mission are also things any elder can understand. Ruling elders may well be less likely to veer off on cultural tangents or fall for trendy methods. We need the common sense and realism of ruling elders.
The genius of Presbyterianism—its true contribution to the church—is the concept of rule by elders and parity among those elders. We ought never undervalue our polity, even when it runs counter to the culture or to trends in the broader church, whose form of government is determined more by tradition or pragmatism than the Bible.
The great 19th century Presbyterian Stuart Robinson wrote a book entitled The Church of God as an Essential Element of the Gospel. The title reminds us that the Gospel and polity cannot be separated.  Rosaria Butterfield wrote a book entitled The Gospel Comes with a House Key. The gospel also comes with a house: the church Over that house are the elders. Now, Rosaria’s book is about hospitality, and I’d like to close with an appeal for hospitality…to ruling elders. The sacrifices ruling elders make to attend presbytery and General Assembly are enormous. Most pastors have their expenses paid and are also paid to attend General Assembly. Ruling elders often burn precious vacation days and “wife points” to attend. Many cover a portion of their own expenses. Even presbytery meetings (often held on weekdays) cut into the income or vacation time of ruling elders. We’d do well to think about that.
General Assembly is confusing to the ruling elder who can only occasionally attend. This is a vexing problem, but certainly pastors could do more to help ruling elders find their way. We can and should make every effort to structure the assembly so that real, substantive business is done and done efficiently.
Some say ruling elders are offended by conflict, debate, and disagreement. I don’t believe they are, but they are offended (in my experience) when they perceive that the outcomes at General Assembly seem almost pre-determined or everything is rushed. Give us an open, accessible General Assembly with time to do our business.
Pastor Terry Johnson was speaking of liturgy and doctrine when he said, “You need a Reformed bucket to carry Reformed water.” Well, Reformed doctrine and the Reformed understanding of Scripture demand a Presbyterian house, even if that’s not the most convenient or cheapest type of house to build.  Nothing is harder than rightly ordering a Presbyterian church, but nothing has more benefits for (or better protects) the Christian. A Presbyterian church is worth all the trouble.
Finally, let’s admit that General Assembly is the easy part. The great task of shepherding is the hardest task we have as elders, and the one in which so many of us, (myself included) fall short. God help us be the kind of elders he would have us to be for the sake of Christ, his church, and the gospel.
Brad Isbell is a ruling elder at Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Oak Ridge, TN, co-host of the Presbycast podcast, board member of MORE in the PCA and the Heidelberg Reformation Association, and a co-editor of the Nicotine Theological Journal.
Related Posts:

There is a profound and disturbing conundrum humming in the background of these eight years and many emails: the secrecy of the majority. By repeated assertion and articulated reasoning, these emails show a small group of officers claiming to stand for the majority in our communion. Their discussion manifests a concern to ensure that the majority view in the denomination is not slighted by the vigorous efforts of minority positions– views purportedly unrepresentative of the majority among us.

The Other Side?
I did not know much beyond the name National Partnership, though I have heard frequent references over these last several years. I had one very disturbing exchange with one of the big-name-round-there brothers. It didn’t tell me anything about the NP, but it resonated with the dark characterizations I saw tagged on to NP. This brother quickly deduced from my criticism of an article on progressivism in the PCA that I preached another gospel. Yep, the Godwin’s law of industry presbyterianism from reading my piece in literally three pairs of DM’s.
I have an extended family member who is given to strong, hard, out of the blue statements. I taught high school with some wonderful students with the wild angles that can show up “on the spectrum”. I didn’t conclude that the fellow was a wingnut. When he said he would pray for me, he clearly put it on his calendar for the next two weeks; he DM’ed me to say he was praying for me. I had to decide to set aside the dark characterizations, but it wasn’t hard. This brother had nothing to do with anything connected to me, and he conducted himself with a balance of admirable and first-blush-odd. I am not a standard to score people on odd.
Then along came Presbyleaks, or NatPartnergate or the We Got Owned Scandal. The National Partnership emails (or some portion?) from 2013-2021 were . . . forwarded, leaked, stolen, made available? Yes, I read them. I was told and discovered them to be entirely concerned with the business of my church’s General Assembly. Barring a few out of order characterizations of individuals, they contained little that could not be stated on the floor of presbytery; nevertheless, it is obvious that much of the diction and most of the substance would never be voiced aloud in that setting. It was a bit like a transcript of a football team watching the films of the upcoming opponents and preparing for the big game week after week. Who would they keep out of that room? The only people who shouldn’t be in on the discussion are the other side. The other side.
I overheard a lot of things about the National Partnership. As they say, I didn’t have the receipts. I didn’t even have a reason to go looking for receipts. I’m a nobody Ass. Pastor, more than occupied with life in arm’s reach. I heard all sorts of stuff about the NP. I didn’t disagree because I was too ignorant. I couldn’t agree with the references to names and events, but I followed the grammar and the logic. If X, Y, Z, then the characterizations were not clearly intemperate or hyperbolic. What is the National Partnership?
I guess the National Partnership™ didn’t want to tell me. I never was invited, which is their vestibule. It looks like someone who knew and had eight years of receipts wanted to tell me. When they did tell me (whoever they may be), they did it with nothing but receipts: the National Partnership is the Other Side. They don’t want me and mine and maybe similar to know what they are doing to win this game. They want to defeat whatever will stop them from winning this game. They don’t want to break the rules. They place a premium on good sportsmanship on the field. Of course, they don’t consider this just a game. This is about the kingdom of God, the gospel in the world, the future of the church. It is far more serious than any sports metaphor, and that’s why they aren’t letting the Other Side in on their activity and resources and goals.
There are men in the mix whom I have known for some time. There are men with whom I have long differed yet still cherish. There are men whom I admire, though they confuse me. The whole mix of men weighs on me. The whole mundane careful counting of National Partnership members, and National Partnership Presbyteries and National Partnership commissioners on Overtures, Review of Presbytery Records, Administration– the banal listing month after month nauseates me. I didn’t know this was going on, I’m not utterly shocked, but I just want to weep.
Men dear to me have been nodding along with all this: repeated mention of this small group speaking for the majority, an annual urgency of ensuring that the denomination’s true identity is represented faithfully by as much NP representation as possible on denominational committees, the obliviously counterpointing leitmotifs sounding so cacophonous when paired– unity in open-mindedness and exclusivity in secrecy.
The Voice of the Spirit without Continuing Revelation?
I have an elevated view of Christ’s reign in his church, one which exalts each officer to be unimpressed with himself and unconcerned with accomplishing his own will. Hubris about our goals is just as ugly as hubris about our persons. That is why several power exists only within the parameters of joint power. Joint power in church courts rests on the belief that these officers are each full of the Spirit, well instructed from the Scriptures and appointed by the Lord Jesus to wield his authority. The lowest, least and even lacking presbyter is unquestionably so invested– unless some members start determining who is actually legitimate, pretending that as individuals or as a faction we wield something of greater import than the Spiritual power culminating in the joint power of the court.
Just such an elevation– ugly presumption and hubris pregnant with harm– is what happens when a faction of officers conclude that they speak for the majority or the purity of the court. Only the living God– the Spirit within and the Father who searches hearts– can report on the majority without resorting to some kind of vote. One can contend for the purity of the church; however, one cannot do this by under the radar implementation– even incrementally. You must contend to inform and invigorate consciences. If you win enough votes else wise, even purported purity cannot be foisted on the church without doing her violence.
Read More

Written by C. R. Carmichael |
Friday, November 11, 2022
No doubt the perishing world will still call the Christian’s message offensive and ugly, but we know from God’s word, as it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” (Romans 10:15). This, then, is true beauty. Sadly, our Western society may still crash and burn in its arrogance to dress up their evil. And no matter what we do, many hell-bound people will still persist in calling the Gospel an evil thing and say that evil is the sassy, more chic virtue for today. But Scripture has already exposed this wicked deceit and it will not stand before God much longer. 

Right now in America we are seeing a crazy amount of propaganda from educators, politicians and media hacks trying to dress up immoral agendas in the clothing of love, tolerance and social virtue. To help facilitate this fashion makeover, a liberal arm of our society has actually seized control of the dictionary in a sly attempt to undermine God’s holy design with reworked definitions that display evil as the latest trend in goodness.
Nowadays, for example, abortion is defined as “reproductive justice,” sexually-charged drag shows are called “family-friendly entertainment,” pornographic books in school libraries are labeled “educational materials,” and body mutilation surgeries performed on children are considered “gender-affirming care.”
Moreover, they claim, a man can be a women, a woman can be a man, and that famous vaudeville joke has been reimagined with the hot new punchline: “That was no lady. That was my husband!”
They’re Trying to Pull the Ol’ Switcheroo
Quite simply, the world is still trying to pull the “ol’ Switcheroo,” a satanic wardrobe change that boldly attempts to refashion unrighteousness as a prevailing virtue in society. As touched upon in Isaiah 5:20, the prophet exposed this scam a long time ago and denounced anyone trying to redeem evil’s bad look. “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil,” he proclaimed, “and who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”
Here Isaiah lays out the classic con job utilized by wicked quick-change artists who “endeavour to confound both the names and the natures of virtue and vice, of piety and impiety; commend and applaud what is evil, and disparage and discountenance what is good” (Benson Commentary).
The latest willing victims of this flimflam are the same ones found in Isaiah’s day: the desperate masses who are all too eager to conceal their moral imperfections with the flattering shadows of the world (John 3:19-29; James 4:4). By limiting their exposure to the Light and accessorizing their look with good deeds, they hope to erase the hard wrinkles of their sins. But according to Scripture, their beauty regimen will fail them when they find themselves in the polluted garments of their self-righteousness (Proverbs 28:13; Isaiah 64:6; 1 John 1:8).
Sadly, there are even professing Christians who have taken off the armor of God to join with the world’s consumers, forsaking the holy pattern of Scripture and stitching together a cheap knock-off from the loose fabric of moral relativism (Proverbs 14:12, 26:4-5; Colossians 2:8). Some do this to earn “likes” and “retweets” from fashionable society, while others would rather question the Bible’s clear stand against sin than have to admit that their dear friend or relative is going to hell if he doesn’t repent and come to Christ. Yet whatever the reason, it eventually boils down to someone who loves the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God (John 12:43).
Why are People so Confused About Evil?
The scary truth is, everyone says they hate evil, and yet evil will rarely come to us wearing a screen-printed t-shirt that says in bold letters, “THIS IS EVIL. PLEASE HATE ME.” The great evils of our day are often cloaked in such a way as to remain hidden from common, everyday perception and many times come into our lives as a specter of virtue for the secret purpose of deceiving us. This deception is especially potent when we try to judge something as good or evil based on the shifting ethics of this world instead of judging with godly spiritual discernment.
This fundamental truth about evil is one about which the Bible has frequently warned us. From the very beginning of creation, evil has appeared in the guise of goodness in order to fool mankind into ruin. Indeed Satan, that serpent of old, tricked Eve into believing that transgression against God had its benefits, and she was thus convinced that the forbidden tree was “good for food, pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise” (Genesis 3:6).
Many centuries later, of course, Satan would try in similar fashion to tempt our Lord to turn stones into loaves of bread as He fasted in the desert, but Jesus sharply rebuked the trickery and exposed the hidden evil with the powerful spotlight of God’s word (Luke 4:1-4).
The strategy of evil to appear in comely attire, in fact, was always a pressing concern for Jesus and His apostles. The Lord himself warned that false prophets would come “in sheep’s clothing” while in fact being “ravenous wolves” (Matt. 7:15). In Matthew 24:24, He tells the disciples that false christs and prophets “will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.”
Likewise Peter warned of false teachers who tell fabricated stories and promise “freedom” when they themselves are “slaves of depravity” (2 Peter 2). And Paul alerted the Church to the presence of false apostles who would disguise themselves as apostles of Christ, just as Satan often masquerades as an “angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:13-15).
As John Newton wisely noted, many centuries before the popularity of glitzy cross-dressing:
“Satan is never more a devil, than when he looks most like an angel. But let him look and talk as he will—he is Satan still; and those who are experienced and watchful may discern his cloven foot hanging below his fine garment of light.”
Read More
Related Posts: